Cyprus-Forum.com

[Londonrake]

Well, I thought you might at least have a day off. But, I imagine you'd get cold sweats and the shakes.

Never mind, Paphitis rushed in to rescue the thread from descending into oblivion. Yet, it doesn't seem to matter about the repeated evidence of your own eyes (When does it ever? ) you still don't appreciate how much the two of us tend to keep you going. That really hurts our feelings you know.

So, there's a prolonged (off topic) heated discussion about the Russian land-grab in Ukraine. Cornered with a few of those unpleasant fact things, you pull the bog-standard stunt - rush off to find an "equivalence" You come back, like a dog with a stick, and post unrelated BS, in order to try to divert (Deny/divert/distract?) from an awkward situation. Then you come up with this gem:

So ..... you still can't provide any justification for your (Western) different attitudes to annexation by Israel vs annexation by Russia ? You just throw another totally unrelated event into the hat ..... Turkey/Cyprus !

Actually, I think it should have been - "a totally unrelated hat into the ring", but let's not get pedantic.



Both of us locked into a discussion about the Crimea - and Israel/the Golan wasn't a "totally unrelated event" then? The usual. You are - absolutely - the worst hypocrite I've ever encountered in my 70. As Dick Emery used to say "I do like you though!".

In case you haven't noticed, we live in Cyprus. In case you haven't noticed, this is primarily an ROC forum. In case you haven't noticed, what Russia did in the Crimea is fundamentally what Turkey did here. So "unrelated"? I don't think so.

This is futile I know (I've had 9 years of experience) but I challenge you to answer, without obfuscation or bullshite, for the interest of other members, a few pertinent questions.

Do you think the Turkish occupation of the north here was justified?

Do you think that if a referendum were held in the north which voted overwhelmingly for them to be annexed by Turkey that would be acceptable?

Do you think that the events which occurred - and such a hypothetical electoral event - are in accordance with the international law that you keep piously spouting about on other threads?

Do you acknowledge that events here in 1974 and since - and those which took place in the Crimea - are intrinsically the same?

I'm sure that, like me, nobody's holding their breathe. Blank.

BTW. Something I was reflecting on this evening. Can you cite a case where you've had a prolonged difference of opinion with anybody, on any forum (and there have been so very many such threads), which hasn't descended into acrimony? What do you think the common factor might just be? Mmmmmmm

[Robin Hood]

LR:
When you have been here as long as me, the one thing you will avoid commenting on or using as a comparison is the CYPRUS PROBLEM! 'Our' view of it is neither wanted or appreciated.

Quick as you always are with accusations ...... the only one I asked you to answer ..... you still blank! You know ..... that one about one annexation being justified and the other being demonised. That is obviously too difficult to answer so you will ignore it!

[Londonrake]

LR:
When you have been here as long as me, the one thing you will avoid commenting on or using as a comparison is the CYPRUS PROBLEM! 'Our' view of it is neither wanted or appreciated.

Quick as you always are with accusations ...... the only one I asked you to answer ..... you still blank! You know ..... that one about one annexation being justified and the other being demonised. That is obviously too difficult to answer so you will ignore it!

No, no, no! We were talking about international law, appertaining to Russia’s illegal annexation of the Crimea. You went off and came back with something totally unrelated about Israel and the Golan I then pointed out a few salient facts about the similarities between what happened in the Ukraine and here. So, please don't bullshit with my "blanking" anything. That's your specialty (well, apart from hypocrisy).

Bollocks to not talking about the Cyprus problem. It's a fundamental foundation of this forum. What happened here is very little different to what Russia did with the Crimea. Please do anyone who is following this thread the favour of giving a straight answer, by explaining exactly how you can justify one, without complicity agreeing with the other.

It's dead simple. We await.

Not of course holding our breathe.

[Robin Hood]

Once again .... back to he OP.

Until quite recently I have always believed in the impartiality and honesty of the British legal system. This I have not seen mentioned in the reports on the Assange Trial until now but from the very beginning in my opinion, the whole episode seemed unnecessarily heavy handed for what was after all a relatively insignificant offence. This explains the original offence, why he skipped bail and why Assange sought asylum. I think events have shown he had every right to be fearful ...... and the British Court now confirms his fears were real and justified.

The Coming Show Trial of Julian Assange - By Chris Hedges

Quote .... from about halfway through the article and is the part specific to this post:

(Assange speaking) “The prosecution attorney told the BBC yesterday I was wanted in the U.S. for computer hacking,” he said. “This is unquestionably false. Even the U.S. admits there was no hack. No passwords were broken. There is no evidence that I, WikiLeaks or Chelsea Manning engaged in hacking. I have 175 years of my life at stake. This is a signal that the prosecution will misrepresent the charges to mislead the press.”

The judge, Emma Arbuthnot, cut him off, saying “this is not the time to go into this.”

Commenting in 2018 when Assange’s lawyers requested that the warrant for his arrest be dropped, Arbuthnot said, “I accept that Mr. Assange had expressed fears of being returned to the United States from a very early stage in the Swedish extradition proceedings but, absent any evidence from Mr. Assange on oath, I do not find that Mr. Assange’s fears were reasonable.”

This statement by the judge captures the Alice-in-Wonderland quality of the judicial persecution of Assange. She dismisses as unreasonable Assange’s fears that if he voluntarily left the Ecuadorian Embassy he would be arrested by British police and extradited to the United States because he did not appear in court to express them. And yet, she is now presiding over his extradition trial.

This circular logic is not the only disturbing aspect of Judge Arbuthnot’s overseeing of the Assange case. She is married to James Arbuthnot, who sits in the House of Lords, is a British Conservative Party politician, was the minister of state at the Ministry of Defense and for nine years was the chairman of the Defense Select Committee in the House of Commons, a committee that oversees the operation of the Ministry of Defense and the armed forces. Arbuthnot, who was reprimanded while a member of Parliament for diverting public funds to maintain his two homes, is a director at SC Strategy, established by John Scarlett, the former head of the British foreign intelligence service MI6. The politician also is on the advisory board of Thales UK, a huge arms manufacturer whose corrupt business practices, which included massive bribes to heads of state in exchange for arms contracts, were exposed when some of its internal documents were published by WikiLeaks.

The judge “has a strong conflict of interest,” Melzer said from Vienna when I interviewed him by video link for my television show, “On Contact.” “Her husband had been exposed by WikiLeaks.”

Assange’s lawyers have asked the judge to recuse herself. She has refused.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51780.htm

The whole article, for me, fills in a lot of blanks in the story of Assange and his ‘crimes’ and if bits of the story are left out then you cannot get to the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth! This would clearly indicate that this is not about justice and fair trial, it is all about compliance with the Law, which is designed to be 'flexible' ...... and the (biased?) opinion of a single Judge. THAT is not Justice!

[Londonrake]

Blank................ there's a surprise!

If I were to repeatedly post articles relating to an OP from the likes of Guido Fawkes or Bellingcat, claiming them to be the font of "real truth" I can imagine the sort of contemptuous comments it would attract from you and how you would scornfully highlight their nature. Rightly so, too.

Yet, you repeatedly post from sites which are so prejudiced as the be laughable. Informationclearinghouse, like just about all of your other "independent" sites, consists almost entirely of anti-West articles. You go there purely in order to get opinions (as a "thinking outside the box" type of course and in the absence of a feed from St Petersburgh ) which echo your own prejudices. Heaven forbid you should be stuck with having to form your own views.

What a brilliant hypocrite you are.

Funny how - when the thread gets diverted, as so many often do, and things get awkward, it always elicits a "Back to the OP" post from you.

I thought I'd have a couple of bludgeon free days. It looks like Paphitis feels the same way.

Another of your threads which would have descended into oblivion. But for the two of us. Yet.................................. we go unloved.

What happened to the Crimea is exactly what happened in Cyprus. How do you reconcile that?

[Robin Hood]

LR:

What happened to the Crimea is exactly what happened in Cyprus. How do you reconcile that?

1) Northern Cyprus was taken by an act of war ..... Crimea was not!
2) Crimea was a self governing autonomous region .... Northern Cyprus was not!
3) As a self governing region Crimea had the UN declared right to self determination ..... Northern Cyprus did not!
4) The population of Crimea had a democratic vote to leave Ukraine .... Northern Cyprus did not.
5) The population of Crimea had a democratic vote on their wish to be annexed ....... Northern Cyprus did not.
6) Crimea managed the transition without death and destruction ...... Northern Cyprus did not!
7) The Greek Cypriot government was democratically voted for by the people .... the Ukraine government was not!

How do you reconcile that?

[Londonrake]

LR:

What happened to the Crimea is exactly what happened in Cyprus. How do you reconcile that?

1) Northern Cyprus was taken by an act of war ..... Crimea was not!
2) Crimea was a self governing autonomous region .... Northern Cyprus was not!
3) As a self governing region Crimea had the UN declared right to self determination ..... Northern Cyprus did not!
4) The population of Crimea had a democratic vote to leave Ukraine .... Northern Cyprus did not.
5) The population of Crimea had a democratic vote on their wish to be annexed ....... Northern Cyprus did not.
6) Crimea managed the transition without death and destruction ...... Northern Cyprus did not!
7) The Greek Cypriot government was democratically voted for by the people .... the Ukraine government was not!

How do you reconcile that?

Tut, tut. No thanks for saving your thread - yet again? What an ungrateful person you are.

You're going off at a tangent again. Haven't you just been hypocritically berating me for that?

Russia used military force to grab part of another country. An act of aggression entirely against all tenets of international law. Sound familiar? Exactly as per Turkey - Cyprus.

You've expressed the view in the past that if there were a positive referendum in the north to accept annexation by Turkey it should be recognised. Do you deny that? (I know where it is. ).

"Death and destruction"? Are you joking? I believe to date that about 10,000 have died in the Ukraine and continue to do so weekly, as Russia deliberately destablilises the country. Although, nobody did before the Russians decided that their minority in the Crimea was "under threat". Exactly like the Nazi excuses for their actions in Czechoslovakia, Austria and Poland.

The reality of why the Ukrainians got rid of Yanukovich was entirely different to the Russian inspired "fascist threat" total fantasy that you peddle.

You’re a Russian useful idiot - and will always follow the direction they give you, unswervingly. Frankly, in that respect, there doesn’t appear to be an original thought in your head and as such your credibility’s zero.

Sweet dreams. I’m not sure why but It seems that - well - you wanted this. I have to assume it’s a case of what you prefer.

[Londonrake]

I’m off for a couple of more bludgeon free days again.

[Robin Hood]

I’m off for a couple of more bludgeon free days again.

Enjoy your day. I am putting your wife forward for the Noble Peace Prize ........ she has my undying admiration for her tenacity and tolerance.

[Robin Hood]

I would rather we discussed Assange and his biased treatment under UK Law! But ........
LR:

Russia used military force to grab part of another country. An act of aggression entirely against all tenets of international law.

Russia used no military force apart from using its legitimate presence in Crimea to prevent bloodshed by locking down Ukraine military bases. Call that illegal if you wish but that ‘illegal’ action saved many hundreds even thousands of civilian casualties and massive destruction as we have seen happen in Donetz and Luhansk. 18K Russian troops were in Crimea by virtue of a legal treaty with the ELECTED Ukraine Government, they were allowed 25K.

"Death and destruction"? Are you joking? I believe to date that about 10,000 have died in the Ukraine and continue to do so weekly, as Russia deliberately destablilises the country. Although, nobody did before the Russians decided that their minority in the Crimea was "under threat". Exactly like the Nazi excuses for their actions in Czechoslovakia, Austria and Poland.

What a breathtaking diversion tactic and distortion of reality!

This is about CRIMEA ..... nobody died and there was no destruction of property. It was The US that deliberately destabilised the Country, not Russia! Russia moved AFTER the fascist coup ‘........to protect its interests and assets in the region.’ .... isn’t that how the US always justifies its military aggression?

The reality of why the Ukrainians got rid of Yanukovich was entirely different to the Russian inspired "fascist threat" total fantasy that you peddle.

Reality? The elected government was brought down and The elected President chased out of the country by extreme fascist groups in a foreign (US) financed and encouraged coup. That is a matter of proven fact not fantasy but, as you live with your head firmly ‘inside-the-box’ instead of taking a look ‘outside-the-box’ on occasions, .... you would maybe not be aware of that? Maybe you should find out more about Ukraine politics. Look up the credentials of the Svodova Party, the Azov Battalion and Stefan Bandera their hero :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_(political_party)#Social-National_Party_of_Ukraine

Victoria (f**k the EU) Nuland and Sen. McCain are on video making speeches and handing out cookies to the ‘protesters’ with Swastika insignia’s and Nuland videod explaining the US had spent $50m to bring this coup about. The US recognised the coup ‘government’ within 2-3 hours and the threats to Crimea, Eastern Ukraine and Russian interests started immediately!

So the ‘Kremlin’ version has more credibility in my eyes, based on the facts, than your US inspired version of events.