Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

and yet at 4 pm 2nd of july 1965 when umit suleyman, zemi ramadan and ahmet berberoglu came to speak with clerides about returning, what exactly did clerides say to them?
did he say please come back and lets restore the constitution of the republic?

or was it something else? but what?


no no no no
i never said anything about invasion. i said about intervention was it legal and if it was legal then why would it be ilegal now. time itself does not change legality only events.

the ultimate question you have to answer is very simple.

it is said that terrgy had to restore constitutional order. the issue here is what constitional order.
was constitution ever set and it was to which point should have terggy brought back cyprus to.

not really that dificult a task is it?

[Kikapu]

and yet at 4 pm 2nd of july 1965 when umit suleyman, zemi ramadan and ahmet berberoglu came to speak with clerides about returning, what exactly did clerides say to them?
did he say please come back and lets restore the constitution of the republic?

or was it something else? but what?


no no no no
i never said anything about invasion. i said about intervention was it legal and if it was legal then why would it be ilegal now. time itself does not change legality only events.

the ultimate question you have to answer is very simple.

it is said that terrgy had to restore constitutional order. the issue here is what constitional order.
was constitution ever set and it was to which point should have terggy brought back cyprus to.

not really that dificult a task is it?

Pyro already answered your above question. First was the legal intervention, second was illegal invasion.

In any case, the guarantor powers UK, Turkey and Greece were to be safeguarding not only the constitutional order of the RoC, but also the integrity of the RoC and finally, the welfare of ALL Cypriots. So where are we today? Can you say that any of the guarantor powers lived up to their responsibilities? Could the present situation been avoided? I don’t think so, because it was destined to be this way, because the way the guarantor powers wrote the constitution could only have this outcome. Going from here to a better future is very difficult, because Turkey and the TCs still insist not only returning back to the 1960’s agreements in principle, but to even worse conditions than the 1960’s agreements. The last 50 years of no settlement is testament to this reality where the GCs and TCs still do not see things eye to eye. Not in 1960, nor in 2019.

[Lordo]

i am still waiting for somebody to suggest exactly what terggy was supposed to do to safeguard the constitutional order. what constitutional order. the constitutional court was abondened in 1963. the constitution itself was not implemented before it was modified by the gcs without so much as a how do you do.

just say to which order should have terggy brought cyprus to.
1960?
1961?
1962?...............................................1973 or even 1974?

which order?
if we wish to go back to 1960 i am forever ready.

[Maximus]

Nothing, the treaty of Guarantee is legally invalid and the guarantor powers are in violation of it too anyway.

Cyprus is an independent sovereign republic and she can decide how to run her internal affairs.

Stick to the present day, look at the state of affairs in Cyprus today.

You love to go backwards because it means you can can roll around in the murky waters of history (yourstory) and make up arguments for the status quo.

Turkey is an ethnic cleanser, illegal occupier and colonizer of a sovereign state. Simple as that.

[Lordo]

Nothing, the treaty of Guarantee is legally invalid and the guarantor powers are in violation of it too anyway.

Cyprus is an independent sovereign republic and she can decide how to run her internal affairs.

Stick to the present day, look at the state of affairs in Cyprus today.

You love to go backwards because it means you can can roll around in the murky waters of history (yourstory) and make up arguments for the status quo.

Turkey is an ethnic cleanser, illegal occupier and colonizer of a sovereign state. Simple as that.

no no no my little garagozzi
the question is about 1974. the terggs interveed, landed all perfectly legal.
the question is what should have they done?
what shoudl they have restored the republic to.
i am asking for a year.
give me a year give me any year.

of course we can forget about going back
adjust the constitution to reflect that there is no bi comunal and bi zonal situation
remove the veto level at the state level so both parties can get on with governong themseves
and leave the political equality to the federal level.

take your pick

[Pyrpolizer]

Nothing, the treaty of Guarantee is legally invalid and the guarantor powers are in violation of it too anyway.

Cyprus is an independent sovereign republic and she can decide how to run her internal affairs.

Stick to the present day, look at the state of affairs in Cyprus today.

You love to go backwards because it means you can can roll around in the murky waters of history (yourstory) and make up arguments for the status quo.

Turkey is an ethnic cleanser, illegal occupier and colonizer of a sovereign state. Simple as that.

no no no my little garagozzi
the question is about 1974. the terggs interveed, landed all perfectly legal.
the question is what should have they done?
what shoudl they have restored the republic to.
i am asking for a year.
give me a year give me any year.

of course we can forget about going back
adjust the constitution to reflect that there is no bi comunal and bi zonal situation
remove the veto level at the state level so both parties can get on with governong themseves
and leave the political equality to the federal level.

take your pick

I already answered you that they did not intervene, they invaded for the whole purpose of occupying part of Cyprus do ethnic cleansing and implement the partition plan. That's what they are doing until today with the help of most TCs and settlers. Not only it's illegal it's criminal by international law. Stop hiding behind your finger. The so called "Trnc" was not created to help re-unification LOL,

If the problem was really the constitution there were a million things they could do to make it implemented to the letter.
To "take measures" does not mean military intervention on the first place-that's the very extreme. E.g.a simple police escort of the TC MPs by a few British+TC policemen would be enough. Same with Denktash who abandoned his position just to be a leader in the enclaves. He wanted to do that because he had to organize the enclaves for partition not because he got pissed off about the constitution.
You mentioned 3 TC Mps who wanted to return in 1965. That's right only 3 because the other 12 were threatened by Denktash and the TMT.

In any case Turkey up until today never claimed that she invaded to protect the constitution. She says she invaded to protect the Tcs. Is that what the treaty of Guarantee says??? Protect the Tcs oust half the GCs grab their lands and properties and bring in settlers to fill up the place?

[Lordo]

now that was not the question. the question was not why did only three mps returned and the rest did not return. the question was what did clerides tell them. find that out and you will understand why the rest did not join the parlaiment and neither did the three by the way. tmt did not have the balls to kill an mp. only eoka had that when they killed the tc mp when he was trying to arrange peace between the fighters in baf region. bullshit will not cut it, you have to answer the question not just give an anwere that suits your argument. just in case you have forgotten the question it really is very simple.

what did clerides tell them?
another thing you need to find out is how did they travel to parliament?
when you find this out then you will understand why perhaps the others were not too willing to travel there.

you may have said this that and this that and the other but that does not make it so. to make it so, you have to declare what they should have done to satisfy your understaning of returning to status quo. all you need to say is to what year they should have returned cyprus constitution.

presumable you do not think they should have just turned back and claim mission acomplished as soon as sampson resigned. or do you?

now that would be funny

[Pyrpolizer]

now that was not the question. the question was not why did only three mps returned and the rest did not return. the question was what did clerides tell them. find that out and you will understand why the rest did not join the parlaiment and neither did the three by the way. tmt did not have the balls to kill an mp. only eoka had that when they killed the tc mp when he was trying to arrange peace between the fighters in baf region. bullshit will not cut it, you have to answer the question not just give an anwere that suits your argument. just in case you have forgotten the question it really is very simple.

what did clerides tell them?
another thing you need to find out is how did they travel to parliament?
when you find this out then you will understand why perhaps the others were not too willing to travel there.

you may have said this that and this that and the other but that does not make it so. to make it so, you have to declare what they should have done to satisfy your understaning of returning to status quo. all you need to say is to what year they should have returned cyprus constitution.

presumable you do not think they should have just turned back and claim mission acomplished as soon as sampson resigned. or do you?

now that would be funny

What did he tell them? According to Clerides book or according to Turkish propaganda?
All I can tell you there's nothing in Clerides book. Now you tell me what's in Turkish propaganda.

What else? Oh, you wanted to learn at what point should the Turks return the constitution back in time.That's a stupid question a)because they did not invade to restore the constitution- they invaded for what I already explained before b) even if hypothetically that is what they should do, it would be meaningless. The constitution was unworkable and un-democratic violating the rights of the majority and over inflating the rights of the minority, plus spreading the seeds of separate states within a state. Thank god over time we changed it a lot to be functional enough to make us in the EU.

Now you tell us what would you do if you were in their position assuming you had genuine intentions for ALL the people of Cyprus. Start from one year after the invasion.

I guess you the benevolent one would impose Clerides -Denktash deal of 1972 right?

[Lordo]

now that was not the question. the question was not why did only three mps returned and the rest did not return. the question was what did clerides tell them. find that out and you will understand why the rest did not join the parlaiment and neither did the three by the way. tmt did not have the balls to kill an mp. only eoka had that when they killed the tc mp when he was trying to arrange peace between the fighters in baf region. bullshit will not cut it, you have to answer the question not just give an anwere that suits your argument. just in case you have forgotten the question it really is very simple.

what did clerides tell them?
another thing you need to find out is how did they travel to parliament?
when you find this out then you will understand why perhaps the others were not too willing to travel there.

you may have said this that and this that and the other but that does not make it so. to make it so, you have to declare what they should have done to satisfy your understaning of returning to status quo. all you need to say is to what year they should have returned cyprus constitution.

presumable you do not think they should have just turned back and claim mission acomplished as soon as sampson resigned. or do you?

now that would be funny

What did he tell them? According to Clerides book or according to Turkish propaganda?
All I can tell you there's nothing in Clerides book. Now you tell me what's in Turkish propaganda.

What else? Oh, you wanted to learn at what point should the Turks return the constitution back in time.That's a stupid question a)because they did not invade to restore the constitution- they invaded for what I already explained before b) even if hypothetically that is what they should do, it would be meaningless. The constitution was unworkable and un-democratic violating the rights of the majority and over inflating the rights of the minority, plus spreading the seeds of separate states within a state. Thank god over time we changed it a lot to be functional enough to make us in the EU.

Now you tell us what would you do if you were in their position assuming you had genuine intentions for ALL the people of Cyprus. Start from one year after the invasion.

I guess you the benevolent one would impose Clerides -Denktash deal of 1972 right?

you can do better than that. unless of course you consider glafcos clerides the path of country by kizilyurek is terggish propaganda. he reveals all on page 134. infact i met kizilyurek recently. everytime he mentioned and blamed makarios the akel members would start frothing in the mouth. he takes no prisoners and says it how it is no matter who gets upset.

you are still avoiding the question. you claim that terggy invaded but instead of restoring the constitution and integrity of roc she decided to divide the island. the question is very simple. let us assume that terggy suddenly developed concience and asked you to which year would you like me to take you in the cyprus constitution. its really not that hard.

as to constitution was unworkable? you have not got a leg to stand on as the constiution was never implemented never mind allowed to work. as your teacher would say to you, you have work harder. concentrate. constitution would have worked better than you can imagine. why would tcs blow a system thay had more than they should have had according to the population. in any case the real opposition for the constiturion was by gcs as they had no wish for independence, they wanted enosis and would do anything to get it including destroying the country. when it comes to communities with lower number in the uk like welsh the scotts and the northernirish all take more than they deserve becasue it is needed to support themselves and we don't mind becasue it is the civilised thing to do. i mean look after those who need it rather than watch them suffer. have gcs reahed such levels of civilisation?

i already told you what i would do and it would not go back to 1974 or 5 or 6. we have to start from 2014 when we had the high level agreement with political equality. it is the only thing being negotiated and it will be the last. there will not be any more agreements other than bbf or two states. of course there wil lbe some adjustments to how much land will be returned and also number of people allowed toreturn to their original homes. if i had my way i would allow all who wish to return becasue i believe it will not upset the balance to threaten the tcs as most people are setteled where ever they may be in or out of cyprus.

[Maximus]

Look bordo, you are still rolling around in the muck.

Bring your attention to the present day.

The treaty of guarantee does not say turkey can do to Cyprus what Cyprus has today.

Turkey is an ethnic cleanser, illegal occupier and colonizer.

All of which are war crimes and turkey and the tc are trying to make Cyprus accept something it shouldn’t nor does it want.

Asiktir eshek, Cyprus is an independent sovereign republic and she will decide how to run her internal affairs. Not some minority backed by the Turkish military, where the majority are forced to accept the unacceptable under duress.

Get turkey and the settlers out of Cyprus then you will see how feasible and realistic your “ solution” really is.. it’s not.....

It doesn’t matter how many times you bath in dirty water, you will will never come clean.......