It was not myself who intervened in the convesration we have had previously and accusing me of forcing a principle to the GCs without their approval. It was you who intervened in the first place.
Hi michalis,
Apologies if I have offended. I do not recall ever accusing you of anything,
certainly not of forcing a principle on the GCs without their approval, perhaps I came across wrong. Please quote where I have done this and I will apologize wholeheartedly.
If you feel I have distorted your arguments then again I apologise, but I don't recall ever doing this. I will admit that I may have misunderstood your arguments earlier, but I think it is evident from my posts that this was the case.
Finally you have given me a definition of bizonality. I kinda reached this conclusion a few posts ago, but was still confused as to what was meant by this. IF this was actually agreed in 1977 then of course we must stick to it, but again from what I have read the 1977 agreements were at a much higher level which fell short of defining bizonality the way you have and left the details of freedom of residence open to discussion.
My belief is that the principle of bizonality as you define it would not be beneficial to reunification. You haven't forced this principle on me as a person and I still hold my opinion as you do yours. We already have bizonality, so my point was there is no difference between that and what we have today. I respect your opinion, but please don't put words in my mouth. I do not disagree with bizonality simply because it is sought by the Turkish Cypriots, I simply feel that it will not serve a unified Cyprus well.
There are very few countries in the world where there is not complete freedom of residence, and what you will find is that those countries are either communist or run by oppressive regimes. Whilst you may feel permanent restrictions on freedom of residence are necessary I consider them alien and un-natural in this day and age. Now please feel free to have your opinion but also respect mine.