Cyprus-Forum.com

[miltiades]

Alexander welcome to the forum . What is a remedial educated Uncle Tom , and how can you use an atrocity , brutality , corruption or any other synonyms of malapropisms to wipe your bottom . Havent heard this expression before just wondered about its origin.
None of the supporters of peace for Cyprus are apologists for Turkey to the best of my knowledge.

[cypezokyli]

i am afraid that with a name like that : Sarah Fenwick , you are going to have problems in cyprus. why dont you consider changing into sth more greek ? its logical

OK cypezokyli, so according to your logic, if Cyprus has conflicting interests with Germany (in the way that Cyprus has with the UK), we should assume that you will support the interests of Germany simply because you live there now?

Would your position change depending on where you are located? If tomorrow you move to Israel to work, would that mean you will automatically love Israel and care for Israels interests in the way that the Israelis do?

the above logic has nothing to do with logic so i will not discuss it.

sotos wrote sth very specific. and if he expresses that belief through a pm i dont really mind / care. but when we have a new member in the forum , who appears to be excited in creating a new newspaper for cyprus and we come up with comments of the kind : foreign names support foreign interests , i felt that i should inform that new member that: NO , not everyone of us thinks like that.
as you said before, there are a number of people reading what we write.
knowing sotos posts for some time i wouldnt characterise him as xenophobic. but that specific line sounded like that imo , and i felt that i should respond it. bc , not evreybody knows sotos 2000 posts. someone comes and reads a threat about an english speaking newspaper where we "prove" that they support foreign interests bc they have foreign names.

and i ask you , in the case you were in the position of reportfromcyprus, how would you feel?
wouldnt it destroy your enthousiasm , when you know that you will not be trusted in this place just bc your name doesnt sound greek ?

or even worse (this has nothing to do with sotos anymore) , that you will be considered as promoting forein inerests just bc you expressed an opinion that the cypriots do not like ?

[Piratis]

miltiades just think about our last "negative solution" of the 1960s. remember that one, we didnot like. the one that was "unjust" . the one that tpap rejected but today woke up and realised that that solution was good. the one we would dream or even beg to return to today. remember that one ?
did it fail bc the solution was bad ?

Everything is relative dear cypezokyli. There is bad, then there is worst, and then there is even worst etc.

The 1960 agreements were bad. They didn't establish in Cyprus a normal democratic country. They gave intervention rights to other countries, they gave 30% governmental positions to the 18% TC community, they gave many veto rights to a small minority. They even had some undemocratic parameters against TCs. E.g a TC could not become president.
Those agreements were bad. However we made one mistake: we signed them (actually Makarios did, without our aproval) . And from that time all those things became legality.
If we had listed to Tpap before placing our signatures there wouldn't be 1963 and there wouldn't be 1974. Maybe things would be better, maybe they would be worst. Nobody knows. What is for sure is that nobody could come today and tell us: "Well, if there was something that you didn't like in those agreements you shouldn't have signed them". As a matter of principle I believe you shouldn't sign something that you do not accept, not sign it and hope that later it will change. I hope we learned our lesson. (some apparently didn't)

So back to "relativity". Yes today we demand what we have the right to demand, legality, as opposed to the illegality that Turkey enforces in Cyprus which is worst than legality and the 1960 agreements.
Of course we would prefer to have something better than 1960 agreements, but since we made the mistake and signed them, we don't even have the right to ask for anything better anymore. You understand now why we ask for 1960 agreements cypezokyli?

Now coming to the Annan plan. This plan would create something that is worst than 1960 agreements, overwriting them as the what is legal, and it would even be worst than the current status.
If we singed those agreements, not only we would not be able to get something good, we would not even be able to get something "bad" (1960 agreements) and we would not be able to get the "worst" (current status). We would be stuck with the "worst than worst" and our only alternative would probably be an official partition, which at that point might seem the better choice among what is available.

or , did it fail bc there was no will to make it work ?

There was no will for what was "bad". Imagine how much will there will be for the "worst than worst". Sure, if there is will anything can work. The Ottoman rule lasted for 300 years so apparently it should have worked pretty good. Maybe we should totally enslave Greek Cypriots again, shut our mouths and stop asking for human rights and democracy, and everything would work just fine!

[cypezokyli]

all this analysis , and you didnot answer the most important question. why would the 1960 "bad" work today ?

the worst than the worst is still to come. (and in my understanding that is partition)... or for some the second best (see, again reletivity )

but dont worry , the second best is not that far away. it seems we are working towards that direction.

btw, we had a great victory some time ago , there were supposed to be some committees to discuss the core of the cyppro ....any news on that ?

[michalis5354]

Regardin the Annan Plan the reason it got worst it was because Papadopoulos failed to negotiate the plan in good faith and make improvements in order for the plan to be able to pass through the referendums. Lets compare anan plan 1 and the annan plan 5 . It got worst . The reason it got worst it was because Papadopoulos Failed to negotaite in good faith and a constructive spirit. Having done that then the plan had higher chances to be passed through the referendums.

[reportfromcyprus]

I appreciate that not everybody in the forum feels angry or negative towards new initiatives or change in general, and thanks for expressing that, cypezokyli.

The constructive criticism I have taken to mean that the new site can and should be improved (which I'm working on right now), and the deconstructive criticism is ok.

Why do I say it's ok? Because I'd rather it were expressed openly in the safety of an online forum than in brutal or violent action.

Voltaire paraphrased (because I can never remember the exact quote) I may not agree with with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

[Piratis]

all this analysis , and you didnot answer the most important question. why would the 1960 "bad" work today ?

Not sure. Still is the only legal thing and any changes to that should come through legal procedures. Nobody has the right to force one sided changes. After the return to legality both sides can propose changes, and if we come to an agreement the constitution can change.

There are also the EU laws which precede the Cyprus laws. (this is a big difference from the 1960) This is something we were about to forgo as well with the Annan plan by accepting permanent derogations.

the worst than the worst is still to come. (and in my understanding that is partition)... or for some the second best (see, again reletivity )

Annan plan (disguised partition) and "standard" partition are the 2 worst options. So by rejecting the Annan plan we avoided the worst of the worst.

By rejecting the Annan plan we kept our options open. Now the best case scenario is return to 1960 agreements that along with the supremacy of the EU law would make Cyprus a quite normal country. The worst case scenario is that the above will not happen and the occupied areas will become something like Taiwan from the international relations point of view.

If we had accepted the Annan plan there would be no best case scenario. There would be 2 almost equally worst of worst scenarios: 1) Disguised partition 2) Official partition.

So by rejecting the Annan plan even in the worst case scenario is still better than what would have happened if we had accepted the Annan plan. And by not signing away our rights we still have a chance to achieve something that could be better even from the 1960 agreements, or at least much better than the Annan plan. (and meanwhile we have something that is again better than Annan plan)

[Bananiot]

You have learned your poem very well Piratis. Disguised partition is a cretin term used to desguise real partition because by voting NO to Annan 5, in effect you voted for Turkey to remain for ever in Cyprus, along with 40 000 troops that can easily become 100 000 or more, not an inch of land returned and of course not a single refugee returning. Well done Piratis, you can feel real proud of yourelf.

Dear Miltiades. You have made some very serious claims regarding the Annan Plan. Remember, the most serious people in Cyprus (Glafcos, Markides, are just two that spring to mind) have accepted the plan despite its shortcomings, because they considered that the alternative would be far worst. Anyway, none of your claims holds any truth. Allegations like these have made many people behave like Piratis, that is, blinded by the shear distortion that was made to the Plan by its polemics. Klerides is the only stateman we have in Cyprus and he wasn't taken for a ride, I assure you of this nor anyone can lightheartedly accuse him of betrayal, with the exception of Piratis, perhaps.

[andri_cy]

Remember, the most serious people in Cyprus (Glafcos, Markides, are just two that spring to mind) have accepted the plan despite its shortcomings, because they considered that the alternative would be far worst.

So Glafcos and Markides are now considered the most serious people in the country? Wow what has the world come to?

[Piratis]

Disguised partition is a cretin term used to desguise real partition because by voting NO to Annan 5, in effect you voted for Turkey to remain for ever in Cyprus, along with 40 000 troops that can easily become 100 000 or more, not an inch of land returned and of course not a single refugee returning. Well done Piratis, you can feel real proud of yourelf.

Bananiot, we are more united today with Estonia or Ireland than we would be with the north part of our own country if we had voted yes. You call that unity? It is not. It is legalization of partition and the violations of our human and democratic rights.

Dear Miltiades. You have made some very serious claims regarding the Annan Plan. Remember, the most serious people in Cyprus (Glafcos, Markides, are just two that spring to mind) have accepted the plan despite its shortcomings, because they considered that the alternative would be far worst. Anyway, none of your claims holds any truth. Allegations like these have made many people behave like Piratis, that is, blinded by the shear distortion that was made to the Plan by its polemics. Klerides is the only stateman we have in Cyprus and he wasn't taken for a ride, I assure you of this nor anyone can lightheartedly accuse him of betrayal, with the exception of Piratis, perhaps.

So bananiot in essence is telling us: "pisteve kai mi erevna, you are all stupid. Just do what the 90 year old pampersman is asking from you to do and shut up."