pantelis wrote: The segments you are quoting were true only for a short period of time.
I quote those segments as a response to your earlier claim
the isolation, or retreat of the TCs forced them to pay a high price, socially and economically. This was only true for those TCs who chose to arm themselves and lock-up each other, in their enclaves.
The effects of loosing a loved one are true indefinately, though the act may have happen in a second.
pantelis wrote:
Did they pay their phone bills?
Did they pay their Electric bills?
They had their electric and phones cut off, not because of non payment but as an attempt to force them to 'give up'.
pantelis wrote:I could accept the case that before 1974, there was discrimination against the TCs.
It was not just a case of discrimination. Before 74 there was a planned and concerted effort by the GC (adminstration and 'irregular' powers) to force the TC community to give up the rights (as a community) they had won in 1960 agreements. This concerted effort used legal and illegal means to achieve it's aim, in a written down planed framework that included how to convince the rest of the world that what was really happeing was not happening. This is very different from 'discrimination' against TC and much more serious (and sinister).
pantelis wrote:After 1974, though, you cannot blame the GCs for their problems.
I was not blaming the GC for the state of the TC ecconomy post 74. I was countering your claim that the (only) cause for the difference between the TC ecconomy and the GC ecconomy post 74 was down to 'the corrupt leadership of Turkey and Turkish army'
pantelis wrote:What kind of an embargo are you talking about Erol?
I am talking about the very real embargoes that exists to this day. We can not for example export to the EU (though we can of course still buy from the EU - just not sell). We can not have flights direct to and from the North. It costs me about £250.00 to fly return from here to UK (and about £300 the other way round). This cost is directly related to the 'emargoes'. The idea that the very real embargoes on trade and direct travel have not affected the TC ecconomy post 74 is just nonsense (imo and with respect).
pantelis wrote:I have visited the north this summer. I did not see an embargo.
Well obviously if you did not 'see' an embargo then there could not have been one?
pantelis wrote:The Kyrenia harbor tables were full of Britts. I saw the villas and the hotels. I saw the Israeli developments at Bogazi. The casinos and the bordelos are all over Kyrenia, I was told by my TC friends.
and if we had direct flights to the north do you really doubt that thee would have been more tourism, more investment , more trade in the north? Or that with this extra tourism etc the ecconomy of the north would not have been much close to that of the south than it is today?
Oh and can we stop this 'bordelos' nonsense? We have prostituies here. You have prostitues there. There are prostituies everywhere.
pantelis wrote:If there is embargo on the TCs, it is imposed by the regime that controls their life.
That is just a total distortion of the meaning of embargo. By definition an embargo is something that an 'outside' agency imposes on you. If it is imposed by you yourself it is not an embargo.
pantelis wrote:They cannot use the beach below their house, because half it is reserved by the army officers' families and the other half for a private hotel, I was told. Instead they have to travel miles, by car, so they can enjoy the sea.
I have asked some questions, in my previous post. Did you or anyone else give me any answers?
You can use any beach you like. If you use a hotels beach facilites then the hotel can charge you for this. If you do not then they can not restrict your access to the beach.
Do you not have 'reserved areas' in the south? Military bases? My trip to the top of the Troodos was 'spolit' by the huges listening bases on the top of the mountain.
pantelis wrote:How is your "government" supported right now? Do you pay any income or property taxes?
and if I start to ask you about your personal fincances and what taxes you pay would you be as willing to be as open as I am going to be. In reality it is none of your business what I pay or do not pay, but I will choose to answer you none the less.
My income is based on property in the UK and as such is liable to UK tax. I pay the equivalence of 'rates' on my property here.
pantelis wrote:How about the British and other foreigners, or the settlers, do they pay taxes?
How and where foreigniers pay taxes is dependent on where the taxable income is dervied from. In simple terms if those foreginers earn income from activites in North Cyprus they are liable for taxes in North Cyprus. Do they pay them? How would I know I am neither a tax collector nor do I go around asking people if they pay their taxes. It is no deifferent foe the settlers as I understand it.
pantelis wrote:Also, Erol, you keep repeating that massive foreign aid came to the TCs after 1974. Do you have any sources, documenting what came and when.
There are many sources available if you care to look. Here is just one for you
http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/wollacot ... omment.htmOn this, that the economic recovery of Greek Cyprus was aided considerably by the Western powers, British journalist Martin Woollacott points out in his incisive article "Cyprus: Dealing for Dollars":
Greek Cyprus must rank as one of the most subsidized nations in the world. With a population of only half a million people, it receives something like $54 million annually in grant aid from the United States, Greece, the United Nations, Britain, Germany and other countries, as well as an average $12 million a year in soft loans. In addition, it benefits massively from the UN military presence - - costs estimated at $29 million a year, of which Canada pays a hefty share -- and from the British bases. Foreign aid and loans approach a fifth of all government revenues, and the over-all contribution to the economy, including the military spending, may be of the same order. This provides a solid, if rarely acknowledged, base for the dynamic Greek Cypriot economy. But since much of the money directly derives from the division of the island, it also creates, as one diplomat put it, 'a vested interest in keeping things as they are'. The booming Greek Cypriot economy, partly fueled by such foreign injections, gives the Greek Cypriots no economic incentive for a settlement and tends to reinforce those hard-liners who prefer the strategy of the long struggle', which is really a strategy for the economic defeat of the Turkish
Maclean's Magazine, June 25, 1979, p. 29.
Here are a couple more references for you
http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/economic ... 20kyle.htmhttp://www.country-studies.com/cyprus/the-economy.htmlPersonally, I did not see it, or felt it. My father worked for 17 years in Libya, so I could go to school and have a place to live in, that's all I know.
Well it was certainly arriving in the hands of your government. Perhaps the fact that it was pouring into their hands and yet you were seeeing none of it as a citizen says something about how 'corrupt' you leadership may have been ?
[/quote]