Bananiot wrote:Kifeas wroteYou are also on the payroll of Papadopoulos, as a highly paid state employee, yet no one stops you from publicly supporting and promoting the Turkish pan-turanist propaganda and objectives on the Cyprus issue, which aim at vindicating and legitimizing the ethnic cleansing, usurping and Turkification of 37% of the Greek Cypriot's ancestral and historical homeland.
The little fascist is suggesting that we lick the boss (no matter who he is) because this is how, in his twisted mind, all public servants should behave. They should give unquestioned support to whoever the President is. Furthermore, he suggests that any criticism directed at the President is playing into the hands of the Turkish propagandists. I detest this kind of argument and remind everyone of Voltaire and ask you to compare him with Kifeas.
What a crook you have really become of!
You quote the above, which was made in response to your nonsense that Claire Palley is on the payroll of Papadopoulos, in order to discredit her work, in order to show you that merely being on the payroll of someone doesn't make your views identical to those of your boss, and one such example I tried to indicate to be that of your self, and now you have the audacity to so provocatively twist that to show that meant the exact opposite of what I so profoundly suggested! Get lost crook! Charlatan!
The Annan Plan was a plan that was supported by the international community (UN and EU).
The initiative was supported by the international community, like always, but not the content of the final product (plan /proposal) itself! The EU had simply said that if we -the people of the country- are ready to accept it as the final solution, it (the EU) would accommodate it! Neither the EU nor the UN said to us that we must accept it, because it is the only solution that we can possibly have! Stop lying! Nevertheless, the mere use of such a stupidly pathetic argument shows your stupidity! Why then on the referendums they had one "yes" and one "no" as the two possible replies and they didn't have two "yes" instead? What a joke you have really become, to resort to such poor and stupid arguments!
There were many things in it that could have been better. Papadopoulos did not negotiate it with a view of making it better for the Greek Cypriots. He infact made it worse so that he could ask for a loud "no". Ask yourself why and there you have the answer: He has been against BBF throughout his life and he wasn't about to change his mind only a few months after climbing to the top job.
What a bunch of Nonsense!
Once again, I remind people that in the world we live in there are no ideal solutions but options, especially for a tiny weeny country such as Cyprus. We have been offered some better options in the past but declined to take them, making sure that the Turks recieved the blame for the stalemate. This worked quite well while Denktash ruled supreme in the north. Basically, we kept the flame going for a different kind of solution that would see Cyprus becoming a unitary state once again with the majority running the country and the minority enjoying all legitimate rights. Of course we were thinking wishfully, as always, but when things did change in the north, our shortcomings were quickly exposed. The whole world now thinks that we are the community to blame and that the Turkish Cypriot community is to be rewarded for maintaing a positive and helpful stance. The victims became the giulty part and Turkey got a resolution at the UN asking her to continue it's good efforts for a solution. The amazing thing is that Padopoulos put his signature on the print but no patriot of this forum protested against it.
Even more nonesense!
Once again I ask: Can we climb down from the clouds and face realities? Realities that were formulated not only by Turkey but mainly because of our own incredible lust to turn the island into a part of Greece (Makarios's speaches in Panayia and elsewhere in the early 60's pay testament to the fact).
There you are! We are the main guilty ones, and therefore we should accept the illegitimate objectives and ambitions of the TCs, Turkey and the Anglo-Americans, and accept a two "pre-existing nation /state" solution, a disguised partition that would have legalized the illegitimate and immoral fait accomplices of Turkey against us, and a confederation on a 50:50 sharing of the Cyprus's international personality and representation; because it was mainly our fault. And then you complain that I call you for what you are, …a traitor. As if Makarios was not the one been overthrown with a coup by a minority of right-wing extremists, because in their rightful view he had abandoned Enosis and tried to solve the Cyprus issue on the basis of independence, from 1968-1974.
Yes, I supported the Annan Plan and voted, among others, for the Turkish army to leave Cyprus and the number of settlers to be restricted to a few thousands. I voted for the Plan because I knew fully well that it was an option that we could not affort not to take. Simitis did so too and of course he was no traitor. He knew only too well that it was the best we could do, under the circumstances. Yet, with the benefit of hindsight, if I had to choose, I would probably still choose the Annan Plan, even compared to a Plan that offered a unified Cyprus, because with our mentality it is probably better if the two communities are separated for the immediate future into their respective geographical regions. From this point of view the Plan was a masterpiece and took well into account, both our recent history and the mentality of a people with zero political culture.
Then why aren't you proposing your TC friends to keep only the 18% of Cyprus for their state, since you prefer geographical separation as you have explained above? And was the Annan plan one that accounted for a temporary geographical separation, or it was one in which geographical separation and splitting of Cyprus into two ethnically based “nation-states,” a permanent? Read the TC Constituent State’s constitution to find this out, and …piss off!
Yet, what weighed really heavily in my mind prior to the referenda was that I knew that Papadopoulos will never be able to manage the "no" of the Greek Cypriot community. Klerides and Vassiliou would have done it in an elegant and a political manner. They could have easily shown the world that the Greek Cypriot community did not reject solution but a specific plan. Papadopoulos will never be able to do this. Remember how he cried on TV when he asked us to give a loud "no"? Well, a politically cultured man would have cried if he had asked his people to vote "yes".
How could he have been able to managed the "no" adequately and convince the international community of his true motives and intentions, if traitors like yourself, Lukas Charalambous, Nicos Rolandis and CIA, all you are doing since the referendums was to constantly defame and discredit him in the eyes of the international world opinion and in the eyes of the TC community -in forums and local English language publications that would also find their ways directly in the Turkish and Anglo-Saxon press and media; with slanders and lies that he is a Turk hater, a hard liner, a nationalist and someone that doesn't want a solution but only partition, because he doesn’t want to share power with the other community, and all the rest of rubbish that you keep bumping around all the time?
The foreigners and the TC community will naturally believe that if Greek Cypriots say the above, then they must be true to some extent. They do not know or imagine that they just come out of the mouth of a spiteful minority that acts deliberately against the interests of its own community. The Turkish propaganda will also naturally make full use of them to further their aims, something that already happens as we speak.
