Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

Insan,

There was no gossip involved between me and MicAtCyp. I was merely defending him because everyone on here seems to have it in for him for speaking his opinions. As it happens, he agreed with my explanation.

Ok mikkie, np for me.

I was trying to point out your attitude that assumes that everything the GC's do, such as gaining EU membership, is in order to bury the TC's and to fuel your 'Hellen' conspiracy theories.

Not GCs as you suggested above. Please I've never made generalizations over GCs. "bury the TC's and to fuel your 'Hellen' conspiracy theories." is your exaggerated interpretation. I just follow the goings-on closely and examining them on a analytical basis by taking into consideration all the data I have. Besides the facts, I also stress some of the imporatnt developments. Furthermore I question the probablities we might face under different circumstances.

One question I have for you is, what about the Turksih Elite? Don't you subscribe to the idea that the Turkish establishment and elite have their own agenda regarding Cyprus as well?

Of course they have and many times I refered to them. But if you think there are some issues that I have never talked about what was the role of Turkish Ruling Elite concerning those issues, please feel free to ask specifically.

As roumour would have it, many people on Talats infamous list of 45000 settlers that would stay, a large number of those seemed to be rather rich and famous Turkish individuals that don't even live in Cyprus!

After a week or so, the list of 45.000 settlers was given to the UN; I read a report about it in Turkish daily Hurriyet and it suggested that those rich and famous Turkish individuals all had been taken out of the list.

I guess many of them fancied having their holiday home there and to also concorete over most of the north with holiday homes for welthy Europeans.

Re mikkie where do you find those rarely used words re What does "concerete" means re? Whole google turned out just one result but didn't give me any idea about what the meaning of this word might be

Speaking of one and excluding the other does not provide for a balanced conclusion, don't you think?

I agree but I thought I speak about both of them related with the issues. And as I said if you have some specific questiones about the TRE(Turkish Ruling Elite), I'm ready to put forward what I know and my interpretations on an analytic basis and if needed quotations from some reliable sources.

[insan]

excellent point,whats good for the goode is good for the gander.

how rich has dektash gotten off partion?

Is that what all you want to know, re bulli?

[-mikkie2-]

Insan,

Its my bad spelling!

Should have said concrete, as in the material for building houses!

[boulio]

i personally dont care how rich dektash has gotten but im sure if people really looked into it,it would be astonishing at how many homes and properties he has and many zero's are in his bank account.

[Saint Jimmy]

(I don't know what galosto means but we TCs use it the way I used it. Not just Gia sou but together with galosto...)

Hehe

KalOston (not 'galosto') - the big O is where the accent goes - means welcome in greek. Kind of like, when you are at home and a friend shows up, says hello, you answer back 'kaloston' - welcome!

[Saint Jimmy]

I want to ask one thing, and please be truthful to me.

If the 'occupation' as you call it ends tomorrow,

will you and GC community give our rights back from 1960 constitution? Will you?

Ask this question to yourself, and answer truthfully.

You know, guys, this is really surprising to me... I honestly thought that the answer to that question was clear-cut and as straight-forward as they get: if we were ever given the chance to go back to the 1960 agreement, we'd all but praise the Lord for the opportunity... But Othellos's answer seemed to me to be more of a 'no' than a 'yes' (actually, Othellos didn't answer the question, so he is quite welcome to correct me if I'm wrong). It makes me really curious about what it is we wouldn't like about those agreements today. Personally, I would be more than happy to apply the provisions of the 1960 constitution, and I used to think that it went without saying that we would be more than happy to return to those agreements

p.s to Saint Jimmy. I am very relaxed man. This is my style.

Cool by me, man. The question still stands though: who said GCs are intellectually or otherwise superior to TCs?
Peace

[mehmet]

So as I understand it, the RoC may change its laws to allow a Turkish Cypriot living in the south to vote fro a president if they accept to consider themselves as part of the Greek Cypriot community. Perhaps next they will ask for 100,000 Greek Cypriot volunteers to agree to be regarded as Turkish Cypriots so that they can say to the world we function as the 1960 constituition was agreed.

[MicAtCyp]

Ask this question to yourself, and answer truthfully. ........snip
If your answer is 'no" then I will say no more, and leave you alone with your hypocritical, self-righteous comments...... snip

Turkcyp,
I personally answered your very same question not once but twice! In my second reply I even wanted to post a poll on your behalf, but I thought it wouldn’t be polite to "steal" your question so I asked you to do it.You never replied to me.
Why should you reply to the No1 hypocrite of the forum anyway?

Here are copies of my first and second replies
*****************************************************

TurkCyp,

I remember when I was participating in a forum the majority of which were nationalists I told them the following:
What you guys think you will do if one day by some miracle the RoC suddenly takes full control of the island? Will the Cyprus government let you go to the northern part and start a new bloodshed, or let you throw people out in the streets? DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT! It will first put all the army, all the Police, All the UN, plus more UN, to guard the borders so that nobody crosses. It will declare a situation of emergency! Then slowly slowly it will bring individual people face to face escorted by police. The first effort is to fascilitate and convince people to exchange equal properties. Everything will be done slowly slowly and it may take 2 - 3 years for the situation of emergency to be lifted.
Do I need to mention that most of the administrative system in the north will have to remain intact and autonomous? And that the RoC will be oblidged under the circumstances to undertake its financing otherwise it will collapse and create chaos at the northern part, that the RoC will not be able to handle? This may surprise many, especially the nationalists, but this is what is going to happen, and if the initial measure of autonomy proves satisfactory to both sides, this is what the final solution will be.

I don't agree that nothing will happen, if the state does not take extremely tough measures and declare a situation of emergency. With all respect but you really don't know how far people can go in defending or claiming something that belongs to them. Alexandros Lordos in this forum is a psychlologist. Ask him to tell you. Or just compare what happens when you cause a little damage to someones car.Of course we are not talking for all the people, but even 20 or 30% is enough to turn the place into hell.

The matter of settlers will be arranged according with international law, human rights, EU Aquis and international aggreements that the RoC already signed! Many of them will have to go. Others will stay. And beleive me everything will be according to law and according to human rights. I can’t describe the whole process in detail, but I am sure you got the meaning.

The RoC of today my friend is a responsible state that functions ACCORDING WITH LAW. It is not the state of the 60s.

PS.1) I would like a TC to tell us how the TCs will react against the settlers in this hypothetical scenario. Will the situation become unstable in the northern part from fighting between TCs and settlers, or will they tolerate each other at least for as much time as it might be necessary to clarify who remains a citizen and who leaves?
2)Why not the Turkish Army leave on an agreed schedule, that will enable all concerned handle the situation?
**********************************************************

So I am asking again one more time to my fellow GC countrymen. Let's say tomorrow Turkish Army decided to leave Cyprus and 'occupation' as you name it cease to exist
Will you then start applying 1960 constitution or not? This is a crucial questions in the minds of many many TCs.

Definetely yes for 2 reasons: Because thats what 99.99% of the GCs want, and second if the rulers of RoC show reluctancy, you will sue RoCs ass out in the EU courts. Can’t you see that? Be sure the ones who will help you do that -in case the rulers are relactant- are the GCs lawyers and specialists themselves.... (Note:Why don't you post a poll for this asking the GCs to vote?)

[erolz]

But leaving the word "theft" aside, do you think that withholding other peoples property and refusing to return it no matter what is helpful or constructive in finding a solution?

In those terms no I do npot think it is constructive. However I do think it is valid for these people to claim that they do not want to be refugees again and that they have paid fairly for their current properties (through exchange of their rights to their propoerties in the south) and thus consider them 'fairly' their properties. This is nto a simple issue it is a complex one and in fact any simplistic black and white view is probably no helpful or constructive from either side.

We have already discussed how many GCs felt about the 1960 agreements. We have also discussed the responsibilities of GC and TC leaders with respect to the overall climate in Cyprus at that time, as well as the level of mistrust between the two communities. And we have also talked about a Turkish plan that the TC leadership followed and that corresponded to the Akitas plan, that (unlike the Turkish plan) never went very far.

The Arkitas plan never went very far? It's objectives were to remove the priveldges that the TC community had as rights under the agreed consistuion. By 1963 this objective was achieved. Until 1974 it was achieved without the 'cost' of Turkish intervention. After 74 it was still achieved but at the (very high) cost of Turkish intervention. The objective still remains today one of the 'core' areas of difference in any settlement.

I wouldn't say that there is a current GC objective is to reduce the TCs to a political minority (although the term "political minority" remains subject to several different nterpretations). After all the GC leadership has accepted long time ago that the solution in Cyprus will be a bi zonal, bi communal federation. Besides, the Annan plan was hardly doing that (reducing the TCs into ……).

You might not think so but I disagree. Some GC claim to want a federal solution - but then explain that their idea of a federal solution is one where TC have a limited 'geogrpahical area' but no level of political equality at the federal level. This to me is not a federal solution at all. You yourself (from memory) have argued that it is a fundamental aspect of democracy that the 'majority rule' - despite the clear discrepancies to this interpretation outsoide of Cyprus (i the EU and USA and other 'federal' insitutuions). How then am I to regard such insistance that the only way to have deomcracy in Cyprus is for the GC community to have effective control of all federal insitutions - other than a continued desire (that matches the objectives of the Akritas plan - but not the meathods) of some GC to reduce the TC community to a political minority in Cyprus, regardless of the 1960 consitution and regardless of any rights of the TC people to any degree of self representation?

Regarding GC objective, I would say that in the mind of the ordinary people this remains the same: to workable solution that will provide for a peaceful and safe future in a democratic country where all Cypriots will have equal rights and responsibilities.

This is easy to say - and if you make the defintion of democracy to be 'that the GC numerical majority must rule at all federal levels' - then by saying you want democracy you are saying you want the TC community to be a political minority. The same is so with human rights. If you chose to define human rights as only those of indivduals, and ignore or dismiss the both the rights of TC community as a people and the reality that these rights can and do clash, then in effect you define 'human rights in Cyprus' as meainning effective control by the GC community of all aspects of Cyprus at the federal level.

Since neither has automatic priority over the other, it only makes sense to assume that people rights cannot violate individual rights under any circumstances. Or am I missing something again here?

Yes you are missing reality. The reality is that the rights of the GC community to self determination in regard to ENOSIS in 1960 were in effect a direct violation of the TC peoples rights to self determination. On groups rights clashed with anothers. There are also examples in solutions today where the rights of indivduals or communites clash. These rights can and do and have clashed. To say that they 'should not clash' is an expression of idealisim not reality.
My point is not that one should take priority over the other. My point is that many GC present the issue as one simply of a violation fo their human rights and refuse to recognise or accept the violations in the past or future violations with regard to TC (usualy by denying our status as a 'people' and thus our rights as such). Where rights do clash there needs to be compromise and limits on rights that are agreed and acceptable to both parties. You can not get this if one side insists that only their rights are being infringed upon or that only their rights should have priotity.

I am not sure what you mean. Was the election of George Bush over Al Gore such an example? Bush had the majority in electoral votes.

What I mean is that in the UK it is possible for a party to win an election and govern the country with as little as 40% of the votes of the elctorate. This means that the largest minority wins not the majority. I think this is possible in the UK though I have not done any real research. If and when I find the time to do so I will.

Why does everyone in here feel they need to explain why they edit their posts?

O.

Because it is possible to edit ones posts after the fact to actively decieve and mislead. I just thought as Insan had mentioned the reason why his posts were shown as having being edited - I would do likewise - especially as it is rare for me not to edit a post. I just wanted to make it clear that this was not to distort or decieve.

[Othellos]

Gia sou galosto re Othellos (I don't know what galosto means but we TCs use it the way I used it. Not just Gia sou but together with galosto...)

Galosto = kalos ton (or kalos tin for fem) =a welcoming

……… Another remarkable point in this story is that, I think; a part of Akel is totally against T-Pap and his policies.

I will agree with you, Insan, that a lot of what we see these days makes little sense. There were people from all the major political parties who voted in favour of the Annan plan and this tells me that in the future we could see voters shifting to or from their "traditional" parties based on who represents their views on the Cyprus problem better. Just a thought...

True. So the question is how can we overcome and get over this conservatism which is a very big obstacle in front of a better solution, Island wide?

That is a good question. The fact that GCs and TCs can now meet and talk face to face again after 30 years is certainly a positive one. There are some good friendships being developed and recently I have read about a small number of "bi-communal" companies that have been founded by GCs and TCs together. Maybe some think that it is not much but it is a start.

Actually I agree with you. A few months ago, after reading a huge amount of articles, studies about the Cyprus problem; I came hear and opened a new thread with a subject "Destroyers of Cyprus". Guess who were in my list.

Who?

………… here's a link which I think may give you a better explanation concerning this issue. There you'll find their official point of view about this issue.

That link does not say much about the 3rd Vienna agreement. Anyway.....

Are you married re Othellos? Child(ren)? I have a son of 7 y.o.

May you see your son grow happy and prosperous, Insan. I have 2 kids (girl 9 y.o and boy 5 y.o)

O.