Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Bananiot, Christofias will never side with the fascists of your kind, get over it. You are history. You will never govern Cyprus again. Never again.

Cry as much as you want, accuse Papadopoulos as much as you want, get as much money from the Americans as you want to fight Papadopoulos. Disi is now alone (whatever remained from it) and we will never allow far right to govern us again. If its not Papadopoulos our president is going to be somebody else that will act for the interests of Cyprus, and not somebody from your side that will sell us off to the Americans for some dollars.

[tcypriot]

"No Turkish Cypriot was killed between 1963 and 1974" 1


These are the words of the fascist leader of the terrorist regime Papadoppolos. Resemblance with what some of the Nazi war criminals were saying about the Jewish holocaust during the international war crime tribunal is unrejectably clear.

In many european countries, Holocaust Denial is a criminal act.


Can the lovers of the Banana president justify his above statement?!

1)The correct number of Turkish Cypriot number of dead is more than 1000.

Genocide Denial - Lessons For Our Country
http://www1.yadvashem.org/download/educ ... /Cohen.pdf

[cannedmoose]

The Annan partition plan was created by the Americans and the British to serve their own, and their good allie Turkey, interests. It was not pragmatic, it was was a "new order" plan, where the Americans think they can do whatever they feel like without giving a shit about human rights and international law. Papadopolous did what we elected him to do: Represent us and defend us. This is how we are correctly represented, and not by some "good boy" who would sell us so he will be invited in high class European dinners.

Thanks for your perspective Piratis. While it is true that the British and American governments do have their own interests in any resolution in Cyprus, it is not correct to say that the Annan Plan was a UK/US creation. Nor is it correct to say that the Plan was designed to favour Turkish interests. The fact of the matter is that the partition of Cyprus happened in 1974, and any future solution is going to have to recognise that Cyprus is a divided country with two mono-ethnic states in situ. The Annan Plan was not an entirely new piece of work, it has its foundations in previous plans such as that proposed by Boutros-Ghali in the early 1990s. Whilst some of the aspects of the Plan are undesirable in GC (and indeed in TC) eyes, it does involve compromise on both sides. Many of the GC views on the Plan result from a degree of 'misselling' that took place in the media at the time.

Yes, you are correct that in some ways it is a 'new world order' plan - in the respect that it is realist in recognising that the situation on the ground is now more than 30 years old, beyond the point where land can simply be handed over between armies and beyond the point where displaced people can return to their lives and rebuild normality. In Cyprus, the war is long over, land has been settled and lives long changed.

I also disagree with your interpretation of Papadopoulos' 'representation' of his nation. In a referendum, it is not the government that takes the decision, the main reason why the referendum clause was written into the Plan. When Tassos went on tv and begged his people to vote 'no', he wasn't being presidential. A true president would have rationally analysed the merits and demerits of the Plan, laid these before his people and said 'i leave this monumental decision to you, the people, it is for you to decide the destiny of our island'. He could have added that he personally would not be voting 'yes' and left it at that. In advocating and outlining the reasons for a 'no' vote (barely mentioning any positive aspects), he abandoned that section of the population who felt a solution at hand and wanted a new beginning for both sides.

Also don't underestimate the importance of being liked in European capitals. Ultimately a Cyprus solution will be found through Europe, not in spite of it. You would be better 'represented' by a leader with clout in Europe, not one who is on the margins. Cyprus had a lot of friends across Europe and a lot of sympathisers who will help turn the thumbscrews on Turkey to Cyprus' advantage. Alienating these supporters is the worst way to represent your people.

[Cypcom]

This is so pointless.
There is a solution to the cyprus problem. It is very simple and easy to understand, but very hard to accept. And that is where the problem lies.

The solution

Abolish the titles of Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot. THIS is where the problems all start. You know what these titles also constitute? Racism.

Now here comes the hard part. Accepting. I know a lot of the "TCs" are now going to come in and say 'you are just saying that cause you want the GCs to rule over the whole island etc etc...' but think about it, doesnt that sentence again bring the "titles" back into play? If we abolish the "TCs" and the "GCs" then we are left with just Cypriots! Yes it will take a lot of trust. Yes in the beginning it may seem unfair to some but in the long run we will have people in high places that arent there because of what language they speak or what religion they believe but because they are the right people for the job. Why shouldnt a muslim Cypriot be able to run for president? Why should we have to say you are a "GC" so yuo can only live here or you are a "TC" so you arent allowed this or that...

If I can get my point accross to at least 1 "GC" and 1 "TC" (as they would title themselves) then I am a happy man.

[Saint Jimmy]

Hmmm...

Man, I can live with that, but I think it's not that simple...

First thing that springs to mind would be... economic domination...?

Most GCs are better off than the average TC (or that's the pereption prevailing in the GC side of the fence - please correct me if I'm wrong), so that would mean that GCs would have the means in a fundamentally capitalist economic system to effectively rule, no?

[Cypcom]

Actually, in my opinion, I dont see it in the way that people tend to present the economic gap between the two. Yes the per capita income in the free territory is much higher than in the occupied but the income in both areas amongst the population seems to be fairly equally distributed.
If both communities were to unite in one state then there would be little reason for different public policies amongst the population, employers would naturally go for the cheaper, yet equally qualified work force (TCs) leaving the more expensive (GC) workforce out of a job, supply and demand would shift and people would start to look for work. Either more companies would begin to form or existing companies expand, taking up the rest of the workforce supply, as would in any good economy (like cyprus) or people would start to be self employed (like a lot of the people in the developed countries).

In the end supply and demand ALWAYS balance themselves out to a certain equilibrium, people will be able to buy and sell, developing our markets, as well as diversifying which inevitably leads to proper distribution of income based not on language (as by this time people would/should be familiar either with both greek/turkish or at least with english), not on religion (insignificant in today's modern, diversified markets) and so not on ethnicity (or racism as I call it).

This may seem like for a while the "TC" are getting the short end if the stick here and some may think that it would support this "economic domination" even if it is just for the beginning. But really if you take a good look at the today economy of the occupied territories with high inflation (high inflation is anything in double digits), relative unemployment (taking into account the part time jobs) and little economic backbone in general and also take a look at the south that even though is struggling a little lately, is still at full employment, one of the lowest inflation rates in the EU and an enormously strong economy in general, the benefits for both sides are just too great to overlook. In fact you would have to be insane to deny them.

Yes it may take a while for the equilibrium to be reached. But think of the outcome 20 years from now, when no one would be fighting about 'your ancestors did this to my ancestors' etc. People would just be looking to better their lives and the lives of their children. Focus will fall away from 'communal' strife or conflict, stabilizing the island politically, which would bring in more investments and more income for the people, stabilizing the life on the island even more, etc etc. If people stop thinking about nationalities and religions (not saying that religion isnt improtant in an INDIVIDUAL'S life) and start focusing on bettering themselves and have a little EMPATHY (a word I saw somewhere else in this forum) then there should be no economic domination, as there be no opposing sides for one to dominate the other.

[Saint Jimmy]

OK, there is an economic counter-argument to the economic domination thing... I'm pretty sure someone will come along and counter that, but I'm not an economist and I can't.

How do we lose the attitudes though??? In your proposed unified Cyprus, any Cypriot can run for President, or Mayor, or whatever. So, if his name is Mehmet, running against some Andreas character, do you really think Mehmet stands a chance? I sincerely doubt that, at least for those first twenty years you mentioned... Why would TCs, then, accept to go through these twenty years of isolation, assuming it's only twenty years???

We are more, it makes sense for us to be perfectly happy with such a proposal. What would their incentive be? What do we give up, to compensate for that initial period???

[Cypcom]

OK, there is an economic counter-argument to the economic domination thing... I'm pretty sure someone will come along and counter that, but I'm not an economist and I can't.

Lets hope so. I dont want people accepting an argument just cause no one else counters.

How do we lose the attitudes though??? In your proposed unified Cyprus, any Cypriot can run for President, or Mayor, or whatever. So, if his name is Mehmet, running against some Andreas character, do you really think Mehmet stands a chance? I sincerely doubt that, at least for those first twenty years you mentioned... Why would TCs, then, accept to go through these twenty years of isolation, assuming it's only twenty years???

Ok so lets take the example of Mehmet. Let us assume that the time frame is about 10 years down the road (20 years is just a very rough estimate for the whole plan to finally be whole, results should occur way before that, maybe as soon as 4-6 years). He is a lawyer running for Mayor. He has gained much respect from the community as he is a senior partener in one of the city's largest law firm. The law firm has partners of all religions. He is running up against the incubent Andreas. Over the years Andreas has been doing a poor job of keeping the city finances in check. Political parties of the opposing field (both greek and turkish speaking, as part of trust building efforts) converge and agree that Mehmet is the better candidate. I know this is all speculation but think about it this way. If people have now managed to get past their ethnic perspectives and accepted each other in every day life why would it be so much harder to run for a position where he may actually be better at than the current mayor. People will have understood that what the mayor does greatly affects them especially economically. It wont be about 'oh he's a turk' or 'oh he's a greek'.

We are more, it makes sense for us to be perfectly happy with such a proposal. What would their incentive be? What do we give up, to compensate for that initial period???

I believe in one of the former forums someone mentioned the great Green Man, I think it was Pantelis. The Green man is of course money. As odd as it may sound, money DOES solve a lot of things. Not because people are selfish and want more, but because as people's pockets become deeper, society becomes richer too. There are examples all throughout history of this. Each Golden Age is a perfect example in any society. As society becomes richer, understanding becomes broader. In the end, if everyone buys into this idea we may end up with a society much like Canada's, where the past like 5 prime ministers (okay I might be exaggerating here) were french canadians even though french canadians are like 22-24% of the entire population.

I'm not saying it's not going to take time, or sacrifice, but honestly if people would really give it a decent effort it would yield better results than anything else out there.

THERE HAS TO BE TRUST! Otherwise everything else is pointless...

[Saint Jimmy]

Over the years Andreas has been doing a poor job of keeping the city finances in check. Political parties of the opposing field (both greek and turkish speaking, as part of trust building efforts) converge and agree that Mehmet is the better candidate.

Cypcom, I can agree with the rest, but this fictional scenario is not very likely. Very rarely are things as black-and-white as that. In every normal aspect of things, the variables influencing a decision are pretty subjective.

A likelier version of that scenario would be that both canidates have their strong and their weak points, with only a few things separating them, as is the case with most elections (at least in Cyprus). I would be pretty sure that when things are not clear-cut, black or white (that's... in most cases!), people will tend to go with what they perceive(...) as 'theirs', closer to them, a part of their group.

Obviously, this attitude will tend to deteriorate in time, as you said, but my concerns regard the first years, because I think this point would to be a certainty.

[Bananiot]

Piratis is back to his old self again. He writes that all people who support DISI are fascists and extreme right wingers. He even thinks that DISI has been destroyed. That is a fallacy. Its the biggest party in Cyprus, according to the last elections, in early May 2004, despite going against the popular treand at the time. The ease by which Piratis labels people as fascist is phenomenal. I do not think he knows the meaning of the word. He is practically saying that 100 000 people who voted for the solution are fascists and are on the payroll of the americans. This is absurd and it does not help the good health of this forum either.

If it makes him feel any better, I could tell him that I do not belong to DISI. I never did. Of course this is absolutely irrelevent and it would be miles better if he could come up with real arguments to support his protege rather than throw mad at everyone who critises Papadopoulos. For example, how does he explain the fact that Papadopoulos insists in his claim that no TC was killed from 1963 to 1974? How can he convince the TC's that the man who was the vice leader of the fascist Akritas Plan now wants to serve the TC's too? Can Piratis explain to us how the man who rejected every single plan for the solution of our problem since 1955, is now willing to acept an agreed solution which will lead to share of power?