Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

I don't know about Akel and Edek but the only way ANY Anal plan could get a less negative voting would be in a state of silence. May I remind you that just 2 people Christos Klerides and Nicos Koutsou guided the whole NO side with unbeatable arguments. The rest were simply repeating what Chistos Klerides was saying.

You said something very accurate before:Most of it had to do with the properties and security. These issues however extend to other issues like for example settlers, EU aquis etc. I mean they are not "stand alone" issues.

Anyway what do you think about Birkibrisli's question on "whats next?"

[cypezokyli]

I don't know about Akel and Edek but the only way ANY Anal plan could get a less negative voting would be in a state of silence. May I remind you that just 2 people Christos Klerides and Nicos Koutsou guided the whole NO side with unbeatable arguments. The rest were simply repeating what Chistos Klerides was saying.

You said something very accurate before:Most of it had to do with the properties and security. These issues however extend to other issues like for example settlers, EU aquis etc. I mean they are not "stand alone" issues.

Anyway what do you think about Birkibrisli's question on "whats next?"

you are overemphasising the opinions of two politicians who represent around 5-6% of the gcs. even worse these two are in any case against a BBF settlement. they will never have arguments in favor of a solution.

ofcource you personally might have found there analysis as "exceptional" , but you just like so many others no-supporters, claim that the reasons of rejection of all the rest, are the same as yours.

even worse you undervalue the power and party mechanisms of the biggest cypriot political party.

[Pyrpolizer]

Yeah, we 've seen their powers.... Desy was not able to even convince 1/3 of its followers.

[cypezokyli]

Yeah, we 've seen their powers.... Desy was not able to even convince 1/3 of its followers.

to be honest i was reffering to akel.
thats why i wrote party , and not parties.
besides when we talk about party mechanisms in cyprus, only one party really has such....i thought it was obvious

[Pyrpolizer]

So you think Akel was any better?
It seems to me you don't understand why communists are communists. It's because they are poor and want to become rich, not because they are poor and want to become poorer by losing their properties.
Akel supported the no vote for this reason. Otherwise it would brake appart.

[askimwos]

So you think Akel was any better?
It seems to me you don't understand why communists are communists. It's because they are poor and want to become rich, not because they are poor and want to become poorer by losing their properties.
Akel supported the no vote for this reason. Otherwise it would brake appart.

Pyr, I think this is the most naive thing I heart from you! Akel is a party that has formed almost all its policies over the last 50 years on two major pillars. These are the communist/left anti-imperialistic ideology and the need to prevent the Cypriot society of being split along the two ethnic lines. It is well known that Akel is the party that was/is pro-rapproachment and its members have paid the price in the past either with their life kavazoglu-mishiaoulis or with being stigmatized as traitors.

These two main pillars of Akel's policies have come to contraticts each other when the final Annan plan was formed. On one side there was a plan that our TCs brothers saw as the solution of the CyProb and at the same time the plan was making Cyprus on a PERMAMENT basis a protectorate of Turkey, and the UK. The fact that the plan was rejected by the party's conference on a 65% to 35% majority which was relatively close to overuling the party's central committee proposal for a No vote shows that the party would have gone for a Yes vote if the Annan plan was somewhat more balanced.

Don't forget that Akel disagreed with Tpap's infamous televised speech about the Annan plan, as it critisized Talat for his stance in Bourgenstock negotiations.

If a few changes that will satisfy the GCs are made on the Annan plan then Akel has the capacity to convince people to vote Yes. However, these changes have to be real changes and not just for the sake of saying that there have been changes.

[Pyrpolizer]

Askimwos I corrected your statement many times in this forum, as you seem totally disoriented as to how any Akelist would be convinced by its leadership to accept whatever plan.
The so called "few changes" Akel supposely needed to come up to a yes vote was nothing but a smoke screen.

Listen the solution is far from any "ideology". The ideology that counts not only for a communist but for EVERYONE is his own personal interest.

Mark my words and don't count on ANY parties decisions regarding ANY plan. Any solution will be discussed publicly and no party directives can stand on logical and well documented arguments.

And to tell you the truth, individual refugee clubs will have more power on their members than any political party will have to the matter of deciding yes or no.

[askimwos]

Askimwos I corrected your statement many times in this forum, as you seem totally disoriented as to how any Akelist would be convinced by its leadership to accept whatever plan.
The so called "few changes" Akel supposely needed to come up to a yes vote was nothing but a smoke screen.

Listen the solution is far from any "ideology". The ideology that counts not only for a communist but for EVERYONE is his own personal interest.

Mark my words and don't count on ANY parties decisions regarding ANY plan. Any solution will be discussed publicly and no party directives can stand on logical and well documented arguments.

And to tell you the truth, individual refugee clubs will have more power on their members than any political party will have to the matter of deciding yes or no.

Pyr, you continue to amaze me with how naive you are on politics. What you completely forget is that Akel is the only party that maybe paid the prize for saying no. Just think of the dynamics and the enthusiasm that will be created within a party such as akel in the case that the Annan plan is changed in a way that it will allow the party to say yes.

Where you are even more naive is when you think that the majority of the refugees will vote No again. Think of those refugees that will get the right to return under Gc administration. If this number is maximised and the big parties say yes and get the time to campaign for a yes vote then no Koutsou or Klerides will be able to influence things in the way they influenced things the last time they were left alone to form public opinion.

[cypezokyli]

Mark my words and don't count on ANY parties decisions regarding ANY plan. Any solution will be discussed publicly and no party directives can stand on logical and well documented arguments.

.

askimwos is right.
you are indeed naive if you believe that thats how politics work.
not to mention the fact that you insist that what has convinced you personally is a "logical argument" while all the rest are not !!

[BirKibrisli]

So do you guys think there is still a hope that the AP would be revived in yet another version? If not I cannot see where the solution will come from in the foreseeable future...