is talet saying we will lose our property!

thetruth


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 268

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 13:00

the cyprus talks are going ahead,is there talk of all brits losing there property in the coming months.who is standing for the brits and making sure we have a say in the talks.we may be sold out to the greeks if the trnc think thay have something to gain if thay go to bed with the greeks!

sparta


Joined: 24/10/2008
Posts: 226

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 13:04

ask MMMMMMMM he knows everything!!

cooper


Joined: 23/10/2007
Posts: 3386

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 13:04

Latest news from the meeting between the two leaders - http://www.e-kktc.com/index.php?tpl=news_trnc&id=448&lan=en



Cooper

Bradus


Joined: 25/02/2007
Posts: 2641

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 13:51

The only thing that has been reported is that whilst the TRNC proposes a 3 pronged approach: compensation, restitution and exchange, the GC's are much more insistent on restitution.



This is nothing new as this has always been the GC stance. Does it mean that British buyers will lose their property? Who knows, we can only wait and see but undoubtedly there will be winners and losers.



Some GC's will settle for compensation, although not many have come forward to use the Immovable Property Commission and with the departure of "Popadolittle" who frowned on this method of settlement, one would have thought that if the GC's wished compensation, we would have witnessed an increase in the numbers applying for compensation.



Others will settle for nothing other than the return of their property. Even if they have no wish to settle back on their land, as it is a matter of principle. In short no mattter what the leaders agree on, property owners will also sway decisions.

negativenick


Joined: 10/11/2008
Posts: 6023

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 16:17

if we brits loose our property and go back to the UK, the island will go skint !



Nick

Cabbie


Joined: 30/01/2009
Posts: 95

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 16:19

can we claim asylum if we go back to the uk ??

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:09

Msg 2, he thinks he does but me thinks he thinks too much

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:13

I think Talat will be losing his job, don't know about our properties tho.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:14

bradus:



"Does it mean that British buyers will lose their property"



Sub-text: Does it mean that British buyers will have to return the property they occupy to the legal owner?

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:29

And hopefully the mainland settlers who now reside in gc propertys will have to give them back! especially the ones who were brought over & housed in the last 8yrs!!

stevemac


Joined: 21/07/2008
Posts: 99

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:32

Yes Juliet and the same goes for the south side too!

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:36

msg11

there are no turkish settlers on the south of the island, so who do you mean?

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 17:56

juliet,



why did you re-register when you were formally known as susanna?



andre

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 18:00

andre



why? is there a problem? only izzet dosn`t seem to mind!

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 2352

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 18:04

I think that there is a cunning plan being put forward to build new villages to rehouse those that want to move (both GC & TC). One might assume that part of the deal for a new home would be giving up ones old land/house plus compensation if applicable. Given the choice between a piece of land (which might be worthless or never get planning permission) and being given a nice new home in a new village, it may be that the offer is too good to pass up. Patriatism is all very well until you might lose out if you don't accept the offer. It might also solve the problem of villas built on exchange land.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 18:24

Hector,



I have seen this possibility in the recent report titled "the day after ll"



However we must remember that the majority of displaced citizens have re-established themselves in both North and South, Many are now deceased or were too young to remember their previous homes pre 1974.

I do not think that there will be many takers upon an offer to re-settle in a far away new village.

Furthermore, There is likely to be important employment opportunity and welfare issues that could well be problematic.



I think that Mr Talats approach for compensation, and some restitution and exchange is far more achievable. Mr Chrisofias, must consider this 3 pronged proposal as the basis for progress. At the moment he seeks pure restitution. This stance cannot posibly proceed. I think the next 3 sessions will be very important indeed.

jay76


Joined: 17/07/2008
Posts: 532

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 19:25

juliet and macha are same people aka pike, inside info

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 2352

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 19:48

It will be very interesting to see what the green eyed God of greed brings to the island if there are offers on the table.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 20:03

re Jay76 msg 17



"juliet and macha are same people aka pike, inside info"



too funny ...

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 20:05

RE Macha and Juliet: Wishful thinking, you honorary Greek Cypriots!



PS. By the way, "Macha": can't you stick to one nickname (i.e. EricSeans) - it's bloody ff-ing difficult to follow who you are from day to day. Thank you.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 20:07

Dear Warren re msg 16



The fact that someone has died before being able to return to the land they love, should have no bearing on restitution..at least 30 of those years has been down to intransigence on the TC "representation" side..

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 20:20

mmmm



I am afraid that your sentimentalities of love have little creedence in the current climate of negotiations.. I have seen no evidence that suggests a mass movment of loving land claimants moving either North or South.



However, I do condone that any displaced person that has the bona fide will to simply return to an ancesteral vicinity should get the support of government providing their aspirations are clear and only to return in order to start again. I fear that these instances will be few and far between.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 21:36

jay 76:



"juliet and macha are same people aka pike, inside info"



Inside info, eh? Despite me being male and her being female...



Credibility alert, matey.

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 21:41

waz



sorry to dissapoint, but my in-laws are alive & kicking even though they are now in there 80s!! they have taken many trips to see there home since the opening even though they hate having to show there ids in there own country!!!

you will be surprised at how many tcs & gcs would return to there homes even after 34yrs, if not them then there offspring!

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 22:16

Juliet,

That is fine and long life to them both. I hope that they have and enjoy their home in the ROC. I assume their offspring are also housed and relatively happy in the ROC.

Some displaced citizens would certainly like to return to their old homes.

The figure however will continue to decline and time will heal even the deepest wounds.

The Islands keepers have changed many many times through the generations.

There will doubtless be many many more. The dark Island history of the 50s 60s and 70s is just another small chapter. The Island and its people move on.

We are all slaves of time and life is too short to for prolonged sadness.

thetruth


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 268

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 22:41

give my house back to a greek,i dont think so.i will demolish the house first.what i do then is not for people to read here.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
07/02/2009 23:00

Ah, go on and tell us anyway.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 11:27

wax re msg 25



"The figure however will continue to decline and time will heal even the deepest wounds. "



Yet again, proving your finger is not "on the pulse" of how Cypriots think.. esp the younger relatives now owning land in the north - they are MORE determined to "get it back"..



Now that may not be "sensible" or realistic but you clearly don't know what you are talking about.



"The Islands keepers have changed many many times through the generations.



There will doubtless be many many more. The dark Island history of the 50s 60s and 70s is just another small chapter. The Island and its people move on. "



Hard to believe we were in the 20th centuary, but records were kept of who owns what, and ethnic cleansing / to the victor go the spoils mentalities don't apply now...



re thetruth msg 26

"give my house back to a greek,i dont think so.i will demolish the house first...."



I bet Mr Apostolides wishes *you* had built a house on his land ;)



BTW Greek = GC, I g

Geoff


Joined: 25/06/2008
Posts: 1370

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 11:33

But there are plenty of properties/land on the south side originally owned by Turkish Cypriots Pre-1974. Same problem, in reverse, as those owned in the north by GCs pre-1974. Moral of the story? Brits are well advised to only buy

property/land in the TRNC on Turkish Cypriot deeds. When the balloon goes up those particular properties will be worth a lot of money!

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 11:36

I hope so Geoff.

But there's the small obstacle of getting our PTP and Kocan before we get the benefit !

Geoff


Joined: 25/06/2008
Posts: 1370

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 11:40

Quite so!!

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 11:41

Land and property

33. Land and property are very difficult issues. The area of Cyprus is about 9,500 sq km, of

which about 2,600 sq km is disputed—nearly a third of the whole island, based on

assessment of the original landholdings. The assessments differ between the two sides, but

not hugely. Even the Turkish Cypriots admit that 60% of land in northern Cyprus

originally belonged to Greek Cypriots.

34. The property issue is important to Greek Cypriots not just for economic reasons. Even

those born after the events of 1974 feel an emotional tie to their ‘home’ village in what

Greek Cypriots often refer to as “the occupied territories”. However, many people do not

want to return to their villages any more—particularly the young who cannot remember

them. Even the old realise that it is not possible to recreate the villages as they were in 1974.

35. A change to the boundaries of the two constituent states, i.e. to the Green Line, would

make a big difference. Between 30% and 40%

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 12:11

Dear Geoff

re msg 29



It is certainly true that many TCs left the island in the 60's .. indeed the Orthodox Church lent money to GCs to buy out TC neighbours at a price above the going rate.



Then there was ethnic cleansing carried out - albeit on a smaller scale than 1974. by both sides..



Of course, if the land you have a property on, is owned by a GC and you can demonstrate the so called "exchanged" piece of land in the south that is owned by the TC, the GC can't have his cake and eat it..



The GC should have first choice of restitution and you could move to the smaller plot allocated in the more densely populated and "prettier" ( not) south.



If you are "lucky" you might get a prefab in Episkopi or an apartment in a high rise block in Lima(s)sol



Metinks you will end up paying some compo - for the land your house is built on, or your land could be converted to leasehold,- owned by the GC.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 12:12

Hi Dee.. re msg 32



"Even the Turkish Cypriots admit that 60% of land in northern Cyprus



originally belonged to Greek Cypriots. "



It's reckoned to be nearly 80% and it is STILL owned.. by the original GC owners..

HighPriest


Joined: 02/12/2008
Posts: 11

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 12:09

Does the ownership of land work the other way , ie can a Turkish Cypriot make a claim for his ancestral home in Southern Cyprus . If that is the case , if my apartmet is to be demolished in Kyrenia will the Paphos seafront + skyline soon be devoid of the GC hotels that have earned them a fortune + will the GC hotel owners pay huge compensation from their profits to the real pre 1974 owners of the land , the Turkish Cypriots .

daily


Joined: 01/01/2008
Posts: 84

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 12:36

Well said high priest - in terms of comparative financial gains on either side, there surely can be no comparison. Embargoes and a well-oiled Greek Cypriot propaganda machine have kept the north's potential tourism economy suppressed for decades. In stark contrast, they have thrived and milked this market for everything it was worth - until the present doldrums, that is.

There appears to be a complete double standard - they argue that using Turkish Cypriot land for public services as in the case of Lanaca airport, hotels etc. is not comparable with selling plots for private gain. But which is/has proved the most lucrative? 'The kettle calling the pot black' (and no don't want to get into a PC argument over that one!) springs to mind.

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 12:39

Good points daily....but you are using common sense in your arguments....something that is in short supply in the ongoing machinations of the latest talks.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 12:54

High Priest,



Nice try, but TC property in the south is protected by law and TCs have legal redress and the opportunity to get it back.



Unlike the fairy tale land of ethnic cleansing and "back of a lorry" holiday homes.

daily


Joined: 01/01/2008
Posts: 84

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 13:12

What exactly does 'protected by law' mean?



Isn't it a euphemism for 'we borrowed it, built concrete jungles on it and bled it dry, making millions in the process'. But now that the fat hands that fed it have also been bled dry, you can try and get it back if you like - and we'll now have back what has become lucrative beyond the border.



And if the north's tourist industry is based on 'back of a lorry' holiday homes, how exactly does that differ to the south's industry - 'back of a lorry' airport, hotels, mass tourism and massive financial gain?



By the way, what exactly is the situation for the Turkish Cypriot owner of Larnaca airport?

daily


Joined: 01/01/2008
Posts: 84

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 13:14

Sorry - forget to mention, those questions were for macha?

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 13:15

Daily....it will be some argument about "compulsory purchase" not being the same as 2stealing" !

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 13:15

Daily msg 36.



Very well written and valid.



mmmmmm Msg 28. You have no patent upon how Cypriots and Cyprus think so please kindly let that go. My own views are posted to be commented upon in a civil and courteous manner. Please kindly refrain if you feel unable.

HighPriest


Joined: 02/12/2008
Posts: 11

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 13:15

So its all a one sided whitewash , what was yours is mine + what I legally agreed to give to you in exchange is also mine + I want it back , but I wont give yours back . An exact case of cake and eat it and I want my ball back .

Wasn't it the Greeks who attempted to ethnic cleanse and started this mess anyway .

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 13:55

Dear "daily" re msg 36



There can only be two reasons why you would use terms like "well-oiled Greek Cypriot propaganda machine"



1/ ignorance .. how could this "well-oiled Greek Cypriot propaganda machine" influence the ECHR and the UN..? Are they all so gullable?



2/ you have a vested interest in keeping things as they are...



May be there are other variants I ,missed ..



I'm sorry - but GCs aren't "smarter" or more devious than TCs or Turks..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 14:17

Dear Waz re msg 42



Lest you forget, TCs have posted on this very board accepting that some land is compulsorily purchased. They even understood that the GCs had to move their airport somewhere, as they had lost the use of TWO in the Mesoria plain.



YES, the TCs owning the land, so purchased, MUST get fair compo and PDQ.

LCA is a red herring - the land was not sold on for private gain.. that is morally wrong.



You are correct I don't have a patent on how Cypriots think, but I *do* know that some of your statements - regarding GCs wanting their own land back - for reasons of financial gain - now that their is a "valuable" house on it ( sic) are NONSENSE..



Example... why if that is the case, is Mr Apostilides asking the Orams to demolish the house they bult on his lemon grove? !

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 14:57

Because if he can afford £400,000 for the court case he probably wants to get rid of the cheap 4 bed villa and build a 15 bed "night club"

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 15:09

mmmmmm



Msg 45.



I think that many Cypriot citizens would capitalise on possible financial gain from land and property re-possesion. I am afraid that this is capitalism that most certainly prevails in the modern world.



In my view. Mr Apostolides seeks a demolision simply to attain a political and nationalistic victory. What other serious alternative do you propose given the fact that the litigation cost run into hundreds of thousands of pounds and rising.

daily


Joined: 01/01/2008
Posts: 84

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 16:18

marky m, m marky, mmmmmm - I've been reading your post for four years - or at least it feels like it. I have also been reading/hearing trash from the 'well-oiled greek cypriot propaganda machine' for about the same time, so please don't patronise me as ignorant. Yes, I am biased - as biased as you are - and yes I do have a vested interest in NC, but no I don't wish to keep things as they are.

I went into this venture with my eyes open and from the start have acknowledged the possibility of one day having to pay compensation for the 'exchange land' on which my property is built. This is not a problem, but what I wholeheartedly object to is the consistent suggestion by the 'well-oiled Greek-cypriot propaganda machine' that Greek cypriots are the only losers in this mess that they started with their dreams of Enosis and subsequent attempts at ethnic cleansing.

And yes, there are some other variants that you've missed - the Turkish Cypriots. I defend these people on a 'treat as I find'

daily


Joined: 01/01/2008
Posts: 84

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 16:34

basis and have never found them wanting; they are genuine, friendly, welcoming and generous, and for those traits alone, never mind their miserable past on this island, they deserve more than they are currently getting.

And as for not believing that the GCs are not 'smarter or more devious' than their TC neighbours. Where then is the high-profile case of a TC seeking restitution that has been funded by a 'well oiled turkish-cypriot propaganda machine', dragged through the courts for numerous years and covered by virtually every national newspaper in Cyprus/Britain?

Please don't insult my intelligence in suggesting that Mr Apostilides is anything other than a greedy, vengeful, bitter man out to make a scapegoat of the Orams and a sainthood for himself. He is a modern day Shylock - 'if I can catch him once upon the hip, I will feed fat the ancient grudge I bear him! A curse on my tribe if I forgive him!'

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 17:07

Daily, good post direct and amusing.

cheers

p

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 18:57

msg 48

Daily,



A well constructed and direct post. I hope that its main recipient will acknowlege your clear understanding.

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 1352

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:04

mmmm

"indeed the orthodox church lent money to gcs to buy out their tc neighbours at a price above the going rate "



MM you do write the most utter rubbish i have ever read .



where do you get your information from "above the going rate " my parents experienced it ,your information should read "a fraction of what it was worth".



it was take it or else,but you know what like waz is saying to you all the time ,but it seems to be falling on deaf ears ,leave the past behind ,pick up from today and move on .



oh if i were you i would take some of what waz is saying to you seriously .



musin

long live the kktc

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:14

I think mmmmm is a very sad bitter and twisted individual, the fact that his wife was refused whatever she needs to live in cyprus has made him this way, he is to be pitied, he enjoys trying to frighten ppl with his views, thankfully most of us are intelligent enough to see thru him, disregarding the claptrap rubbish he spews.

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:16

Juliet Msg 10,an all your compatriots will have to give their land back to TC landowners in the South.....shame really because land is so much more valuable in the South !

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:29

A lot of sensible,widely held sentiment there."Beware Greeks bearing gifts!" I think.Mr Talat would be well advised to keep that in mind,during the current negotiations.

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:35

clarets



where have you been!! the tcs land & property awaits them, all they have to do is walk over go, to the land registry & move into there home & after 6mnts if they want they can sell it! if at present it is in use by a gc refugee they will be rehoused so the tc can move back in! & has been done by a number of tcs in the last few months!

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:46

Juliet,

If only it was as simple as that.

Perhaps Mr Apostolides would like to cross to the North, sledge hammer in hand and proclaim his victory in Lapta.



I think that the property isues for both ROC and TRNC hinder any real movement until final settlement, compensation, exchange and restitution is completed. Then we can really get things sorted.

ian444


Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 71

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:48

Message 53 dee



I think mmmmm posts are intelligent articulate and well reasoned, I may not always agree with all his views but find them consistently entertaining.



Personal insults are not called for



Any way I am sure he can look after himself

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 19:52

waz



i`m talking about what the tcs can do if they decide to come & claim what belongs to them, weather they are tcs from the uk or tcs from the north,its quite easy for them as i have witnessed!! the gcs going north to claim back what is rightfully theres is a no no! for now anyway!!

Bradus


Joined: 25/02/2007
Posts: 2641

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 21:22

Juliet,



"its quite easy for them"



Easy? To leave your current home and employment? To try and gain new employment? To leave your family and friends for 6 months? To pay rent for this 6 months period?



I think your term "easy" is grossly exaggerated. I hope that when there is a solution for both sides it is not based on this inappropriate 6 months ruling otherwise the property problem for TC and GC will never be sorted. There should be no such conditions for either side.



Its not easy for TC's and GC's abroad to simply up sticks and move. There has to be a better and fairer system than this?

coolkid


Joined: 24/07/2008
Posts: 64

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 22:40

I dont think many people would sit back and let there property be taken back thats what the United Nations and EU discussuions are about and you can take the same position re larnaca Airport owned by The Turkish Cypriots the compensation is to be paid via thr UN I believe.

LondonCypriot


Joined: 15/12/2008
Posts: 426

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 23:36

Why is the Turkish Army going to withdraw. Its just a big show. Under no circumstances can Turkish troops can leave the island.

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 23:50

who said troops will withdraw, can,t see it myself.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
08/02/2009 23:56

right on lc!



love 'em or loathe 'em the turkish army is here to stay



and you really must ask yourself:



why waste so much time bitching about withdrawl/reunification

call it what you will, since it is really most unlikely?



and what would you call people who still want to "argue the toss"?

er...

arguers?



andre

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 00:01

Dear LC, Pilgrim , Andre



The Turkish Army will go if TCs want it... they would have HAD to have gone ( save 950 ) if the GCs had voted YES to Annan.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 00:02

Bradus, msg 60

Valid point.

Nothing easy about property for either side.

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 00:06

Juliet......and where have you been?I have been told quite the opposite by former owners of land in the south......they would appear to have no reason to lie to me!

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 03:23

Dear Juliet



re msg 59



The "six month residency rule" is inappropriate and if it is going to be tested at the ECHR the RoC will lose, for sure..



Better to allow a TC to return, giving time for the unfortunate GC to have to move AGAIN, and show up the immoral stance of the "TRNC's" blanket refusal to allow the rightful owner to retake possession.



Can ANYONE tell me of one case where the IPC set up by Turkey, in the north, has allowed a dispossessed TC to return home - if the property is occupied?

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 07:35

Msg 58... lol, why did you even bother to reply to my post.

juliet


Joined: 11/01/2009
Posts: 612

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 07:45

mmmmmm



There are quite a few tcs that are now living in there original propertys on the south, A lady i work with is a prime example, she lives in a 2 story tc house, the tc gentleman is now living in the bottom of the house & has said she & her husband can stay for a while longer until his 6 months of residence is up then they will be rehoused & the tc gentleman has said he will either sell the house or the land to a developer he hasnt yet decided! there is NO bitterness between them in fact quite the opposite!

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 08:55

Dear Juliet re msg 70



I'm grateful for your example, but that doesn't change the fact that the RoC -despite all the things stopping GCs returning to THEIR homes.. does make it hard for TCs.



I know of at least two GC families who are desperately trying to avoid having to move out - having been dispossessed in 74, as he TC owners have "won" the right to move back- a process much longer than it should take...



The important point to make is the TCs *can* do it...



Now, it might be possible for GCs, too IF they` "test" Turkey's IPC, but the short-sighted stance of the previous govt put off folk from TRYING...



Again, I ask, how many GCs have been handed back properties that were occupied.. I only know of cases where UN-occupied places were returned, and far more instances where the properties can't be handed back for "military reasons"....

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 10:45

by UN I meant un as in NOT.. not the United Nations :(

Lincsman



Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 117

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 14:11

In reality how many TC's actually intend/want to move back south to repossess their lands/properties?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 14:39

Dear Lincsman re 73



I think you mean how many CYPRIOTS want to move back to their land / properties..



Many more in the south *say* that want to come "home"... but the "trick" to a settlement is to give Cypriots the "ownership" of the land - but allowing the present occupier a long-term lease. .. priority going to locals..

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 16:29

mmmmmmmm re 74



Why do you feel the need to re-word Lincsman's question? It seems fair to assume that the question he wrote was the question he meant to ask - it's a perfectly sensible one. Is it perhaps because the question you would have liked him to have asked gives you a better chance to spout your repetitious rhetoric?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 16:45

Dear Vincehugo re msg 74



1/ I'm phrasing the post as a suggestive question - but thank you for giving me the opportunity to make it clear



2/ Rhetoric implies "The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively" - thanks for the compliment - which I'm sure was unintended... I think if you study the posts you'll find there's a lot more folk posting as if they think they know better than the ECHR and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth..



3/ do check the title of the thread - it is about GCs gaining the right to take back their properties via a TC "official" as a "concession" at the current talks

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 17:01

Dear mmmm re 76



1) No, you were telling Lincsman what you thought he meant.



2) Funny that, I found another definition which was "Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous". And "repetitious" merely accentuates the problem.



3) Lol at the idea of mmmmmmm picking someone up for (supposedly) not sticking to the title of the thread.



I would maintain that the issue of TC's taking back property in the South is intrinsically and fundamentally linked to the subject of the thread. It oft seems forgotten that restitution for GC's in the North will likely result in eviction for GC's in the South.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 17:03

mmmmmmmmmm



As for folks thinking they know better, I note your comment earlier (Msg 28)



"Yet again, proving your finger is not "on the pulse" of how Cypriots think.. esp the younger relatives now owning land in the north - they are MORE determined to "get it back.."



This does seem to be somewhat at odds with the recent UK Foreign Affairs Committe report which says



"The property issue is important to Greek Cypriots not just for economic reasons. Even those born after the events of 1974 feel an emotional tie to their ‘home’ village in what Greek Cypriots often refer to as “the occupied territories”. However, many people do not want to return to their villages any more—particularly the young who cannot remember them. Even the old realise that it is not possible to recreate the villages as they were in 1974."

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 17:19

Dear Vincehugo re msg 78



I'd say it backs up EXACTLY what I said.. the young GCs ARE more vehement that that they want the right to return...



The report says many people do not want to return any more.. that doesn't mean the majority...



You would note, if you weren't too quick to jump in that I have repeatedly said that I feel GCs would settle for an acknowledgement of their right to return, and a long-term lease arrangement to allow most locals not to be uprooted.



You would do better to respond to 77 than *trying* to score points ( and failing)



Suggest you seek out my comments re this report on the relevant thread.



It avoids many thorny specifics.. it is a fence sitting report.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 18:18

mmmmm Re 79



Curious.



You say that the young GCs ARE more vehement (than the older GC's) that they want the right to return.



And you say that the UK FAC report backs this up "EXACTLY".



The UK FAC report says "However, many people do not want to return to their villages any more—particularly the young who cannot remember them" which I would venture to suggest can be interpreted without much difficulty as meaning that the young are LESS interested in the right to return than other (older) people.



And this, I would say, contradicts EXACTLY what you presented as fact.



As for "jumping in" I never said anything about majorities or your views on what GC's would settle for. I was focusing on a discrepancy between your view and that of the UKFAC, which in turn would make me less inclined to listen to your views of what you think GC's want.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 19:42

daily:



"I went into this venture with my eyes open and from the start have acknowledged the possibility of one day having to pay compensation for the 'exchange land' on which my property is built."



Let me know when it's your turn to face the music so I can pop the bubbly. I have nothing against people who bear no malice to those whose property they are tresspassing on, but the vindictive ones merit special attention.

Blackpoolfan


Joined: 03/12/2008
Posts: 1568

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 22:23

mmmmmm,

Do you have a secretary? otherwise your fingers must be raw... I should like to ask a question of you as a lot of what you say makes sense and some goes over my head and i wouldn't pass comment on what i dont understand and also some comments with respect can be quite opinionated and short at times.

In your opinion re the property issue what hypothetically is the best and worst case scenario for all property owners? in terms of the solution..........

Bradus


Joined: 25/02/2007
Posts: 2641

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 22:56

""I went into this venture with my eyes open and from the start have acknowledged the possibility of one day having to pay compensation for the 'exchange land' on which my property is built."



This is the problem, everyone has believed that the worse thing that could happen is having to pay compensation. People seem to have convinced themselves that at most compensation would be paid, based on 1974 values. However there was always the chance that the owner would want his land/property back and would not agree to compensation.



This is not something buyers wish to believe could happen, so the usual action appears to be to bury ones head and attack those that might "burst the bubble"

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 23:55

Msg 83.

Bradus,

There are various scenarios for exchane of title deeds.

It may be that a negotiated settlement via the political theatre may produce an agreeable outcome to both TRNC and ROC title holders.

If it is the case that a citizen does not find the offer of compensation from a possible "property Commission" acceptable then a private negotiated sale of said property is a possible route to settlement.

If the citizen is adamant for a return of property then of course the prospect of satisfactory settlement is somewhat diminished. There would be no obligation to leave the property in any better state than it was when it was deserted. Furthermore any improvements to the property could be incorporated into negotiations in the same way as application for rent. I think it unlikely that litigation for trespass or theft would lead to successful settlement.



I believe that the vast majority of cases will indeed be resolved with compensation.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
09/02/2009 23:58

re msg 80 Vincehugo



You definitely need to READ posts and THINK before responding.. I say, AGAIN, the Young GCs want the RIGHT to return, I have frequently said that THAT, in conjunction with a long-term lease-hold "tenacy" for the current occupier, might be enough to swing things.. for a GC YES.. a sort of you were "right" in principle and you "own " the land, but we aren't going to turf off TCs right now.



I didn't think I'd need to "spoon- feed you", but hey ho :(

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 00:07

I think I just worked something out:



in leningrad during stalin's terror in the 30's people had their cases packed ready to go, and recall that they felt relieved when the secret police finally

pounded on their door ready to drag them off to siberia...incredible but true



just like all this waiting, wilting and wittering about compensation or expulsion



calm down dears!



the turkish army ain't adding to your troubles by throwing you to the wolves

anytime soon, because the two communities on cyprus dislike each other

as much as they always did, behind all this soothingly high-flown eurowaffle



actually the worse thing to happen is you die,

perhaps due to a head injury caused by a carelessly-popped champaign cork

but even then you shouldn't notice much discomfort afterwards



and if you still feel inclined to fret and foam about the er, cyprus question,

don't worry, this one will run and run...



andre

HighPriest


Joined: 02/12/2008
Posts: 11

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 00:28

If at the end of all this compensation is the answer , surely part of this compensation should be paid by the TC who sold the exchanged land to the builder + the builder himself who acquired the exchanged land + built the properties . Both have already made their money out of something that was never theirs ( or was it theirs ) ? + this still continues , TC's are selling + builders are building because they know that the final problem will lie with the house buyer . Why should it be the new owner who bought in good faith bear all the cost .

Maybe the advocates who rubber stamped everything + even the Estate Agents should be included aswell .

As usual its the Expats who's money helps this economy enormously getting the bill .

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 00:36

msg 87

High priest.



I understand and sympathise with your sentiment.



In my opinion, compensation will most likely be forthcomming from the International community which has a real desire for settlement. The EU and UN will almost certainly stump up significant funds in return for specific treaty and resolution approval.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 00:49

mmmm Re Msg 85



Absolutely unbelievable!



You accuse me of not reading posts properly and posting before thinking, but you have this uncanny knack of ignoring the point that is being made and turning to one more of your soap box deliveries.



READ MY POST AGAIN and then explain to me how you believe that you and the UK FAC have the same view on the relative importance of the right to return for the young and old GC's.



For clarity (and it seems you definitely need it) I am not arguing that SOME young GC's want the right to return. But I am saying that it is less of an issue for young GC's (according to the UK FAC) than it is for the older generation. Wheras you suggest you can speak for all young GC's when you say they want the right to return." or that " .. the young GC's are more vehement.."



Please do me the courtesy of reading my post properly before going off on one.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 00:54

msg 89 vinchugo.



Your stance is absolutely correct and your earlier point very valid.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 00:57

Msg 90 Waz



Thanks. It's good to know that the point is clear and valid to some - and I guess it just shows the true colours of others!

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 01:10

Re Msg 88



I know that there has been a lot of water under the bridge since 2004 but I think the Annan Plan provides a pretty good benchmark for any future settlement on property. It worked on the principle that those with Es Deger title (whether TC or "foreign") would take ownership in a settlement with no compensation required. The basis for this was that they (or the previous "owners") had already surrendered their title to land in the South creating a nett zero sum.



Depending on what you read, the risk in the current negotiations is that the TC's are even less inclined to vote for an Annan-like solution than they were in 2004, so going backwards is not an option.



Having said this, who knows how, what or when any workable solution will be reached.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 01:20

Hi BF re msg 82



No, I don't have a secretary and I do type FAST.. hence loads of typos :(



I work from home so THAT's how I can be overly prodigious .. and I will try to take on board what you say - esp as we nicked your Manager !...



I think the settlement will be akin to Annan, but with new "compromises" / "wins" for both sides leaders to "sell"..



The "rump" RoC may get less territory "back" but they will gain more leverage on property.. but they might not be able to use their properties for a generation.. I reckon many "freehold" "TRNC" titles will go "lease hold" .. particularly more recent builds..

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 01:43

HighPriest:



"As usual its the Expats who's money helps this economy enormously getting the bill"



Correct. But who else was ever going to cough up other than the end user? You can't just say: "A big boy did it and ran away."

HighPriest


Joined: 02/12/2008
Posts: 11

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 02:05

Macha ,



The TC Landowner + the Builder + a whole host of Advocates have contributed + profited enormously from this situation , so in my opinion they should share the consequences . I am saying that whether they like it or not they should at the very least share the responsibility of payment if it is deemed that compensation is due .

Unless you sold land or are a Turkish Builder I can't see how many could disagree with that .

HighPriest


Joined: 02/12/2008
Posts: 11

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 02:11

Is there a proposal anywhere that expats in the South who own houses on Turkish Exchanged land may have to pay compensation to the Turkish family who vacated it + a posibility that the building may have to be demolished . Funny We don't here that one very often .

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 09:16

Dear VinceHugo re msg 88



You are just repeating my sentiments ( posted twice, now ) re *your* inability to read.



I HAVE read your question and answered it.. suggest you take your own advice...



The GCs aren't going to go for any plan than is *perceived* as Annan-like - they have an unreasonable" phobia" about it..after all the crap they were "fed" about it's creators and bias... as bias their leader at the time "allowed" to happen as he didn't negotiate in good faith.



THIS time the leaders both realise that time is running out.. that if THEY can't agree, then decisions will be made OUTSIDE Cyprus...

The "rump" RoC fear the UK/ US will allow a Taiwan scenario in the "north", if they don't make concessions re giving TCs a BIG say, but in return they can continue to make Turkey's life VERY difficult in the Courts and CY is an EU roadblock.



Most locals will not have to "move" but the title will become "leasehold" ..

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 09:45

Hi mmmmmmmmmm,



Why do you keep referring to locals as if they, as EU citizens will be treated any differently than other EU citizens in the same position? The moment an agreement is arrived at and EU law becomes fully applicable in the North as it is in the South, there will be no such thing as locals. The current case of "British jobs for British workers" in the UK demonstrates quite clearly how membership of the EU precludes favouring ones own (EU) citizens over others. I think your reference to "locals" is a bogey-man implication that somehow ex-pats (EU) will be thrown to the wolves.

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 09:53

mmmmm...msg 97



Excuse my ignorance but WHAT is a "Taiwan scenario" ?

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 10:24

mmmm Re Msg 97



My apologies Mark. I had assumed that you were capable of an intelligent discussion based on an written exchange of questions, answers and facts. I see now that I was wrong.



Carry on - the floor is yours.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 15:43

cronos,



I also mentioned taiwan roc earlier so may I reply?



taiwan is unrecognised internationally due to the rehabilitation of china (prc)

it is extremely successful in economic terms but the chinese parliament voted

to "take it back" which they may try and do once they have a powerful enough amphibious force, at which point america will have kittens as it were

and we'll all end up getting blown to bits or not as the case may be



"big danger with" or "great opportunity for" north cyprus

(depending which side of the fence you are on obviously)

is that the trnc acquires de facto acceptance or virtual recognition like taiwan

just as exchange land already enjoy de facto recognition among buyers

as well as within the trnc, while it has very little status under international law



andre

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 15:51

andre514.....you lost me after "reply"

Only joking!



Thanks for the explanation...I wasn't aware of the Taiwan situation and how it might relate to Cyprus.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 21:37

Hi "TRNC"Vaughan re msg 98



No, !!



let's be straight.. let's sort out the dispossessed FIRST, THEN the non Cyps.. esp as they KNEW that the land / property on which the land was built on wasn't theirs...



However ....Your observation re "locals" versus "non locals" all being EU citizens has merit..Why SHOULD they be treated different?



So,can we can say, therefore that all GCs can come and live in the north, as they are EU citizens, too ?!





AH.. perhaps you wish to rethink? ;)

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 21:53

Hi Cronos re msg 99



Even though VinceHugo said I could "have the floor"... he "nicked the mic", again )



The defeated Chinese Nationalist govt of China was forced to flle the mainland and was recognised by the UN as the RoC ( rep of China) .. but the UN ultimately decided that the PRC ( People's Rep of China) - Mao's victorious Communists should have the UN seat - so although the PRC say it is part of China, Taiwan has stayed a de facto state.. protected by the US..



It has direct flights and had a good economy.



It is often said that post 2004, the TC YES to Annan, that the "TRNC" should be treated like Taiwan.. but China will NEVER vote to overturn the UN sec res. against "TRNC" unless the RoC ( Cyprus) agrees..



There is no UN Sec Res calling on states NOT to "deal" with Taiwan.. as onlty China would vote in favour.



This is why the "Taiwan" scenario would be a legal minefield - hence no direct flights - although supported by the UK.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 21:59

Msg 98. TRNC Vaughan.

Your point is valid.



The EU status, politically, extends to the whole Island. It is unclear as to the status of citizens of TRNC that are not EU citizens. Many TRNC citizens are accepted as EU citizens by virtue of their home nationality such as British ex-pats. Turkish setlers on the other hand ,for example, may currently be excluded. A Human Rights case could gather creedence.



As mmmmm points out ROC citizens being now also of the EU could ostensibly move to and reside in the TRNC. This however, as we all know, is currently very unlikely for obvious reasons.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
10/02/2009 22:58

Dear Waz re msg 105



Did you know that a EU member state decides on how / who one get's citizenship?



Sounds CRAZY?.. Tell that to Latvia and Estonia - who won't give ethnic Russians who were BORN in the country citizenship - they are "NON-citizens" they have residency rights, pay taxes, but can't vote and AREN'T counted as EU citizens as they aren't Latvian / Estonian..!!!



the EU can apply "pressure" - but the RoC will NO WAY be handing out RoC passports - and will block any attempt to give Turks passports - unless they can show they are married to a TC- then they can have residency as an EU dependent...



Hmm, come to think of it.. knowing the battle WE ( wifey and I had) had... may be Turks should come for me for advice on how the can get an EEA Family permit - now THAT would test the RoC ministry of Interior ;)



In THEORY the RoC can't refuse a Turk married to a RoC passport holder right to enter ...

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 00:54

mmmmmm Re Msg 104



Now I'm seriously worried about your sanity. Is it some form of paranoia. Until now the "mike" has been yours though you don't seem to use it to answer the questions that are put to you.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 01:06

Here's a thought.



IF the key issue in finding a solution is addressing the property issue and



IF we are looking for a settlement "akin to Annan" and



IF the GC's "aren't going to go for any plan that is perceived as Annan-like"



then it would be really useful to know how many GC's actually read the Annan plan's strategy with regard to property. (When I hear all the talk about restitution it certainly seems like they didn't understand it).



If, as I suspect, the answer is not many, then maybe they could just use a bit of cut and paste on a 2004 document and emerge from the talks with a "new" plan called the "John Smith" plan, or the "Cypriot" plan and everyone would be happy!?

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 01:21

mmmmmmm



Thank you for comment.

Ethnic Russians that are from for example Latvia can apply for citizenship of the same.

Ethnic Russians residing in "Russian" enclaves such as Daugavpils are classed as Aliens. Aliens may hold Latvian passports but are marked as alien status.Such Aliens can apply for full Latvian citizenship, sit an examination and be awarded Latvian Citizenship and full EU valid passport.



On Cyprus the attitude of ROC to persons living in the North needs no explaining. The EU, in pricipal accept that the Northern part of the Island is entitled to EU status. Significant EU funding has been awarded to the North to allow economic and social development.

In the event of settlement ,there will be without doubt provision for EU citizenship status for TRNC citizens.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 09:58

Hi mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,



Your 103.



I think if GC's want to come and live in the North that is up to them, not that I think many will want to. However, I also think that under the current proposals being put forward by the TRNC re property, most of them would be buying new land/houses with their compensation money and not repossessing their former homes. I also think that in order to protect the interests of "Northern" TCs the voting rights of "Northern" GCs would have to be resitricted in some way as, given time, they could outnumber TCs (in theory).

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 10:34

Dear Waz re msg 105



sorry I missed this..



" ROC citizens being now also of the EU could ostensibly move to and reside in the TRNC. This however, as we all know, is currently very unlikely for obvious reasons."



I think you mean post any settlement.. as many RoC citizens simply want the right to move back to their homes..and would do so.. if you had a choice of Bellapais or Limassol....!



re msg 109 Waz,



Warren I don't think you understand... TCs can turn up in the "rump" RoC with proof of rights of citizenship and get ID and a RoC passport ..



Have you BEEN to Latvia ?! Daugavpils ain't no "enclave"..Do you know what the "exam" necessary to get Citizenship entails? ..



Clue.. imagine TCs had to sit an exam in Greek and sign a statement renouncing the occupation of Cyprus by Turkey... how many TCs would be able to or WANT to take such an exam...?!



My point about Latvia and Estonia - is that the RoC doesn't make it hard for TCs to get RoC passports - useful for tr

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 10:43

( cont) useful, for travel purposes.. no Visas necessary for many countries.





"TRNC"Vaughan re msg 111



Hi, why do you think GCs should PAY for any unwanted "improvements" made on their land.. Mr Apostolides doesn't.. he wants the Ormas to knock the house down.. !



I KNOW it was in Annan.. I'm thinking like someone who had their land nicked for 35 years and then is told - you can have it back - but you have to raise the case to pay for the house someone built on it ... if you can think about it in an unattached way - surely you can see how daft and even "insulting" it sounds ?!



You ARE right of course re the numbers that would come back - even if they were "allowed".. they ( GCs) want the right of freedom of movement.. but would they use it ...?



re msg 108 Andre



You nearly got it.. it is semantics.. Don't use the word Annan, re jig it, and GCs might go for it.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
11/02/2009 10:59

Hi mmmmmmmmmmmmm,



I think you missed my point.

I said "...most of them would be buying new land/houses with their compensation money and not repossessing their former homes." No-one is suggesting as you ask "...why do you think GCs should PAY for any unwanted "improvements" made on their land.. Mr Apostolides doesn't.. he wants the Ormas to knock the house down.. !"

I am suggesting that the likes of Mr. A should get compo and then he could buy land or A N Other house in the place of his choice - the North if he wants to. If he wants to live in it or sell it, fine. He may alternatively stick the compo in his pocket and call it a day.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 16:34

Stop Press re Msg 108 and 112



mmmmmm and I appear to be agreeing on a cunning strategy to reach a solution (though I think that's 'cos he mistook me for someone else!)



So mmmmm, when you say I have nearly got it .. what else is required to make it complete?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 17:00

Dear VinceHugo re msg 114



No mistaken ID.. I refer to your comment in msg 108 .. that's WHY it says ref msg 108... ( not for the first time, I have to wonder if you smoke something with mild narcotic properties ?! - as you seem to have problems with English .. would you prefer I try in Russian ;) )



OK.. other members seem to have "twigged" .. you can't use the A word around a GC.. so if it is wrapped up in a different way.. say more "benefits" re property - but less territory handed back..



Semantics..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 17:04

Dear TRNC"Vaughan re msg 110 / 113



If you THINK GCs will go for this "plan" of Mr Talat's.... FORGET IT..



They want what is THEIRS.. simple... and as you correctly say.. most won't take it.. so the TC can "stay" as a leaseholder...



I'm sorry I missed what you were saying.. it is a non-starter..

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 19:47

mmmmmmmmm Re Msg 115,



It says "Ref msg 108 Andre" which is not my name, hence the comment about mistaken ID. Why do you have to be so rude? All it does is highlight your inability to read messages properly AGAIN and AGAIN.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 20:08

Dear VH re msg 117



I F*d up .. I admit it.. I called you Andre.. I apologise..



Now if only you could re read all my responses you might see why I was "rude" .. I'm not even sure if you do it deliberately :(

Lemtich



Joined: 15/02/2007
Posts: 1487

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 23:12

I can't help thinking that in the event of a "settlement", Greek Cypriots clutching title deeds to land in the north of Cyprus issued by a more than eager Land Registry Office in South Nicosia to prove GC land ownership could run into the same legal problems as Brits and TC's issued with Kocans to the same land by the TRNC. That is, unless every GC landowner who fled south in 1974 had their original land deeds with them, which is possible, but unlikely.



There will be associated problems due to the passage of time, such as identification of owners, inheritance issues, wills. There are property issues, land built on, land existing but used for public use, land used by military, land available but without clear access.



Once these issues enter the legal arena, no broad European Court directives on the issue will solve the problems on the ground. Unless the relevant governments decide to underwrite long, expensive and protracted actions, then only a political solution beckons. L

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 23:20

msg 119 Lem,



Thank you and very valid comment.



Furthermore. Any GC that holds title deed that can researched to have been issued post 1974 is likely to see legal challenge against the alleged title.

If the said ROC title is shown to be issued after 1984 then the case for ownership could well fall on foul legal ground.



It is well known that more than 80% of TRNC land was unregistered and without title in 1974.

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
12/02/2009 23:28

Although I feel unlikely, should developments affect me I will instigating a co-operatve approach and would be seeking other affected individuals to form a group and pooling resources to ensure best legal representation and therefore best chance of success or limitation of damages.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 00:18

I think much of this theorizing is premature given their deep differences,

talat is a guy who has invested a lot of political capital in these serious "talks"

but after july '09 the sides will drift apart tho' with a promise to keep in touch:

my message to both of them would be this : "wake me up before you go go"



as regards the barmy army of revanchists playing out their wet dreams

of victory in miniature on this humble forum,

I'm sure the legal process will be persued by the claimants to the bitter end

which may finish with the house of lords putting the kybosh on the whole idea, asset-hiding on a promethian scale,

or most likely it all being submerged under a mountain of legalistic paperwork



and remember that no court in history has restored disputed territory:

this has only ever happened either by reconquest or by compromise, both of which seem somehow unattainable by our sophisticated friends in the south



andre



calm down dears!

moomoo


Joined: 15/12/2008
Posts: 18

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 00:26

Dear Brittish Ex Pats..



Firstly we love you here on N.Cyprus..



You will not loose your property. This is because of two factors..



1. Turkey is less keen on joining the EU everyday.. so there is less pressure everyday. Turkey s the 17th largest Economy in the World and one of the top 5 fastest growing. Turkey now has choices.



2. While the Turkish Army is in the North no one is going to be enforcing any eviction orders lol



Also please bare in mind.. Many Turks from the mainland have bough property and land and I cant imagine they will give it back!



Finally.. and this is pretty cool.. Larnaca Airport and a GC Powerstation are built on TURKISH land..



So if they want they oland back they will have to give back the TC land..



So please stop worrying..



Long live Turksih and Brittish friendship!!!





Love you people!!

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 00:28

pılgrım msg 121,



A very Brıtısh approach whıch wıll I fear, just lıke petıtıons and pressure groups, count for nothıng hereabouts.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 00:31

moomoo:



''While the Turkish Army is in the North no one is going to be enforcing any eviction orders lol''



Even though they are down from 44,000 to only 21,000 troops now, as a top UN offıcıal recently let slıp. Doesn't that tell you all you need to know about Ankara's long-term strategy ın Cyprus?

rowlo



Joined: 12/10/2008
Posts: 4796

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 00:45

msg 125 are you missing something , the turkish reserves are more than capable of protecting trnc greek army have no spine ?? much like youre army they hide behind the night , but soon comes daylight my friend ?

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 00:49

rowlo,



Try a bıt more water ın that.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 01:06

msg 127



you appreciate the guy honouring us on this north cyprus forum



is actually a professional journalist, his real name is lunchtime o'sailorsuit



andre

Lemtich



Joined: 15/02/2007
Posts: 1487

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 01:22

I'm not a military genius, but if I had to move a large military force of troops and equipment some 60 or 80 miles to an already ready location with airstrips and other military facilities, I wouldn't exactly be wetting my pants because garrison numbers had dropped..



Sounds more like a LEAN exercise, the Brits have been doing it for years, minimal garrison, quick deployment, just in time, shoot the dingbats, move on.



Lem

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 01:28

msg 129'



Except the Brıtısh forces aren't proppıng up an ıllegal regıme ın Cyprus and by default protectıng more than a few people's ıll-gotten gaıns.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 01:42

mmmmmmmmm Re Msg 118



Thank you Mark - apology accepted.



Shame you still don't see the gaping hole in your logic on the main point I was making. No matter how many times I read your messages it will still be there.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 02:14

msg 130



an unrecognised regime not an illegal regime



andre

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 09:24

Hi mmmmmmmmmmm,



You are still referring to TCs as if they are some sort of super EU citizen with extra rights and protection and that they will be allowed to stay on as tenants, with the implication that others won't. As "British Workers" are finding out, "British Jobs" cannot be reserved for them to the detriment of other EU citizens. Similarly, EU TCs will receive no better or worse rights or treatment than any other EU citizen, post settlement.

i.e. If they stay, we stay. If we have to go, they have to go. The EU could not be seen to support anything else.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 09:47

Dear "TRNC"Vaughan



re msg 133



Sorry, I'm not getting through.. Annan would have restricted the GCs - EU citizens - from being able to choose where to live in the TC sector.. right?



I did not hear you say this would be "wrong"..



You will see - the next plan WILL deal with Cypriots as a priority..THEN more recent property "acquisitions"..



If you want "fairness" then innocent folk should be allowed to choose if they want to move back to their land / property..



Most non-Cypriots knew the score when they bought on GC land - We've all read the posts.. "we thought it was worth the risk"..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 09:51

Dear VinceHugo re 131



Re my "gaping holes"..



You see, if I make a "howler", I'm capable of admitting it.. so I would like you to try to - clearly - demonstrate to me - point by point - for clarity - what the holes are ..



and if I'm wrong - I'll admit that, too ;)

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 10:12

Hi mmmmmmmmmm,



Your 134.



"Most non-Cypriots knew the score when they bought on GC land.."

Are you saying TCs didn't, or that they did, but we'll make an exception for them?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 10:21

Dear "TRNC"Vaughan re 136



I AM saying that if GCs or TCs had to move home because of ethnic cleansing - their cases should be dealt with FIRST..



Could you deal with my point re the inequality of GCs under Annan - as you want to claim you can't be treated any differently to a TC, why would a GC be different ?!



My feeling is you want to "ignore" the question ;)

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 10:43

Hi mmmmmmmmm,



Your 137.



I'v got nothing against GCs or TCs being dealt with FIRST. I do have a problem, as an EU citizen, with other EU citizens getting preferential treatment.

Annan, as SG of the UN, was proposing something which to the UN was seen as necessary as well as desirable. The difficulty was and is that the UN and the EU have quite a different agenda. The EU has stated many times that the resolution of the Cyprus problem is a UN issue. What the UN has proposed in this paticular instance goes against EU principles and therein lies the dilemma.

However, it is still quite clear that, post solution, TCs will need to be assured that they can not and will not be marginalised and/or outvoted in their own backyards.

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 11:00

Lemtich...msg 129



Must agree.....rapid deployment in this day and age would not be a problem.

Turkey should use this fact to their advantage and make a big political show to the rest of the world by reducing TRNC troop numbers to say 5000.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 11:12

mmmmmmmm Re 135



I have tried in the earlier messages to spell it out. It's a very specific, but I think important point. I will paraphrase to try and make it crystal clear - the precise wording is contained in earlier messages



You say that the younger GC's are MORE vehement about the right to return than the older GC's.



UKFAC say that the younger GC's are LESS vehement about the right to return than the older GC's.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 11:26

Dear Cronos



re msg 139



Top post



"TRNC" Vaughan might remember my letter to Mr Erdogan post April 2004 and the GC NO vote ..



I suggested he used his big majority to implement many of the initiatives of the Annan Plan and the GCs would have had to concede he was a man who could be trusted.. TCs would have had their direct flights, TR would have ben WELL on the way to EU accession and President "LIEALOTOPOULOS" would have had the rug pulled from under his feet..



It would also have been a CLEAR signal who ran TR ..





I wonder could he pull it off now? It would be perceived as "weakness" - back then he had five years ahead..



TOP POST..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 11:48

Dear "TRNC" Vaughan 138



You STILL don't answer my question re WHY is is "OK" for Annan is have excluded GCs from freedom of movement, but you want a solution on EU values.. This is what Papadopoulos maintained was "unfair" about Annan.



The whole idea is to reassure TCs they won't be overrrun.





*I* can't see how you can, apparently, want to "have your cake and eat it ..."

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 11:56

Dear "VinceHugo" re msg 135



No.. the UK FAC say "many people do not want to return to their villages any more—particularly the young who cannot remember them"



As I thought... you don't read properly.. the RIGHT is more important than whether they would return...



If you get that, you'd see why I think "acknowledging the wrongs".. and converting GC/ TC owned land to some sort of leasehold ( similar to what the RoC did - allow GCs to "say" it is their land, but allowing the displaced TC to stay there - and for at least a generation- could be a GOER..



I HOPE you finally got it... and that we can progress to have a reasoned debate "Andre" ;)

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 12:30

Hi mmmmmmmmmmm,



Your 142.

I didn't say it was "OK" for Annan is have excluded GCs from freedom of movement.." I said it was a dilemma because of the difference of agenda between the UN and the EU, but as you say "The whole idea is to reassure TCs they won't be overrrun". I don't see how you are going to do it any other way.

I suppose you could say "Give a dog a bad name" because of what the GCs did 1963 to 1974. A steady reintegration over time, also as proposed by Annan, must be the way to go rather than for TCs to wake up one day as a minority in their "own" country.

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 12:48

mmmmmmmmm Re Msg 143



OK. We have progress.



In Msg 28 you say the younger GC's "are MORE determined to "get it back.." " (excuse the double double quotes)



So the "get it back" was in quotes because you were alluding to their Right to Return, rather than their intention to return. (A subtelty which I hope you would excuse the average reader from missing).



So your opinion is that the young GC's are more vehement about their Right to Return than the older GC's.



And the UKFAC's view is that the young GC's are less interested in actually returning than the older GC's.



These are now two separate points and I do understand the difference.



In Msg 79 you could have clarified the subtelty of your "get it back" but instead you say the UK FAC ".. backs up EXACTLY what I said.. the young GCs ARE more vehement that that they want the right to return..."



This is just not correct - they are (now we have greater clarity on "get it back") two different points.



Lets move on

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 12:51

My brain hurts!

Pedantics does that to me .

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
13/02/2009 13:13

TRNC Vaughan Re Msg 135



I take mmm's point about restricting movement of EU citizens, but on the property issue I don't believe the Annan Plan was at odds with the rights of EU citizens, or provided any special rights by virtue of nationality. The Annan Plan uses the terms "dispossessed owner" and "current user", which clearly could apply to GC's or TC's but importantly, it also accepts that the rights of a dispossessed owner are inherited by a "successor in title". In conjunction with the Es Deger arrangement created by the TRNC government (which is embraced within Annan) this meant that anyone buying Es Deger land (whatever nationality) would inherit the rights of the dispossessed owner.



Of course, that is not to say that the same arrangement will be included in any new property settlement (if it ever emerges) although it has been suggested that it will be "akin" to Annan.

canyavuz


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 363

Message Posted:
09/03/2009 20:17

I know the politics of North Cyprus very well.....and the way the minds of North Cyprus, Turkey and the Turkish armed forces work.







1.They cannot ask for everything to be knocked over and given back, purely because half of the population would be homeless..



2. Turkey wouldn't allow for this area to be inhabited by Greek cypriots at a large scale, or anything more than 3% of the total population.



The only solution there will be, would be compensation to be paid.



Either the government, or current owner would be liable for this compensation.



Nobody will be giving anything back......nothing will be knocked down, or over.....believe me.