Forget about reunification -it wil never happen ( it will !) 2

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 14:45

Dear Robnjo re msg 254



Yes, you are trying to be a pendant - but not succeeding as you aren't "correct";)



The RoC are meeting the elected leader of the TCs -not the "President of "TRNC"" ..



it's all very simple... NOT ;)



Going by your logic - if I show my passport - which I won't - to be allowed to cross to "TRNC" - I'm recognising the "state"....!



Is your name Rauf Denktash ?! ;)

Lambousa Gordon


Joined: 03/11/2007
Posts: 1992

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 14:48

MMM - Can I be a key-fob then?



;)

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 14:51

Sorry, Gordon, I'm not sure you "swing" to my rythmn ))))

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 15:49

Darling Mark,...



and when you return to the ROC from the TRNC, if you flash your passport, are you taken to one side and questioned as to why you are entering the ROC from an illegal point of entry?



If not, the ROC are treating the TRNC as a recognised legal POE.



Rob

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 16:09

hope I am not going to be accused yet again of wandering off thread

however it is clear that some of the postings, albeit from a small group,

while posing as genuine queries about un declarations, churches in the area

and events that may or may not have happened a third of a century ago

are "really" about this thread ie re-unification...



well let us say it one more time:

there is nothing on the horizon to suggest that re-unification is in any way likely



the question of whether there indeed should be a single administration

for the island of cyprus is a highly controversial one

and has cost lives on all sides until partition resolved it

there are pluses/minuses for everyone involved, no easy "shoe-in"

and from my own narrow perspective wholly undesirable as well as incredible



so less of the: "it is to be hoped" and "what cyprus really needs" flannel please

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 16:17

andre



I agree.



Personally I don't see any sign of reunification, but certain signs of recognition.









Which is what Cyprus needs and is to be hoped for.









Oh Bu**er! I just said the naughty words!



Rob

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 16:38

ermmmm dt... what about the turkish history?

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 16:38

Oh and by the way it is Cypriot history.....

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 16:50

Still, we have the Guarantee................

newlad



Joined: 02/03/2008
Posts: 7819

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 19:41

Tyne brand no lumps of fat or gristle GUARANTEED !!!!!!!

waddo


Joined: 29/11/2008
Posts: 1966

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 20:05

Msge 7 - Why not it seemed to work in the South to get rid of Turkish history or was that just a Greek thing?



Why is it the Greek side want to be Greek and not Cypriot when the Turkish side want to be Cypriot?



The USA has not even been the USA for 400+ years yet they all want to be Americans and there are multi nationals in that country. Something very wrong here when one side wants to be part of a country that is miles away and for what reason anyway - to me it is a church thing and that means there will never be an answer.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 21:01

Paul, when you say Guaranteed do you mean Guaranteed as in " your properties are Guaranteed". If you recall this was the statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister.

Turtle


Joined: 28/05/2007
Posts: 2669

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 21:27

No1, did you just mention our properties are Guaranteed ?

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 21:29

Is that Guaranteed to be Guaranteed???

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 22:23

Turtle. Yes, Guaranteed.

Turtle


Joined: 28/05/2007
Posts: 2669

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 22:31

Well bugger me with a fish fork....what a result

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
03/04/2009 22:58

Turtle, yes that's right Guarantee!

Tiggy


Joined: 25/07/2007
Posts: 1994

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 00:18

Will that include the official guarantee stamp?



I see Count Cylad is out of his box again. The sun must have gone down in Port Glasgow.

canyavuz


Joined: 22/02/2009
Posts: 363

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 02:58

mmmmmm,

why can;t you just call the tc president, the "tc president", rather than the tc leader??

Even the BBC refers to him as the tc president, or prime minister...........and we all know how biased the bbc can be sometimes, but not this time.



and regards to unification. Personally, i dont think it is possible. Both sides have different interests, and i pressume you agree with me on this.

I think the greek decline of the annan plan put the tc's off unification quite a lot.

In a survey, around 40% of tc's said that, if the annan plan was bought to the table again, they would decline it. (ofcourse these results are just for illusttrative purposes, and not the idea of the trnc population as a whole).

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 10:11

Dearest , Darling, RobnJo !, re msg 4



"and when you return to the ROC from the TRNC, if you flash your passport, are you taken to one side and questioned as to why you are entering the ROC from an illegal point of entry?"



1/ I never show my passport to a "TRNC" "Policeman"- I show him R. of Cyprus ID - which they recognise ( happily) ;)



2/ As I would have entered RoC via a legal PoE, and "TRNC" isn't recognised - i never "left" ;)

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 10:22

Dear Canyavuz, remsg 22



1/ if you feel the Beeb, is "biased" feel free to complain.. The BBC refer to Burma as Burma and not Myamar - they make "mistakes" ;)



2/ *IF* Mr Talat *is* a President of a nation - recognised by the UN - I'll refer to him as Mr President - simple.



3/ Unification - we did this one.. UN proposed bi-zonal, federated states the only "goer" - TCs retain region autonomy.



4/ The GREEKS wanted GCs ( I know you meant that - but I'm trying to get you to be clear) to accept Annan.



YES, the GC no has done untold damage..



5/ We both know that a a huge recession, TR is going to have to cut back it's "investment" in "TRNC" - esp if the IMF set some firm guidelines on how their money is spent .



IF the Orams' lose and GCs wised up into using the IPC, Turkey is going to have to find a lot of money.



Just like before - I can see a time when TCs will be saying "This country is ours"....

Tiggy


Joined: 25/07/2007
Posts: 1994

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 13:50

Tiggy: well you got the name right.



You are banned from the board and have no right to be on it or spouting your worn out guff. The clock is ticking for you......macha and pikey are now gone and you will be following behind.



What a lovely day.

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 14:18

I keep seeing facts and figures on displaced GC's does anyone have any facts and figures on how many TC's were displaced from the south and had to flee leaving thier Property, thier land and businesses behind, is there any figures as to how many will seek compensation from the south or restitution of property and lands occupied by GC'c or foriegn owners having bought properties on illegaly owned land, is this not a two way street. As dt.. stated the Turkish Cypriots have been established on Cyprus for 400+ years, do they not have any rights???

Tiggy


Joined: 25/07/2007
Posts: 1994

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 14:23

Well I have an e-mail from Izett saying otherwise Mr Smarty pants.



He was unaware that you had returned as macha and hence you disappeared.



If you were suspended then how comes you can not come back on as the others......or was it a "permanent" suspension !!!



most people can take your "Mr Know it all attitude" about Cyprus.....but what they do not like is your cheap and nasty jibes at people, trying to scare them about homes etc. You have even admitted this and said it was wrong.....but you can not change or help your self.



Have a bit of decency and backbone and accept you are not wanted and go on to a forum that accepts your kind of behaviour.



Tiggy. (bonified 44 member)

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 17:33

msge 7



I think you make a good point. The GC's with their 3000 years of history, which is probably embedded deeply in their DNA or resonating in a morphic field, will never give up their struggle for the whole of the island.



I wonder too, if Christian and Muslim struggles on the island are just a recurring habit. I was reading a book about economic trade by William Bernstien and surprisingly came across this passage.



"This island (Cyprus), a predominantly Christian focal point of Mediterranean trade, also had a substantial muslim minority. The disease (black death) struck there in 1348 and devastated the islands animal population before infecting humans. So many christians died or fled Cyprus that those left alive, fearing that Muslims would seize the opportunity to grab power, gathered up all the muslim prisoners and slaves and slaughtered them in the span of a few hours."

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 18:38

mmmmmmmm

Did you not once support a bi-zonal Cyprus?



Re-unification as per Juliet et al will not, in my view happen.

TRNC is far to well established as is the ROC. The two regions could just as well be on opposite sides of the planet.



Property issues, compensation claims and payments, European Court pedantics will not force a re-unification of these two very individual republics.



Fortunately,it will be the military and strategic importance of the whole Island that will force a Cyprus Solution. The Solution will be driven by the UN, USA, a EU and Turkey. Vast amounts of financial incentive will, in my view ,be offerd to both sides to settle. This will be forthcomming from mainly UN,EU and USA who all acknowledge the need and desire to have military presence and ally upon the Island.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 18:38

may I defend mark, juliet and cylad/macha/pike/sean?



they have every right to argue:



that the trnc is not legally the trnc,

exchange properties were never really exchanged

that the president is just a private individual

and the re-unification negociations may result in a deal



but never forget it is argument and opinion, nothing more



does anyone believe that if they had any chance

to influence events in the "real world" (remember that place?)

they would waste time preaching on a north cyprus forum?



on the other hand there are it must be acknowledged,

two brighter sparks amongst the fogs of an unfathomable quest:



firstly there are members ready to humour the revanchists with offers of cash for south cyprus (who are too stiff-necked to have ever asked for any)



secondly the dire state of the north cyprus economy

which may spawn the wildest flights of fancy,

but here the phrase "out of the frying pan into the fire" springs to mind

keithcaley



Joined: 13/06/2008
Posts: 2521

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 18:46

As a compromise, how about a 'Twinning' agreement between the two sides?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 18:48

Dear Warren, re msg 31



"did you not once support a bi-zonal Cyprus? " - a Single nation, with bi-zomal federated, autonomous regions.. Nought's changed.. THAT's my "reunification"









"TRNC is far to well established as is the ROC. The two regions could just as well be on opposite sides of the planet. "



The RoC is all of Cyprus - no longer a "goer" and "TRNC" - well it never got off the ground outside Turkey, who can't afford it's upkeep..







"Property issues, compensation claims and payments, European Court pedantics will not force a re-unification of these two very individual republics. "



Well there's only one Republic that doesn't control all of it's territory and a surreal attempt at nationhood.. The ECHR rulings, IMHO, will actually bring both sides TO the the table.. Military Force, US, UK just drove 'em apart,, that WAS the plan ...

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 20:23

Mark,

If that is indeed your interpretation of a bi -zonal Island then You may well have the basis for a solution.



What is very clear however. The TRNC is not in the slightest the ROC. The de-facto status of TRNC is abundantly clear when you see the display of national flags, the clear differential between the two regions.

The TRNC is most certainly firmly in control of the North and out of reach of even the most nationalistic ROC politicians and indeed forum members.



Of course we have the few that will continue to strive through the courts to see some sort of step back to pre 74. The chance of mass success to such an asspiration is almost certainly nil. Money will change hands under the guise of compensation and both regions will move towards tollerence, convergence , acceptance and mutual benefit and prosperity.



In 5 years time....Cyprus problem...What problem?

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 21:34

you have to ask yourself:



why does mark with no real connection to out-of-reach north cyprus

appear so interested in its foibles, history, "rulings" apertaining to etc



being my cynical self I would imagine there is something or other to gain

should it is ever be er... "reunited" with the rest of the island



if this is not the case, and I keep an open mind on the matter,

the remaining choices are more or less as follows:



obsession, moral crusade, or grudge



but rather than enlighten us,

I suspect mark will do himself no favours by referring to an earlier "reply"

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 23:01

Dear Warren, re msg 35,



Sometimes we are nearly so close, and then you "spoil it" ...



There is no doubting that *defacto* the RoC doesn't control the top 37% of the territory - but if you don't believe me.. listen to the ECHR or many TCS as to WHO really controls "TRNC"...



"we have the few that will continue to strive through the courts to see some sort of step back to pre 74"



Well actually, "going back to 74" is to get the right to use THEIR land / property... and it "ain't" a "few" - do you KNOW how many cases are "on hold" by the ECHR... ? You do say the strangest things...



YOU are of the opinion that they don't stand a chance.. you might be right .. unless GCs wise up and PUSH TR's IPC to its limit and force that ECHR to rule.. Do you see them overturning the cases already won against TR.. ? The loss of use compo continues to pile up..



In five years I hope we could say Cyprus problem - what problem - sadly I think a recession and legal reasons might "help"

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/04/2009 23:07

Dear Andre_414, re msg 36



You should ask yourself



"Why do I keep ( this is the forth time) asking WHY Mark contributes on this forum.. ? "



Did my answer change from the first two times..? I need to ask you, if you truly suffer from selective amnesia or if you have a real medical condition.. this is NOT a sarcastic response..



As my earlier reply had all the answers you'll ever need -it covered SEVEN or was it EIGHT posts and two threads - you might do better to ask Hans to find it..

twaddle


Joined: 06/07/2008
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 12:03

Mark, you often refer to the fact that the IPC should be tested by the GC's as they will find that TR will not be able to afford to pay up. However, I believe that the ROC could find its' self pushed financially as well. As you know the ROC court decided in the Orams case that compensation should be paid for the use of the land as well as demolition etc. However, we are all aware that there are the homes of 50,000 TC's that were located in what is now the non occupied part of Cyprus. Many of these properties have been the home of refugees for the past 35 years. They have all been charged rent by the ROC government. Surely that rent money belongs to the TC owner of the property. I hope that the ROC has been saving all that rent money up as they will need to pay it to the rightful recipiants soon!. Andy

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 13:42

Andy, along the lines of what I was thinking.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 15:00

Twaddle / Saints , re msg 39/40



It would be a sensible Q, if the GCs hadn't been ethnically cleansed and the "all powerful Mr Denktash" DEMANDED that TCs move to the north side..



IF you knew your CY history - folk had to move south to north *against* their will...post the traumas of July / August 74



So, do you think the RoC should pay for the actions for TURKEY ?!



Tell me - what am I missing?

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 15:14

Is a displaced person is a displaced person whether GC or TC have they both got a claim or am I missing something??

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 15:21

Let's try that again,



Is a displaced person a displaced person whether GC or TC have they both got a claim or am I missing something??

No not for the actions of Turkey as you put it but to compensate "Cypriots" who happen to be muslim and and referred to as Turkish Cypriots despite thier 400+ years on the island.

twaddle


Joined: 06/07/2008
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 16:04

Mark, you cannot have it both ways, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

If you want to go into who was ethnically cleansed, then we only need to look to the 63-74 period when TCs were ethnically cleansed and forced into enclaves living in tents and under attack.

What I am saying is that both sides cannot afford a solution unless they find some even ground and stop pointing at each other saying "you started it" TCs are still land owners as are GCs and if they all want to be compensated for all the wrongs of both sides then nobody can benefit as the cost is too great. It is about time that common sense prevailed and BOTH sides move forward with a bit of goodwill.

If not, we will be having the same silly arguments for the next 35 years. Andy

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 18:05

MM msg 41



"and the "all powerful Mr Denktash" DEMANDED that TCs move to the north side..

IF you knew your CY history - folk had to move south to north *against* their will...post the traumas of July / August 74"



Just how did Mr Denktash or Turkey force TC left in the South after 74 to move to the North ? The vast majority that moved after the military action in 74 ended did so because they did not feel safe in the South. A tiny proprtion who did feel safe stayed. Neither Turkey or Denktash had any means to force TC left in the South to move. Neither had any physical presence there with which to compell TC to move.

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 18:22

I may be ignorant when it comes to the History of Cyprus, but I am trying to get informed, a little difficult though when I keep getting a one sided version of events.

I would have thought that a Cypriot is a Cypriot no matter what his or her religous beliefs, therefore GC or TC as a Cypriot should get equal treatment when it comes to land/property disputes both sides of the line.

Scythian



Joined: 14/03/2009
Posts: 75

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 19:15

Бесконечная пустая болтовня и трата времени

twaddle


Joined: 06/07/2008
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 20:10

Go on then Scythian, I'll ask.... What does that say??

cronos


Joined: 26/10/2008
Posts: 2093

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 20:35

From Russia With Love ?

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 21:58

msg 32 mmmmmmm

TRNC is indeed controlled by the TRNC administration. I think that you consider that Turkey does. The current enthusiasm for forthcomming elections speaks resoundingly for the vibrant democracy in the TRNC. Let the ECHR ,some marginalised citizens and indeed your self support the democratic process.



The cases for a return to pre 1974 status of land use, ownership, right of access or whatever you describe really is small in the scale of things. The issues are indeed on hold awaiting a workable settlement. This part of the problem upon which you continually dwell continues to decline. Cases have been resolved and will continue to do so. There have been no mass population movements or displacments. The TRNC remains steadfast.



The decline in GC applications to the IPC supports the case for resolution. The compensation route has had success. ECHR must be aware of the de-facto path to solution.



World recession is not a problem unique to any country.

Magbs


Joined: 26/02/2009
Posts: 278

Message Posted:
05/04/2009 22:25

Re Twaddle msg 43/42



He said "endless TWADDLE and wasting time"

I guess his "robot-translator" is out of order.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 11:30

Hi Mike, re msg 38/41



Interesting that you should mention it... there was a UK national expelled from the RoC ( his case is before the ECHR) who referred to TCs as "Muslim" Cypriots and he drew a lot of flak from a TC who just wanted to be called a Cypriot !



I'm hoping to TRY and come across as "balanced" here, see what happens ?! ;)

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 11:47

people are people, good and bad in all races and religions.

my feelings are that if you need to refer to someone as a muslim then you do have some sort of problem with it. unless you are talking about religion in general.

its a bit like calling someone white or black, haven't we got past that now?

often in the uk people say' you live in the north aren't they all muslim?'

i just reply yes all my friends here are muslim why is there a problem? because it makes no difference to me.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 13:17

Dear Twaddle ( Andy) , re msg 39



I'm sorry my response seemed - to you, and maybe others - so "one-sided".. I fully acknowledge that TCs ended up in enclaves and endured terrible conditions.



The point I'm making is the "proportions" involved - FAR more GCs would have claims against TR, no ?



IF the ECHR ever rules that the "rump" RoC's provisions and treatments of TCs is inadequate re claims for property loss, your argument for point if view would be stronger.



Perhaps there are some cases pending that might bring that about.



for now, Turkey is going to be paying out, and any wise GC claimants will insist they are STILL the owners and seek only loss of use. forcing the ECHR to review the cases.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 13:20

"Dear" ErolZ, re msg 40



FORCED movement of TCs to "north" as part of threatening posturing by Mr Denktash...



I'm surprised you would even dispute this- the UN - UK troops included had to "help" folk "relocate"..



Many TCs would have preferred to remain.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 13:25

Warren, re msg 45



"TRNC is indeed controlled by the TRNC administration. I think that you consider that Turkey does."



the ECHR say that..



"The cases for a return to pre 1974 status of land use, ownership, right of access or whatever you describe really is small in the scale of things. The issues are indeed on hold awaiting a workable settlement."



As dt.. attempts to point out. elsewhere - you CLEARLY don't understand the "make up" of Cypriots if you are trying to separate the land issue... it is entirely part of the settlement process - a MAJOR factor.



Your comment about the lack of use of the IPC by GCs is clear indication - again - that you don't understand. The RoC govt - especially the last admin of "Liealotopoulos" tried to make those using an ECHR recommended route to be "bad".

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 13:44

I don't think I am coming accross too well here, what I was trying to get accross is I keep seeing GC and TC but I why? surely they are all Cypriots and have a voice and a claim non lesser nor greater than the other.



fire starter, my wife is Tatar (Sunni) so I know exactly what you mean.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 14:31

MM msg 50



"I'm surprised you would even dispute this- the UN - UK troops included had to "help" folk "relocate".. "



Are you REALLY claiming now that UN troops in the south post 74 FORCED TC from their homes there and made them go to the North ??



I am sorry MM but this is just not what happened. You are totally confused here. There were scences where TC were crying and weeping as they left their homes in the South under UN supervision post 74 to go to the North. This was because leaving your home is an emotional and distressing thing to do. They chose to do it because they felt they had no choice , not because the UN troops were forcing them to. The very idea that the UN troops were operating as agents for Denktash is crazy. In 75 agreements were signed by the 2 communites saying that anyone who WISHED to move, either way, could so and the UN would facilitate such moves. To make out this was forced movement by UN troops is a groos distorition of reality



[cont]

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 14:36

Go and read these agreements and the UN brief. It does not allow for any forcing of people from their homes at all. The idea that the UN would force people from their homes is ridiculous.



"Many TCs would have preferred to remain."



SOME TC (a very very small number) did decide to stay in the South. No one forced them to move. Not Denktash, not the UN troops or anyone else. Some that orginally chose to stay later moved because of what their lives were like in the South as TC living in a GC state. How then do you explain these that did remian. Why where some according to you forced to move and others not ?



The simple reality is much plainer. Most TC CHOSE to make the emotional and distressing decision to leave their homes in the SOuth and come North, under UN supervision, because they did not feel safe living in the South. Trying to make out that Denktash or the UN forced these people to move is preverting historical reality.

Scythian



Joined: 14/03/2009
Posts: 75

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 18:05

Yes, From Russia With Love, only not forget, about the all-seeing eye of KGB.





Joke.

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 18:21

Should that not be FSB now

Scythian



Joined: 14/03/2009
Posts: 75

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 18:31

Excuse me, that in Your conversation interfere, last events, choice of secretary general, resistance Turkey, NATO, my opinion confirms, if Turkey will enter into European Union, there will be not European Union, there will be the Osmanskaya empire, half moon above Kel'nskim by a cathedral and above the cathedral of Parisian Mother...

And you discuss the association of Cyprus here, will regain consciousness, open the eyes on the world...

Yet slightly and araby-musul'mane will govern Europe, and no Rekonkisty not to turn out, it is continuation XI century, after 1000 years...

continuation will be...

Terrible, I arrived a week ago, I had been Germany, Paris, Amsterdam, ....horror.... drugs.... cofeeshop.... unemployment.....mass meetings....protests....

It reminds the Western Roman empire, glory to the most high - The East Roman empire living - Russia.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 19:35

Erolz re msg 53/54



1/ Who forced this exchange of populations - the GCs had already been expelled - threatening further use of force ..? Answer:. Mr Denktash



2/ The coercion came from the "north" and the "rump" RoC was by then desperate to keep numbers of TCs up..



3/ the UN did not make the TCs leave - I did not INTEND to infer that - but on re-reading I can understand I did not make that clear.



If you dispute my info - the simplest reference is in the Rough Guide to Cyprus - which I know you recommend.



My copy is still in Moscow with a "friend" - who also has my "Bitter Lemons" ... other wise I'd look up thepage..



If you can't find it - I'll visit a bookshop next weekend and find it.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 23:10

mmmmmm

Msg 51



The ECHR has no real significance uppon the political path to a Cyprus solution.

Its involvment is primarily in Civil litigation cases that are a frustration to the real negotiations to settlement. The Court acknowledges the de -facto administration which is very clearly TRNC. Turkey as you know provides military and financial support to TRNC.

I accept that land and properties are issues for negotiation. However the issues continue to diminish and can be overcome without great difficulty. The IPC is the basis for settlement to most cases.

Your references to past ROC administrations is historical and of little current relevance.

twaddle


Joined: 06/07/2008
Posts: 245

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 23:32

Mark, re message 49. Thanks for your response, I think that saying that the GC's were affected more than the TCs because there were more who were affected is not the strongest argument. Anyone affected needs to be treated equally if there is ever going to be a just and lasting solution.

However, persuing individuals or entire states for loss of use is a pointless and destructive exercise that will lead to a financial bar to any proper settlement. The only solution will have to be based on restitution or compensation at realistic values. If the belief exists in people that they can sue for compensation for loss of use and then expect that they have the property returned to them and that (I suspect) huge numbers would then choose to sell rather than re-occupy then, will only lead to stalemate. Both sides were subjected to wrong doing and both sides need closure. If this is not done fairly this will never end, the cycle will not be broken. Andy

Tiggy


Joined: 25/07/2007
Posts: 1994

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 23:42

Cylad was removed last night and replaced by dryboak.. truly a sad demented lad that can not get on in life on his own.



A moderator just has to let Izzet know he is back and this vermin will be removed.....again. He is also using another name that will be revealed again shortly as he can not help himself.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/04/2009 23:54

Dear Warren, re msg 59



"he ECHR has no real significance uppon the political path to a Cyprus solution. "

A veritable "gem", sir !



Now you can tell us:



1/ Why did Sendar Denktash "order" that gates - so long closed to Cypriots to intermingle - were opened in April 2003



2/ Why did Turkey stop persecuting the GCs in the pan handle?



3/ How did the IPC come about... ?





"Your references to past ROC administrations is historical and of little current relevance. "



My reference clearly showed that any admin/ govt is unwise to ignore an ECHR ruling if it doesn't "suit"..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
07/04/2009 00:05

Dear Twaddle re 49,



Andy - firstly - thanks for your thanks and back at you !



" Anyone affected needs to be treated equally if there is ever going to be a just and lasting solution. "





But TCs can take come to the "rump" RoC and claim what is theirs - if it was unfair - they , too can go to the ECHR. The TR hasn't given GCs that option and thus ended up having a series of ECHR judgements to pay out for loss of use.



"However, persuing individuals or entire states for loss of use is a pointless and destructive exercise that will lead to a financial bar to any proper settlement."



You might think so, but *I* feel it has brought TR to the table .. if only the "rump" RoC had had a leader capable of seizing the moment - but no - after many years of being the "whipping boy" they wanted to push for more..



FAIR is listening to wise sages - Judges from Council of Europe - who rule in ECHR cases.. FAIR is giving TR a chance to put right it's part... GCs should test out the I

Tiggy


Joined: 25/07/2007
Posts: 1994

Message Posted:
07/04/2009 00:10

1/ who



2/ what



3/ when



4/ where



YES/NO answers not accepted.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
07/04/2009 00:31

MM msg 58



"1/ Who forced this exchange of populations - the GCs had already been expelled - threatening further use of force ..? Answer:. Mr Denktash "



This is just not true. Denktash had no means or ability to do anything to the populations in the South. This is just plain reality. The idea that he could force those in the South to do anything or use the UN to do it for him is nonsense.



"2/ The coercion came from the "north" and the "rump" RoC was by then desperate to keep numbers of TCs up.."



Where there was coercion on populations in the South it was to stop TC moving North. That is why the UN brokered a humanitarian deal to allow and facilitate those who WISHED to move to be able to do so.



The actual UN document detailing this agreement can be seen here.



http://www.visionmatters.co.uk/cyprus/N7515145.pdf



"If you dispute my info - the simplest reference is in the Rough Guide to Cyprus - which I know you recommend. "



[cont]

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
07/04/2009 01:18

Whilst generally the rough guide's potted history of the cyprob is reasonably good on this particular issue it has got it wrong. It talks of Turkish and British army Trucks rounding up TC in Phapos area in 1975. This is clearly a mistake. THere is no way that Turkish Army trucks or personel were in Paphos post 74. The ONLY personel involved in movement of people post 74 were the UN and THEIR mandate was NOT to FORCE people to move. THEIR mandate was to facilitate the movement of theose that WANTED to move.



I am sorry MM but on this issue you are just wrong. Denktash had no ability or means to force TC in the south post 74 to move to the North. Even if he could have forced them to move , which he could not, he had no means to prevent them from returning. Some TC did stay in the South post 74. Some did return to the South post 74 having moved intially. Some that intally stayed moved later to the North. Most CHOSE to move to the north and stay there and for obvious reasons.

Jenks


Joined: 05/06/2008
Posts: 13

Message Posted:
07/04/2009 02:46

Cyprus solution - very funny. The Cypriots (either side) have no idea how to poltically manage their "nation". They've never had to - from close on 500 years (Ottoman rule followed by British). I know i'm oversimplifying (hans) but these people are simply unable to manage their own affairs without coming to blows. They're like kids. Personally i'm glad i'm out of it - they can keep their little blob in the med - and fight over it forever. I wonder if the GC's ever consider themselves lucky they never came under Ataturks ethnic cleansing after WW1? Brits out??

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
08/04/2009 03:02

jenks,



I know the greeks and the greek cypriots had a magnificent past

and the republic of cyprus is bigger than the north

but on the cyprus issue I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw 'em



not that that this is really any of my business,

as a non-cypriot it is not appropriate for me to tell trnc locals what to think



and it wouldn't be necessary anyway:

for many years they wouldn't trust them as far as they could throw 'em either

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
08/04/2009 09:37

Dear ErolZ



re msg 66



"sorry MM but on this issue you are just wrong. Denktash had no ability or means to force TC in the south post 74 to move to the North." ..



OK, ErolZ.. IF I'm "wrong"...

1/ why is this misinfo constantly republished ?

2/ Denktash DID have "power".. a big TR army presence with a recent history of going / doing where / what they wanted... How do you think Denktash got his mother's remains moved to the north?



Let's both "dig" to back up our stances..

Cyprusraider


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 99

Message Posted:
08/04/2009 13:15

Sorry mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm



But you seem to have great faith in a Guide Book for your historical information.



Clearly the "misinformation" is regularly re-published in error. The Turkish Army at that time were not free to go where they pleased. They were holding the Atilla Line. Not even the vaguest possibility of their trucks being in Paphos. As to Denktash's mum's remains. Perhaps the Greek Cypriot's felt sorry for him.

Cyprusraider


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 99

Message Posted:
08/04/2009 13:15

kl/hk/lhl/

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
08/04/2009 15:06

MM msg 69



"1/ why is this misinfo constantly republished ?"



You will have to ask rough guide that. However do YOU really believe that the Turkish Army was in Paphos in 75 ? Clearly there is something wrong there.



"2/ Denktash DID have "power".. a big TR army presence with a recent history of going / doing where / what they wanted... How do you think Denktash got his mother's remains moved to the north?"



Are you saying that TC in the South post 74 felt compelled to move North because they feared if they did not Denktash would use the Turkish Army forces to come and get them ? It makes no sense MM.



As far as Denktash's mother, of course he had connections to those in power in the South and could make deals with them. However that does not mean he could exert pressure on TC living in the South. He could not. He no physical means to do this.