Cyprus bicommunal discussion and chat forum : Discussion of argument split from Straw Topic

Album

Home

Discussion of argument split from Straw Topic
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Author

Message

cannedmoose
Warnings : 4
Moderator

Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5355
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:49 am Post subject:

Xenos 2Fan wrote:

Geez .....keep the whole island if you would just give it a rest for a moment. Rolling Eyes

Maybe that's a solution we've been looking for. The 'keep Kifeas' mouth shut' Plan, involving full right of return, 82/18 split in a federal union, removal of all foreign troops and liquidation of the UK bases... all if Kifeas promises to become a trappist monk.

Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial

Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2732
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:52 am Post subject:

cannedmoose wrote:

If I were in the position to offer 25% of Cyprus to the Turkish Cypriots, then certainly you should be offended... perhaps you might also try to assassinate me. However, thankfully for you, I will never be in such a position and would never savour such a position either. IMO, the Cyprus problem is for the Cypriots alone to sort out, I can shout from the sidelines what I think is a viable solution, but the only real solution is one worked out for Cypriots, by Cypriots, with the rest of the world only there to support their efforts.

My sincere hope is that one day you do get back your land in Lapithos, just as I hope that my uncle also gets his land back in Lapithos, my brother-in-law gets his land back in Angastina and my koumbaros gets his land back in Kyrenia. Sadly, for most of you, I don't think this will happen, especially with the current generation of leaders in Cyprus.

And we would have gotten it with your A-plan for which you scream against us for not accepting???? "kounia pou se kounage!" Ask your wife to translate it for you!

cannedmoose
Warnings : 4
Moderator

Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5355
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:55 am Post subject:

Since when did I scream at you for not accepting the AP? Prove it... I think you'll find from my posts that I have never claimed the AP was a panacea, in fact I have criticised it for being one-sided in favour of Turkish Cypriots. As for getting my wife to translate, erm... no... I'll rely on one of my forum folks here to do that for me.

cannedmoose
Warnings : 4
Moderator

Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5355
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:57 am Post subject:

Anyway Kifeas, I wish you a pleasant evening, I am off to sleep the sleep of the righteous...

Xenos 2Fan
Warnings : 5
Ministerial

Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 3498
Location: Dallas,Texas/Mersin, Turkey

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 2:21 am Post subject:

cannedmoose wrote:

Xenos 2Fan wrote:

Geez .....keep the whole island if you would just give it a rest for a moment. Rolling Eyes

Well said!

SP

Senior Villager

Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 265
Location: Girne

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:55 pm Post subject:

Kifeas wrote:

SP wrote:

Sounds a lot like 1963 and the Samson Coup of 1974.

What do you mean here????

SP wrote:

18% is a nominal figure, even Makarios thought that 25% was reasonable

Makarios thought 25% was reasonable??? Never!!!! Where? When? Under what circumstances? Do you have any reference to that? This is a complete lie! Why 25%? Based on what reasoning? Just becasue you are "Turks"? Just becasue you "won" the "war"? Where is this based? Rolling Eyes

Quote:

They are views that are support illegalities by international law, such as the usurping of other peoples properties and homes and the violation of their human and historical homeland ownership rights. You are supporting the maintenance and perpetuations of illegalities that they are the outcome of a war (an act of aggression.) There is absolutely no difference between you supporting the perpetuation of illegalities and the expressing of desires to legalize the spoils of a war

This bit sounds like 1963 and 1974 Samson Coup to me.

Thank you cannedmoose for your quote from 1977 meeting where Turkish Cypriot's apparently OWNED 32% of the Island

Quote:

Denktash pressed by Makarios, replied. "Since you insist I mention a percentage, I say 32.8% which corresponds to Turkish Cypriot ownership of land." When His Beatitude stated that there was a very great and unbridgeable gap, Denktash observed "This percentage is negotiable, it remains open for discussion."

MAYBE he meant 37% was OK?? Wink

Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial

Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2732
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 2:32 pm Post subject:

SP wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

SP wrote:

Sounds a lot like 1963 and the Samson Coup of 1974.

What do you mean here????

SP wrote:

18% is a nominal figure, even Makarios thought that 25% was reasonable

Quote:

This bit sounds like 1963 and 1974 Samson Coup to me.

And I will ask you again what you mean by that…., unless of course all you can offer is to dump empty slogans in the forum!

SP wrote:

Thank you cannedmoose for your quote from 1977 meeting where Turkish Cypriot's apparently OWNED 32% of the Island

Quote:

MAYBE he meant 37% was OK?? Wink

No Sir, the T/Cs never owned 32% of the island! Never! Denkash throw that number but of course Makarios rejected it immitiatelly. Nevertheless, those figures, as I explained to Moose already but which explanation you purposefully skipped, were discussed within the contexts of negotiations for a Federal solution, and not for partition. Makarios wouldn’t accept more than 18% if the negotiations were on the basis of partition. Read my reply to Moose!

This is the property ownership in Cyprus based on the land registry records.
You have absolutely no evidence to back up your claim (or Denktash’s claim) that the T/Cs owed 32% of Cyprus, simply because this was never the case.

The case was /is as below:

PS: Moose, thank you very much for contributing to the misinformation of people in this forum. As evidence, I cite SP's latest posting here. At least, try to rectify your mistake and explain to SP the difference between the text you quoted regarding the Makarios Denktash talks in 1977 and the issue that we have been talking about before you had thrown that quotation, which was that of what percentage the T/Cs should be entitled in the case of Partition.

cannedmoose
Warnings : 4
Moderator

Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5355
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:07 pm Post subject:

Kifeas... ... it is up to SP how he interprets the quote that I posted... unlike you I don't try to force people to believe in my point of view. In this particular case, I agree with you that SP may have been mislead by Denktas' assertion that Turkish Cypriots owned 32% of the land. I think we all know that the reality was clearly significantly less than this. I would similarly note that the 12.2% figure that you quote is also subject to dispute, I have seen figures ranging from 10% to 14%, but no more. However... what we're really talking about here is how much territory we think the Turkish Cypriots deserve in a federal solution. In a partition scenario, I think 18% would be the only fair measure, reflecting the size of the Turkish Cypriot population, but in a federal solution, similar to that which I proposed and you failed to provide any constructive comments on, I feel that a territory of 25% is the minimum that will be acceptable to the Turkish Cypriot community. Given that Makarios did not see this figure beyond the bounds of possibility, I think we can safely say that this would also be acceptable to the broad sweep of Greek Cypriot public opinion, which I'm not entirely sure that you represent.

Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial

Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2732
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.

Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 4:23 pm Post subject:

cannedmoose wrote:

Kifeas...

... it is up to SP how he interprets the quote that I posted... unlike you I don't try to force people to believe in my point of view. In this particular case, I agree with you that SP may have been mislead by Denktas' assertion that Turkish Cypriots owned 32% of the land. I think we all know that the reality was clearly significantly less than this. I would similarly note that the 12.2% figure that you quote is also subject to dispute, I have seen figures ranging from 10% to 14%, but no more..

Moose, please do not act on my nerves! The table above is the data provided by the Republic of Cyprus Land Registry, as is was published by the LR department in the press, numerous times by now! Do you dispute its accuracy, when the ECHR does not! If you dispute its accuracy, then you should also dispute the validity and accuracy of the title deeds of the property that your parents bough in Cyprus! If you do, perhaps you should also assume that maybe your parents bought a property that did not belong to the person that sold it to them, but belonged to another G/C, or another T/C for this matter. If you dispute its accuracy, then you should dispute the accuracy of the records that the British colonial regime has turned over to the Republic of Cyprus in 1960! British colonialists made few good things for this country and many bad things. One of the few good ones is the LR that they developed in Cyprus, which is one of the most thorough and accurately documented, with records and topographic maps, in Europe.

The 12.23% of land that the table shows, represents the private ownership land that belongs to T/Cs (individuals, associations, companies, evkaf, etc.) The equivalent figure for the G/C private ownership land(individuals, associations, companies, church, etc,) is 61%. The rest is state ownership land (public buildings, roads, forests, rivers, dams, etc, etc.) There are no figures that you saw, ranging from 10% to 14%, because these are the figures above, and no other figures! Do not do what some T/C do, which claim from time to time all sorts of arbitrary figures, citing evkaf ownership some 100-200 years ago. The story with evkaf is closed for ever in 1960, when the British paid to evkaf 1.5 million sterlings, as a final settlement, which Denktash and Kutchuk on behalf of it have accepted, signed and took the money. This agreement is an annex part to the 1960 treaty of establishment.

cannedmoose wrote:

However... what we're really talking about here is how much territory we think the Turkish Cypriots deserve in a federal solution. In a partition scenario, I think 18% would be the only fair measure, reflecting the size of the Turkish Cypriot population, but in a federal solution, similar to that which I proposed and you failed to provide any constructive comments on, I feel that a territory of 25% is the minimum that will be acceptable to the Turkish Cypriot community. Given that Makarios did not see this figure beyond the bounds of possibility, I think we can safely say that this would also be acceptable to the broad sweep of Greek Cypriot public opinion, which I'm not entirely sure that you represent.

I already said a million times that I have no objection to any percentage of the Turkish Cypriot constituent state in a federal Republic of Cyprus solution, as long as this is justified by the percentage number of G/C that will be permitted to become internal citizens of this state. If it is going to be 25%, so be it, but this should automatically make acceptable that as much as 28% of the population of the north Turkish Cypriot state should originate from the G/C community. If it will be 29%, as it was in the A-plan, then 38% of the total population of that state should originate from the G/C community, and not 18% as it was in the a-plan. If the T/Cs want 0% (zero) of the people of the north T/C state to originate from the G/C community, then they should accept only 18% as their states territory. I am talking here about internal citizenship status with all citizenship rights in full respect, just like the rest of the T/Cs, and not mere residency rights, or like weekend and summer holiday vacationers owning just a house in the north.

I hope you understand better this time!

turkcyp

Senior Villager

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 423

Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 8:47 pm Post subject:

Kifeas wrote:

Where did you get the 28% and 39% Kifeas?

Kifeas wrote:

If the T/Cs want 0% (zero) of the people of the north T/C state to originate from the G/C community, then they should accept only 18% as their states territory. .

If Turkish Cypriots are to accept 18% (or whatever it is their entitled land from 1960) then what is the point of union and federation. WE get 18% and have our own Republic of Northern Cyprus and you get your own 82% and have your own Republic of Cyprus. Sounds fair to me.

Kifeas wrote:

I am talking here about internal citizenship status with all citizenship rights in full respect, just like the rest of the T/Cs, and not mere residency rights, or like weekend and summer holiday vacationers owning just a house in the north.

Basically you are saying minority rights. Hehehe!

Ok. Lets start which 18% Turkish Cypriot will have to have a legal partition because minority rights will never be accepted by Turkish Cypriots.

Have a good day,

Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial

Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2732
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.

Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 9:08 pm Post subject:

turkcyp wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

Where did you get the 28% and 39% Kifeas? .

What did you not understand from this?

turkcyp wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

If the T/Cs want 0% (zero) of the people of the north T/C state to originate from the G/C community, then they should accept only 18% as their states territory. .

If the majority of the Turkish Cypriots wish formal partition on this basis (i.e. with territory equivalent to their population or land ratio,) then perhaps the majority of the G/Cs may also accept this. However, you need to provide a solution for those T/Cs that might not wish on an individual level to wave (loose) their Republic of Cyprus citizenship, and I am sure there will be quite a lot of them. Legally, the Republic of Cyprus doesn’t have the right to deprive them of their citizenship status, but only if they so choose themselves and on an individual basis.

turkcyp wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

Basically you are saying minority rights. Hehehe!

I do not understand what you mean here?

turkcyp wrote:

Ok. Lets start which 18% Turkish Cypriot will have to have a legal partition because minority rights will never be accepted by Turkish Cypriots.

I do not understand what you are saying here either! Where did I speak about minority rights, and how did you come up with this idea?

turkcyp

Senior Villager

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 423

Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject:

Kifeas wrote:

turkcyp wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

Where did you get the 28% and 39% Kifeas? .

What did you not understand from this?

I just want to know how you arrive the figures of 28% and 39%/? That’s all.

Kifeas wrote:

If the T/Cs want 0% (zero) of the people of the north T/C state to originate from the G/C community, then they should accept only 18% as their states territory.

If the majority of the Turkish Cypriots wish formal partition on this basis (i.e. with territory equivalent to their population or land ratio,) then perhaps the majority of the G/Cs may also accept this. However, you need to provide a solution for those T/Cs that might not wish on an individual level to wave (loose) their Republic of Cyprus citizenship, and I am sure there will be quite a lot of them. Legally, the Republic of Cyprus doesn’t have the right to deprive them of their citizenship status, but only if they so choose themselves and on an individual basis.

Heheheh. Sneakiness to the roof.

Although there is no reason for Republic of Cyprus to deny their citizenship rights (all it has to deny them are the property rights,since they are given property in north) if you want to play like that then OK. There are plenty of people in the world that has multiple citizenship. Hell I have 4 citizenship, 4 different passports.

But all those that return back to Republic of Cyprus are to get their property back right. WE can give it one year for example, and say that anybody who wants to return to Republic of Cyprus in this one year can and get their property back (or something of equal value). Those who wishes to stay are to forfeit their property in south, and then after that we can make the partition.

Kifeas wrote:

I do not understand what you mean here?

I do not understand what you are saying here either! Where did I speak about minority rights, and how did you come up with this idea?

You do not have to speak of minority rights. The end result is minority rights. If those Greek Cypriots are to be given every right of Turkish Cypriots in the Turkish Cypriot state without any restriction on voting rights, and if all the elections are done on state basis, instead of some sort of ethnic basis then that is what exactly you are proposing.

Do you take us as stupid?

Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial

Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2732
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.

Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 10:18 pm Post subject:

turkcyp wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

turkcyp wrote:

Kifeas wrote:

Where did you get the 28% and 39% Kifeas? .

What did you not understand from this?

I just want to know how you arrive the figures of 28% and 39%/? That’s all.

It is very simple! If the T/C state will cover 25% of the territory of Cyprus, that means that it will cover 28% of territory in excess of the T/C share. (i.e.: 25% -18% =7%; 7% /25% = 28%.) This extra 28% of territory over the share of the T/Cs which is 18% should be filled by members of the G/C community as citizens of the T/C state. The same logic goes for the other case, i.e. if the territory will be 29% as it was in the Anan plan. (i.e.: 29% -18% = 11%; 11% /29% = 38%) (Note: in the above figure is written as 39% instead of 38%)

turkcyp wrote:

Heheheh. Sneakiness to the roof.

Where did you see the sneakiness?

turkcyp wrote:

Although there is no reason for Republic of Cyprus to deny their citizenship rights (all it has to deny them are the property rights,since they are given property in north) if you want to play like that then OK. There are plenty of people in the world that has multiple citizenship. Hell I have 4 citizenship, 4 different passports.

But all those that return back to Republic of Cyprus are to get their property back right. WE can give it one year for example, and say that anybody who wants to return to Republic of Cyprus in this one year can and get their property back (or something of equal value). Those who wishes to stay are to forfeit their property in south, and then after that we can make the partition.

I am talking about those T/Cs who will wish to remain in their current locations which will fell under the Republic of Cyprus territory after territorial adjustments, or who will wish to return to their former properties in the south, and naturally will have to keep their Republic of Cyprus citizenship, instead of abandoning their current locations and citizenship and move into the Turkish partitioned state which will be reduced to 18%.

Do you agree that based on the percentage of the T/Cs that will choose to remain as citizens of the Republic of Cyprus and stay within the territory of the Republic of Cyprus, there should be a subsequent reduction of the T/C partitioned state accordingly? If for example 20% of the T/Cs will wish not to move into the T/C partitioned state and not to obtain the new TCPS citizenship, then the territory of this state should be reduced down to 14.4% of Cyprus. (i.e.: 18 x 20% = 3.6; 18 -3.6 = 14.4) Do you agree?

turkcyp wrote:

So what do you suggest? Do you suggest that those people become citizens without political rights? This is not possible! Do you suggest that those G/Cs will be citizens of the T/C state but move to the south G/C state and exercise their political rights though that state? This is also not possible! People should enjoy and exercise their political rights at the place of their stay and through the procedures of same district and state in which they reside. This is a standard universal law and right, set aside an EU one.

Furthermore, if any of the above is followed, then the T/C state, if it covers more territory than the share of the T/Cs such as 25%, it means that it will be in the ownership and control of only the 18% of the people (the T/Cs) who will have the political rights in this state. The G/Cs that will move into this state, will be merely residents /tourists who will be paying taxes local taxes, but will not have any political rights, something which of course is not acceptable.

What i do not undertand is where do you see the issue of minority rights, if lets say 28% or 38% of the population of the T/C state will originate from the G/C community?

turkcyp wrote:

Do you take us as stupid?

No, I do not take you as stupid, but perhaps you take us as stupid!

repulsewarrior

Deputy
Deputy

Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 1643
Location: Canada

Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 6:38 am Post subject:

cannedmoose wrote:

Xenos 2Fan wrote:

Geez .....keep the whole island if you would just give it a rest for a moment. Rolling Eyes

This is the most succinct resolution of where we stand right now. It's not a bad plan, it's the right of return that should be important to all of us, and the rest is negotiable.

cannedmoose
Warnings : 4
Moderator

Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5355
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:14 pm Post subject:

repulsewarrior wrote:

cannedmoose wrote:

This is the most succinct resolution of where we stand right now. It's not a bad plan, it's the right of return that should be important to all of us, and the rest is negotiable.

If you're referring to my rather facetious plan above... watch it or you'll be added to Kifeas' hitlist Laughing

Display posts from previous:

All times are GMT + 3 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

get the latest forum posts directly to your desktop

get the latest album posts directly to your desktop

Link Partners

2342 Attacks blocked