 |
| Author |
Message |
Viewpoint
Warnings : 2
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 971
Location: Lefkosa/Nicosia
|
|
| Wasn't there a case recently where Turkish Cypriot land by the coast was sold to a development company? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2733
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.
|
|
| And the Lefkoniko (Gecitkale) airport in the occupied north is built on Greek Cypriot land. In fact, the Larnaka airport is only partly (20%) built on Turkish Cypriot land. The Lefkoniko one was built almost in its entireness on Greek Cypriot land. The new road from Kyrenia to Davlos (Kaplica) passes almost exclusively through Greek Cypriot land. One needs to distinguish between public benefit /use works or projects, and individual or private profiteering. The Turkish Cypriot leadership had absolutely no right to usurp private Greek Cypriot property and “transfer” its “ownership” to other private individuals, be it Turkish Cypriots or foreigners. The state, (any state including even unrecognised ones such as the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus,”) has to a certain extent the natural "right" to appropriate or use private land, only for the construction of public benefit projects, provided there is no state owned land available, and provided that it does so in an indiscriminate manner as which particular areas it chooses to expropriate. The Larnaka airport being on 20% Turkish Cypriot owned land doesn’t indicate purposefully discriminating appropriation of Turkish Cypriot properties. In fact the Turkish Cypriots in the Larnaka area were more than 20% of the population in this area, before 1974, and consequently their share of properties was also higher than the total (18%) ratio of their overall population. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2733
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.
|
|
| Viewpoint wrote: |
| Wasn't there a case recently where Turkish Cypriot land by the coast was sold to a development company? |
You do not mean to stop the cheap propaganda, do you? You know very well that the particular case that you have in mind is a case of fraud by individuals, whom the Republic of Cyprus public attorney has in the courts for doing so against the rights of the Turkish Cypriot owners. Yet, you choose not to see the positive side of it, and instead you manipulate the case for cheap propaganda, as if they two situations are in any way related between them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
halil
Villager
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 27
|
|
To Kifeas
You had people migrate from both sides? As far as I am aware of the answer is yes.
The Turkish Cypriotes who fled from the South and left land there actually gave up all the RIGHTS in exchange for points to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government who then gave them land depending upon how many points they had received, one can assume the points were based on the amount of land lost
e.g.: 1 acre equals 100 points, 2 acres equal 200 and so on,
So when you look at the picture in black and white all Turkish land pre-74 on the South side is actually owned by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government correct?
When you look at the Orams case, all we have seen is cheap propaganda, this has recently also included the F1 dispute, the advertising on London buses and many more similar issues, if you look through history the Greeks never actually owned the Island so why kick-up a fuss over something which throughout history never belonged to you?
Please correct me if I am wrong, and if this is the case then why did they insist on unifying the island with Greece in 1963?
Please explain the fraud deal to me in which you mentioned, I don’t see any of this as fraud in fact the Court of Nicosia can’t expect to rule a judgment and for it to be accepted by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (especially if it doesn’t exist)
We all want an unification but one on equal terms and on which shall last…
Once again I congratulate the Orams they have helped prove that the Greeks don’t rule the entire island, even though there is a appeal to be made nothing shall change
Cheerio halil |
|
| Back to top |
|
brother
Warnings : 3
Site Admin
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 8938
Location: London/Cyprus
|
|
| halil wrote: |
To Kifeas
You had people migrate from both sides? As far as I am aware of the answer is yes.
The Turkish Cypriotes who fled from the South and left land there actually gave up all the RIGHTS in exchange for points to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government who then gave them land depending upon how many points they had received, one can assume the points were based on the amount of land lost
e.g.: 1 acre equals 100 points, 2 acres equal 200 and so on,
So when you look at the picture in black and white all Turkish land pre-74 on the South side is actually owned by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government correct?
When you look at the Orams case, all we have seen is cheap propaganda, this has recently also included the F1 dispute, the advertising on London buses and many more similar issues, if you look through history the Greeks never actually owned the Island so why kick-up a fuss over something which throughout history never belonged to you?
Please correct me if I am wrong, and if this is the case then why did they insist on unifying the island with Greece in 1963?
Please explain the fraud deal to me in which you mentioned, I don’t see any of this as fraud in fact the Court of Nicosia can’t expect to rule a judgment and for it to be accepted by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (especially if it doesn’t exist)
We all want an unification but one on equal terms and on which shall last…
Once again I congratulate the Orams they have helped prove that the Greeks don’t rule the entire island, even though there is a appeal to be made nothing shall change
Cheerio halil |
Hi Halil and welcome to the forum  |
|
| Back to top |
|
cypezokyli
Ministerial
Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 2344
|
|
| halil wrote: |
To Kifeas
You had people migrate from both sides? As far as I am aware of the answer is yes.
The Turkish Cypriotes who fled from the South and left land there actually gave up all the RIGHTS in exchange for points to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government who then gave them land depending upon how many points they had received, one can assume the points were based on the amount of land lost
e.g.: 1 acre equals 100 points, 2 acres equal 200 and so on,
So when you look at the picture in black and white all Turkish land pre-74 on the South side is actually owned by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government correct? 
When you look at the Orams case, all we have seen is cheap propaganda, this has recently also included the F1 dispute, the advertising on London buses and many more similar issues, if you look through history the Greeks never actually owned the Island so why kick-up a fuss over something which throughout history never belonged to you? :shocl:
Please correct me if I am wrong, and if this is the case then why did they insist on unifying the island with Greece in 1963?
Please explain the fraud deal to me in which you mentioned, I don’t see any of this as fraud in fact the Court of Nicosia can’t expect to rule a judgment and for it to be accepted by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (especially if it doesn’t exist)
We all want an unification but one on equal terms and on which shall last…
Once again I congratulate the Orams they have helped prove that the Greeks don’t rule the entire island, even though there is a appeal to be made nothing shall change
Cheerio halil |
no offence but this is one of the most confused posts i ve ever seen.
you mix unrelated topics to reach irrelevant conclusions.
just a comment on the matter of points.
as far as i ve heard, what a Turkish Cypriot received in the north had nothing to do with what he owened in the south, but most probably with what connections he had with denktash.
if i am not mistaken we even have forum members who didnot get an "equivalent" in the north of what they left in the south.
please correct me if i am wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
halil
Villager
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 27
|
|
| Unfortunately that is wrong, the only way people who land was those who didn’t go and hand in their deeds and collect the required points, other then that everyone else has been given land in compensation for what they had to leave |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dhavlos
Warnings : 1
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 4697
Location: Birmingham
|
|
| I know this is slightly off topic, but am i correct in saying that in some cases, turkish cypriots were forced from teh south by turkey and the Turkish Cypriot leadership to the north against their will?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2733
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.
|
|
| halil wrote: |
To Kifeas
You had people migrate from both sides? As far as I am aware of the answer is yes.
The Turkish Cypriotes who fled from the South and left land there actually gave up all the RIGHTS in exchange for points to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government who then gave them land depending upon how many points they had received, one can assume the points were based on the amount of land lost
e.g.: 1 acre equals 100 points, 2 acres equal 200 and so on,
So when you look at the picture in black and white all Turkish land pre-74 on the South side is actually owned by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus government correct?
When you look at the Orams case, all we have seen is cheap propaganda, this has recently also included the F1 dispute, the advertising on London buses and many more similar issues, if you look through history the Greeks never actually owned the Island so why kick-up a fuss over something which throughout history never belonged to you?
Please correct me if I am wrong, and if this is the case then why did they insist on unifying the island with Greece in 1963?
Please explain the fraud deal to me in which you mentioned, I don’t see any of this as fraud in fact the Court of Nicosia can’t expect to rule a judgment and for it to be accepted by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (especially if it doesn’t exist)
We all want an unification but one on equal terms and on which shall last…
Once again I congratulate the Orams they have helped prove that the Greeks don’t rule the entire island, even though there is a appeal to be made nothing shall change
Cheerio halil |
Halil, unfortunately you are the victim of your community’s fabrication propaganda, and your inability to search and find the truth yourself all these years.
The Greek Cypriots did not "migrate" from the north! I did not migrate from Lapithos in 1974. I and my family were forced to flee under circumstances which are beyond me to describe at this stage. We were ethnically cleansed (if you know the meaning of the term) by 40,000 Turkish pirate dogs that came off the sea and the skies, in order to precisely do this and nothing else. Those that left themselves behind and fallen into their hands, were either killed, raped, send to Turkey as "Prisoners of War," or in the best of the cases "escorted" at gun point to pass towards the south. We were illegally expelled from our lands, villages and towns. We did not migrate! The Turkish Cypriots continued to live in the south, until one year later (1975,) when they voluntarily decided to migrate to the north, in what they were they were conditioned to wrongfully believe by their leadership was an act of "population exchanges," without such an agreement ever been discussed or signed. They were not force by the Greek Cypriots, nor did they flee as you said. They left in a very organized and civilized way, taking with them almost all of their movable property, unlike the Greek Cypriots who fled with only the clothes they were wearing at the time, and being a summer time then, they were not wearing that much either, and were never allowed back ever since. Do not try to teach us our history, especially on things that we have experienced in our very skin, and saw with our own eyes. I was 9-10 years old then, and I remember absolutely everything, as if it was done yesterday.
You said that those 55,000 Turkish Cypriots that migrated from the south, exchanged their properties with the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," in exchange of Greek Cypriot illegally usurped properties. With whose right did this happen? Who gave the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," an illegal and unrecognized entity, to conduct itself in such "transactions?" Who gave them such a “right” to assume that the Greek Cypriot properties (properties that up to this day legally and by all international human rights laws and international court's decisions, still belong to their Greek Cypriot owners,) were something to be traded with anything and anyone else, and be given as their own to other individuals in the "exchange" of their properties in the south, without the consent or agreement of their natural owners? This is a "right" than not even recognized and legal states or entities may possibly assume, because it goes against all international human rights laws, protocols and principles. Who really, if not the power of the Turkish tanks and guns, i.e. the law of the jungle?
Last edited by Kifeas on Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:57 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
halil
Villager
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 27
|
|
No, it was not by force but they had no other choice as there was a civil war on the island and once Turkey as one of the three guarantors intervened the Turkish Cypriote population found it safer in the north rather then the south.
I would advise everyone to read the GENOCIDE files it’s a very good book about Cyprus
(hope this helps) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dhavlos
Warnings : 1
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 4697
Location: Birmingham
|
|
No, the genocide files is not a good book for a proper history of the cyprus problem! i have read a lot of it myself, and all i see is a lot of hate and anger, written by an anti-Greek Cypriot author. Yes some of it is real, and many stories are probably true too, but i would not say it is a good book at all.
It is very onesided. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Alexios
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 981
|
|
Much as I disagree with Kifeas on the policies followed by the current Republic of Cyprus government towards solving the Cyprus problem, Annan plan etc, I have to agree with him on the points raised regarding the property issue.
I can accept the confiscation of property for public use purposes. I agree with the allotment of G/C houses to provide shelder for the people who left their own houses behind.But to issue title deeds left right and center to do what one likes with them, to userp G/C properties for a few developers to make money, selling it off to british or other fortune hunters and adventurists is to me an immoral policy. One would say Denktash started it, but atleast Denktash did it in line with his overall strategy of division. Whats the point of the current authorities in the North??
To argue that there is nothing one can do as long as the Cyprus issue is not solved, much as that is to be blamed on the current Republic of Cyprus government as well, is hypocritical especially for people who advocate reunification of some sort. The least they could do, is lease the concerned properties until a solution is found, whatever that solution is and take things up from there.
If any of you come up with one single instance of a T/C property sold and transferred to anybody, G/C or foreign national, i ll take all this back..
The rest is nonsense... points and views one can afford to support from a position of power, without ethical substance.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4211
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Alexios wrote: |
Much as I disagree with Kifeas on the policies followed by the current Republic of Cyprus government towards solving the Cyprus problem, Annan plan etc, I have to agree with him on the points raised regarding the property issue.
I can accept the confiscation of property for public use purposes. I agree with the allotment of G/C houses to provide shelder for the people who left their own houses behind.But to issue title deeds left right and center to do what one likes with them, to userp G/C properties for a few developers to make money, selling it off to british or other fortune hunters and adventurists is to me an immoral policy. One would say Denktash started it, but atleast Denktash did it in line with his overall strategy of division. Whats the point of the current authorities in the North??
To argue that there is nothing one can do as long as the Cyprus issue is not solved, much as that is to be blamed on the current Republic of Cyprus government as well, is hypocritical especially for people who advocate reunification of some sort. The least they could do, is lease the concerned properties until a solution is found, whatever that solution is and take things up from there.
If any of you come up with one single instance of a T/C property sold and transferred to anybody, G/C or foreign national, i ll take all this back..
The rest is nonsense... points and views one can afford to support from a position of power, without ethical substance.... |
Alexios I understand what you are saying and I also sympathise with those Greek Cypriot that have lost land. However the idea that after 74 the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus could have only 'leased' non pre 74 Turkish Cypriot land in the north is imho not realistic. If this policy had of been persued then approx 80% of the Turkish Cypriot that pre 74 held freehold land would instead have had 'leasehold' land for the last 30+ years and no sight of regaining any freehold land be that which they lost in 74 or some alternative any time soon. Whatever the moral and legal rights and wrongs of the Norths apporpriation of Greek Cypriot land after 74, there was imho very little other option but to appropriate much of the pre 74 land and distribute the freehold deeds to such to those that had lost freehold property in the South, if the north and it's people where to have any degree of 'viability'. It was a matter of necessity imo. If the ratio had been the other way round and say 80% of the north had been Turkish Cypriot owned pre 74 then the viability of only allowing 'temporary' usage of the remaing 20% would have been real, but with 80% of the land being Greek Cypriot pre 74 there was little other choice.
On the issue of the 'points system' and the distribution of land by the Norths authorities post 74, there can be little doubt that this was accompanied by much 'unfairness'. There were people that lost nothing in the south and yet gained from the redistribution post 74 and those who lost much in the south and gained little or nothing post 74. I do not think than any such an 'event' could have happend or happen today in Cyprus (on either side) without a similar degree of 'unfairness' and nepotisim. Nepotism is a generic cypriot problem as far as I am concerned. There were also a significant number of Turkish Cypriot who chose not to exchange their rights to their land in the south for points/land in the north (yet these people today can not just go to a court in the south and get back their property, as some have suggested previously). |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dream_Merchant
Warnings : 1
Senior Villager
Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 422
Location: Limassol
|
|
| Alexios wrote: |
Whats the point of the current authorities in the North??
|
The point is, as Mr Erdogan likes using it, a win-win situation and strategy for the T/C leadership. Division or Solution.. scheiss egal. Why bet on one horse when you can bet on both.. its not as if you have anything to lose if your other bet doesn't resolve, and at any point you may appear to be supporting either, whichever is convenient at that moment.
A 'Diplo'-'mat' at his best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Alexios
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 981
|
|
| erolz wrote: |
| Alexios wrote: |
Much as I disagree with Kifeas on the policies followed by the current Republic of Cyprus government towards solving the Cyprus problem, Annan plan etc, I have to agree with him on the points raised regarding the property issue.
I can accept the confiscation of property for public use purposes. I agree with the allotment of G/C houses to provide shelder for the people who left their own houses behind.But to issue title deeds left right and center to do what one likes with them, to userp G/C properties for a few developers to make money, selling it off to british or other fortune hunters and adventurists is to me an immoral policy. One would say Denktash started it, but atleast Denktash did it in line with his overall strategy of division. Whats the point of the current authorities in the North??
To argue that there is nothing one can do as long as the Cyprus issue is not solved, much as that is to be blamed on the current Republic of Cyprus government as well, is hypocritical especially for people who advocate reunification of some sort. The least they could do, is lease the concerned properties until a solution is found, whatever that solution is and take things up from there.
If any of you come up with one single instance of a T/C property sold and transferred to anybody, G/C or foreign national, i ll take all this back..
The rest is nonsense... points and views one can afford to support from a position of power, without ethical substance.... |
Alexios I understand what you are saying and I also sympathise with those Greek Cypriot that have lost land. However the idea that after 74 the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus could have only 'leased' non pre 74 Turkish Cypriot land in the north is imho not realistic. If this policy had of been persued then approx 80% of the Turkish Cypriot that pre 74 held freehold land would instead have had 'leasehold' land for the last 30+ years and no sight of regaining any freehold land be that which they lost in 74 or some alternative any time soon. Whatever the moral and legal rights and wrongs of the Norths apporpriation of Greek Cypriot land after 74, there was imho very little other option but to appropriate much of the pre 74 land and distribute the freehold deeds to such to those that had lost freehold property in the South, if the north and it's people where to have any degree of 'viability'. It was a matter of necessity imo. If the ratio had been the other way round and say 80% of the north had been Turkish Cypriot owned pre 74 then the viability of only allowing 'temporary' usage of the remaing 20% would have been real, but with 80% of the land being Greek Cypriot pre 74 there was little other choice.
On the issue of the 'points system' and the distribution of land by the Norths authorities post 74, there can be little doubt that this was accompanied by much 'unfairness'. There were people that lost nothing in the south and yet gained from the redistribution post 74 and those who lost much in the south and gained little or nothing post 74. I do not think than any such an 'event' could have happend or happen today in Cyprus (on either side) without a similar degree of 'unfairness' and nepotisim. Nepotism is a generic cypriot problem as far as I am concerned. There were also a significant number of Turkish Cypriot who chose not to exchange their rights to their land in the south for points/land in the north (yet these people today can not just go to a court in the south and get back their property, as some have suggested previously). |
Erolz i am a simple man and your first paragraph is too complicated for me to apprehend fully.. plus i had a busy day....Please try to put it in simpler lunguage...this is not a rarcastic comment..really i am confused....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
 
 
Link Partners
605118 Attacks blocked
|
Register 
Log in 
Album 
Home