www.talkcyprus.org

[100%cypriot]

Quote: UN SECRETARY-general Ban Ki-Moon is concerned over the human rights situation on the island, citing a number of incidents involving Turkish Cypriots that show the Cyprus government in a bad light.


http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.php?id=31402&archive=1

Just noticed this piece on the Cyprus mail , he is definately getting fed up by having a go at both side's ,,,, GOOD for him :bow:

mod note: link corrected. Please pay attention to copy the correct link from your source. Thx.

[Bananiot]

The Cyprus Mail follows up with a lead article which ends with the following paragraph that pretty much summarises quite well the turning of the international community against the Greek Cypriot side as a result of Papadopoulos´s policies.

Quote: Such a turnaround is the outcome of three years of unrelenting negativism, bad faith, paranoid isolationism and unrelenting criticism of powers in the international community, powers that used to be our friends. It may have gained the government domestic kudos, but there is a price to pay.

[Kifeas]

Bananiot wrote: The Cyprus Mail follows up with a lead article which ends with the following paragraph that pretty much summarises quite well the turning of the international community against the Greek Cypriot side as a result of Papadopoulos´s policies.

Quote: Such a turnaround is the outcome of three years of unrelenting negativism, bad faith, paranoid isolationism and unrelenting criticism of powers in the international community, powers that used to be our friends. It may have gained the government domestic kudos, but there is a price to pay.

No Banana, the absolutely and scandalously one sided note made by the new SG’s aides, regarding human rights in Cyprus, has nothing to do with being “the outcome of three years of unrelenting negativism, bad faith, paranoid isolationism and unrelenting criticism of powers in the international community,” as the “Cyprus” Mail so foolishly suggests, but it has to do with the fact that we did not “seat” for them in the 2004 referendum.

In your paranoid wish and effort to backstab and hit the elected president of your country under the belt, there is absolutely no one single "holy and sacred" left on which you did not try to step on and /or spit at! Apparently, you have found nothing to comment on the scandalously biased content of the SG's "note."

I cannot even say "shame on you" any more, because such a word doesn't exist in your dictionary, neither do the words morality and ethics!

[cypezokyli]

Kifeas wrote: Bananiot wrote: The Cyprus Mail follows up with a lead article which ends with the following paragraph that pretty much summarises quite well the turning of the international community against the Greek Cypriot side as a result of Papadopoulos´s policies.

Quote: Such a turnaround is the outcome of three years of unrelenting negativism, bad faith, paranoid isolationism and unrelenting criticism of powers in the international community, powers that used to be our friends. It may have gained the government domestic kudos, but there is a price to pay.

No Banana, the absolutely and scandalously one sided note made by the new SG’s aides, regarding human rights in Cyprus, has nothing to do with being “the outcome of three years of unrelenting negativism, bad faith, paranoid isolationism and unrelenting criticism of powers in the international community,” as the “Cyprus” Mail so foolishly suggests, but it has to do with the fact that we did not “seat” for them in the 2004 referendum.

In your paranoid wish and effort to backstab and hit the elected president of your country under the belt, there is absolutely no one single "holy and sacred" left on which you did not try to step on and /or spit at! Apparently, you have found nothing to comment on the scandalously biased content of the SG's "note."

I cannot even say "shame on you" any more, because such a word doesn't exist in your dictionary, neither do the words morality and ethics!

looking back at over 50 years involvement of the UN in cyprus, would you mind stating :

which SG (or his representatives) notes, SC or GA resolutions have been "biased" and which "unbiased" ?
and why would some be unbiased and some biased ?
and if we consider that currently the UN or the SG are biased, what should we do ? should we continue searching for a solution within a biased UN or with such a biased SG ?

[100%cypriot]

To Say that the outside world is not getting fed up would be very innacurate to say the least !

[repulsewarrior]

Certainly, the tables are turming.

But, the world has a point to make in Cyprus.

If the most determined of the Interlocutors are given consideration over the right to self determination then we will have failed as Human Beings to better ourselves.

Cyprus is an island. It is populated by people which can be called Cypriots. Still under subjugation; divided.

Have these people self determination, or sovereignty to the land? This is the issue impossible to ignore, at the UN, and of interest worldwide..

[Mete]

repulsewarrior wrote:
Have these people self determination, or sovereignty to the land? This is the issue impossible to ignore, at the UN, and of interest worldwide..

What are you talking about??? Who's ignoring the self determination of the population of Cyprus?

[repulsewarrior]

Have we the Turkish Army on the land to which only Cypriots are sovereign.

Has it been a Turkish aim to ignore the existence of this state: the Republic of Cyprus.

Is the Constitution of either the Republic or the regime of the north conforming to modern values and our Human Rights?

As time ticks by, Cypriots cannot feel free, while others uninvolved live without restriction on their association, expression, and movement.

Mr. Ki-Moon will learn quickly what a muddle the affairs are in. My hope, he is not a man to deal away the rights of all people or the displaced, rewarding Turkey in an illegal act, just to have a deal.

He will appraise and outlast the current players before acting as the one person we are all relying on.

[Bananiot]

Kifeas wrote (among else)

Quote: In your paranoid wish and effort to backstab and hit the elected president of your country under the belt ... etc, etc

I have been a staunch adversary of the President ever since he decieved the whole world that he wanted to solve the Cyprus problem on the basis of the Annan Plan (remember the letter he sent to the Secretary General in December 2003). I have never tried to hide my feelings and in a free and democratic society, criticizing the President or indeed any elected official is a must for the society to go ahead. Especially now, as we are approaaching presidential election time again, I will again stand up and be counted because now the choice which we are faced with is between solution and partition. Voting for Papadopoulos will most certainly mean the end of Cyprus!

By the way, what the final paragraph of the Cyprus Mail article said is not much different from what Marcos Kyprianou (EU Commisioner and a member of Papadopoulos´s party too) said in a recent interview in a Greek newspaper.

[Mete]

Bananiot wrote:
I have never tried to hide my feelings and in a free and democratic society, criticizing the President or indeed any elected official is a must for the society to go ahead.

You're right Bananiot, that is a must in a truly democratic and transparent society. Unfortunately in democratically immature societies criticizing the official line always means being a traitor, or backstabbing your country...and you always have plenty of "cheerleaders" to make sure you and everyone else knows that you're a traitor just because you criticize your elected officials..who are human beings prone to error at the end of the day.

[Mete]

repulsewarrior wrote:
He will appraise and outlast the current players before acting as the one person we are all relying on.

Ok whatever you say.

[repulsewarrior]

Here is my question,,,

if TPap does not choose to run for re-election who is the best statesman to replace him. Who is the best choice for President? Are there people, not politicians, to replace many who, I imagine, would resign with him.