The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


FIRST EQUALITY REQUEST BY TCs

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby insan » Sun Sep 12, 2004 11:27 am

Piratis wrote:
Question: Can a single state block any decision it wants in the US senate?




I've answered this question before but you still keep asking me the same questions. Yes, a single state can veto and decision it wants in the US senate and Senate have the right to override the veto.


Also, in the USA, California has 2 senators, while Wyoming with 60 times less population has 2 also. So why is it that you can not accept that the other minorities in Cyprus (Armenians, Latins, Maronites) can have 2 senators also? .


I've answered this too. Do the minorities in US states also have Senators in Senate as a state in state? You really have a serious understanding problem.


This is clearly a double standard, which is only aim is to give the TCs an effective veto on everything, something that it is not the case in the USA.



This is clearly a true democrasy which is only aim to create a true partnership(Political equality on Legislative and judicial bodies) amongst two major communities of Cyprus. Moreover, it is obvious that you don't even know that the US federalism evolved from confederation in 200 years and a US like federalism in Cyprus can't be adopted exactly as its current form. You dream of living like a fish on the ground.

As is known to you, there is no principle in international law providing for the annexation of every country to the country which is homogeneous to it.


No, this is known only to the person called George Georghalides and the ones who want to believe it:



The above quotation has been taken from a speech of Zakia who was a member of legislative council in 1930. Do you deny that TCs were always against Enosis? Or do you believe that TCs had accepted Enosis and it was the Brits who made TCs to oppose to it...?

The Declaration states that "the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the United Nations Charter and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and cooperation, and that steps should be taken to transfer, unconditionally, all powers to the Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories so that they might enjoy complete freedom and independence".



According to this resolution which approved in 1960, Cyprus became an independent state. And according to the 60s treaties and constitution of RoC, Cyprus was aan independent state which comprises two constituent communities and 3 minorities.

Also in 1960, the Assembly approved resolution 1541 (XV), defining free association with an independent State, integration into an independent State, or independence as the three legitimate options of full self-government.

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonizat ... ration.htm




Also in 1960, the 60 treaties and constitution prohibitted the integration of Cyprus to another state because there were two major communities in Cyprus which were constituents of RoC.


Here you can find the "Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories" this refers to: http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonization/trust2.htm and you can see Cyprus (as a whole) is included.


I know but you ignore that there are two constituent communities in that territory with a single self-determination right. Each community has one vote on self determination issues.

You talk about opinions of some people. I talk with UN resolutions. Who makes international laws? Mr. George Georghalides and Insan? I don't think so.



You use, exploit, abuse UN resolutions to make them fit your self-interests. I talk about a viable, fair, secure, true partnership of two major communities of Cyprus. As long as you claim TC community is a minority, the solution will be shaped on a two seperate states. In a few years time you'll be forced to accept it. If you have sufficient power to confront it keep insisting on your self-interested ideas and policies.
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby Piratis » Sun Sep 12, 2004 1:08 pm

a single state can veto and decision it wants


No, it can not veto any decision it wants. This is just a lie. I checked very well and everywhere it either talks about simple majority, or 2/3rd majority in the senate. Maybe there are some very specific issues that a single state can veto, but nothing beyond that.
If you disagree please give a link to where it says that a single state has a veto power on anything. Otherwise stop to insist that black is white.

I am sorry, but I there is no reason to argue agaist a bunch of lies. The laws are there and they are very clear. You keep violating them but sooner or later justice will prevail. You go ahead and give as many lies and excuses as you want.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby Mike » Sun Sep 12, 2004 1:56 pm

Turkish Cypriots are a minority that want to be promoted to majority using the force of weapons. They respect no international law and now they make profits from using our properties.
User avatar
Mike
New Member
New Member
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 1:02 pm
Location: Cyprus

Postby iskismet » Sun Sep 12, 2004 2:52 pm

Mike - do you like discussing things or just making statements?
iskismet
Member
Member
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:46 am
Location: UK

Postby insan » Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:17 pm

If you disagree please give a link to where it says that a single state has a veto power on anything.



OK Mr only truth teller :lol:


http://www.ccleague.org/leginfo/handbook/legprocess.asp



Code: Select all
        LEGISLATIVE EFFECTIVE DATES AND THE GOVERNOR'S VETO POWER

A significant part of the legislative process involves the governor's action on bills. Within 30 days after passage, a bill must be sent to the governor. If he approves the bill, he signs it and it becomes a public act. If the governor does not approve the bill, he vetoes it by returning it with his objections to the house where it originated. If the governor does not act on a bill within 60 days after it is sent to him, it becomes a law without his signature.

The Illinois Constitution allows the governor to make four kinds of vetoes to bills: a total veto, amendatory veto, item veto, or reduction veto. The last two apply only to appropriation bills. The following describes each kind of veto, the possible legislative responses to it, and the effective date of a law resulting from re-passage by the General Assembly.

Total Veto

The governor may reject an entire bill and return it with a statement of objections to the house where it originated. If the first house, by vote of at least three-fifths of the members elected to it, the bill becomes a law. Otherwise it is dead.

Amendatory Veto

A governor who approves the general purpose of a bill but finds fault with one or more of its details can return the bill "with specific recommendations for change" to the originating house. In practice this has meant the governor has returned the bill with a proposed "amendment" setting forth the exact text of each suggested change.

Two responses are possible to an amendatory veto:

(1) the General Assembly can override the veto by three-fifths vote in each house, in which case the bill becomes law in the same form in which it was originally passed by the General Assembly; (2) the General Assembly can accept the governor's recommendations by a mere majority of the members elected in each house. In the latter case, the bill is returned to the governor, and if he certifies that it conforms to his recommendations, it becomes a law.

Effective Dates of Laws

The date when a law takes effect must be distinguished from the date when it is enacted. When the law takes effect depends on several factors. The Constitution provides that a bill passed in any calendar year before the intended session ending (now midnight May 31), with no effective date in its text, will take effect on a uniform date set by statute. A statute now sets that date as January 1 of the next year. However, such a bill may set an effective date in its text, which can be earlier or later than January 1.

In the case of a bill passed after May 31 in a calendar year, the Constitution says the resulting law may not take effect until June 1 of the following year, unless it contains a specific earlier effective date and is passed by three-fifths of the members elected to each house.

If a bill is totally vetoed and the veto is overridden, its effective date is determined as if the governor had approved it.





Moreover, the US federal System gave the veto power to the governor of the states and is not bi-ethnic but the one that we will establish in Cyprus will be a bi-ethnic, bi-religous and bi-lingual. This means seperate majority votes is needed to pass or reject the bills.



I am sorry, but I there is no reason to argue agaist a bunch of lies. The laws are there and they are very clear. You keep violating them but sooner or later justice will prevail. You go ahead and give as many lies and excuses as you want.



I'd wish a united Cyprus under any form of state but your insistance on making TCs a minority in Cyprus will dug your own hole and end up with two seperate states.



Turkish Cypriots are a minority that want to be promoted to majority using the force of weapons. They respect no international law and now they make profits from using our properties.




There's not just a single word in 60s constitution that defines TCs as a minority in Cyprus. so stop making nonesense.
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby Piratis » Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:12 pm

OK Mr only truth teller


Insan, don't make a fool of yourself.

What you pasted there refers to the government of California. The Governor has a veto power over the decisions of the bodies of its own state!

Here it is from the same site you gave me:

Patterned after the United States Congress, California has a bicameral (two-house), two-party Legislature with 80 assembly members and 40 senators. Assembly members are elected for two-year terms and senators for four-year terms with one-half elected every two years. No member of the Assembly may serve more than three terms and no member of the Senate may serve more than two terms. The majority party in each house controls the leadership role.

The California Legislature is the policymaking body of state government, restricted only by the federal and state constitutions and the governor's veto power.


It is nearly impossible to discuss anything serious when you don't even accept simple facts.

I repeat that what you are asking for has nothing to do with federation. What you are asking for is something between confederation and association of two separate countries.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby MicAtCyp » Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:31 pm

Insan wrote: Does it seem to you that the both communities only concerns were about hunger and poverty? do you believe that only the Zakia and the likes had been worrying about Enosis


Yes I do! In fact I already said it, in my previous post, both the claim for equality and the nationalistic dreams for Enosis were only in the minds of some elitists. I even consider the "equality" claim as a natural demand of the Moslem elitists Vs the Christian elitists back in 1890 in an effort to get as many privilages from their Masters (British) as possible. I said "natural" because the two elites were approximately equal in numbers. That is to say a handful of people from both communities.

Remember I referred to your initial article for the situation in 1890. Then the equality was equality of the elitists. What happened in the 30s and the 50s is a spread of the elitists interests into the masses, however with a different content than the original one. For example today the contents of the term " political equality" as clarified during the numerous negotiations with Denktash is by no means the same as what you describe in your posts. It is a 50 - 50 on everything, with two Political entities each having clear and defined borders. In other words it is two separate states.

Insan wrote: That's what TC had done from the first day they heard about a group of GCs Enosis demand.


That's reasonable and understandable. Would they invent any "equality right" if Cyprus would be delivered by the British back to Turkey though, like it was taken away from them in 1878? With or without an Enosis claim from the other community? Think about it. Notice the real massive reactions against the Enosis dream came after 1923 (treaty of Lauzane) after which Turkey lost all rights she previously had over Cyprus.
User avatar
MicAtCyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Postby insan » Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:47 pm

Veto power is granted to presidents and governors not the senators. Having equal number of Senators from different political parties in Senate; doesn't mean that they have veto power. Each communities senators represents their own communities and use their power for the interests of their own community and the whole Cypriots according to the laws of Federal State and international laws. The constitution of United Cyprus and laws determine their legal or illegal actions not the outnumbered community.

That's what I'm trying to point out...
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Previous

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests