Page 4 of 4

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 5:04 am
by Saint Jimmy
-mikkie2- wrote:Alexandre,

I think that what perhaps MicAtCyp is refering to is that the US and UK probably gave strong assurances that the GC side was ready to accept any plan! I very much doubt there was any bribing going. I think you have to put it in context for the period.

Bush was having a disaster in Iraq, he was up for re-election, Cyprus was about to be an EU member etc..


Mikkie, I have two points on which I would like you to elaborate, if you don't mind.

One is your reference to 'assurances' on the part of the US and the UK. Are you referring to the same 'assurances' that hit the front pages of our newspapers a few months ago? Because I was under the impression that those 'assurances' (the ones implied by Gunther Verheugen in the European Parliament) were attributed to Clerides and Markides, mostly.

Two is what you named the 'context' of the period. I understand the argument, but how do you assert that any US and UK assurances to the UN as to the GC attitude towards the plan would save their necks, with respect to Iraq, his upcoming re-election and our EU membership? How would one 'balance' the others?

Thanks :D

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 6:13 am
by boulio
Bush was having a disaster in Iraq, he was up for re-election, Cyprus was about to be an EU member etc..

by solving cyprus i think he means a diversion from iraq,like "hey see the US can do good things like solve a 30 year old division by christians and muslims"

by solving cyprus concerning the elections,3 million greeks and g/c in the US,ALOT OF VOTES.

CYPRUS ABOUT TO BE A EU...BY THAT HE means if they become a eu member without a solution,alot harder for turkey.meaning ascesion and negotionts of a new plan.

thats what i get from the statement,i could be compltly wrong im drunk right now.

good night. :D

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 6:21 am
by Saint Jimmy
boulio wrote:thats what i get from the statement,i could be compltly wrong im drunk right now.

good night. :D


Nice going, man, beats the hell out of studying for finals and s**t like that :D

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:59 pm
by MicAtCyp
Jimmy wrote: Who is this sentence referring to, if you don't mind my asking?


What I meant Papadopoulos was new at his post.He was succeptible to and even seeking advices from the previous President. Klerides has never hiden the fact that he accepted many outrageous proposals for the Cyprus issue, just to win points as a good boy, because he was absolutely certain they would finally be rejected by Denktash.

Papadopoulos, listened to him and perky and smelling sat down and wrote the letter to the UN to start negotiations based on the Anan Plan just to show off as a good boy.Although both him and Klerides made no mistake (Denktash in fact rejected everything) there came Turkey not bluffing anymore, who turned the game upside down by eliminating Denktash!.Thereafter the disaster started for us.

Jimmy wrote: think the Secretary General himself has answered these questions (at least the first one), in his report to the Security Council... He claims that the GC side never prioritized its demands, and tried to filibuster its way out of the talks, forcing them to collapse, in a form of 'panic' reaction, after they realized that Turkey was serious about going through with the talks. In essence, we didn't really tell them what we wanted (or, better still, we did tell them everything we wanted, but not which we wanted the most), so we didn't get anything! But, I guess the closing point of your post is answer enough for this whole paragraph.


Jimmy if you want to beleive that version so be it. Heres something just to think about: Gul went on shouting and warning on the media that if the final outcome is not acceptable by Turkey they will NOT accept the result of arbitration by Koffi Anan, setting also conditions that would leave the final decision to their National assembly and the Generals. Then all of a sudden he silenced. What do you think might have happened that silenced him?

Our side was ridicculed there my friend.No matter what we said, no matter how we said it, no matter how much we shouted for Verhoigen to drag his feet and come, as long as the arbitration was there, they were just laughing at us. You may call that panic, I call it panic too, but if I were the president there, I tell you I would make such a scene at the closing ceremony at Burgenstock, that the whole world would remember it for years.

Jimmy wrote: Whoa! Is that going too far? I mean, I can't say you are wrong (or right, for that matter), but I think this stance is rather bold...? I just can't get myself to stomach it...


OK, Ok you are too young for that. My friend there is no single case in the whole world that moneywise can be evaluated to more than a million were there is not at least one key person lubricated. Just look how Denktash remained in power for so many years, look how he lubricated each and every retired General by giving him a free villa in Kyrenia. Look at how Kyprianou, perhaps the worst President we ever had, managed to rule for 10 years.He lubricated 1/3 of the population by increasing the salaries of the public servants by 50% through his famous scheme of re-organisation that ended up solely to salary increases.

Just see how many persons in Cyprus got money to print and distribute top-top luxury booklets explaining the goodies of the Anan Plan. Lubrication can be direct or indirect.Direct in pure cash, indirect through benefits or support.

Erol wrote: Are you suggesting these people (your politicans and the EU and UN people you mention) were paid money (by whom?) to purposely favour the TC community in the Annan Plan?


Of course that is what I am suggesting. Where do you live Erol in the Angels world?Correction though:To benefit Turkey, on the expense of the GCs and the UK and the US on the exense of all Cypriots. And through Turkey to benefit the TCs too, although the TCs were not their major concern anyhow. As from whom, I leave it to you to guess.

Alexandros wrote: actually what I said was that the UN was not impartial


Woops you are absolutely right. Apologies for the misunderstanding. Of course you presented a different aspect of that non impartiality, to which anyhow I don't disagree.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:20 pm
by -mikkie2-
Jimmy,

I think boulio explained well what I was trying to put across, even in his drunken state. Perheps if you were drunk when you read it then you might have understood better as well :lol:

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:27 pm
by boulio
isent it amazing what absolut citron can do. 8)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:34 pm
by -mikkie2-
I prefer JD myself! :wink:

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:02 pm
by Saint Jimmy
Yes, from now on I'll try to be blind-drunk when I read posts in here :D
It seems that's the only way I can make any sense :P

By the way, tequila shots in between countless beers is the way to go :lol:

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:58 pm
by -mikkie2-
I tried that.

I was sick!

:oops: