Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

I gave Klerides's example to show that you may formulate something and not believe in it. This can happen world wide but in the Middle East such behaviour is not unheard of. This is also one of my quarrels I have with Klerides. He never had the guts to go against Makarios. He disagreed fervently with the efforts to change (unilatterally) the constitution, yet, because he thought his political career was on line, he went on to formulate the dreaded document with the 13 changes that meant the begining of the end of Cyprus. Your sure, of course, that Papadopoulos who was involved with the policy change, after 1974, that brouht federation to the forefront, is also a supporter of federation and bizonality. Well, in his entire political life, that goes back to the late 50's, he has never given one single hint that he includes federalism and bizonality as one of his options for a solution. You say that he will be pressed by events to come around to this way of thinking. There is no chance for this to happen. He is extrememely old and stubborn. In this respect he is no different from Denktas. In the meantime, let us be entirely honest. Papadopoulos and his men day and night are misinforming people about bizonality and federation. They play with peoples' s primitive instincts, telling them that they will lose the good life, their jobs, their livinghood. Slowly and surely they are building a mentality (conditioned reflex, so to speak) among Greek Cypriots that separation is better than federation. Many people, in private conversations, claim that its better to stay as we are. Of course they will not tell you that partition is better (only Papadopoulos said this in Helsinki but it was a slip of the tongue and 2 reporters that weren't even present in the room where he said it, hurried the next day to call liars the 2 reporters, from two different newspapers, that reported the incidence) bur they will tell you that the other side is at fault, or Anastasiades and Vasiliou, who betrayed our cause.

So, you want me to substantiate the above with hard evidence. Don't you realise that this is what political analysts do (of course I do not claim to be one, nor do I have the credentials to be one) reading between the lines, looking at many parameters in order to try to get an inside of political players? I suspect you do the same but you take for granted everything Papadopoulos and his government does. Even his lies (look at the recent incidence with the Polish Prime Minister) do not seem to bother you, or rather, you turn a blind eye.

Anyway, the best that can happen, as you say, is for Papadopoulos to eventually see that federation is the only option. I say, you cannot teach an old dog new tricks in the same way Denktas will never embrace the RoC.

[-mikkie2-]

Bananiot,

I am not suggesting that Papadopoulos is a fervent supporter of the BBF. That, however, does not mean that he won't accept it as a way to bring some kind of closure on the Cyprus issue that will allow Cyprus to move forward to better days. I am not a supporter of federation either but I am pragmatic enough to accept federation as the lesser of two evils and move on from that.

I cannot for 1 minute believe that Cypriot refugees will be hoodwinked, or talked into a partition which would obvioulsy result in them loosing everything.

Out of necessity he will have to negotiate to mitigate the areas he does not agree with. A leopard may not change his spots but it can learn new tricks! This is the first time I have seen a Cypriot president spend more time abroad than he does in Cyprus. He is having constant contact with many EU leaders. He is getting a wide set of opinions and he perhaps is learning the 'tricks of the trade' as far as the EU is concerned. From this he will know what he can play with and come to a plan of action that would lead to something that can move us forward.

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now and see what happens in the next round of negotiations. This is when we will trully know what is what and that is where I will base my judgement. If he screws up then I will be the first person to say so.

I agree also that there have been some gaffes by him, but again, that to me is not conclusive proof that he means to head us towards partition. It is easy to take what is said literally and come to conclusions. However, sometimes things get lost in translation, and this happens in this forum all the time!

[Bananiot]

Just one more thing. You wrote that it was Papadopoulos who formulated the bi-zonal, bi-communal, federal ideas in the high level agreements of 77 and 79. I have looked around but I have nothing to show that your assertion is actually true. On the contrary, I stumbled on an article by Papadopoulos in his newspaper "Kirikas" in which he claims that double enosis is better than federation!

[-mikkie2-]

As I said, we shall see what happens when negotiations restart. I have an open mind on how things will go. I still think your assertion that Papadopoulos will lead us to an agreed partition to be wrong.

[Bananiot]

Fair enough, I only pray you are right and I am wrong. I have searched further the matter of Papadopoulos being one of the formulators of the bizonal, bicommunal federation proposal. I still have found nothing, absolute zero, to suggest anything to this extend. On the contrary, I have found scores of articles by Papadopoulos himself against federation. If you have a source please let us see it.

[MicAtCyp]

Mikkie, Bananiot is one of a kind my friend. Within a 10 line post, one can easily trace 10 personal insults, but he does it in vague way, so that in case he is caught, to have open doors for escape. Look how he jumps up however when he gets a milder one, however direct in return.Although his behaviour is irritating, I wouldn’t mind if at least he presented something solid. He thinks he is the owner of the absolute truth regarding Papadopoulos.Yet the only thing he says is that he can read through the lines.He cannot even understand, that reading through the lines regarding a politician, you can reach almost any conclusion.
Bananiot’s tactic, is to present a 4-5 allegations post, and when you prove him wrong on everything, either avoid to reply, or stuck on one of them, where -what a surprise!- he discovered you insulted him. A typical example is his response to my very friendly advice that what he and Anastasiades do, simply causes polarising.
Now look how he replied to your so analytical post regarding presending his arguments. He just tells us he can read through the lines.Try now to discuss what he reads through the lines and he will mess you up even more...

And when you think you are finally done with him, in 3-4 days he reverts with a new version of exactly the same story.In my opinion he is following the very primary principle of propaganda i.e tell the same things over and over again, in the end you will find some people to beleive you.

He even pretends to be an ally of the TCs in his effort to get rid of Papadopoulos and re-unite the island.At the same time though he pretends he does not hear the voices of the majority of the TCs who either want a clear partition or a disguised one.... Well the aim of Bananiot and his likes is certainly not partition, thats for sure. It is the discuised partition!

Going on further one may wonder what these people will earn by a disguised partition? As our friend Insan says: "Ain’t it obvious?"

[Bananiot]

Is that Dr Jenkyl talking or Mr Hyde? After all this time he discovers that I want disguised partition. He pours on the advice for mikkie and all else to pre empty any chance they take a … liking to me. He calls me an idiot and refers to me by Turkish names (a tactic considered degrading to be called a Turkish name) and then he has the audacity to claim that I write personal insults. Bagger off, I say to him Insan. I pretend to be an ally of the TC in this forum, he says, but then he accuses the majority of the TC’s for striving for clear (sic) partition or at best, disguised partition. Bagger off, twice.

[insan]

Is that Dr Jenkyl talking or Mr Hyde? After all this time he discovers that I want disguised partition. He pours on the advice for mikkie and all else to pre empty any chance they take a … liking to me. He calls me an idiot and refers to me by Turkish names (a tactic considered degrading to be called a Turkish name) and then he has the audacity to claim that I write personal insults. Bagger off, I say to him Insan. I pretend to be an ally of the TC in this forum, he says, but then he accuses the majority of the TC’s for striving for clear (sic) partition or at best, disguised partition. Bagger off, twice.

Bananiot, I wonder which partitionist Great Hellene emperor(Tassos?) gave the ridiculous rethoric " disguised partition" into the mouths of MicAtCyp likes. It seems they like much to chew this bubble gum. It is obvious that they do not want to let the benefits of defacto sitution to go. They are creating ridiculous excuses such as "disguised partition" in order to keep the defacto situation up and get all the benefits untill they satisfy. They are also aware of that this greediness will soon lead us to partition. That's what Tassos, his crew and his clan leading us towards. They should better bugger off.

[Bananiot]

Papadopoulos has introduced many cretin phrases into our vocabulary. Here are some more: areas of concern, viable solution, functional solution, voting (when it comes to TC's) instead of elections, agreed solution, strungling deadlines etc. These go pretty well with the natives but with the outsiders (those that matter) they are just a further example of the tyrrany of words that holds us hostages to the mentalities of the sixties. They do not take him seriously anyway. You see, a federal solution will render him a leader of a community at best and when he has finally realised his life-long ambition to become the president, he will not let go so easily. Lets brace ourselves for anoher five years of Papadopoulos (71/2 in all) and we will see about a solution later. In the meantime, he holds AKEL to ransom. I know for a fact that the leadership of AKEL has a gallop in its pocket which says that if they break the bonds with Papadopoulos the party will lose up to 15% of its popular vote. Christofias will not place his country's interests about his party interests. We are doomed to partition my friend and you can add any adjective you like in front.

[Piratis]

We use words and phrases that perfectly describe reality.

The Annan plan, and what Insan and others ask for has absolutely nothing to do with unity. They want racial separation in everything, they want separate confederal state with its own citizenship, flag and national anthem etc. And then they call this "unity".

In any case I don't need to convince anybody about such obvious things. Insan himself (and many other TCs) admitted several times that what he wants is partition. Bananiot is just doing his job, adopting every single desire that the TCs have, and throwing mud at Papadopoulos.

In the meantime, he holds AKEL to ransom. I know for a fact that the leadership of AKEL has a gallop in its pocket which says that if they break the bonds with Papadopoulos the party will lose up to 15% of its popular vote. Christofias will not place his country's interests about his party interests.

And who decides which are the country's interests? You?
Bananiot, I will give you the same answer that I gave to Andrik some days ago:

You people will never learn. What is right is subjective. In democracies what we do is what the majority wants (always with respect to minorities the human rights, and the laws), and the rest should accept these decisions either they like it or not. The last time you people thought you were the smart ones and the rest of us the idiots that needed your "shoulders", you screwed all of us up.

You DISY supporters are all the same. You never respected democracy! You expect from our leaders to go against the will of people to serve the interests of a small group.