Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

Here's some homework for you Paphitis mostly referring to our after EU accession period:

1)Which Country's Ministry of Agriculture was accepting agricultural products with the stamps of the so called "Trnc" from 1983 up until 1992 at which time it was sued and lost at the ECJ?
2)Which EU Country's idea was to end the "isolation of the TCs" assuming they would vote yes to the Anal Plan , and which Country wanted the Direct Trade draft regulation + 259 million Euros promised to the TCs to be approved as they were initially proposed behind our backs (as a direct trade with a 3rd country i.e.) and thereafter refused to discuss anything else? Effectively delaying it's implementation by 6 more years
3)Which EU Country was the first whose diplomats came to Cyprus and went directly to the occupied to meet Talat at his "Presidential Palace" despite warnings not to do so by Tassos? And eventually Tassos refused to meet them lol.
4)Which Country is annually financing the pseudo state through it's High Commission with unknown sums over and above the EU approved 259M, presumably to help bring itself up to EU standards in judicial and civil service reforms?
5)Who drafted most of the Anal plan and who made sure it included sea shell rights for them?
6)Whose ex-Foreign Minister advocates partition of Cyprus on every chance he gets?

Easy quiz.
Everywhere you look at it's ALWAYS the same country. You may answer with just one word.

Hint: It's the same country whose PM cared to warn us with a gesture of contempt (stepping in our own country to presumably say hello to her soldiers) not to dare raise the issue of the British bases at the upcoming Brexit negotiations.

There is no longstanding animosity as far as I can tell at all. On the contrary, I believe relations with Cyprus are very warm.

Friendly and warm relations my ass.

[Paphitis]

Sorry Pyro but that wasn't the UK. They would never send any diplomats to meet with so called "trnc" representatives first or fly through an illegal port of entry.

If some British MPs did that, then they were acting on their own volition and not on an official diplomatic capacity because that would be anathema to all their protocols and procedures.

Secondly, it wasn't their idea to end the isolation. That was an EU initiative, not a British one. Having said that, I would be very happy to stand corrected as long as you provide any solid evidence from reputable sources that the British Policy acted as a matter of their policy.

I also do not believe the British are funding the "trnc" that is a blatant lie. The EU however is handing over vast sums in aid,

Everything so far Pyro you have claimed just is false. You even try tried to convince me that the British Judiciary supported Turkish Interests in the Orams case when in fact the opposite was true.

If the Brits wanted to advocate for Partition, they would do it at an official capacity and vote against the RoC in the UN. But there is no evidence that this is what they do and their official line is that they recognize only one authority and the territorial integrity of the island.

But as I said, please provide evidence from official sources. Rather than you handing me the "homework" the onus is on you to educate us and prove that in fact Britain is an enemy of the State. Something I do not subscribe to and is news to most of us. I know a lot of people make hysterical accusations, and sure, Britain has a very bad reputation going back to the 50s and even 60s, but most reasonable people do not consider Britain and Cyprus to be enemies at any level.

[miltiades]

As per usual Paphitis posts inaccuracies based on HIS interpretation of events, either in Cyprus or elsewhere.
Let me tell you that it is the senile brainless Brit peasants who rushed to prop up the pseudo state, eager to buy stolen properties on the cheap. You know fuck all about Britain and its politicians, some of the most currupt in the world. In it for what they can make for themselves. Corruption in the political establishment in the UK is rampant but just as a... high class prostitute hides her ...profession the British politicians camouflage their greed and corrupt practices.
Britain has NEVER supported the RoC, has never honoured her LEGAL obligation as guarantor of Cypruss' independence.
To put it blantly the British establishment dont give a fuck about Cyprus, still have not recovered from their shock in that the Cypriot people had the audacity to demand their right to chart their own destiny. Democracy, according to the British establishment is not a universal right but only just if accepted and approved by HM Government.
Mate you know as much about Britain as about Syria !!!

[Paphitis]

As per usual Paphitis posts inaccuracies based on HIS interpretation of events, either in Cyprus or elsewhere.
Let me tell you that it is the senile brainless Brit peasants who rushed to prop up the pseudo state, eager to buy stolen properties on the cheap. You know fuck all about Britain and its politicians, some of the most currupt in the world. In it for what they can make for themselves. Corruption in the political establishment in the UK is rampant but just as a... high class prostitute hides her ...profession the British politicians camouflage their greed and corrupt practices.
Britain has NEVER supported the RoC, has never honoured her LEGAL obligation as guarantor of Cypruss' independence.
To put it blantly the British establishment dont give a fuck about Cyprus, still have not recovered from their shock in that the Cypriot people had the audacity to demand their right to chart their own destiny. Democracy, according to the British establishment is not a universal right but only just if accepted and approved by HM Government.
Mate you know as much about Britain as about Syria !!!

I think you have lost the plot old man. Britain does not and has never at any stage propped up the "trnc" or assisted its citizens in buying cheap stolen property. On the contrary, their Foreign Office has warned its citizens continuously that they should not be buying any property in the "trnc" without the assistance of proper lawyers to verify the original ownership of the property is as depicted. In other words, if the property belongs to a refugee, British Courts recognize the legal ownership and that any buyers of stolen property will be considered as "trespassers"

Once again, it seems you and Pyro are making some pretty wicked allegations which have proven again and again to be wrong. The onus is on both of you to provide credible evidence to support your claims.

You know very well that the UK Government does not support the illegal acquisition of property in the "trnc" and that it will have no problems in applying natural Justice to the proper and legal owners of the property as we saw with the Orams case.

[Pyrpolizer]

@ Paphitis

I noticed you chose to reply selectively.
I translate that as an effort to avoid the issue.
After you reply to ALL points, I would then provide you links.

Sure most things related to EU matters seemed to be coming from the EU as a whole, the question is who within the EU was at the forefront?

[Paphitis]

@ Paphitis

I noticed you chose to reply selectively.
I translate that as an effort to avoid the issue.
After you reply to ALL points, I would then provide you links.

Sure most things related to EU matters seemed to be coming from the EU as a whole, the question is who within the EU was at the forefront?

Mate, I reject all your claims. I don't reply to all of them in order to save time but consider them ALL rejected. I can do that because you are the one making these claims without any supprtive evidence. It is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence.

Not only rejected, but I find your claims to be utterly stupid.

I know who the author of the Annan Plan was. There were 2 of them. I speak to one of them even to this day. They are both Australian Citizens but one is of Russian descent and both these guys were appointed by the UN. Their assistant was a Cypriot from Rizokarpaso.

The Russian Guy continued on as Downers advisor. The Cypriot advisor from Rizokarpaso also continued to work with Downer.

I don't believe there is a forefront. There is the EU Acquis alone.

If you want to say that Britain is the instigator of everything from the Annan Plan, supports the "trnc" and the sale of stolen properties among other things, then you need to provide evidence.

[Jerry]

Turkey never actually won and Cherie Blair lost in the English Court of Appeal; Milti, Bill C and myself witnessed her "humiliation". I got the impression that she always knew she would lose but Turkey's cash was too good to turn down. Turkey thought that "buying" the PM's wife would secure their case but unlike Cyprus, where the judge is likely to be your cousin, the judiciary are, in the main, scrupulously independent.


On 6 September 2006 a Judge of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in the UK allowed the Orams' appeal against registration and enforcement in Britain of the Cypriot judgment on the grounds that the application of the acquis communautaire was suspended in the occupied area. That court had nevertheless pointed out that, according to the relevant judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, the property rights of Mr. Apostolides in relation to the property in question remain in force and Mr. Apostolides remains the lawful owner of his property in Lapithos. It was also his opinion that the British couple were indeed trespassers.

http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/embassies/emb ... 0Orams.pdf

This a a CY gov. document and has every reason to avoid describing the exact timeline.
The fact is that Cherie Blair did win the case in Sept 2006.
This is an indication that the British Justice might not be as independent as you think.
Furthermore I am certain a Cypriot Supreme court would know what to do without trying it's last chance to seek advice from ECJ...
Please don't under-estimate neither the capability nor the integrity of Cyprus' legal system..

Notice that considering one of the things the UK seeks to get rid of after Brexit is the ECJ rulings, I won't be surprised if the 2010 decision would one day be overturned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolides_v_Orams

In September 2006, the High Court of Justice ruled in favour of the Orams.
Mr Apostolides appealed the decision at the Court of Appeal which in turn referred the case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), in Luxembourg.[11][12][13]

The ECJ in turn ruled in favour of Mr Apostolides (see next section below).

The case was then returned to the Court of Appeal in England which decided in favour of Meletios Apostolides on 19 January 2010.[14] According to one of the judges of the Court of Appeal panel, under the current system, this decision is final and no further escalation is possible.[15][16][17] However, the Orams tried to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.[18]

On 26 March 2010, the U.K. Supreme Court refused permission for the Orams to take the case to appeal, effectively bringing it to a conclusion.[19] The Cyprus Mail reported that the Orams' had abandoned the property rather than demolish it.

Blair "won" simply because the judge wrongly believed that the suspension of the acquis communitaire in the north meant that EU law did not apply there and could not be enforced - effectively a technicality. He also said that Apostolides was still the legal owner and Orams were trespassing. Since EU law was being used to try the case it stands to reason that the European Court should asked to look at the case.

[miltiades]

The fact of the matter is that Britain, as well as the impotent Greeks, failed in their Legal obligation to protect the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus. I can understand the Greeks, after all they are all mouth and fucking.... beards, they could not punch their way out of a ....souvlakia pitta. But the Brits, the orchestrators of the Zurich agreements? Stood by and blamed the extremists ie those that do not consider Cyprus as their natural and true motherland. The British government at the time as a Guarantor ought to have honoured its obligation. Of course that option did not suit them , they would have upset their buddies.
Do we now need British bases in Cyprus? NO we do not, we need those nations that can offer strategically some benefits.
We will get NOTHING from the British based in the so-called sovereign bases.

[Paphitis]

The fact of the matter is that Britain, as well as the impotent Greeks, failed in their Legal obligation to protect the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus. I can understand the Greeks, after all they are all mouth and fucking.... beards, they could not punch their way out of a ....souvlakia pitta. But the Brits, the orchestrators of the Zurich agreements? Stood by and blamed the extremists ie those that do not consider Cyprus as their natural and true motherland. The British government at the time as a Guarantor ought to have honoured its obligation. Of course that option did not suit them , they would have upset their buddies.
Do we now need British bases in Cyprus? NO we do not, we need those nations that can offer strategically some benefits.
We will get NOTHING from the British based in the so-called sovereign bases.

We are not talking about the Treaty of Establishment and Guarantee. This is just evidence of the fact that no one is going to fight our war for us. Why would they send their boys to die fighting the Turkish Military?

Greece won't do it, and neither will Britain. Which makes this type of treaty as an unworkable anachronism. It only legitimizes someone's right to interfere in the RoC, something Britain and Greece are not interested in.

From a security perspective, the only thing that works is collective defence and security arrangements such as NATO, and ANZUS and so on. These treaties are very effective.

The insinuation from you and Pyro is that the Brits are in some manner an enemy to Cyprus. That they for some reason operate in a fashion which isn't helpful to RoC interests but assists and furthers Turkey's interests in Cyprus. You also mentioned that Britain is advancing the interests of the "trnc" and is in some way complicit with the illegal sale of stolen property. This is not my understanding at all.

These statements are just silly and you need to provide evidence!

http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... N05663.pdf

http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/embassies/emb ... 0Orams.pdf

[Pyrpolizer]

@ Paphitis

I noticed you chose to reply selectively.
I translate that as an effort to avoid the issue.
After you reply to ALL points, I would then provide you links.

Sure most things related to EU matters seemed to be coming from the EU as a whole, the question is who within the EU was at the forefront?

Mate, I reject all your claims. I don't reply to all of them in order to save time but consider them ALL rejected. I can do that because you are the one making these claims without any supprtive evidence. It is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence.

Not only rejected, but I find your claims to be utterly stupid.

That said I don't see any point continuing any discussion with you genius.