The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content

US type Federal System in Cyprus

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

Postby magikthrill » Fri Dec 03, 2004 10:55 pm

Piratis wrote:After 1974, and after you stole our land, raped, killed 6000 people and made refugees 200.000 Greek Cypriots, I am sorry that we forgot to ask you if you allow us to try to survive or not.

Yes Piratis, how dare you bring up such a touchy subject? If the international world has managed to forget these meaningless facts, shouldnt you as well????

and anyway, i was under the impression that the constitution was the same, since there are seats in parliament that are supposed to be occupied by turkish cypriots but since they dont like the GC company they are unoccupied.

also, how does this distinction between TCs and GCs officially work? is it from the name or on your passport/ID card does it say "TC" or "GC"?

as far as the us federal system, that systems was created to manage a country with an extreme amount of land and population and not to represent the rights of minorities. in fact most minorities were slaves.
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 2245
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:09 am
Location: Athens, Greece

Postby turkcyp » Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:27 pm

deleted by the author...
Last edited by turkcyp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 5:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:40 am

Postby MicAtCyp » Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:32 pm

Turkcyp wrote: I would totally agree with you, if we turn back to 1960 constitution. Would you accept that?

Kyprianou Vasiliou and Klerides proposed this to Denktash hundreds of times.Denktash answer was always "don't even think about it". I am really surprised that the TCs never heard of it!!!

TurkCyp wrote: And if they keep on claiming
that RoC is the legitimate body then, they simply should
accept that without our approval they could not change
the constiturion alone........ (like changing 1960 constituion
without our approval).

The constitution of the RoC has never changed!!! If you have different information tell me just one article that has changed.

TurkCyp wrote: But if we are doing that, then we should also turn back everything to 1960, including the point in consitution that says RofC can not be a member of any international institution which UK, Greece, and Turkey is not already a member of. Oooops. I guess this rules out EU.

Are you a lawyer my friend? Are you sure this is exactly what is written in the Contstitution? Be careful words are important. For your information Cyprus was a member of the Commonwealth as an ex British Colony immediately after 1960. Neither Greece nor Turkey were. It became a member of the non aligned movement whereas neither Greece nor Turkey were. And the TC Vice President did not veto any of those joinings..... Also for your information the matter of the legality of joining the EU was examined exhaustively by the EU lawyers themselves. (They had to after a lot of screamings from Denktash and Turkey). And they did not find it contradictory to the RoC constitution.
User avatar
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Postby erolz » Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:44 pm

MicAtCyp wrote: The constitution of the RoC has never changed!!! If you have different information tell me just one article that has changed.

Firstly appologies to all for being off topic.

It may not have changed in writting but it most certainly has changed in its implemtation and not just as a result of TC 'withdrawlal' (which we could and no doubt would argue about in endless circles). It changed (in implementation) for example when Makarios rejected the decision of the supreme court which led to the resignation of the indpendent judge.

Anyway can I make an appeal that we all try and respect the original posters wishes and try and keep this thread on the topic of the 'US consitution'?
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Girne / Kyrenia

Postby pantelis » Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:52 am

Libertocracy-Another point of view! ... rships.htm

In Indonesia, the Moslem majority voted to deny the people of East Timor, who are predominately Christian, the right to independence, even though the people of East Timor democratically voted for independence. Which one was the most democratic? If you believe in democracy above all else, then, since the idea of democracy is majority rule, the larger the majority the more legitimate its rule. Therefore wouldn't the larger majority trump the smaller? If the ethnic majority doesn't have the right to deny minority ethnic groups their independence in East Timor, then why can't the Kurds be independent of Turkey? Why does the world not demand that Russia stop its aggressive war of subjugation against Chechnya? Why can't the Basque be independent of France and Spain? What gives the right to Mexico to hold the Amerindian majority of Chiapas? What gives the right to the United States to deny Amerindian nations secession and independence?
You say those are examples of extremes of democracy and that democracy must be moderated and include respect for minority rights? Such an idea is a fraud and an impossibility. You can't have majority rule and minority rights at the same time. Democracy is by definition the rule of the majority imposing its will on the minority. It is the systematic tyranny of the majority over the minority. The only way you can have minority rights is if the vote of the majority is not binding on the minority. Otherwise the minority will always be subject to the majority and the minority's rights will always be violated by that majority. The only difference between democracies is in degrees, it is the degree to which the majority takes power and the degree to which the minority's rights are violated.
The United States, and their allies, have fought wars, committed acts of terrorism and supplied weapons to others to fight wars to impose democracy. They presume to justify this by saying it's all in the cause of democracy, as though it were some magic word that immediately absolves themselves of all sin. The end does not justify the means, especially when the end is the evil of democracy, mob tyranny. They claim that the atrocities they have committed or supported are not the same thing as the very same atrocities committed by fascists and communists because its all in the cause of democracy. How foolish do they think the world to be, first of all, democracy is an evil, immoral, political system just like fascism and communism, the fact that the mob rules makes it even more of a comprehensive tyranny and often harder to change. Theft, terrorism and political tyranny is immoral no matter what motivates it. Is being persecuted, enslaved or murdered less wrong because it's for the cause of democracy? Horribly, I really believed there are some deranged people who actually believe this, those who do are the moral equivalent of fascists and communists. These wars for democracy are just democratic imperialism, to impose their own illegitimate and immoral system on others.
The only political system that can ever be justified is Libertocracy which cannot be forced on people, nor can it be created or supported by committing crimes against the human rights that it serves. Just the track record of the many evils of democracy compared to the ideals of Libertocracy stands as the best example to all people which is right and which is wrong.
Ironically, the United States and their allies are not even democracies, they are republics, their claiming to be democracies is fraudulent. They commit or support crimes against people in other countries to impose democracy when they don't even have it in their own country. Still even more ironic is that while the United States supports fighting wars to impose democracy, they have a track record, since the end World War II, of undermining democracy and supporting right wing military dictatorships. The propaganda of fighting for democracy is just a lie used to promote their own brand of imperialism.
The United States and other countries who are not democracies themselves say they have an interest in promoting democracy, because, 'it's the right thing to do', that the people are better served by it, they're better off for it and they have a national interest to do so because it's consistent with their values and promotes American interests. This is a clear declaration of political imperialism, they fight wars, perpetrate acts of terrorism, oppress individual rights, attack freedom, commit crimes against humanity all to impose their own corrupt and illegitimate political system on others -- and, its not even a democracy . They impose economic sanctions which harm innocent people, cause famine and cause people die by denying them access to medicine all to impose their own political cartel which is just another form of political tyranny, it's only a difference of degree, a style of political policy between democracy, oligarchy, dictatorship, communism, fascism, they all commit more or less the same crimes with the only difference being their degrees and procedures, they are all illegitimate, they are all wrong, they are all evil, and their adherents are filled with a self righteousness (that disregards rights and what is right) that makes what they do even more dangerous to more people throughout the world.
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
Location: USA

Postby turkcyp » Thu Feb 03, 2005 8:11 pm

deleted by the author...
Last edited by turkcyp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 5:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:40 am

Postby brother » Fri Feb 04, 2005 1:31 pm

So lets start a poll and ask who would agree to the return of the 1960 constitution, and if it proves positive then maybe ALEX would not mind doing a official poll with a 1000 tc and a 1000 gc, if that in return comes out positive then we can forward it to the relevant people and hey presto, solution.
User avatar
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:30 pm
Location: Cyprus/U.K

Postby Saint Jimmy » Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:16 pm

MicAtCyp wrote:Kyprianou Vasiliou and Klerides proposed this to Denktash hundreds of times.Denktash answer was always "don't even think about it". I am really surprised that the TCs never heard of it!!!

Mic, don't be surprised, I've never heard of that either! :shock:

Are there any sources that explicitly mention such proposals?
User avatar
Saint Jimmy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:29 pm
Location: Leeds, U.K.


Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests