[PROPAGANDA] Only if it concerns his GC friends

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
18/09/2010 08:49

6xM in another thread [ http://www.cyprus44.com/forums/45331.asp ] "... when some folks can't live in their own homes ..."

Mark, you ignore again (I'm not surprised) that this goes for "some folks" in TRNC as well. Your re"mark" is one-sided once more hence propaganda as usual.



Furthermore, how long does it take - in your opinion - before a claim on a house and on land loses its validity? 36 years, fifty years, one hundred years, four centuries, eight centuries (this is a comprehensive history of Cyprus)? Or *never* - as long as it concerns your GC friends?

nurseawful



Joined: 06/02/2009
Posts: 5934

Message Posted:
18/09/2010 08:54

Most of us live in OUR own homes as they were not here before 1974!



Chris

cypgab


Joined: 09/01/2010
Posts: 338

Message Posted:
18/09/2010 23:18

But the land was.

LaptaMike


Joined: 07/10/2009
Posts: 1679

Message Posted:
18/09/2010 23:37

Hans, I actually agree with you for once



A neighbour of mine was born in Pathos, he is a TC. His family had to leave their ancestral home a few years before 1974 because the GC 'terrorists' were threatening to kill his family.

apc2010


Joined: 28/07/2010
Posts: 1689

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 01:40

hans , one question what was the ratio that were displaced pleased , or on your map could you put coluours for pre 74 areas , inc all the t/c land in paphos ...............

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 03:15

the only way the two communities can live together is with a lot of give and take

but power sharing lasted just three years from 1960-1963 after it was foistered on cyprus



it appears that living separately not side by side, is the route of choice for cyprus

but it's the result of history and not my "take" on the situation, I have no "opinion" as such



if people suffer from say the evil isolations or having had to move in 1974,

surely compromise is the way to progress



relying on outside powers like turkey, russia or the eu-mix will never unify the island

even if people would think that should benefit them personally in some way or other



andre

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 08:17

I truly believe that most of the political world outside of Cyprus has now come to the awful realisation that there is no way back to a truly mixed Cypriot community.



It can't be forced upon them and if it were, as it has been and will remain, it would be a recipe for disaster.



There are simply too many recriminations and unsettled scores....



I feel things must go the way Kosovo (Kosova) and Serbia seems to be going. Two independent states agreeing to live together with an open border each with their own peace keeping forces and police. Pretty much how it is now but with more structure to the arrangement. Mutually beneficial changes would be made to re-align borders to more fairly divide those areas in neither side's use or control where practicable.



No amount of land re-alignment can put back population numbers to pre-74 figures... Those living here are living here... their right to exist just as relevant as anybody else's and those rights are enshrined in EU law.

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 08:19

If the south didn't want anyone from any part of the EU to take up residence on the island they ought never have joined the EU... in the same way France is treating the Roma illegally and will need to take them back or face sanctions.



You can't be a member of the EU and opt out of this main plank of EU legislation.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 08:20

RE msg 5, apc2010: (...) hans , one question what was the ratio that were displaced pleased , or on your map could you put coluours for pre 74 areas , inc all the t/c land in paphos ............... (...)

=> This map may answer your question (as close as I can show)? http://www.cyprusdownload.nl/BB_pics2/Cyp_map_population_movement_72.jpg

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 09:02

What’s all this about GC homes? Most expats live in new homes built on scrubland. Even the TC's prefer to live in new homes rather than the hovels, oh sorry ancestral homes, abandoned by the GC's - time to get a life mm.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 09:28

I believe that many people live in homes they paid to be built but are "owned" by the builder or, in the case of a poorly worded trust agreement, even their lawyer.

dippersgirl



Joined: 04/05/2010
Posts: 795

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 09:42

I totally agree. where do you stop. My father lost his house and property in the Czech republic when all Germans where expelled with no recompense(this was the sticking point with the Czechs and the signing of the Lisbon treaty. Our family never asked for anything.When we had to flee East Germany, we lost everything again. We did not like it, but we have moved on.

Gc's always shout as if they're the only ones. All Hellenic people I have met, think Alexander the Great was a hero(why was he great????I read a lot about him), he wasn't even a nice person by modern standards. He concered a lot of land, but when the Ottomans did the same some centuries later, that was soooo bad!!!

Mhhhmmmm......................

yrret


Joined: 17/08/2010
Posts: 761

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 10:09

Surely the bottom line is that throughout history there have been 'conquerers, and 'loosers'

I rest my case.

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 10:58

Mark, don't make the further mistake of equating population numbers with land...



If the minority population were largely farmers they would probably have owned proportionately more land than their numbers would infer.... Farmers tend have bigger tracts of land than other occupations.



The Turkish Cypriots are known to have largely been agricultural communities often spread on the fringes of Greek Cypriot villages or in wholly Turkish Villages like Hizarkoy.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 11:16

Hey, Hans it's been 'too long' ;)



You neglected to explain the contextual origin of my 'propaganda' ... if you compare the relative inconvenience of having to go back to an airport to collect a case - as opposed to being ethnically cleansed.....





You DO know that twisting in such fashion IS the 'propaganda' ....... ?!!



Chris ( re 2) 'Your' home.. is it on land owned by a GC by any chance...? If it is on pre74 TR / Foreign owned deeds you can REALLY claim ownership...

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 11:27

Mark, how about answering my question in msg 1? I'll repeat the question for your convenience: "Furthermore, how long does it take - in your opinion - before a claim on a house and on land loses its validity? 36 years, fifty years, one hundred years, four centuries, eight centuries (this is a comprehensive history of Cyprus)? Or *never* - as long as it concerns your GC friends?"

Rottolover



Joined: 21/06/2009
Posts: 519

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 11:32

Hi sixems,



You also neglected to explain the meaning of your sentence, and I'm sure you realise that phrases like "ethnic cleansing" are emotive hand grenades, usable by both sides in a confrontation.



You say 'your' home to Chris, apparently inferring it isn't if it has been built on land previously (or still, as you seem to prefer) owned by a GC. If so, do you then claim her home really belongs to that GC?



To take this point a bit further, I live in a development of 14 villas, all built in the last 6 years on land previously (still?) owned by a GC. Do you consider that GC is the rightful owner of all 14 villas, as well as the land they are built on? Land, incidentally, that was too scruffy and steep to have even had lemon or olive trees on it.



Further, some land areas have now had hundreds of villas built on them. Do you seriously consider that the former GC owner(s) should now be given their land back, together with the ownership of all houses now existing on it? Really?

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 19:33

groucho message 7 and other contributors:



before prescribing imaginative upgrade solutions for cyprus island,

let's first be clear about the past



yes the communities lived side-by-side, often had cordial relations,

many tc's spoke greek...and after all they were "cypriots"



but you are can only be referring back to colonial times past,

first the ottoman empire then britain



because when cyprus had to govern itself from 1960 onward,

using the fragile power-sharing deal forced upon it by foreigners,

who still apparently knew best, "unity" swiftly collapsed



this is what self-styled do-gooders should always bear in mind

when considering what is their preferred best route for "cypriots"

...whoever they may be



andre

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
19/09/2010 20:37

dc message 1:



you are making the point that claims can only be for a limited time...if at all



looking at europe in the 20th century, millions were displaced,

think konigsberg, thracian greeks, lvov, 125k craina serbs who did their neighbours no wrong:

the tally is near limitless just for this most civilised of continents



some cypriots are able to claim because there is now in the north at least

an internationally recognised commission to decide on matters



but the south cyprus authorities rejected a compromise of sorts in 2004

which would have settled all outstanding property issues on an overall basis



yes mark 6m is technically quite correct when he says gc "ownership"

can continue more or less "whatever"

but it is a concept of dwindling usefulness since the echr now points claimants

towards the less lucrative local remedy, which is unlikely to include restitution



while everyone north of the line in "former" property gets ever more settled in



andre

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 09:26

Hi RottoLover ( and DC) : we BOTH know that if the land was owned by a GC in 74 - it still Is .. there is no question of that - the ECHR has ruled - many times - can we agree on that?



However - how to DEAL with that .. now the ECHR has offered TURKEY a chance to offer a local remedy - which GCs have been reluctant to use - thanks to INSANE govt. 'advice' ..they should have PILED in in their thousands..



So DC - yes - there is now a time limit ... Do you nee me to dig out old quotes of yours - where you dismissed the fact that such disenfranchised folk would ever get the right to claim for their homes ?! ;)



Troodo: I'm quite sure that GCs would have upgraded their accommodation - given the chance.. ;)



Groucho: the ECHR go by the 1974 RoC land registry - not your 'theories'..



yrret : this is the 21st Century and Turkey is being held accountable [ to the ECHR - the IPC is to redress claims from GCs] for 'intervening' and forgetting to go home.. I rest MY case ;)

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 09:54

I am with Mark on this one.



His previous post outlines the only viable (and fair) solution to the whole property mess.



For GC land in the North that has been developed, the GC 'owner' should receive financial recompense as deemed appropriate by the IPC.



For GC land that has remained undeveloped, the GC should be given the option of either returning to it, selling it or seek recompense from the IPC.



The same process should apply to TC land in the South albeit any recompense would have to come from the RoC government as opposed to the IPC.



Regards



Paul

Rottolover



Joined: 21/06/2009
Posts: 519

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 10:42

Yes, sixems and fiendishpaul, I agree with the IPC being a solution for developed land, and for undeveloped land.



But what about former GC houses that still exist and are now 'owned' and being lived in by new 'owners'?

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 11:00

RE msg 22, Rottolover: (...) But what about former GC houses that still exist and are now 'owned' and being lived in by new 'owners'? (...)

=> Yes, what about it?! A final, firm, not changing again stand point by the TRNC Government would be most interesting and helpful - for many Cypriot Turks, Turks and expats alike, wouldn't it? Now follows a very, very sad smiley: :-(

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 12:19

Mark you are conveniently neglecting recent ECHR decisions that clearly outline a lack of lasting legally enforceable interest in land after 36 years especially if the GC deed holder had never lived on the land...



It is quite clear now that the ECHR has seen the light of day and it's not mass repatriation or reclaiming of land... it is compensation via the organs of the IPC and furthermore they have also made it clear that the deadline on Dec 2010 is an existing date by which any such claims should be lodged.... Otherwise the claimants will have to wait for a political solution....



Those advocating a wait and see policy in lieu of staking their claim via the IPC are taking a chance of ending up with nothing...



The south by the same token has not instituted a similar arrangement to the IPC for TCs holding deeds to lands in the south. This is likely to come back and bite them on the bum.... and their bum does look big in this!

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 12:22

As the south has not instituted a suitable local remedy (the 6 month residency requirement being an intimidating joke) the same can not be said.... i.e. The ECHR has to look at the claims of TCs retaining deeds to land in the south as it is unjust to impose residency rules on the claimant when you know there would be hostile elements to any such attempt to reclaim their property.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 12:51

RE MSG 22



Rottolover



>>But what about former GC houses that still exist and are now 'owned' and being lived in by new 'owners'?<<



They aren't 'former GC homes'' and they are *still* the owners - as any GC - who IS the owner - would find out if they apply to the IPC...



What we aren't seeing enough of is these type of applications..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 12:57

RE MSG 24 Groucho

>>Mark you are conveniently neglecting recent ECHR decisions that clearly outline a lack of lasting legally enforceable interest in land after 36 years especially if the GC deed holder had never lived on the land... <<



No - I'm not.. how do you work that one out? The IPC specifically aids GCs who lost their primary dwelling



>>The south by the same token has not instituted a similar arrangement to the IPC for TCs holding deeds to lands in the south. This is likely to come back and bite them on the bum.... and their bum does look big in this!<<



Nonsense.. the 'rump' RoC has had a mechanism in place for decades - without the need to be coerced by the ECHR - what was wrong was the requirement for the TC claimant to reside in the 'govt controlled areas' for six months .. prior to starting the claim process.



You'd know I long protested that this was unfair and the ECHR have made this clear to the 'rump' RoC...

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 13:26

Hey Hans !



as you are posting here, why don't you loginto SKYPE or check your email or fix your mailform on allcrusades.com



Are you hiding from me ? ;)

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 13:30

Mark, I seldom use Skype (to chat I use Adium, but that won't work on a Windoze box), but I'll start it now for your convenience. And I've already checked my email, saw your message and will reply this afternoon.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 13:33

Hi Hans, your Mac must be taking a long time to log in to SKYPE ;)...



Call me, now - if you can - I'll be on the road this pm

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 13:48

Gotcha ! ;) Tot ziens, Hans

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 14:01

RE msg 31, 6xm: (...) Gotcha ! ;) Tot ziens, Hans (...)

=> Make it all Dutch: "Te pakken! ;) Tot ziens, Hans." Well said, Mark! And I'll update my version of Skype, because I now see that I have a very outdated version on my hard disc! Amazing that it still worked with my updated Mac Operating System - Skype is flexible indeed. Tot ziens!

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 14:05

Rottolover Re Msg 22



Former GC houses are a tricky one.......



IF the owners of the property are still alive, then the 'right' thing to do would be to give them the option to return to the property, if they chose not to then they should seek recompense from the IPC.



What of the current 'owners' I hear you cry, well if the GC did want to return to the house (unlikely I would suggest given the current state of the unification talks) then they should seek compensation from the TRNC government who issued deeds on the property in the first place.



Personally, if I was a GC, I would apply to the IPC and at least have a chance of getting something back for what I 'lost'.



Just my opinion of course



Paul

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 14:07

"Nonsense.. the 'rump' RoC has had a mechanism in place for decades - without the need to be coerced by the ECHR - what was wrong was the requirement for the TC claimant to reside in the 'govt controlled areas' for six months .. prior to starting the claim process.



You'd know I long protested that this was unfair and the ECHR have made this clear to the 'rump' RoC..."



Yes but it's no good having had a mechanism for decades that had a fatal flaw... The residency requirement... is it still in place or has this hurdle been removed? If so on what date? How many TCs have been able to get restitution of their properties occupied by GCs after 1974 since the removal of this obstacle?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 14:26

re msg 34



Groucho an elderly TC lady - resident in the UK - with a place in Larnaca took the 'rump' RoC to the ECHR over this 'resident for six months' requirement and it was agreed it was unfair - and her claim was processed .....



So .. the theory is that a TC could claim, too ...





I would like to see some pre 74 ( say 1963 ) claims from both ethnicities, too

Groucho



Joined: 26/04/2008
Posts: 7993

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 14:37

Yes but while the IPC exists in the north... the lady had to go to the ECHR... not quite so easy... is it?

blade


Joined: 19/06/2010
Posts: 1286

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 15:14

DC,

I have a question regarding your map.

The area in red shown under/labelled Kyrenia, can you please tell us what villages are now on that outer left hand side.?

What makes me ask is that quite a few villages in that area were infact totally GC villages.

So if you could please confirm.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 15:49

RE msg 37, blade: (...) The area in red shown under/labelled Kyrenia, can you please tell us what villages are now on that outer left hand side.? What makes me ask is that quite a few villages in that area were infact totally GC villages. So if you could please confirm. (...)

=> To answer your question means doing some research on other maps in my archives or on my hard disc. But from first sight I don't think you're right. The bottom of the area near Nicosia is Gönyeli (Geunyeli, CT for centuries), the top near Kyrenia (Girne) is Zeytinlik (also known as Templos and Cypriot Turkish for centuries also). Which villages in the area do you mean - makes it easier for me to look up the facts.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/09/2010 18:23

Here' s a 1960 census map...



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Ethnographic-1.jpg



Does this help as a comparison ?

blade


Joined: 19/06/2010
Posts: 1286

Message Posted:
21/09/2010 10:57

They are both quite different, i would be nice to find one with place names .



DC, The map looked to me that the Kyrenia district show on your map was too wide to the left hand side as you look at it. I am talking about villages like sirineveler ,coceri, kozankoy basically anything to the left hand side.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/09/2010 11:26

this any better?



http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/cyprus_ethnic_1973.jpg

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
21/09/2010 22:43

mark message 26:



please explain, who is "we" in your last line?



andre

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
22/09/2010 09:24

'We' is surely ANYONE who wants to see this mess finished - ANYONE living in a house on land owned by someone else, the owner of said land, and the 'world' that hopes a major stumbling block to a comprehensive settlement in Cyrus will disappear..



Not to mention those buying / selling houses....



A Bizarre question, really, andre