Deportation of Israeli citizens from RoC.

[exodus]

Amos you wernt there, so why are you 100% sure they were not told the reason they were being sent back?

They were told. And why did they not obtain the correct visa before they made the trip? They HAD been told which visa they required before they departed. They applied for the wrong visa deliberately, as they wrongly assumed that had they applied for the correct visa it would not have been granted because they wished to enter Gaza.
If they had applied for the correct visa they would have been allowed to enter Israel and to then visit Gaza to help out the children's charity there.
Israelis are not animals, but we insist on knowing who is entering our Country and for what reason. Any refusals are ALWAYS advised at the time for the reason. We have so many threats against our people we have to be so careful.
Before I retired to Cyprus we had a missile land in our garden - something I will bet you have not had, unless you were alive in London during WWII.
Amos.

[WHL]

Amos this dosnt make sense ,,you cannot apply for a visa for the north from the Republic..theres only one visa to come to Cyprus no other

[exodus]

Amos this dosnt make sense ,,you cannot apply for a visa for the north from the Republic..theres only one visa to come to Cyprus no other

We are talking about entry into Israel, not Cyprus.
Please try and keep up.
Amos.

[WHL]

Hands up im done....no more to say

[exodus]

The following article in today's Cyprus Mail (Sunday Mail) says it all really:
http://cyprus-mail.com/2017/11/26/view
I would say not just irrational but also discriminatory!
Amos.

[Band]

It should be borne in mind that this is an opinion piece, not a news story, so doesn't really add anything to the argument.

I also cannot see why you call it discriminatory, given that the rule applies to non-EU citizens and, as has been stated above, has been applied to a number of nationalities in the past.

[exodus]

It should be borne in mind that this is an opinion piece, not a news story, so doesn't really add anything to the argument.

I also cannot see why you call it discriminatory, given that the rule applies to non-EU citizens and, as has been stated above, has been applied to a number of nationalities in the past.

The problem is that it is not applied equally to non-EU citizens. For example it mentions Russians being barred, yet we know that many Russians do go over and stay in hotels on their "list".
The whole thing is mickey mouse, as I said left hand and right hand.
Typical Cypriot I suppose!
Amos.

[Band]

For example it mentions Russians being barred, yet we know that many Russians do go over and stay in hotels on their "list".

How do we know that?

Maybe it depends what they answer when asked the question about their intentions?

[exodus]

For example it mentions Russians being barred, yet we know that many Russians do go over and stay in hotels on their "list".

How do we know that?

Maybe it depends what they answer when asked the question about their intentions?

Maybe so, proving how ridiculous the system (if we can call it that) is.
I know that (Russians) BTW because the other weekend we went for lunch in a hotel in Kyrenia that is on the immigration's list and met some Russians staying there for 2 nights gambling. Along with many GCs I might add!
They had not been asked where they were staying or for how long or what was the purpose of their visit, either exiting the RoC or re-entering it.
Clearly had they just flown in to Larnaca they might or might not have been asked all that, and if they had they might or might not have told a porky.
The report in the Cyprus Mail YOU drew to our attention was about 2 of my Countrymen who were asked, had replied honestly, and got chucked out.
Incidentally you quoted the CM yourself as though it was a true and accurate report, but when I posted a CM article from today's CM you cast doubts on it because it is a newspaper article.
That makes you as bad as some Cypriot immigration offices at Larnaca airport. When it suits you.
Anyway my point has been made, which is why I started this thread in the first place.
I think it has now been well discussed - so I can't see anything to be gained by further prolonging the debate.
Forum members reading it all, and maybe not contributing, can make up their own minds.
So this is my last post on the topic.
Thanks to all who participated - well worthwhile I think.
Amos.

[Dominic]

Your point hasn't been made. Your point was that Israel was being picked on. It wasn't.

Regarding the two pieces, your piece was an Opinion piece, it wasn't a news report. The Sunday edition of Cyprus Mail is like most other sunday papers, and has a lot more opinion pieces in it.

[Poppy]

Cannot see your point Dominic.It seems obvious to me that they have been discriminatory to Israelis and Lebanese. Apparently the Cypriot Embassy in Israel said it was against Cypriot Law for ANY foreigners to be allowed access to holiday in the North. We know full well that UK citizens,Russians etc are allowed entry so either some officials do not have a clue what they are doing or it is blatant discrimination.

[Dominic]

It wasn't as Exodus claimed, anti-Israeli (and therefore anti-Semitic etc), it was anti anybody outside the EU.

Presumably, they cannot treat people in the UK and EU the same, because of free movement, and the fact that the entire island of Cyprus is in the EU.

This is my understanding.

IE, if the ROC were able to ban everybody from entering the North, then they would. They cannot ban people in the EU, because of freedom of movement, but they can ban other nations.

[Jimgward]

I get the impression that RoC has tried to find a way to deal with barring tourists from non-EU countries from travelling to ‘barred’ resorts in the North. It has been clumsily applied and not universal. Since many of the tourists doing this are from the middle-East and particularly Lebanon and Israel, they are bearing the brunt of a divisive and ill-constructed policy. I agree it wasn’t designed nor applied as anti-Israeli and certainly not anti-Semitic. (I’d be truly appalled if it was in any way)

However, since the Israelis have a stronger embassy and voice, I’m sure they’ve been ab le to highlight this and other occasions better than some other nationalities.

[jeba]

It may have been an opinion piece, but it made perfect sense...why as a EU citizen are you allowed to visit the occupied North and stay, eat, gamble in Greek Cypriot "owned proporties or proporties built on GC owned land when if you are a non EU Citizen out are not?

That´s easy to answer: Because Cyprus must treat EU citizens the same way it´s treating it´s own. Cyprus would have to ban it´s own citizens from doing so in order to be able to ban EU citizens from doing it.

[exodus]

It may have been an opinion piece, but it made perfect sense...why as a EU citizen are you allowed to visit the occupied North and stay, eat, gamble in Greek Cypriot "owned proporties or proporties built on GC owned land when if you are a non EU Citizen out are not?

That´s easy to answer: Because Cyprus must treat EU citizens the same way it´s treating it´s own. Cyprus would have to ban it´s own citizens from doing so in order to be able to ban EU citizens from doing it.

I wasn't intending to add further posts in this thread, but I must answer Jeba.
Why doesn't Cyprus ban all EU citizens, including GCs, from doing so, if they feel so strongly about it? At least then they would be being consistent.
Also I understand Larnaca Airport is built on appropriated land owned by Turkish Cypriots; in which case why don't they refuse to use it?
Amos.

[Dominic]

As I said before, I was under the impression that they couldn''t, under EU law, prevent EU citizens from going there, because the entire island of Cyprus is in the EU, not just the ROC.

I should stress, that I read this in a comment, as opposed to an official document. But, if true, it does explain why EU residents are allowed.

I can understand why they would want to ban everybody. But there is no logic in only banning non-EU, unless they are not allowed to ban EU.

[WHL]

It may have been an opinion piece, but it made perfect sense...why as a EU citizen are you allowed to visit the occupied North and stay, eat, gamble in Greek Cypriot "owned proporties or proporties built on GC owned land when if you are a non EU Citizen out are not?

That´s easy to answer: Because Cyprus must treat EU citizens the same way it´s treating it´s own. Cyprus would have to ban it´s own citizens from doing so in order to be able to ban EU citizens from doing it.

I wasn't intending to add further posts in this thread, but I must answer Jeba.
Why doesn't Cyprus ban all EU citizens, including GCs, from doing so, if they feel so strongly about it? At least then they would be being consistent.
Also I understand Larnaca Airport is built on appropriated land owned by Turkish Cypriots; in which case why don't they refuse to use it?
Amos.

Larnaca Airport was build on an old RAF runway, a small part of it ( at the end of the runway near Mckenzy beach) was owned by a Turkish Cypriot, he agreed compensation with the Cypriot government many years ago.

[exodus]

For WHL:
Thank you for that clarification, seems my info was out of date.
Amos.

[WHL]

Cyprus main objective is to unify the country, if it decided to stop its own citizens from crossing over to the north it would be shooting its self in the foot..Cyprus does not recognize the north, so it follows free movement for its citizens over the whole of the island is a must, if it stopped its citizens from crossing over then there would be an outcry for Turkish cypriots not to be allowed to come this side, thousand of Turkish cypriots get free health care over this side , they use Larnaca airport.. etc etc, that would not go down well with the Turkish cypriot community

[WHL]

Be interesting to see if UK nationals, will be treated the same as Israelis/Lebanese etc regards crossing over to the north after Brexit?