I already hear some people saying; will I allow to a 30year or a 40year old man to make love with my 15year or 14year old daughter? I don’t know this, I don’t know your intentions although l know that you, as a man -and as all men- have the desire to make love with somebody else’s daughters and maybe with your own daughter.
In my point of view it is your right to have such a desire. I don’t blame you for this.
I cannot intervene to your desire for anybody. I don’t blame your erotic desire for anybody, even for your dog or your cat, but l blame your hypocrisy.
What would I say then as a reply to those who ask whether it will be allowed to 30year or 40year or 50year (plus) old men to make love with 14year or 15year old girls? The answer is clear. Of course it will be allowed. It will be allowed and you will allow it. Why not to allow it? Because supposedly the 30year old men are much-o-men and supposedly they have big penis? What can I say to you? However, I see many 15year, or 16year old men -and 15year and 16year old girls too- who are more much-o than many 30year or 40year old men. And whether the 30year or the 40year old men have big penis, ask the sexologists and they will tell you: excluding the child hood, the size of the penis depends neither on the age nor on the physical formation. There are many young people who have bigger penis than many adults have as well as there are many tiny people who have big­ger penis than many big in size people. It’s on the talent. Does anyone know what’s going on? I generally believe that no man in the world has such a big penis so as to make damage to its accepter.
In the matter of speaking, every girl can estimate the situation by itself. She can estimate the weight of the body and the size of the penis of every man she has in front of her (the city can provide her with everything she needs for this) and if she judges that someone has such a big penis that can make damage to her, then she can tell him to test it first to his ass and if he it doesn’t harm him, then to let him test it to hers. It depends on her, whether she will make love with someone or not and according to the person she has in front of her, she gives her “yes” or her “no". If she wants, she makes love and if she doesn’t want, she doesn’t make.
Rapes will not be allowed. So, all who are tempted take it into consideration, although I would like to make some comments on this subject, because rape from

rape differs. For me, the real rape is when the rapist makes real damage to his sex­ual object and this definitely will be punished. Considering the size of the damage and if this is his first, or his second or his third attempt, but the city will make clear that it won’t allow any extreme situations. The city will offer to everybody the pos­sibility to be erotically abundant, yes, but if some people interpret it as its weak­ness or as its inclination to brutalities and acts of violence, then they will be sur­prised from its reaction.
As far as the other kind of rape is concerned, the mild one, where the ‘rapist’ push­es a little his sexual object so as to sweep it away to his passion, this, I don’t con­sider as rape, even if it is imposed on a girl or even if it wasn’t a desirable -or unde­sirable- experience. If it was over without doing any harm, then it doesn’t matter. Is it over? You are welcome to it. We go on. Let her hope to nicer experiences. Life goes on. We will not put into jail a person because he desired someone else so much that he lost control. We will let it pass. We will not make the flea a camel because some people want to make a case out of nothing.
What I am asking from women is to be strict in the matter of reproduction. In this matter, they have to choose to have children with whom they decide to and not with someone whom they will sexually erect.
Maybe I provoke reactions to some people with my thoughts but this doesn’t bother me. I will express my opinion without fear. For me, a sexual act, even a little violent or an undesirable one doesn’t leave neither wounds nor any trauma but only some bit­terness or bad memory that will be easily overcome. All these theories about psycho­logical wounds that follow you the rest of your life are only exaggerations and non­sense. Simply, some women who don’t have balance in their life and they don’t man­age to control the situation, in their effort to find excuses for this, they search in their past to find whom or what to blame. And what’s the easiest thing to say that it is this or that? But is it true? Do you think that an -even undesirable and violent- erotic expe­rience during someone’s childhood or adolescence can be fatal and catastrophic for the rest of her life? Was her “rapist” so awful and disgusting? Was he a monster? And really, didn’t she feel anything? Or she felt when she felt and then she was ashamed for this, so she considered that with an accusation against her “rapist”’, her “sin” or her weakness will be forgiven?
I wonder how many women who make love for money have the desire to make love with this or that man? Aren’t they psychologically wounded when they make love with an undesirable man or are they healed by the money that they take from the “customer"? Go and find the way out. I insist on asserting that much more psy­chological wounds exist due to an undesirable sexual abstention and inactivity than due to an undesirable erotic relationship or act. Some events we forget in one, two, three or four days. Will we remember an undesirable sexual act that hap­pened 10, 20 or 30 years ago? Is it possible? Why should we? Is it still inside us? Didn’t it come out?
In one aspect I wish our memory could be so strong to keep alive all our vivid experiences from the distant past because together with the bad experiences there will be and the good ones. They must exist.
Unfortunately -or fortunately, if you prefer- the human memory is not so strong. Because if it were, we would cry every day for lost loves, for loved ones who stopped being loved ones, for friends who stopped being friends etc. Shakespeare wrote: Eyes that are not seen are quickly forgotten. And 1 add: words that are not heard, they are forgotten too. Acts and experiences that are not repeated, they are also forgotten, ail are forgotten. Sometimes fortunately, some­times unfortunately, but that is how it is. Great Solomon had a ring on which two words were written: everything passes. For some people don’t they pass? And they don’t really pass or due to the professional obligations of some people is convenient the opposite to be spread out? Doesn’t time function as medicine for some people? Doesn’t life go on for them? Doesn’t oblivion exist for them? Let’s be serious and let’s be honest. One way or the other, the truth is that violence is part of life and it has of course its scales. A little violence, a little pressure, a little force or a small push didn’t hurt anybody. An exceptional desire is better than a civilized indifference. A civilized and balanced violence can be useful and can be a very good antidote to shame, to fear and to irresolution that somebody may have not only for love but also for other matters. Let’s be a little tolerant with our fellow-citizens’ desire and who knows? Maybe we soon need their tolerance. The important is to be cool, to see clearly, to be fair in our judgment, to know what we want and what we pursue and to keep always the balances.
There is no way things could get out of control since the new establishment will tolerate neither insane people, nor drunks or drug-users, in this respect my estab­lishment will be open, liberal and generous but it will be strict too. It can overlook a little improper behavior or some abnormal situations but it will make clear to everybody, that children and adolescents like everybody else will have the right to make love - if they want to and with everybody they like - but they will also have the right not to make love if they don’t want to. That everybody must understand well. People will have a rich sexual life but it will be in the boundaries the new establishment will impose. No less attention, measures, logic and discipline will be demanded and the city will remind them of this every day. To nobody will be allowed to go beyond the limits. I would give freedom, yes, where I judged that it functions positively, but never anarchy. But even with or without erotic discipline ,
I think that erotic horizons of people get much wider.
As men, let’s suppose that you who read this text are men, wouldn’t you support such an establishment? Wouldn’t you vote for the candidate who suggests such an establishment? Do you think that I am wrong to believe that the majority of the men voted for me?
Then, what would you say if you were women and you had my suggestions in front of you? What suggestions did I have for them? I had suggestions for Matriarchy and good-seed selection, for an establishment where the woman

would be free -and at the same time obliged- to satisfy sexually enough men but also where she would have the absolute and undisputed right to breed the sperm of the most handsome, healthy and capable from any aspect men, meaning that marriage and family as institutions will be abolished. Nobody would have the obli­gation to live to the same “cage” with the same person for five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty or fifty years. In a word, I said to my fellow-citizens that things can work out in another way too, that people can make love and have children without getting married and nobody to accuse them for this.
What were my suggestions for the women? I think that they were the best ever suggested to women. I think that they were suggestions coming from the sky. Think about it and let me know how you would see it if you were a woman. Don’t you think that they are convenient to you and very convenient indeed?
Do you think that I am wrong when I believe that the majority of the women voted for me too? Ask as many men and women as you like. The majority will make you understand that what men want is the same with what women want. What will a woman offer to a man with whom she lives for 5, 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 years and what will a man offer to a woman with whom he lives for 5, 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 years? Come on now! We’ve been husbands and you’ve been too. So, let’s be honest. It is well known what we all want, men and women, young and old. We all want change in our sexual relationships. We want renewal of our sexual life. Because the change of our sexual companion and the renewal of our sexual life is a need for the human being and I suggested exactly an establishment where this need would be satisfied without anyone to get hurt. A bit of bitterness might be given from A to B or from D to E, but under other presuppositions it might be given from B to A or from E to D and so on. It’s a matter of time when this or that would happen. Any bit of bitterness would be overcome since the new establish­ment would teach them all to live and function in a different way. The new estab­lishment would suggest, advertise and impose the change and the renewal of our sexual companions and it wouldn’t simply tolerate it.
But you will say; did I really get the majority of the voters just with some sexual suggestions? Of course not! I didn’t get the majority just with some sexual sug­gestions, although l believe that from the moment I was addressed to a preemi­nently erotic being, these suggestions influenced a lot their decision but not completely.
At the same time I had of course suggestions for health. I was very clear to this too; that health is the most valuable thing in life and that without health neither food nor water or the oxygen or life even love, matter.
If there is someone who has real suggestions for a real health, it is something that is obvious. The human being who has a real health and that shows that can as a leader offer it to his fellow-citizens, it is also obvious. What I suggested and I still suggest was exactly the same with which I live myself too. I suggested a diligent system of good habits that would start from the first awakening and would end to the next one, a system that would include daily running or walking for 2V2-3 hours, swimming for 21/2-3 hours too, 4-5 hours handcraft, the relevant lunches or breaks and the relevant sleep.
How did I come up to this conclusion? How else than by experimenting! And how can you check whether l am right or not? How else than by experience! There is no other way.
Do I seem to you that I am a masochist or a sadist who wants to torture himself and his fellow-citizens putting them to unjustified and exaggerating hard work? Or am I someone with super muscular powers? I wish l were, but I am not. I am like you.
What I was taught as a muscular being is that a human being can do almost every­thing with muscular-means. And fortunately it is like this because only then we have a hope that we will save the environment. For me, the muscle can be the best protection shield of the nature.
I myself was surprised when I realized that my experiment drove me to this con­clusion but I didn’t refuse its uprightness. I simply coped with it and I try to live with it. Nevertheless it is the only way to be self-supported as a muscular being. Because if I don’t do these and if you don’t do these either, then either cigarettes you will desire -and me and you- or alcohol, or pills, or drugs, operations for this or for that, etc. and you will become a pathetic and early old-aged little man, who will deserve to die rather than to live.
Should I complain for this to my Creator or should you consider that I exaggerate?
I told you; I don’t exaggerate. Although I didn’t expect this result, my final thought was almost this; if my Creator made me capable of so much work and physical exercise and not for less, then l think that it is wiser to thank him for this than to complaint.
What do I earn from this? I can do much work without needing any machines, I can cover enough distance without needing any vehicles, and this means savings and health for me and for my place.
What may my fellow-citizens earn from this? What may the city and my country earn from this? It may also do many kinds of work with muscular means, people or materials may be transferred with muscular means and so with the use of their muscles, people will earn in health and they will save fuel for machines or vehicles that can help people in other works where it is difficult or waste of time to do by themselves in a muscular way, the environment will be protected etc. If the work­ing places and the resident places are put in a right way, then, a whole city would function with the fruits of the earth as fuel and nothing more. From the moment that a city will be built right together with the relevant agricultural housing, then, with the equal and by turn’s work of all unexception ally the citizens, this city would produce everything -even its electricity- almost exclusively with muscular means.
If you really care for the environment and for the people and if you really want to do something good for them, then I think that you ought to listen, to pay attention and to bow to my suggestion. As you see, I don’t simply propose ecological or economic cars. In the meantime, 20.000 or 200.000 ecological cars can make the same or more damage to the environment than 10.000 or 100.000 non-ecological cars can. What I suggest is ecological and economic cities and ecological and economic countries. I suggest cities that will not need cars. I suggest cities and countries that will make almost everything in a muscular way and that they will hold back the technology from manufacturing devices and tools that will function with muscular means.
The measure for the withdraw of the old and filthy cars and their replacing with new is good of course- always under presuppositions- but without the withdraw of the old and filthy cities and their replacing with new and friendly to the man and the environment cities, the good it can do is very small.
Believe me; these are what l almost said to my fellow-citizens during my political fights. I didn’t make up theories to impress you that I care for this or for that. No. This was my main subject for three decades now and I know that I fought with all my strength for this. I prepared my vision for much worse situations, but I prefer to let these outside my text. Nevertheless, what I was interested in and what I judged that my fellow-citizens were interested in, was shown through my words and through my texts and through my designs and -believe me again- the people saw them and understood them. They were obvious. If I was caring for the health and the happi­ness of my fellow-citizens, it was shown through my suggestions. If I was caring for the environment, it was shown through my suggestions too. If I was caring for the establishment of a real political order and harmony it was also shown and if I was expressing and representing a real political word, it was shown too.
What alternatives did my political opponents have to suggest? None, absolutely none! Every claimer of this or that political power - and not only in my country but almost all over the world - doesn’t really have anything to suggest that is worth­while. If he manages to fulfil! his aim he will not be more than under the power of a catastrophic for the human being and the environment system and he will say or do nothing to change the situation, nothing new and nothing useful. The new and the useful in my country were suggested only by me and the luck I had, I’ve already announced to you. The people voted but the state and the political lead­ers falsified their votes, keeping under their control every power.
My opinion is that there is no nation all over the world -provided that it isn’t com­pletely barbarian- that would resist to such suggestions. I told you about my sug­gestion l had about love, a suggestion that was showing that l care for the pleas­ure and happiness of my fellow-citizens. I told you about my suggestion I had about health, a suggestion that was also showing that l care for the health of my fellow-citizens. It was showing that I have knowledge of what exactly gives a real health to people and that in this main subject I wouldn’t give half-solutions but l would give radical solutions and I would impose an establishment that would face preventively every illness and it would make hospitals and cigarettes and alcohol and medicine and drugs useless for people.
In my suggestions though, it wasn’t only these. Together with these suggestions I had posed in front of my fellow-citizens the best city plan ever captured by a human being. And this wasn’t any city. The city I designed and I’ve seen it in design since 1996 was the city of Apocalypses, a symmetrical city, a square city with the same length and width but without the same height and without of course the dimensions it determines. Let’s say that I made some corrections, which I passed -where I judged it was right- the Apocalypses and l gave the design of a city in the measures of human muscles, a city that you can run it, walk it, swim it without needing any vehicle for your movements in it, even any bicycles. The dimensions and the arrangement of this city were the result of the experiments I made on my muscles. Finding the movement I needed to be healthy, I went on designing a city in the measures of the human being, a city that will have such dimensions and arrangement that would help in carrying out all its physical duties and needs.
I tell you that it wasn’t an easy matter although, it was in my measures. To give to people the right city was a big challenge for me. I saw and l handled it as a per­sonal matter, at least up to a point. Either in a difficult or an easy way, I knew that this was my subject and l had the obligation to give a solution sooner or later, eas­ily or not. Whether I made it or not, you can see it. The design is already at your hands.
What do you think? Do you think my design is good but maybe you don’t consid­er that it is realizable? And why is that? Which is the difficulty in its realization? As long as I think of it, what I see is that only the lack of strong will make it difficult to be carried out.
What do l ask from you to do? What cities do I ask from you to build? Do I ask you to build very big and enormous cities or cities with very high buildings? What do I ask from you? See first what cities you have; enormous, huge, vast, incoherent, with 10, 20 and 30 floor-buildings, cities with a population of million people, cities without shape and without boundaries, cities that exist and function catastrophi­cally for the human being and its environment and that every year will function more and more catastrophically.
What do I suggest? First I suggest for the city a shape from the beginning. I sug­gest boundaries from the beginning. It is stupid for you to allow the uncontrolled arrangement and its uncontrolled extent. Put the buildings in rows and the rows in zones to help the muscles in the fulfillment of their duties. Use during construc­tion, Mathematics and Geometry. Don’t make it dirty and don’t make it difficult for those who chose to live in it. Don’t transform the place that it should be the best to live in, to be the worst.
What dimensions do I suggest for my city? I suggest the 4.5 km length and width, a city where the distance from the center till its most far away point will be only 3 km. And as far as the population is concerned, I suggest 144.000 for the city and 96.000 for the country, a population of 240.000 habitants. I suggest, in two words, a city neither big nor small. I suggest a medium in extent and in population city, a city friendly for the human being and its environment, a city that will be the meas­ure, the harmony and the indication point for the thing called civilization.
What equal-worthy had my opponents to show and suggest during the presiden­tial elections of 2003 and what had my opponents to show and suggest during the presidential elections of 2008? What equal-worthy had Tassos Papadopoulos or Glavkos Klerides to suggest in 2003 and what equal-worthy had Giannakis Kassoulides or Dimitris Christofias or Tassos Papadopoulos -again- had to sug­gest in 2008? It is obvious almost to everybody: in comparison to what I suggest­ed, they had absolutely nothing to suggest. Whatever they suggested, whatever they did it was obvious that they were simply perpetuating and cementing chaos, ugliness, social inequality, corruption and political paranoia.
For the people there were from one side two or three party candidates who had absolutely nothing good to suggest for the people, candidates that people got tired of and that it is well-known to everybody that what they were interested in was their appearance and the “seat”, people made of wood, vein and without sub­stance and on the other side there was a candidate with a sparkling spirit, a can­didate who challenges you to see him and listen to him, a candidate who in his silence and his inaction still provokes the curiosity and the interest of all and that he is always noticeable, a candidate who moves like storm and from wherever he passes is a subject for the news, a candidate who in his -even few- television appearances he gathers almost the 100% of the spectators (and not because he “sells madness” but prudence and courage), a candidate who is loved by the whole population, a candidate with open mind, with knowledge on his matter, a candidate with liberal suggestions wherever appropriate but also conservative where necessary.
He made it clear where he would handle a matter with flexibility or he would not. He didn’t intend to compromise in health matters for instance. To this matter he was clear; he would impose -if it was necessary by all means- anything that knowledge, experience and logic say that is useful to people and he would for­bid anything that the same knowledge, the same experience and the same logic say that is harmful to people. He doesn’t hide his intentions. If he claims this or that axiom he does it to become useful to his feliow-citizens, to become useful to their hearts, to their stomachs, to their heads, to their teeth, to their eyes and to everything.
This is how he was seeing his role as a politician and he was expressing himself accordingly. The young people wouldn’t determine his policy, these young peo­ple who are excited with his suggestions about free love but who want the free use of drugs too.
Of course the latter would not be permitted. I suggested and I still suggest free love because I judge that -under certain conditions and presuppositions - it may be useful to people biologically, psychologically, socially, financially and political­ly, but I will never give the freedom to anybody to smoke or to have drugs or drink alcohol because I judge that the use of the cigarette, of the alcohol and of the drugs harms people and I consider it my duty as a politician to prevent them from anything that harms them.
How would I do it? Simply they wouldn’t take them because they wouldn’t find them anywhere; I, as a politician, could give to them other replacements and l would give them these.
What are they? What else except from muscular exercise and work of course? When a human being takes the right doses of muscular exercise and work, then neither cigarette nor alcohol or drugs will ever need.
With my suggestions I didn’t intend to flatter anyone. Such were my suggestions: radically liberal in some aspects, strictly conservative in others. If people voted for me supporting my liberal views they also voted for the conservative aspects of my proposals. As far as they judge that I am too strict to the second matter, but if they think about it they will judge at the end that I know what I am doing and I am doing it for their sake and for the sake of their city and that they wouldn’t be excused if they had complaints, if I made them not to need all these that everybody knows that they give them only a temporary solution to a problem that is due to the lack or the absence of muscular exercise and work.
I know that with my suggestions I would intervene and deprive them of their human rights but l see things differently. In my opinion, the most important human right is the right of happiness and the right of health. It is the right of the people who came to live in this world under the best circumstances for their health and the right of the people who will come to live under the best circumstances too.
How then can I protect -because as a politician who looks forward, I owe to do- the right of the new generations that will come to live in this world under the best circumstances of health when 1 allow to the present generations to smoke, to drink alcohol, to take drugs, not to do sports, not to use their muscles for work and to do everything that might harm them? What kind of people would I hand over the world to? Do you think that it is fair to allow new people to come in this world bur­dened with the heart attacks, diabetes, cancer, ulcers or psychosis inherited from their fathers or grandfathers, or should we do our best to avoid them? What do you say?
Do my suggestions seem paradox to you? But these are for you and for every­body. These are and these were my suggestions, whether some judge that they violate this or that right, or not.
If you consider it well I hope you will see that all these together compose a politi­cal vision that can save the human being and the world from one edge to the other, a vision that can give health, safety, order and happiness to the nowaday generations and perspective to the next ones. So, do you think that my fellow-cit­izens didn’t understand ail these or that only a small minority understood them? No, my friends, they understood them. Almost everybody understood them and almost everybody voted for them. I insist on asserting that every nation is able to understand such a vision and such suggestions. They were more simple and clear than any prior political suggestions and fortunately 1 had the opportunity to pres­ent them to the public. A nation must be completely insane to reject such sugges­tions and the Cypriots, -I tell you- are not. They are definitely cowards -and 1 blame them for this- but they are neither stupid nor blind. Their election duty against the vision and the suggestions I posed in front of them, they did it as every other nation would do. No nation would reject such a vision. Nobody would vote for chaos and ugliness when everybody had the possibility to vote for order and beauty. No one would vote for a hell when everybody had the possibility to vote for a paradise. No one would vote for a Christofias when he had the possibility to vote for an Outopos and no one would vote for a Russian peasant when he had the possibility to vote for a Greek god.
The thing is simple and obvious. I told you and I showed it to you. To hope to the restoration of the truth and justice is vein. Unfortunately for my country no one cares for truth and justice if it is no convenient for him and if it doesn’t raise him, socially and financially. Unfortunately, the people who could help me have been bribed or threatened enough so as to hide the truth. Here and then they would perform some scandal but never such a scandal.
And how wili they dare or how will they think to do it when with this or that way they have already become part of the scandal? Nobody can hear someone shout­ing in the desert, as the proverb says. It’s no use. I must bear it and maybe look somewhere else to find my right. I see that here I lose my time. Unfortunately for me,for my country and my fellow-citizens - and I believe for the whole world - Pharisee and the hypocrites won, liars, thieves, and crooks won, the outlaws and the deceivers won, although it’s me who is the real winner and the real president, it’s me the straight, the sincere, the honest and the clear one but I am buried, 1 am humiliated and cheapened for once more.
I toid you before what percentage I got from the Greek-Cypriots: 1 got 72.8%. What did the leaders give me? They gave me 0.24%. That means in effect nothing. What percentage did Dimitris Christofias get? He got 9%. What did he get in the second round when his only opponent was loannis Kassoulides? He got 23%. And what did loannis Kassoulides get? He got 21%. Who got the remaining 56%? Who do you think got the majority? I got it even if I was not on the ballot-paper. Because this is the truth and I tell it because l learned it, no matter from whom and how l learned it. The 56% of the Greek-Cypriots voters canceled their ballot-paper. They wrote “Outopos” on it and they put it into the ballot-box because this was what l asked from them until Friday, at least. On Saturday I was saying something else, but meanwhile the majority had taken the first message and had transferred it to every direction.
This is the truth, my friends. Cyprus voted for me and not for Dimitris Christofias. And it voted for the left wing but not Dimitris Christofias. Because the left wing, the real left wing I was representing and not Dimitris Christofias. Go back to the dec­larations that both made and you wili learn it.
Now, what kind of left wing I suggested, this needs explanation. For this reason I consider that I must talk about this for not being misunderstood and for not being misinterpreted and now I think it’s the time.
I know that the opinion that is spread for years by the political leaders of the world is that the left wing (communism) is an out-of-date and old-fashioned ideology that has been tested and completely failed. The phenomena show that some people who say this are right, but often the phenomena are deceptive. I know that the communism is a difficult undertaking and a difficult system. Anarchy is a thousand times easier, because at least it has all the possibilities to succeed since at its fail­ure it is theoretically successful. In my opinion what it failed to the soviet undertak­ing is exactly this model, with these and those specific people as its fulfillers, with these and those specific conditions and with these and those specific data. That it had good points, it definitely had, but it also had bad points. I will not enter to details. I didn’t live it in person and I don’t know it well. What I know best is what I have inside me. What I have inside me is what I suggest and this I know that it is a different and new model of communism.
Points from the old models of communism it inevitably has, but it also has new points. This model I polished up for so many years, this 1 express, this I advertise, this I suggest and this I have the ambition to fulfill.
Is this undertaking difficult? Undoubtedly it is difficult, but this is not a good rea­son to prevent me trying, on the contrary, because difficulties challenge me.
Whether it is difficult or not, I am here for this and for the other, for this and for ail cases. The important thing is to give useful results for the protagonists and the participants in this or that undertaking and as far as it concerns me, I have the ambition to bring the best and most spectacular ones.
For not being wordy, 1 tell you that communism (in two words it means to me: the system that will handle everything in common and for the common good) repre­sents the most perfect political system. In my opinion, communism means sim­plicity and simplification, it means saving. Saving of money, saving of time, limi­tation of bureaucracy, avoidance of keeping personal data or accounts -things that need a lot of bureaucrats for their fulfillment- and massive right use of all the living and non-living dynamic for the creation of the best conditions of survival, work, physical exercise, entertainment and alimony of the citizens.
If you think that it is possible the most perfect political system to be fulfilled and to function perfectly from the first or the second attempt, then probably you are mis­taken. And if you think that one or two failed attempts are enough for a political system to be judged, then maybe you are mistaken again.
1 wish everything could succeed with the first attempt or even with the second one, but unfortunately the world history teaches us how difficult this is. If you like, go back to the history of the spirit and the science pioneers and you will find out how many efforts were needed for the achievement of even a small aim.
Allow me to say that the aspect that communism is a failed in advance political sys­tem is a superficial and naive aspect. If furthermore, it is spread by the “fighters” of the other political systems so as to advertise the system they represent and to pres­ent it as the only right or the only attainable one, then this is a malevolent aspect.
By the way, isn’t the state as a state a communistic concoction? These people who suggest the abolishment of the communism, why don’t they suggest the abolishment of the state too? Is that because it is to one’s advantage the existence of the state because this secures the income and the privileges of the political and state leaders? Why don’t they abolish it and why don’t they give everything to the “jungle” of the other political system so as to be able to see it in all its grandeur?
What did this political system achieve after all, as to make us accept it and not to look for another one? What it brought is obvious: it brought chaos, the absolute chaos. It brought anarchy, incoherence, agony and fear and ugliness. It brought insatiability, hunger, poverty, exploitation and fraud. It brought us illnesses, it brought corruption and destruction to whatever it touched, for the earth and for mankind.
What do I suggest to you instead? 1 suggest to you the order and the well-order,
I suggest to you beauty and measure. I suggest to you symmetry and harmony, geometry and mathematics. I suggest a rational and well-balanced system of pro­ducing goods, of production and of consumption. I suggest a system that will sat­isfy all the main needs of all human beings for food, work, shelter, clothing, edu­cation, exercise, health, safety, happiness and love. I suggest a state and a sys­tem where everybody will be participant and not only the 20% or the 30% or the 40%. A system where everybody will be equal in food, work, shelter, clothing mat­ters etc. I suggest a system where everybody will pass through all vivid activities and procedures equally and by turns, a system where everybody will participate to the easy and to the difficult muscular tasks equally and by turns, within the lim­its of a specific program that the city will specify in advance and that -with some imperceptible changes- will be the same for everybody. I suggest a system where people will be useful and productive everyday, a system where people will offer their services to the city from the first day they can offer until the last. I suggest a system that will create and conserve workers and not drones.
And to make it clearer; I suggest a system where the citizen will offer his services to the city for free and the city will satisfy all his needs (food, shelter, work, exer­cise, etc.) again for free.
So if you want to know about the working policy of this system, I will tell you; I sug­gest a system where the citizen will offer his services to the city for free and the city will satisfy ail his needs, again for free.
If you want to know about the sanitary policy of my system 1 will tell you; I suggest a system where the citizen will offer his services to the city for free and the city will satisfy all his needs, again for free.
If you want to know about the insurance policy of my system 1 will tell you the same thing: l suggest a system where the citizen will offer his services to the city for free and the city will satisfy all his needs, again for free.
If you want to know about the pension policy, for the agricultural policy, for the housing policy, for the athletic policy, for the sexual policy and for everything unexceptionally, the answer will be again the same; I suggest a system where the citizen will offer his services to the city for free and the city will satisfy all his needs, again for free.

What are these needs, it is more or less weil-known. The needs, the real needs of

human beings are more or less the same. What the city should do is to pose sim­ply the mechanisms so as to have its citizens’ services anytime it needs them and the citizen to have the city’s services anytime he needs them. What’s easier than this? What’s simplier than this, what’s more convenient than this and what’s more economic than this? How many goods would come with such a system and how many bad things would be avoided, it is needless to say.
What it makes it difficult is probably something bad, suspicious and unworthy and this is the self-interest, the narrow-headed persons, the mistrust against any new pioneered suggestions, it is the envy of the powerful against the pioneers, it is the vanity of selfish people, the incapability of the leaders to look over their nose, the attaching to the tradition, the dishonesty and the hypocrisy of the privileged of the existing system, it’s all these together, things that more or less compose a plague, a disease for the society and an insuperable obstacle for those who will dare to go further from the known and existing limits.
Whoever knows more or less the humane history they will also know that the story 1 said to you is more a film in repetition rather than a new story, even if in it people with different names in different places have the main roles. In reality it is the same drama that is repeated every time a pioneer is shown up in the proscenium. What if we live in the 21st century and what if we are in Europe? It wasn’t in Europe where the biggest crimes have occurred? What does'prevent them not happening now?
I wonder if any European distinguished person will be touched if he learns about my story and will try to help me. I wish he did, I hope he did, but I am afraid that he would do the same if he was at the Cypriots leaders’ place. He would step on me as if I were a worm, if he saw that with the success of my suggestions all his privileges and rights would be violated and he would look forward to cleaning everything for my traces on the ground not to be noticeable.
What Europe and non-Europe? What I know is that these that have done to me before entering in Europe, they do them and after we entered in Europe, without anyone “to know” and do anything.
However, I owe to try; i owe to try with the Europeans. And if the Europeans want to show that they are Europeans, let them show it to me and if they are human beings or even humanists, let them show it to me too and I will see it.
In any case, for not dispersing my subject here and there, I was saying that the system I suggest for the people is this. It’s obvious that it is new, that it is a threat to the old system, to the old constitutions and to the old customs. It’s also obvi­ous that it is not a simple threat but a fatal threat to the system, to the constitu­tions and to the customs as well as to the privileged and to the leaders. It’s obvi­ous and I emphasize at every opportunity that I suggest a new system; I suggest new constitutions and new customs. I suggest a new world, a new human being, a new religion, even a new God!
Didn’t I have the right to do it? Didn’t I have the right to suggest new constitutions and new customs or didn’t the Greek-Cypriots have the right to accept and vote for new constitutions and new customs? Or do you judge that they have the right to vote for them and their vote to be acceptable only if the privileges and the rights of the leaders are not threatened and that they don’t have the right to vote for them and their vote not to be acceptable if the privileges are threatened?
I asked the political leaders in Cyprus this question but no one gave me an answer based on valid arguments. It was easier for them to give an answer by falsifying the popular will.
Is there a possibility for you to answer me with an argument? Will someone give me an answer? Will you tell me why nobody cares for the fact that a European country elects and promotes presidents of the minority? Will you tell me why nobody cares to search this matter? Am I such a big threat to all of you? Do you see that the foundations of the system that showed you and gave you name, wealth, and glory and to me ashes, are so much threatened?
And why is that so? My only ambition was to help people, to benefit and to save people and the world and this I will not allow to anybody to dispute. I tried, I fought and I sacrificed almost everything to give a direction to a vision that asks to ben­efit everybody and everything.
What did I find instead? Falsification after falsification, fraud after fraud, lie after lie, humiliation after humiliation; and these go on for a decade now. And who is going to stop all these?
My friends, this is my story. Listen to it and believe it because it is a real story. It is as real as I am and as my vision is for the human beings and for the world. From now and then if you want and if you can, help, so as justice to prevail.
Even if you search it a little on the surface, you will learn who tells the truth and who lies, who is the real president of the Greek-Cypriots and who the faked one, who is the real and who the false, who is the president of the people and who is the president of the parties’ leaders, who is the legal and who is the illegal one.
However, let’s suppose that my official percentage is the real one {the 0.24% and not the 72.8% that I claim). Let’s suppose that 1 am really misinformed or badly informed or that I am crazy, a lunatic and paranoid. Let’s suppose that l am a false- prophet or even the Antichrist. Am I a political “crook”? But am I really? I am not?
What can I tell you? Am I a person who didn’t manage to deceive his fellow-citi­zens with his tricks and take the authority to do only God knows what, and now is looking for suckers to foreign countries? Am I really? I am not? Who am I anyway?
I think that the best you can do is to see me and judge me from the suggestions I present to you and suggest to you, even if you suspect that these are the sug­gestions of a false-prophet or a lunatic.
See the city plan I’ve made. Is this a lunatics’ plan or a reasonable person’s plan? Is this a plan of a foolish or a prudent person? Because this is the city I suggest.
1 suggest, yes, new cities, cities with order, shape and full planning before the first stone is built. What you already have, are ugly, in disorder, chaotic and extrava­gant, very extravagant for the people and for the environment. Their function is not advantageous for the people and for the environment and maybe they are not advantageous even for being drown with the ground.
I suggest cities where cars won’t circulate and almost everything will be done with muscular means. 1 suggest cities where people will go to their jobs by using mus­cular means and they will return at their home by using muscular means. I sug­gest cities where people wili go to the country by using muscular means and they will return to the city by using muscular means. I suggest cities where the build­ings and the streets will be illuminated with natural means, cities that contaminate nature the least possible. The suggestions and my plan can save your environ­ment. At least save it, if you don’t want you to be saved.
Please, see this plan. Is this a lunatics’ plan? See it. Put it under the microscope, check every detail and put, if you like, architects and mathematicians and political engineers and town-planners to check it and tell you their opinion. Ask ecologists and environmental people to check it too and to teli you their opinion too. Is this a lunatics’ plan or a wise person’s plan? Is it a politically irrelevant person’s plan or a political scientist’s plan even, if he doesn’t have any certificate or diploma of political sciences, or of architecture, or of political engineering or any other diplo­ma? Ask them; is it a lunatics’ plan or a dreamer’s plan?
But, come on now. Is it possible to pass through your mind such a thought? I think that all your mathematicians and all your architects and all your town-planners - and you too- ought to bow in front of this plan and to do their best to eliminate the city chaos that reigns to your world. They can even ask for my help in everything they need and 1 will offer it to them.
However, can I expect such a reaction and such a behavior from these people? Will envy allow them to recognize a better plan than theirs? Will envy allow them to recognize a talent or a mind better than theirs?
See what I have done. I’ve given the best city plan ever captured by a human mind, I’ve given a plan that humanity spent thousands and millions years till it comes, a plan in front of which ail must bow, a plan that all alive beings of this world need and due to the envy and the vanity of my powerful fellow-citizens ended to be a plan of fantasy rather than a plan of action.
However, the plan remains. It is still alive, it is at your disposal and on your table and it depends on you, whether you will ignore it or not, whether you will despise it or bury it, or on the contrary, whether you will take notice of it, or you will pro­mote it and you will fulfill it.
See also my plan for the country. Is this also a lunatics’ plan? Ask here too for your mathematicians’ opinion, your town-planners’ opinion but also the agriculturists’ opinion, the farmers’, the stock-breeders’ and everybody's opinion. See with what order 1 surrounded the city. Are 240.000 the citizens of this city-state? I divided the country to 240.000 (...) pieces. All can perfectly function. A movement of the magic stick is enough and harmony can replace chaos. A decision of the power­ful people and all can start from the beginning, in a right way, nicely from the beginning.

After, see my plan for health and physical exercise. See how it is harmonized with my plan for the city and for the country, as if it is made to function inside this spe­cific place and nowhere else. And really it is so.
Believe me; I didn’t work on one plan separately from the other. No. I did a paral­lel work. The one helped me to complete the other and the other way around, and I spent 20 years to end it like this.
What is the final conclusion that my study and my experiment gave to me? It is this: that the human being is made according to a mathematical design to do certain things at a certain time, for certain duration, with a certain speed and in certain doses. As far as he does all these things he makes himself happy and healthy and as far as he doesn’t do all these, he makes himself unhappy and unhealthy.
See it as you like, check it, look into it, test it personally and let all the instructors, all the coaches and all the athletes, to test it too. If you are honest yourself then you wili learn that this plan is as valuable for the mankind as a biological being as my town-planning is for him as a social being. See only the one part of it -the mov­ing part, let’s say; swimming, running, walking- and you will see that it is not enough. Due to this you can avoid some heavy complications of the heart, of the stomach, of the head, etc. but I tell you that if you don’t complete your moving exercise or task with the relevant static exercise or task, then you will lose the biggest part of pleasure that exercise gives when it is complete.
What are the city and the country in this plan? They are exactly the place that can help this plan to function in an almost automatic way, in four phases.
First phase (4 days duration): living in the country with hard work and exercise. Few (6), long duration {60 minutes) and alternated, always, doses of exercise and work (3 in land and 3 in water) every 3 hours. Pius the relevant static work (it will be valid to all phases). The muscles are tired and this is how it should be done.
Second phase (3 days duration): living in the city’s 3rd residential zone. The doses of exercise become more (12), are shorter (30 minutes) and less intense, every 1 ? hour. We disperse our efforts. The muscles get into a relaxing phase and this is how it should be done.
Third phase (2 days duration): living in the city’s 2nd residential zone, closer to the center, (note that the distance of every zone from the center is not irrelevant. On the contrary. Likewise the distance of every zone in the country from the stock- breeding and handicrafts zones is important. All distances have a specific, mus­cular reason) .The doses of exercise are further increased (18), are shorter (20 min­utes) and less intense (running is not allowed, the speeds are low) every 1 hour. We disperse more our efforts and we relax more.
Fourth phase (1 day duration): living in the city’s 1st residential zone, almost in the city center with even more (36), shorter (10 minutes) and less intense doses of movement, every 1/2 hour. Complete disperse and relaxing. The muscles are completely relaxed. They are new, renovated and rejuvenated and ready again for the 1st phase, always to a 10days circle, thing that means that in my system the week will be abolished as an itinerary point of work and exercise.
See and test this plan. I developed it by experimenting and I don’t think that you have another way to learn whether it is good or not but the experiment and the test.
Next, let me introduce my suggestions for free love, the matriarchy and the good-seed selection. Consider them and think what the advantages would be for the human race if the women chose the best, in any aspect, men to make children with. How much nicer would be people in 20, in 30 or in 40 years!
1 wonder if with this plan I violate the rights of the ugly and stupid persons by not letting them have the possibility to have descendants.
What to say to you? Maybe l do. 1 see things this way and l pose to you the ques­tion: is it right, ugly, mentally incapable and undesirable people to exist for ever? You, as a father, or as a mother, wouldn’t you like to give to the world a beautiful, clever, capable and desirable in any aspect, child? Then, would you suggest to your daughter to have a child (a grandchild for you) with an ugly and spiritually poor person, when it is easy for her to have children with a handsome and spiri­tually rich person? What would you do?
That’s why I tell you: let women chose the father of their child without having the obligation to live together with him. It is them who will carry the baby for nine months so let’s do them a favor. It doesn’t cost us anything. I believe that women are endowed with a good taste and they will make the right choices.
To be all perfect with the first generation, maybe it is difficult, but all will get bet­ter. In due time, everybody will play his or her role better, as men or women respectively. Personally l don’t see another way to embellish the human race. However, let them make love with everybody, but they should make children with the handsome men.
What do you say? Don’t you think that this would give the motive to men to try to be more handsome and gentler against the women to earn together with their favor, the privilege to be the fathers of their children?
What advantages this would give to the society, cannot be said. As far as my sug­gestion is concerned for reducing the limit of sexual adultness, then, it seems to me that if you are an alive and capable person, man or woman, then I think that you should immediately start to hurray. Or am I mistaken?
Next, let me explain my plan for the New Earth. See how I can really arrange the 240.000 cities-states in it.
Don’t think that it was easy for me to succeed it. No! It had also its difficulties and it needed its time, the most of the time, I can say.
The opinion that this Earth is made to contain 240.000 cities I have already written at least 12 years ago.
How did I conclude to this number? It is simple: when l ended up to the total num­ber of the habitants of a city-state and having the conviction that during the next phase of his plan, God would act strictly mathematically and geometrically, it wasn’t difficult for me to decide how many cities-states he had in his mind for this planet.
The area (square kilometers) of the city-state I planned was taken for granted (2.025 sq. km (45x45 km) as the area of the planet was taken for granted:

1. 000 sq. km. 240.000 cities of 2.025 sq. km., give us 486.000.000 sq. km.
2. 000 sq. km. are left, that is more or less the extent that the poles of the earth have; the non-habitant area of the planet.

It’s been 12 years since l came to this conclusion. I wrote it, I printed it to some leaflets and I left it.
But to believe that this is the proper arrangement, according to the data, for the New Earth is one subject. The other subject was how on earth I would manage to arrange these 240.000 cities-states in a spherical earth.
What do you think? Would l make the earth square, as I would make its cities square? Would God make it square to do me a favor, so as to fit my plan or would he make it rectangle because the square root of 240.000 wasn’t giving me a com­plete number? If he would do me a favor, then I think that he would probably make it rectangular since the only way to arrange 240.000 cities on an earth with its poles frozen is to have 600 in length and 400 in height. What on earth he intend­ed to do in the end, I didn’t have it clarified.
In my texts I had already some detachments from old books. From Apocalypses:
New I make everything. Or: and I saw sky new and earth new ...the first sky and the first earth departed... and sea doesn’t yet exist, neither pain nor cry don’t yet exist... And the city, Holly Jerusalem, new I saw coming down from the sky by God... etc. From Plutarch (referring to Isis and Osiris) I had found something from the era of Pyramids: a new era, it is said, will come where Earth will be flat and smooth etc., etc. while I had in mind some images from Koran too: that some day God will rise the mountains as the clouds in the sky and he will throw them into the sea and he will make the earth flat and he wili make it gardens where rivers will flow.
In what conclusion would I come then and what would I think? Would he finally make it flat with the exact meaning of the word from its one end to the other, or would he just make it seem flat and smooth to the human eye, keeping at the same time its spherical shape?
Of course if God wants, he can do both. He can make it function whether it is flat or spherical, or square, or triangular, or rectangular or round. How he would make it was his business and his problem. I have no say.
I’ve been thinking ail these for a long time until at the end I drove to the conclu­sion that the Earth would remain spherical. It would seem to us that it would be fiat, but in reality its shape would remain spherical. As far as I know, the sphere is a steady shape for the planets in the universe and this would be valid for the New Earth too, as it was valid for the Old Earth. What it would change it would be only its surface.
The enigma was remaining for me all these years: how could l arrange the 240.000 cities in a spherical Earth? I had clear in my mind “how many” but I didn’t have clear “how”. I left it for years so as to be mature inside me but in reality I left it -I guess- because I was afraid of it. Let’s say that I was finding it difficult.
As the years passed by, I decided that this subject must be over. Someone else to do it for me and to take me out of this trouble there was no way, so this subject became a personal matter to me.
A first attempt to close the subject I did a few months ago. New designs started to enter in my papers. Circles replace slowly-slowly squares and soon spheres invaded in my house.
A new election period was coming to my country and this was giving me the motive to finish the soonest possible. When I was getting involved I had already a clearer image of the subject. I left it for a while due to my pre-election campaign, but the obligation to close the subject soon never slipped from my mind.
I have already told you how my last election fight progressed and how it ended. The losers won and the winner lost; the same old story.
When it was over and 1 returned home, I returned determined that I couldn’t let this subject open for long. Together with this decision, I took the decision to go per­sonally to Europe and say personally my story. And where in Europe would I go?
I would go to the centers of power, in Brussels and Strasbourg. I would go to mother-Greece too, to the powerful people and to the power. I wanted to tell them the whole story, my whole complaint and the whole truth for everything my fellow- citizens did to me for five consecutive elections.
This decision to go to Europe gave me the motive to close my last subject the soonest possible. I considered that I ought to go there having this subject closed first, having conquered this subject too and being armed with a new weapon.
On the one hand I had my city as a weapon until now, a very strong weapon indeed, but on the other hand I believed that the presentation of a new weapon would make them realize better with whom they deal with and pay attention and believe my story.
Since my last election adventure was over 21/2 months passed until the day that I write this text. What did I succeed until now? I believe that l succeeded something even if I don’t consider that the whole operation is completed.
Did it take me more time than I expected from the beginning? Yes it did. It took twice, maybe three times as long.
Did I make mistakes during the process of my operation? Of course I did. For who tries to find or to do something new, this is inevitable. It is, let’s say, part of the game but I was here to find them and correct them.
Generally l believe that I did well. I solved all the technical problems l found in front of me and I went on. Some defects you may of course see in my designs if you like to put them under the microscope but this was inevitable too, since the means I used, were, in a way, primitive and impromptu. Nevertheless, I think that with these and those designs I succeed to show to you that this plan for the arrange­ment of the 240.000 cities-states in a spherical earth is and possible and realiz­able.
First, I divided the spheres on which I worked, to 36 zones of cities-states -18 for the north and 18 for the south hemisphere. Next I made an arrangement in city- teams (10x10). You can see on the sphere how I count 2.400 “squares” of 100 cities each (1.200 for the north and 1.200 for the south hemisphere)?
While with this arrangement there are no problems for the city zones near the Equator, there are problems for the city zones closer to the poles if I insist on the arrangement in teams. If I want to have in a line 10 vertical to the Equinoctial cities at the small zones, then, because the zone gets narrower to one point and gets wider to the other, the cities will be narrower respectively. And although this nar­rowing won’t affect the residential zones of the country, it will affect a part of agri­cultural extent, which means that a part of the residency will lose the direct con­tact with the necessary vital agricultural place. Instead of putting mechanisms so as to move these people to a far point of the country, I judge that it is wiser to abandon the plan of the arrangement in teams and to adopt the plan of the arrangement in cities, where all the cities remain as a whole -as stamp on the Earth- so it’s not necessary any pointless moving of people to this or to that point of the country.
This arrangement in cities I cannot polish up on the size of the spheres I worked on for the arrangement in teams. I need a bigger sphere for this, a sphere with one, two, or more meters diameter which will cost me time and money and for this reason I decided to leave it for later. An arrangement in cities in papers, I already tried it and I see that I am near to my target. Under certain presuppositions I can find 50, 100 or 150 cities more than the 240.000 and under other presuppositions I can find 50, 100 or 150 cities less than the 240.000, but generally speaking l am in the target. It doesn’t worry me. With a little more effort and persistence it will per­manently close.
Even without this final closure I think that I have already made it clear for you that this planet has been made according to a mathematical and geometrical design so as to contain a specific number of cities with specific dimensions and with a specific number of inhabitants.
If you get to trouble and multiply 240.000 cities times’ 240.000 inhabitants, then you will find a population of 57.600.000.000 inhabitants.
Now, you will say to me: where will be all these people found since we are now more or less only 8.000.000.000? And if they are found, where shall we put them to live? We are already many.
Yes! You are right, but don’t forget that l am talking about a New Earth, for an Earth without seas, without mountains and without deserts. I am talking about a wide and fertile plain that will be spread to the whole Earth -except from the poles- a vast plain that will be traversed by hundreds rivers that will start from the one side of the Earth and wili end to the other. Such an Earth I am talking about and this I design.
Nevertheless, your question about where the rest of 50(...) billions of people will be found to live in the New Earth remains. The answer is this: these 50 billions will be the people who lived on Earth before and have died and that specific day they will rise and live with us on the New Earth. Whoever said and promised a New Earth, he promised the resurrection of the dead too. I don’t argue. I take if for granted. Our life doesn’t end with the death. It may stop for a period of time, long for the past generations and short for the new ones, but it is on hold for a new beginning.
I put it this way: if there is God, everything is possible. And whether he exists or not I think that I prove it to you in a mathematical and geometrical way. God
exists and has plans for this Earth, he has an eye and watches this Earth; he has a system that writes down every single movement, every act and every thought of every human being that exists and breaths in this world.
When wili he at last, reveal his plan? What to say? For whom that wanted to learn or to listen the indications for his intentions existed for such a long time and were disposable to everybody, anytime.
With me, let’s say that you have the proofs; mathematical and geometrical proofs.
Do not have any doubts whether God will keep his promise. He definitely will. The New Earth wili be soon the first big reality and the resurrection of the dead the sec­ond one.
Don’t you have a person of your own, a relative, who has passed away, a father, a mother, a grandfather, a grandmother, a child, a brother or a friend whom you want to see coming out of the ground beautiful and strong, “wearing” his most glamorous youth, to live with you again from the beginning to the New Earth, with­out any illnesses, without any pain and without death?
If yes, then I consider that I bring you a joyful message, a message that it’s worth spreading to the whole world.
When and under what presuppositions the New Earth and the New Life will be given to people? Will they be given as a punishment or as a reward to the human race?
I’m asking you to be at the place of the person who can give the one and the other whenever and how he wants to and the punishment and the reward. Let’s see what the human being did and still does for other human beings on the Earth or what does he do for the Earth itself? Does he show love and respect for other human beings or even a little mercy or a little compassion? Does he show love and respect for nature?
It seems to me that neither of that happens. No respect for the human being and no respect for nature. Neither the United Nations can save mankind nor can efforts to protect the environment save nature. Thousands of people die every day due to lack of water, lack of food or lack of exercise. Hideous and chaotic cities inun­date the Earth from one side to the other. Nature and environment are slaughtered for the favor of the development points. Anarchic building everywhere, anarchic work, anarchic production of goods, adulterated feelings, adulterated food, adul­terated bodies, adulterated life, adulterated people, adulterated souis, all are adul­terated, all are left to luck and in the air.
What do you think that human race deserves for this situation? And mostly: what do the powerful people deserve; punishment or reward? I think that the first one would deserve them. Unfortunately, as human beings, we didn’t do anything spe­cial to deserve the second one.
Come at his place. Would you reward your child when you see that it destroys what you gave to it or would you reward your child when you see that it is trying to do the best possible for this? If you think that there is logic to God’s plan and if God’s logic is by likeness and by image of the human logic, then how would you act? Even if we suppose that the reward is the only thought to the divine plan for the human being, I don’t think that he would offer it to us finally if he doesn’t see first that we really try for the best. I have the impression that he waits something from us to do it finally, otherwise he will postpone his plan for a vague time. He needs an excuse to do it. And this excuse only alive people can give to him. If he doesn’t have it he will leave his plan for later.
What is this excuse? I told you something before about this: God must see that we are doing our best for the Earth he offered to us and for the human beings who exist together with us on this Earth. We must help the Earth and the human being. We must save the Earth and the human being. We must respect the Earth, we must pro­tect nature, we must make our place nicer than we found it, we must make the air more fresh than we found it and at the same time to do the impossible possible to feed the hungry people, to cloth the people dressed in rugs, to shelter the homeless, to cure the ill people and to make happy the unhappy people.
Maybe this Earth is not so friendly for the human beings and maybe many of their sufferings are due to the unfriendly activities of this Earth, but we could, as a human race, to succeed in our aim.
Do you think that God, who sees and writes down everything, wouldn’t see this? Do you think that he wouldn’t be touched by this and wouldn’t he react to this?
Be careful though because I think it is not enough for him to reward us with a New Earth or maybe I would say, that it may be enough to reward us with a New Earth but not with a built New Earth. 1 wish he would give us the New Earth, even non- built, with the only excuse that we fed the hungry people of this world, that we sheltered the homeless and we protected the environment. It would be something but I personally believe that human being can look forward to achieving more if he decides to do something more than this.
What would this “more” be? To rebuild the old Earth according to a plan that will respect human being and nature, to build cities that function in a way that they respect the human being and nature.
The city plan is already at your disposal. The plan is the same for all cities, for all countries and for all continents. I need a map and I will show to you how many cities you must build in Europe, how many in Asia, how many in Africa, how many in Australia and how many in America. Already, some designs I consider that maybe you have already in your hands. I believe that with these I give you an idea of how I intend to handle the subject.
First, I need if possible, a flat area of 20 square kilometers for the city (20.25 square kilometers actually) and two or, maybe, three, four, five or more thousands square kilometers if large parts of the terrain is not useable. Next to this I will do the same and next to this again the same or similar, until the whole planet is cov­ered and functioning according to this plan.
I want to believe that it is God’s will to see this happen before he decides to give to the human being an Earth new and built. I remind you of his word: everything good we do, he wili give it back to us a hundred times. Think about it and see that it is possible to work out. How many cities can according to the existing cultivable land be viable on this old Earth; 20, 25, 30 or 40 thousands? I suggest 24.000 to 30.000 cities {9.500-12.000 for Asia, 6.000-7.500 for America, 5.000-6.000 for Africa, 3.000-3.500 for Europe and 500-1.000 for Australia). On the New Earth there will be 240.000 cities. This means a ratio of 1 in 10 or 1 in 8. Let it be 1 in 8 in the end. Let him give them to us in this ratio and we will still be satisfied.
By the way I remind you of the Apocalypses: and l saw the city, Holly Jerusalem, coming down from the sky etc. etc.
What do you think? Doesn’t God who made the universe and made it function in a perfect ecological way, know a way to create 240.000 cities and put them on the New Earth that he will build?
Of course he does. It’s up to him to do it whenever he wants to. However, the point is not what God can do, but what the people can do. Let us understand that and act accordingly, and as for what God must do, he will do it when we show to him that we deserve it.
Be careful though. Pay attention to the perspective and the possibility l show you.
I propose the perspective of a new and built earth, the perspective of a new life and the perspective of a new human being. If we suppose that the fulfillment of this perspective depends on you, then what do you think that you must decide and how do you think you must go on?
You have two perspectives to choose from; on the one side you have the Old Earth, an Earth deficient, irregular in the ground and climatically unsteady, inhos­pitable in many places, hostile now and then, with large ranges of mountains and deserts and elsewhere large areas covered by oceans. In many places there are floods, tsunamis, earthquakes and droughts, heat and cold. The temperate and friendly areas for human beings are few and these are already threatened by the unreasonable human intervention in nature. The perspectives for this Earth are rather inauspicious. The bad gets worse from one day to the next, but there is not a world strategy to save the environment. All those who really care and can con­tribute to a solution don’t have any power and l, who suggested the best solution, behold, see what I suffered by the leaders of my country.
The perspective to destroy this planet is open in front of us and the perspective to go and live on another planet is closed. The only hopeful perspective is the one I offer to you and you better take it into serious consideration. Let’s say that this per­spective is a one-way street for the human race and for its place. I don’t see any other choice and any other way out. This perspective is a joyful one for the human being, yes, but as I told you before we must do something to deserve it.
What is the perspective that I offer and what am 1 trying to convince you that it is worth having a go at? This is it. Read it and then close your eyes and imagine it. Imagine a New Earth, a perfect in shape and arrangement Earth, a smooth Earth, friendly and hospitable for the human being in all its extent. Imagine a vast and fer­tile plain with sweet waters everywhere, disposable for drinking and swimming and watering the earth, an Earth with mild temperature, acceptable for the human skin, with beautiful and functional cities, with beautiful and functional buildings, imagine an Earth decorated with beautiful, healthy, happy and erotic people, peo­ple full of life and feelings, people friendly and compassionate, willing to do good to you than to hurt you. Imagine an Earth and a human being without illnesses, without troubles, without hunger, without poverty, without old age and without death. Imagine a vast garden of terrestrial enjoyments, an ecological, a working, a healthy, a dietetic and erotic paradise. Imagine an internal spring, a peace and an internal peace and happiness
What do you think? Is it worth doing something about it? Is it worth trying? If you think it’s worth it, then pay attention to me. I told you who I am and what my per­sonal story is. I told you: I am a citizen of Cyprus, of a small country- member of the European Community. I was a candidate for the presidency of my country in 2003 and in 2008. I got almost 73% of the votes in both elections, but due to the intervention of the political leaders of my country the results were completely fal­sified. i told you that they used as pretence that I was a threat to the constitutions, although what everybody knows is that l was rather a threat to their financial priv­ileges and to their political future than to the constitutions. I was of course a threat to the constitutions but I don’t think they cared for this.
I started my political struggle having the intention and the ambition to benefit everybody in every way I knew. I had the ambition to be the people’s best friend, their best benefactor and guard, but my opponents saw me as their worst enemy. Undoubtedly they were driven to this conclusion by a disastrous passion and this passion exists in all democracies. This passion is the envy and it is the most noto­rious passion among people.
Believe me: I didn’t do anything till now without seeing it in front of my eyes. For so many years I advertised in my country the most beautiful vision, I advertised the best political plan and program that ever existed. I am the most popular politician and still I couldn’t have a political post.
1 know that for anonymous people 1 am the leader and the president and people show it to me every time they meet me. So what am l for you? Will you pay atten­tion to me when I have no name and no post? Will you pay attention to me when 1 am an insignificant person.
So as what kind of person do I present myself to you: as a president and prophet under persecution in the 21st century A.D. or as a visioner who seeks a place and people for his vision? Do you see me as a dreamer or as a maniac? However you see me, consider that I come as a friend. Accept me at least as a friend, if you don’t accept me as a president. Accept me as a human being who brings only friendly suggestions to you. Don’t look at me as an enemy. Even if I weaken your passion which is common in human beings and democracies, pay attention to me just a little. I don’t see myself as a threat to your political position, even if possibly I am a threat to the existing values and priorities of the European Community.
Most important is that you accept or at least pay attention to my suggestions. Even if I personally provoke your dislike or your despise (maybe for what I wear on my head or how I dress), I want you to consider my suggestions carefully. Think about them. Whatever you think of me, I want you to listen to my sugges­tions. Mostly I want you to ask yourselves whether they could be useful to you. See all my designs, as l told you, ask for the opinion of your wise persons and of your scientists and of your experts and if they convince you that they are right and for your own interest and for your people’s interest, then keep them and leave me behind.
If you don’t want me as a president and you prefer to put me aside, if you find me bad, shifty and selfish, if you find me disgusting or horrible (I don’t know. Maybe when you see me, you see something different from what I see in front of the mir­ror or in my photos. Maybe you see a monster or a snake. I don’t know what’s happening but I think that I seem to be an accessible, sweet, good, sympathetic and lovable person or am I mistaken?) and if, I continue, you find me hooligan or rebel who threatens to destroy the existing order, or even you are afraid that somebody will steal your performance or that people will look and pay attention to somebody else more than you, then put me aside and in obscurity, provided that you accept my suggestions.
If you think that my appearance on the political stage of Europe wili harm you, then leave me behind the scenes, provided that you accept my suggestions. I am more interested in them rather than my reputation. I have made my priorities and needs clear.
These priorities and these needs cannot be satisfied neither by the reputation nor by the show, but by a systematic exercise and by one, I repeat, cared system of good habits, a system that when you succeed it makes you feel president and king and God and which with these and those political fights I look forward to mak­ing it accessible to all. What honestly I want is to make my fellow-citizens to feel that without being anything they are somebody and something.
Well, look at my suggestions and my vision for mankind and for the world. Look at them and not me because most likely envy will not allow you to see me as I deserve it. Because definitely I am - and I will always be - a fatal threat to every human being in this world who has any political ambition. Unfortunately for some people, I have big ambitions and these are not new. Since my adolescence I declared that I had the ambition to overshadow with my work all big men of History and not just the presidents or the prime ministers of this or that country or continent.
But is it possible to separate me from my vision and my ambitions? If it is possi­ble, I would do it, but it seems to me that it is impossible. Whether it is good or bad, we have only one self and as I say, through this seif we live, we exist, we think, we fight, we love or are loved, we win or be defeated. 1 cannot change it. So please tolerate me.
However, my friends, do you think that it is right to envy me or to put me aside because I have ambitions? Wouldn’t it be wiser to check first what suggestions I have, if they can function for the good of human beings and if they have the inten­tion to hurt or to benefit human beings and the environment? This you must see.
Tell me: am I right or not? Am l a reasonable person or do I talk nonsense, do I exaggerate or do 1 get carried away?
What can I tell you? I’ll tell you this: I think that you should requisite me here and now so as the vision I presented to you to be fulfilled, even if I am not the real pres­ident of a European country and even if I am not even a European citizen.
See what managements and coaches of football teams or basket ball teams do, when they find out a talent. Whether this talent is from Africa, or from America, or it is yellow, or black, they will do anything to have its services. And for what goal are they struggling? Their goal is to win a championship, a cup or even a double.
Think what you would succeed with a vision like mine and a servant like me. The benefits and advantages for the human race and for the world would be countless.
That’s why I tell you: you must requisition me here and now. You must call for my services here and now even if 1 insist on not wanting a salary. Because 1 am in a mood to offer my services for free. What I did until now for all human beings I did­n’t do it to sell it but to offer it as a gift.
I strove hard for so many years to create this vision and to present it to my fellow beings, did I earn any money? On the contrary. I was always giving everything I had, so as to keep this vision alive and see it growing, being mature and moving on. What did I get? I got nothing!
What did I get all these years from this story? I experienced only defeats and humiliations because my powerful fellow citizens wanted it this way. Do you have something better for me?
Maybe I have a good name and a good reputation among anonymous people, but this is not enough for me, because I don’t want to impose my name but my vision. I want to impose a vision that will benefit continuously the human beings and the world every hour and every minute. 1 want to impose a vision that will touch and direct everything and everybody for ever. I want, if you like, to promote a vision that will benefit those who love me, and those who will love me when they find out about me and my fight. I want to promote a vision the main point of which wili be love, order and beauty and nothing else.
This is who I am, this is my vision and this is my story. Do you think that this story and this vision are a lunatics’ story and vision? If yes, then you better suggest to Mr. Christofias to put me into his crazy houses and not let me loose on Europe to sell stories and fairy tales. Mr. Klirides and Mr. Papadopoulos have already tried to do this unsuccessfully. Bear this in mind.
And if not, if however you believe that this is the story of a thoughtful person, then pay attention to me and help me, if you can. Don’t forget that I came to you as the best friend you could ever find, as the best benefactor you could ever find, as the best assistant and servant, as the best advisor, and the best leader you could ever find for you and for your friends and for your children and for your grandchildren and for the nations of Europe and for the nations all over the world.
Do you have something to tell me? I am here. If 1 cannot meet you in person, I can be contacted at the following address:
Costas Kyriacou (Outopos) ,P. C.: 8879, Makounta, Paphos, Cyprus,
Tel.: 00357 99 561 898 - 00357 26 322 334.
I close by reminding you that an old objective of mine still remains: that is to claim the post of the General Secretary of the United Nations, if you are interested in this goal of mine and if you think that I could be useful to the world and to mankind, I am here!
Sincerely yours Outopos.
P o s t s c r i p t: at the last elections for the European Parliament (at June of 2009)
I was also a candidate. The fraction ,and l mean the real fraction, I took from the people was not different than the elections before and I conclude it from two infor­mations.
The first came from a policeman who took it from a journalist and it was that the exit-polls at Limassol gave to me the 68%, or: the 69% from the periphery and the 67% from the city of Limassol.
The second came from a Greek journalist who got in the place where the ballot- boxes, and I mean the real ballot boxes, were guarded and he opened two of them.
At the first I had, as he told me, the 73.5% of the votes and at the second, he said, was taken out the part of the ballot with my candidacy as if I was not a candidate at all. In mind.
All these informations didn’t give me of course something 1 didn’t know in a way or something I didn’t expect. On the contrary.
I knew that another one time the people would give me the majority of the votes
and that another one time the people in power would change the will and the vote of the people. I had no doubts neither for the one nor for the other, neither for the real nor for the falsified result. This time I was better than any time before prepared and almost gave up, and if 1 put down finally my candidacy I didn’t do it but to have one more reason to tell you this story...
Always: Outopos

Outopos was bom to parents who were farmers in 1958 (5 of March) in Agios Ermolaos, a small village in the Kyrenia District and he lived there until the Turkish invasion in Cyprus in 1974. After his high school studies and his military service he went to Greece to continue his University studies which he started from the period of his military service as an external student at the Philosophic School Department of Aristotelion University of Thesalloniki. At the end of the third year he stopped his studies and embarked on an adventure in sports which didn’t bring to him any success but gave to him the incentive to create after years of experiments his designs for the city-state and form a plan of health and training which he would call ‘driving license for the human body’.
At July of 1980 he returned at Cyprus. After a short (three months) stay at Agios Neophytos monastery and after one nine-months stay at Lefcosia he returned at the place which accepted his family after the Turkish invasion and from the beginning of 1982 he lives there, at Makounta, a very small Turkish- Cypriot village near Polis Chrysochous, at Pafos’ District.
During his stay in Lefcosia he published a small book in the style of a Diary with the title ‘My fight’, in which he outlined his political intensions and ambitions and which he intented to complete in ten volumes but he didn’t succeeded to publish finally but only a few photocopy or polygraphic copies.
In 1983 he married and he got from that marriage three children but in 1990 he divorced. In 1994 he advanced at the publishing of one new book with the title ‘the portrait of a New Religion’ which he completed the next years with two more volumes. In 2001 he published a Diary and in 2006 a second Diary which was nothing else but an attempt to republish his first book with the title ‘My Fight’ and which he intends to complete with two or three more volumes when his economic situation permits this.
In February of 1993 he attempted to claim for first time the Presidency in Cyprus but he was excluded because of age. In 1998 he attempted again for the Presidency but because of an intrigue he was out of the ballot for one more time.
In 2001 he succeeded for first time to be in the ballot as a candidate member of the Cyprus Parliament. In 2003 he was a candidate president, in 2004 a candidate member of the Europe Parliament, in 2006 again a candidate member of Cyprus Parliament, in 2008 again a candidate president and in 2009 again a candidate member of the European Parliament, he received at all these cases almost the 3/4 of the votes of Greek-Cypriot population but because'of the well organized attempts of vote rigging undertaken by the Cypriots party leaders he never succeeded to be elected.
Part of his next political movements is the claiming of the position of the General Secretary of the United Nations, a position which he aims to use to succeed his further purpose in this world which is not else but the consecration of one Universal State, one Universal Language (the Greek language) and Civilization, one Universal Religion, Law, Justice and Currency, one, finally, Universal regime which will give to all the people on Earth a share of work, food, education, roof and cloths, health and love, pleasure and happiness.