UK tells CFK “no Falklands’ sovereignty talks unless and until such time as Islanders so wish”
“There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish”, reaffirmed the UK delegation in an official statement in reply to remarks from the President of Argentina before the UN General Assembly.
Such position is based on the principle and right of self determination established in Articles 1 of the UN charter and the International convenant on civil and political rights, adds the release.
In her speech to the UN General Assembly Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner threatened to review and suspend a 1999 agreement with the UK on air links between the Falklands and the South American continent unless the UK complies with UN resolutions for discussions on South Atlantic islands sovereignty.
Follows the full release from the UK delegation “in exercise of the right of reply to the remarks made by the President of the Argentine Republic in the general debate on 21 September 2011”.
“The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has no doubt about its sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. The United Kingdom Government attaches great importance to the principle and right of self determination as set out in Article 1.2 of the Charter of the United Nations and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That principle underlies our position on the Falkland Islands. There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish.
“The United Kingdom’s relationship with all its overseas territories is a modern one based on partnership, shared values and the right of each territory, including the Falkland Islands, to determine if it wishes to retain a link to the United Kingdom.
“The democratically elected representatives of the Falkland Islands once again expressed their own views clearly when they visited the United Nations for this year’s debate in the Special Committee of 24. They asked the Committee to recognise that self-determination is a universal human right, and respect for this principle is enshrined in the UN Charter as one of purposes this Organisation. They made clear they, like any other people, are entitled to exercise the right of self-determination. They reiterated the historical facts that the Falkland Islands had no indigenous people and that no civilian population was removed prior to their people settling on the Islands over 178 years ago. They confirmed that they are and have been the only people of the Falkland Islands, and they did not wish for any change in the status of the Islands. They lamented the measures adopted by the Republic of Argentina that unlawfully aim to limit both their transport links and their access to open and free trade.
“The Falkland Islands Government is entitled to develop both fisheries and hydrocarbons industries within its own waters. This right is an integral part of the right of self-determination, which is expressly contained in Article 1.2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It states that all peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
“The United Kingdom continues to believe that there are many opportunities for co-operation in the South Atlantic. However, in recent years the Republic of Argentina has rejected these opportunities. It withdrew from co-operation on the South Atlantic Fisheries Commission, and in 2007 repudiated the 1995 Joint Declaration on Hydrocarbons. The Republic of Argentina placed a ban on charter flights travelling to the islands in 2003. It has also introduced domestic legislation to restrict shipping to the islands and penalise companies who wish to do business in or with the Falkland Islands.
“The United Kingdom has maintained an unchanged defensive military posture in the South Atlantic for over 29 years. This includes routine military exercises. The United Kingdom remains fully committed to defending the rights of the people of the Falkland Islands to determine their own political, social and economic future”.
Suggested Stories
-
Jun 19th 2013
Malvinas C24 Argentina petitioners: Maria Angelia Vernet and Alejandro Betts
-
Jun 19th 2013
India-Argentina pledge to improve trade; Timerman thanks Delhi support on Malvinas dispute
-
Jun 18th 2013
Falklands’ C24 debate: Timerman heads Argentine delegation and includes two governors
-
Jun 17th 2013
Falklands’ conflict depicted in opera ‘Allies’ based on Pinochet-Thatcher relationship
162 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
The UK only stated facts and provided examples of where self-determination is agreed and ratified.
I agree with Elaine, you can't really argue against UK's reply. But I look forward to Think, Marcos et al attempting to.
I have never seen a more diplomatic GFYS ever.
The principle of self-determination does not apply to the Malvinas Islands Question.
The specificity of the Malvinas question is that the United Kingdom occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the original population and did not allow his return, thus violating the territorial integrity of Argentina. Is ruled out then the possibility of applying the principle of self-determination, as its exercise by the inhabitants of the islands would cause the “breach of national unity and territorial integrity” of Argentina. In this regard it should be noted that resolution 1514 (XV) “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples” in the sixth paragraph states that “Any attempt aimed at partial or total disruption of national unity and territorial integrity a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. ”Malvinas Question In the General Assembly of the United Nations included this doctrine - the principle of territorial integrity by referring to the interests and NOT the wishes of the people of the islands - in its resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12) , 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm the invitation made in resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the UK) ”to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee on the Situation with regarding the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in order to find a peaceful solution, having due regard to the provisions and objectives of the United Nations Charter and Resolution 1514 (XV), and the interests of the people of the Falkland Islands. From 2004 he was permanently on the agenda and the paper by the Bureau of the General Assembly.
no more air link for you, no more fresh eggs from Chile.
oops sorry, you can also eat fresh petrol !!!
The UN says:
”…………all peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.”
I say:
The BSIM (British Squatters In Malvinas) are not a “People”.
The HAMC (Hells Angels Motorcycle Club) are not a “People”.
Both of those groups have, of course, human rights.
Neither of them is entitled to Self-Determination.
The UN states that self-determination applies to ALL people. No arguement against that.
There is no original population Raul. The Falklands prior the 19th Century did not anyone living there. The ancestores of those who settled there first remain in the Falklands.
Resolution 2065 (XX)
1. Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the problem, bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations and of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas);
Note it says the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands.
as Islanders so wish ...... do i read it right ??
(there must be referandum for these subjects at FI....)
we have already said that UK is FINISHED..now we see their brains FINISHED too....!! trapped theirself ..what an unawareness !!
I am very sure that in Buenos Aires ,the Foreign Ministry experts/diplomats laughter..... !!
The Purposes of the UN are:
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples..,
UN Resolution 1514 (XV):
2. ALL peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
The Argentine claim is laughable but their behavour is sad - the main losers from blocking air links are the argentines who will be unable to vist war graves
don't waste your time vainly writing any comments here !!
first... realize a REFERANDUM at FI..and then after come here !!
*****************************************************************
Their bogglers, are doing a grand job, right here,
As typical and on par, they disagree with the law,
But only because the laws of the free world, does not suit Argentinean bogglers,
The british response never once made a threatening comment,
Showing that gentlemen of an educated society,
Does not need to threaten an under-indoctrinated, Person, as par, he can do this himself,
The fact is, whenever the argie bogglers like it or not,
All Argentina can do nowadays is talk talk and brag,
So as Sidney James always said
CARRY ON TALKING ??
.
Note saying that the interest of the people of the Falkland Islands.
It is true, speak of interest BUT NOT WISH OF THE POPULATION
Resolution 2065 (XX) The Assembly considered the issue General.Habiendo the Malvinas (Falkland Islands), Taking into account the chapters of the reports of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples relating to the Malvinas (Falkland Islands) and in particular the conclusions and recom ¬ mendations approved by the same regarding the Terri ¬ tory, whereas its resolution 1514 (XV) of December 14 1960, was inspired by the cherished aim of putting an end to colonialism everywhere and in all its forms, one of which fits the case of the Malvinas Islands (Falkland Islands).
(THE FOLLOWING IS FUNDAMENTAL)
Noting the existence of a dispute between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over these islands.
(Recognizing the principle of territorial integrity over self-determination by the existence of a conflict is to SOVEREIGNTY TALKS ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF A DISPUTE)
1. Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pursue without delay the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee to examine the situation ¬ tion with respect to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in order to find a peaceful solution, having due regard to the provi ¬ tions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations ¬ das and resolution 1514 (XV) of the General Assembly and as the interests of the population of the Malvinas Islands (Falkland Islands);
2. Calls on both Governments to inform the Special Committee and the General Assembly at the twenty-first session on the outcome of the negotia ¬ tions.
1398th. plenary meeting, December 16, 1965
The flagrant, unashamed and obvious British hypocrisy, about the “Self-Determination Right of Peoples” will be perfectly highlighted in the next hours……............., when the United Kingdom votes against the Self-Determination Right of 20 million Palestinians at the United Nations Security Council.
Brainwash anybody
You're right, the double talk and lack of morality are those of the representatives of the United Kingdom. They talk about self-determination and vote against Palestine. Pitiful and pathetic.
before you feel silly,
the chances are that the british will abstain,
but we will wait,
just like you fortune tellers .
Which way did Argentina vote?
Hypocrisy anybody?
I actually don't agree with the UK vote, although I understand the reasoning behind it.
I don't think you bunch of miserable hypocrites are in any position to lecture anyone about anything to do with self determination until you drop your pretensions to our country and stop blockading us in clear contravention of international law.
Raul, you are the definition of pitiful and pathetic. No-one cares what you think. You want to colonise us against our will, so you can just keep quiet about 'decolonisation'.
Your plastic faced b*&%* of a president calling for negotiations about 'our sovereignty' is the most pathetic thing of all. What does she think there is to negotiate about? Nothing obviously.
You ask:
“Which way did Argentina vote?”
I answer:
Argentina's vote will be in favor of the Self-Determination of an authentic People as the 20 million Palestinians are.
Where is the hypocrisy?
I can only give my own opinion,
And what I see on television and in the papers,
It is a very difficult situation and mind boggling and the very least,
If Britain backs Israel then it fails with the Falklands perhaps,,
If they back Palestine it will upset Israel and the us,
So I think the British will do what the Americans love to do with us over the Falklands sometimes, and sit on the fence,
The way I see it, whatever we do we will be dammed, so the wall looks very inviting,
It’s hard to side at a time when they are both killing each other, and blaming each other,
A problem to be well out of I think,
Remember Israel did aid Argentina in 1982 by way of Peru,
Some people don’t forget,
But dammed if we do//dammed if we don’t//
I think the brits will sit on the wall in this one,
Just my opinion mind.]]
.
If we were ever forced to become part of Argentina, we would turn up at the UN asking for independence, just as the Palestinians have. And we would be a 'people' then. You wouldn't have a leg to stand on, would you. We don't have anything in common with Argentina,and we don't want you.
The hypocrisy is in you Brits thinking you can decide that less than 1400 ethnic Brits born in Malvinas constitute an 'authentic people' with rights extending over millions of square miles of South American territory.
after all they are british
falkland island born.
and have the same rights and freedom as others,
Raul, who is the definition of pitiful and pathetic. Nobody cares what you think. Want to colonize us against our will, so just be silent about “decolonization”.
This is not to respond in a reactionary, but not be so sure, did you sure that you think anyone cares?
Remember we are all important in both English and Argentines, like me and you and everyone else. Somehow you and I give an account of what we do, be sure to do so.
Pathetic and unfortunate are those who bet historically violence and terror. We are not no innocent, we have many errors and crimes to account, but compared with 500 years of history in the UK, who are the creators of colonialism and racism, is to take an examination. Leave the bitterness and hatred. This dispute is not resolved with resentment and revanchism. Resolved to peace and dialogue.
As the world public opinion is internalized more of the Falklands conflict, many countries are sympathetic to the claim of sovereignty. And even in the UK itself believe it is possible to reach an agreement acceptable to both parties. Just so long to see newspapers and Web specialists in the subject.
As Luther King: There are no roads to peace, peace is the road. I think most people's English has the same feeling deep. Peace, dialogue and Nonviolence
Thank you very much.
Claiming to respect the Falkland Islanders rights but in the next breath insisting they have no right to self-determination.
Claiming to respect their way of life but in the next breath accusing them of being squatters.
Claiming they can preserve their identity and in the next breath asserting they must become Argentine.
But then Think and his ilk are two face hypocritical racist bigots who sell the big lie to keep the pretence going and avoid the inevitable conclusuion that Argentina, which had every chance of being a great nation, is a fuck up because of the idiots in charge. Idiots they happily re-elect.
Nothing like a spot of racist bigotry to unite the masses.
Just following on from what Monty said....The whole “not an authentic people” thing, seems to stem from them being culturally and in the most part ethnically British, cierto?
So, if Argentina did somehow manage to gain sovereignty over the Falklands, they would presumably become an “authentic people” as they would be a group distinct from the Metropolitan state.
So, upon Argentina's hypothetical take over of the Falklands, let's say the islanders take the same course of action that Palestine is now taking, how could Argentina argue against statehood for them?
I imagine it would be easier for the Islanders, than it will be for the Palestinians, as I don't think the U.S would veto it.
I guess the question is, how could maintain soveriegnty?
That if Argentina supported palatines freedom and right to choose,
And back up independence, and world recognition ,
Then surely by the laws of common sense,
They would have to support the Falkland islanders in the self determination to be ruled by whom they choose,
Question
1, has Argentina voted yet
2, when is the vote, anyone know.
.
When Argentina regains its sovereignty over the Malvinas, the British squatting Kelpers will, right away, cease to be squatters …………
From this day they will be a nice idiosyncratic bunch of British Kelpers…………
Like our Chubutean Welsh Settlers, Pampean German Mennonites or Misiones Swedish Gauchos.
But not a distinct People…………..
”I say:
The BSIM (British Squatters In Malvinas) are not a “People”.”
I say
The SSIA (Spanish squatters in Argentina) are not a people.
It is true, speak of interest BUT NOT WISH OF THE POPULATION”
I would like to see the note explaining how one can claim to be in the interests of the islanders while not representing the wishes of the islanders, explain please?
Buy they do say that desperate people will say anything to survive
Even a lie,
Like our Chubutean Welsh Settlers, Pampean German Mennonites or Misiones Swedish Gauchos.
Yep one big happy argie family,Thanks but no Thanks
Indigenous Peoples had Little to Celebrate during Argentina's Bicentennial
www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=12315
You forget that there Argentines inhabiting the islands in 1833 and who were expelled from there. We can not forget them. What solution you can give to those who were expelled in 1833?
Do you realize the gravity of that crime? Please place the Argentines even a second. We had four British invasions. You forget the four British invasion we had to suffer (1806.1807.1833 and the Battle of Vuelta de Obligado occurred on November 20, 1845 against French and English. That destroyed any hope of winning the hearts and minds of the Argentines .
We are very proud of our president, who in spite of British aggression, continues to promote peace and dialogue among peoples. If you still have doubts read the historical statements of our presidents in the United Nations and you will notice.
Our president is calling for dialogue and not violence. We can not remain indifferent to it. Leave the hatred and spite. This conflict is resolved with peace and dialogue that is so superbly ignores the UK.
Thank you very much.
The United Nations Committee ,expressed concern at Argentina’s “discriminatory attitudes” against citizens from African countries, particularly Senegal and neighbouring countries Bolivia and Paraguay.
Look at the next blogg,
Just a big argie conn, argentines must wake up to the lies, and corruption,
Next blogg
Given that we 'ethnic Brits' (St Helenians, Chileans etc) are definitely not Argentines, the chances of us ever being forced to become Argentines in this day and age are nil.
It would therefore make more sense to develop friendly and co-operative relations throughout the region, because peaceful neighbourly relations is the absolute best that Argentina can hope for.
Their current policy is destructive and destabilising. They might kid themselves that their neighbours love them, but actually no-one wants to be pushed around and the Chileans certainly won't like being bullied over flights. Especially not now that so many Chileans and their Falkland Islander families live in the FI.
The ultimate hypocrisy is the way you argentines all act like these policies are in pursuit of your sovereignty claim. They aren't, and you all know it. You're all lying. You know perfectly well they aren't going to get you anywhere. Even the Botox Queen knows it. It's just an excuse to cause suffering and enjoy it, while pretending to be all moral and outraged.
That's hypocrisy.
To the country’s indigenous, independence marks the beginning of the state expansionism that destroyed their culture, their way of life, and often their people in some form of travail. From their perspective, it signifies the genocide of native peoples and the theft of their land. Today, the indigenous remain stigmatized outsiders from Argentine society who receive inadequate federal aid and even less concern.
You forget that there Argentines inhabiting the islands in 1833 and who were expelled from there. We can not forget them. What solution you can give to those who were expelled in 1833?
Do you realize the gravity of that crime? Please place the Argentines even a second. We had four British invasions. You forget the four British invasion we had to suffer (1806.1807.1833 and the Battle of Vuelta de Obligado occurred on November 20, 1845 against French and English. That destroyed any hope of winning the hearts and minds of the Argentines .
We are very proud of our president, who in spite of British aggression, continues to promote peace and dialogue among peoples. If you still have doubts read the historical statements of our presidents in the United Nations and you will notice.
Our president is calling for dialogue and not violence. We can not remain indifferent to it. Leave the hatred and spite. This conflict is resolved with peace and dialogue that is so superbly ignores the UK.
Thank you very much.
to late and to old to save,
I confidently expect you will be incapable of accepting this.
But..
You have been told the British expelled an Argentine settlement in 1833.
This didn't happen.
Its a lie.
Its untrue.
The British protested at the sending of a “garrison” in 1832, which Argentina ignored.
In 1833, they asked that garrison to leave, and it did.
But the settlement established by Vernet, was actually encouraged to stay, it remained there.
There are Falkland Islanders living today that can trace their ancestry to the few survivors of Vernet's settlement.
It was not expelled, it remained. You have been lied to.
In the Falkland Islands archive, there is the diary of one Thomas Helsby, a clerk employed by Vernet, he documented this period.
You can yourself refer to Charles Darwin's diary, its online, it documents his meeting with members of Vernet's settlement in March 1833 and the year after.
Fitzroy's diaries are on the same website and they document his meeting with Vernet's deputy Matthew Brisbane.
The truth is out there but I'll bet you can't accept it.
Just for clarification purposes, could you give me your definition of a “people”?
Do you really believe that it would be the same as with the immigrant groups that you mentioned?
In our hypothetical situation, how could you argue that you and they are the same people?
Can you not s
We've been through this many times before…………
Nobody, I repeat, nobody is trying to force any of you, Kelpers, to become Argentines.
No friendly and co-operative relations are possible as long as you, Kelpers, insist of being the spearhead of Britain’s interests in the South Atlantic and assist them in the plundering of our natural and mineral resources.
About the ~300 Chileans living in Malvinas…………….
More than 1 million Chileans live all over Argentina…….. Just some hundred miles north from my place, there is a town with ~30,000 Chileans residents.
The Punta flight is history if we so decide……..
And don’t fool yourselves…..
There will be no flying around, over or under ……………
I strongly believe that the only way to handle the “British Bully” is hitting him where it hurts him most and that’s his pocket.
El Think
This doesn't hurt the British at all and you know it.
This has nothing to do with Britain. It's about persecuting falkland Islanders. If you need to do that to feel big and clever, then poor you.
We import more from Argentina than we export.
You try and “hurt” us, we're better off, you hurt yourselves.
British bully my arse.
The British are supporting a small island community, against the local bully boy. Exemplified by a cowardly little fuckwit who trawls the Internet trying to intimidate anyone who stands up to him whilst hiding behind an anonymous pseudonym like the despicable coward that he is.
Sad really isn't it, the only way they can feel good is threatening a smaller neighbour.
Freud would have field day.
You say:
“This doesn't hurt the British at all and you know it.”
I say:
Ain't you Kelpers British and proud of it?
But you wont always get such a polite response,
It’s only a matter of time before you push the wrong button,
Or make a very silly mistake,
Then you may well regret all the bullying,
For humiliating you, will do Argentina massive damage,
It would prove not only to the free world, but also to your imaginary friends, that despite all the bragging,
Argentina can do nothing////nothing, but talk talk and more talk,
How embarrassing is that,, thank goodness the British are more mature and adult like, and do not act like spoilt children,
You can rely on the British to back you up,
Rather than talk talk ???
@50 .... 1900 Argentina had , along with Australia, the highest standard of living in the world and relied on agricultural exports.... one decent depression and they went to the bottom of the heap....
110 years later... not remotely near the top of the tree and still relying on agricultural exports..... if the world economy does go tits up as looks likely Argentina will end down there alongside Burkino Faso.....
The Falklands will be the least of their worries
Still, I see the Argies are particularly roused up, Think certainly. Unusual for you Think, so - don't like Britains answer. Seems a little more detailed than the usual “ We have no doubts ...” etc.
Worth thinking about that!
You keep trying to hurt us in the pocket Think, but the prospect of oil is a massive pain killer :-)
All Argentina has got is geography - not enough.
Did you now that it was the UK that persuaded the US to promote the idea of an Antarctic Treaty. Gves all the access we require whilst forcing Chile and Argentina to shut up! Smart piece of diplomacy I hear :-))
Still the Falklands are British this bright morning, so all is well with the world !
Monty I asked you this questions before, you didn't answer:
Some years ago Chile suspended all the flights to the islands for several months after the detention of Pinochet in London for his crimes against humanity.
Did you complain back then?
Are you aware of how many Chileans live in Argentina?
Are you aware of how many Chilean business exists in Argentina including LAN?
By the way Néstor Kirchner's mother Maria was born in Punta Arenas, Chile.
And as for Troneas....the population of the Isle of Man have been there for thousands of years. The so called “Argentine population” (Argentina wasnt even a country in 1833) was there at the approval of Britain, and only the garrison was expelled, the population remained. This is well documented. Read some factual history, not whats in your light blue and white “text books”.
Argentina's argument is weak and full of holes.
And honestly Marcos, what does the fact that the Mother of your dead ex president have to do with anything? Clutching at straws springs to mind.
The settlers remained.
The trespassing Garrison was required to leave.
Your analogy therefore makes no sense !
“ .. March 1st, the HMS Beagle visits the islands and Charles Darwin records the make-up of the remaining settlers in his diary, ” …The present inhabitants consist of one Englishman, who has resided here for some years, & has now the charge of the British flag, 20 Spaniards & three women, two of whom are negresses.” Captain Fitzroy of the Beagle, merely notes that seven gauchos and five indians remain....”
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1823-1833/
We are 7 generation. We want to be Argentine citizens and our right to self determination.
@ 55 (Argentina wasnt even a country in 1833) This is denied by the treaties signed by his country with Argentina.
Look them up in your own historical archives in BA for a start? - Look at the originals - not some fake copies that have been altered perhaps? Then compar them with those papers held in the British Archives.
You will find the following FACTS:
The ONLY people ORDERED Out by the british were the Arg Military garrisson who had only been in the Islands about 3-4 months - hardly a settled population!!
The ONLY others who VOLUNTEERED to leave - they were NOT forced to - were just 2 couiples - and one of them was Uriguyan and one was Brazillian!!
ALL the other civilians freely elected to STAY in the Islands under the British. The last of those died here in about 1870.
Now those are the FACTS - yes these nasty things that so many Argentines like to forget and twist and pretend never happened- FACTS and REALITY.
Think - do you seriously think that cuttin off the route for the Lan flight will at any time bring us to the table to talk- lets agree - only one thing Arg will talk about - the date we become an Argentine Colony?
You are I think an intelligent guy - so you know that will Never Happen!
The loss of the link would inconvenience us for a while but we have alternative air -routes for passengers and freight in and out.
The loss of the airlink would make restoration od a shipping link between Stanley an Punta more viable again - and it would thus most likley happen - after all it still does at times - despite the famous decrees.
The loss of the link would result in the Islands reinstating our 1999 side as well - the banning of all Argentine passport holders visiting the Islands by any method. So bad news for all the portenos who book cruises down this way in Jan and Feb - and all veterans and families of 1982.
Similar bad news for Chileans.
Seems bad news for S America but no real problem for Islanders.
As I’ve said many times before in here, and paraphrasing a Great Briton: This is not even the end of the beginning…………
Everything depends, of course of the success or failure of the current British Pirate Oil Exploration
If it fails, you better prepare for many meager years…….
If it succeeds……. Well then; paraphrasing another Anglo: ….Huston, we have a problem…..
54 Troneas, in 1833 there WAS no native born population in the Falklands - Vernet's settlers were not native born- and only one native born person: José Simon, son of Jean Simon, who was murdered by Rivero and his gang, and Carmelita, one of the negresses of Darwin's report that Redhoyt mentions above. Neither he nor his parents were expelled. Carmelita later had a child with Manuel Coronel, Manuel Coronel Junior, and after Coronel Senior died she married settler Richard Penny and had a son Richard Jr. So your Isle of Man analogy is utter crap.
What's more it is a matter of recorded fact, in more than one contemporary account, that those Buenos Aires settlers, the civilians, were encouraged to remain. All except 4 did. Some of today's Falkland Islanders can trace their ancestry back to those Bs As settlers. The illegal military garrison was expelled of course. The Falkland Islanders are in their country of origin. They have been there for 7, 8 and even 9 generations. Many more than the vast majority of Argentines have been in Argentina.
Referandum ? what referandum?
There are no any referandum in UK history, becouse there are no
any people will (initiative) inside their monarchical system .
[no its the beginning of the end][for argentine perhaps]
and
If it succeeds……. Well then; paraphrasing another Anglo: ….Huston, we have a problem…..[or argentina has a problem]
are you not looking for your own oil in argentina,, if you find lots of oil, then you wont need those wind swept islands, will you,,,
but on the other hand, if you fail, and the falklands start producing oil,
then i suspect argentina will have leaner years ahead .
The Chileans suspended flights because the Argentines told them to. the Pinochet thing was just a pretext. And yes, we did complain.
The number of Chileans in Argentina is irrelevant. No-one is threatening to cut them off from their families. Or are you? I wouldn't be surprised.
Thailand ... ??
If it fails, you better prepare for many meager years…….
If it succeeds……. Well then; paraphrasing another Anglo: ….Huston, we have a problem…..
Yup all about resources.
Shouldn't that be Houston?
Sounds like you could be ringing the wrong people.
Referandum ? what referandum?
There are no any referandum in UK history, becouse there are no
any people will (initiative) inside their monarchical system .
Really?
This year alone we have had at least one national and one regional referendum.
As said before - there were only a small handfull od Chileans here in 1999, today there are several Hundreds. And yes a complaint was made by London to Santiago then saying it was a bit unfair to take it out on the Islands just because UK had arrested Pinochet in England!
Monty- it was aChilean Govt decision in 1999 - they wanted it done instantly - Lan pointed out they had contractual arrangements so it was delayed for some time. Then once the flight stopped Arg realised - this is a good idea, we now have a bargain chip - we will only renew the overflight permit under conditions etc- thus came about the 1999 Agreement - ant despite what crazy CFK says Marcos and others - it is a Firm Fromal Signed International Agreement - and lodged at the UN.
But we all know It Agreements mean nothing to Argentine Govts! Same as we all know how Arg Govts work when it comes to Commercial Blackmail!! Maersk- Hamburg Sud for a start. Several Spanish Fishing Companies etc. So Yes obviously you will do the same Blackmail Theat to Lan - drop the flight or we will screw you and make you loose millions of dollars in all your aviation with Argentina. The world knows how Arg works. Its all you can do as you are to scared to go to the ICJ!!
But this one would be an own goal - it would mean the end of Argentines visiting here as tourists,veterans and nextofkin families. It would be several hundred innocent Chileans cut off from their families and friends - or having to loose their jobs here, sell up and return to Chile where they may not get such a goos job so seasy?
And have very little effect on the Islanders and UK - other than make us here even more determined to never ever have anything to do with Argentina! So I would say it would be a pretty stupid thing for Arg to do. It would be 2 negatives to you and no gain!
Ed tells different type / strategical referandums....
Europe/countries make more than 100 referandums for every subjects
in every year..... !!
Now Britain will shortly have 14 brand-new multi-role tanker transports. That's big aeroplanes to you. They can carry passengers and/or freight as well as big tanks of that liquid stuff jet planes use. And they have a range of 9,200 miles (14,800 km). So they can fly all the way from Britain to OUR Falkland Islands without stopping once! Isn't that nice? Strangely enough, LAN Airlines have some similar aircraft with a range of 8,500 miles (13,700 km). So I doubt any little tantrum by CFK is going to make much difference.
On the subject of how Britain is going to vote in respect of those arabs, we don't know yet. But my opinion is quite clear. Around 3,200 years ago Hebrews/Israelites/Jews/Israelis had a couple of territories called the Kingdom of Judah and the Kingdom of Israel right where the State of Israel is today. There is archeological evidence. Not their fault the Romans forced them to flee. Back then the Romans basically did what they liked. Then in 1947 the UN decided to put that right and the State of Israel became independent in 1948. Coming back to reclaim their own. Much like the Falklands in a way. Britain withdrew in 1776 for economic reasons but did not relinquish sovereignty. In 1833 Britain reclaimed its own. And are still there! So what about the “palestinians”? Who are they? There's no country called Palestine. Never has been. It's a geographical area. Like the Andes. Who's supporting a claim to statehood by the Andeans? I really hope my government tells the “palestinian” terrorists to p*ss off. Just as we, politely, tell certain others to p*ss off when they try to claim OUR Falkland Islands as their own.
I see that, if CFK goes ahead with her threat, the Falkland Islands intends to ban Argentine passport holders. Could they not be used for mine clearance? Must be something they are good for!
---
just a technical and plain detail to keep it real, Think:
“The third most numerous foreign community are Chileans with 191.147, most of them living in Patagonia and in fourth place Uruguay with, 156.592 members.”
en.mercopress.com/2011/09/03/almost-half-of-foreign-residents-in-argentina-are-from-paraguay-and-bolivia
---
Still numerous, but way a distance to the million. I knew I had seen this the forum previously ;)
with the United States, because of a U.S. warship destroyed a facility owned by the Republic, one of the Falkland Islands. The Republic asked
satisfaction and the United States appointed a special envoy, but the negotiations are not reached successful completion. The envoy requested and obtained their passports. The government of
Argentina accused him of having gone to hinder the negotiations. . . and declared the determination of assert their power and rights to the Falkland Islands. . ”.
The Annual Register, London
Wrong too. The USA did not appoint a special envoy !
1832 - In June, Francis Baylies, the new United States, Chargé d’affaires, arrives in Argentina and sends a long letter of protest to the Foreign Ministry.
[A part of this letter, which largely details the events up to this point, relates an exchange between an unnamed correspondent and Vernet who, when asked why he had not taken action against the crew of the Adeona, a British sealer, said, “ that he could not take an English vessel with the same propriety that he could an American.”]
July 10th, Chargé d’affaires Balies, in frustration at the lack of response from the Foreign Ministry in Buenos Aires, writes again to the Argentine Minister outlining his view of the situation and of the rights that Buenos Aires claims to the Falkland Islands.
[This letter is too long to repeat here, but is remarkably well detailed in its consideration of the history of discovery, the 1770/71 dispute, the British protest of 1829, Nootka Sound and the break up of the Viceroyalty. Most interestingly, Baylies asserts, “ ... But, if it be hypothetically admitted that the full and entire right of sovereignty was possessed by Spain - has Spain renounced it? Has Spain ever, by any acknowledgement whatever, yielded the rights which she once possessed?..” - See British and Foreign State Papers, vol 20, p.344]
On August 18th, Francis Baylies, in a very short note, requests the return of his passport, and shortly after leaves the United Provinces. This severs diplomatic relations between the US and Buenos Airies ...”
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1823-1833/
Read and learn MoreCrap :-)
I was a bit optimistic in my estimation of how many Chileans live in Argentina.
But you and Mercopress are waaaaay too pessimistic!
”Población de chilenos residentes en Argentina
De acuerdo al Censo Nacional Argentino, en 2001 la población total de nacidos en Chile y residentes en Argentina alcanza a 211.093 personas. La población total de nacidos en Argentina, pero de padre o/y madre chilenos llega a 218.615 personas.
Sumando ambas categorías, se obtiene una cantidad de 429.708 personas de origen chileno, residentes en Argentina.”
www.ine.cl/canales/sala_prensa/revistaseconomicas/25/burnnett25.pdf
And that was 10 years ago……...................
If we add all those “Shilenos de Corazón” in Argentina that can cook a decent Curanto, dance a Cueca, and drink a bottle of Pisco sin pestañear, we would end pretty close to the million… I would “Think”……….
Marvin - do you have a date for your quote ?
I said: As shown in Annual Register, the incident is between Argentina and the United States.
Argentina protested.
U.K. did not protest the destruction of “his” British colony, Red ;-)
66 Monty69
”The Chileans suspended flights because the Argentines told them to”
WRONG, we don't tell Chileans what to do nor they tell us what to do.
They suspended the flights after the detention of Pinochet in Britain for several months. You are just using the few Chileans living in Malvinas, be careful, they serve your food at Malvina H.
How many more times and in how many languages must the idiot Argentinian politicians be told that the English speaking people living in the Falkland Islands have voted for the status quo and have no desire to become Argentinians.
After all, France does not have a problem with the British Channel Islands off the French coast. The people there are left to get on with their lives as Britons without constant threats from the Nation that owns the nearest landmass.
Argentina has no hope. I would not be surprised to find that the British government and the FIG have plans to make the Islands totally uninhabitable. Massive minefields at every possible landing site. Buried explosive devices in all sorts of unexpected places. Wouldn't that be fun? If the only safe places on the Islands were on the top of moutains, where they can be hit by Typhoons, Tornados and cruise missiles. And all remotely controlled and made of plastic. Undetectable and walk over them a dozen times with no result. Then, one day, they get switched on! A couple of weeks and the SAS and Gurkhas arrive to plant some more. Remind me to advise the MoD that we need cameras to record the expressions on argie faces as they get blown to smithereens!
Hello argies. Want to avoid this? Want your lovely towns and cities to only suffer from your homegrown criminals, drug pushers, homos? Stay away from OUR Islands. When they're no longer OUR Islands, they will belong to the Falkland Islanders. Do you think that will make a difference? It won't. Do you think Britain will EVER leave the Falkland Islands defenceless against Argentina? Not in the next thousand years. Give it up!
I believe nobody usurped islands to France.
@ 81 you're so funny, you're living the Kirchnerist paranoia hahaha cristina de kirchner is such a monster lol you're a fool conqueror, do you live in the falklands? because you're living in that bad mood all the time lol cristina de kirchner has done it hahaha cristina de kirchner is an insane person, she's mentally ill and she is making the people of the falklands paranoid and schizophrenich as well as much as she is hahaha if you listen to cristina de kirchner, you'll be miserable all your life end you'll end up killing yourselves, it's your choice, you can ignore her or you can do what she wants you to do, it's all up to you people hahaha
(a negative used to express dissent, denial, or refusal, as in response to a question or request)
Collins
World English Dictionary
no 1 (nəʊ)
— sentence substitute
1. used to express denial, disagreement, refusal, disapproval, disbelief, or acknowledgment of negative statements
2. used with question intonation to query a previous negative statement, as in disbelief: Alfred isn't dead yet. No?
— n , noes , nos
3. an answer or vote of no
4. ( often plural ) a person who votes in the negative
5. the noes have it there is a majority of votes in the negative
6. not take no for an answer to continue in a course of action despite refusals
[Old English nā, from ne not, no + ā ever; see ay 1 ]
[Argentinean meaning of no]
1, it does not really mean [no]
2, you might mean [yes]
3,You probably mean [yes]
4,You don’t know what your saying
5, we know what’s best for you,
6, it’s a lie
7, we don’t believe it
8, its British fabrication
9, its British for lying
10, we done understand the word [no]
• [in other words Argentina does know what [no is] but freely chooses to ignore it ]
,
Thailand has 3 times referandums in history of 60-70th years,their
interests were related to ongoing disputes agricultural areas where
two of them west-east border sides the other from inner line.
In history there are many geostrategic referandums which republic
regimes have , but monarchic and some other totaliter kinds regimes
have not.
In Falkland/Malvinas sample can not be tested becouse of that there
are no any people in technically,but if ,let's assume that there are
mixed or argentine origin people whose population 50000---100000
under the brits invasion admin,then there can be made referandum
to ask them to choose argentina ? or united kingdom ? by how to start?
very simple that by way of united nations special committee ,no need
by way of un general assembly or un security council decisions.
if the invader country doesn't accept this committee decision then
it is voted in general assembly and send to security council to submit.
at his point the security council doesn't have any objection right.
what if the indigenous people like tobas, diaguitas, mapuches, and the others start complaining about us living in argentina and claim that they want their land back and we are squatters? lol wouldn't it be funny? what will we do about that? hahaha
of course ,(first) you can apply to Argentine or Chile or a government
whereever you live to obtain some cultural right,after obtaining
cultural identity ,wait,and apply again to have some economic rights,after having them ,wait, apply to have political autonomy
rights ,after having it ,wait ,final step you can apply to united nation
general assembly to have some independence.
as you see on this process , if you have some autonomous region
then you can have your targets more quickly.,certainly that you
must have a bit courage to have independence.
or is that something else these two goverments failed to tell the people .lol.
How do you manage that insane laughter? By being insane, of course.
Glad to put a bullet through your, or her, brainspace (no brain, of course) any time you like. Alternatively, I could employ my kukri and relocate your heads.
For you, personally, I have a special treat. Given that argies are, by definition, queer, homosexual, faggot perverts I have in mind a 2 inch diameter, 8 foot long pointed rod. argie is placed with the point of the rod in his as**ole. Then dropped. Just think. Sexual fulfillment and immolation at the same time. argie heaven! And it'll never cr*p again!
Why would anyone in their right mind want Argentina to exist? It lies, constantly. It threatens, constantly, It breaks the law, constantly, It contains perverts, constantly. It glorifies perverts, constantly. Is there anything good about Argentina? Only if you're a perverted, lying would-be bully.
Fortunately, Britain has the answer. It's called destruction. Push your luck, kiddies. Do be aware of the real world. The remainder of your existence could be measured in minutes. Get it? You're alive. 5 minutes, or less. You're dead. Fried. Don't push your luck. You don't have much to start with.
i said that Argentina or Chile becouse they have scattering living
in two or more countries becouse that they don't have any powers to
deal with more than one government let alone one of them.
also their living areas in inner zones.
like as Kurds are living in Syria,Turkey,Iraq,Iran.my thought is
they can obtain independence just in Northern Iraq.
For a sovereignty dispute to exist your county first has to register the dispute with the ICJ something it has failed to do & no surprise since your county has said it wont respect any decision the ICJ makes unless its in your favor. The UN has never issued a singe resolution against Britain just Argentina. The advisory notes of the special decolisation committee only advise both sides to seek a peaceful solution but this is no longer possible since Argentina enshrined sovereignty over the islands in your constitution ruling out any possible form of negation. Argentina is STILL in breach of the UN Charter and international law due to its continued illegal blockade of the islands.
The UN say's the Islands belongs to the Falkland islanders & they have the right to stay British citizens. If Argentina wishes to challenge this then only the ICJ can make this ruling. So take us to court where you will get a chance to prove your claims, a problem because you cant prove lies & propaganda & your goverment knows it.
They tend to be used more on a local level.
PS: this is not the place for your homosexual urgencies conqueror, go somewhere else.
depends,, we have a referendum about every 4/5 years, the goverment is in power [i belive] 5 years, and can call an election when he/she feels confident, or before they have to go ?
the referendum on the european union, has been suspended i belive 3 times now, promises again broken, as the eu, is really unalectable
a referendum is meerly between goverments,
but i may well be wrong .
We have Argentine documents, no less, from that time which state, quite clearly that the Argentine Garrison of 23 was understandably told to return to Buenos Aires. They had only been at Port Louis for 3 months and during that time had unbelievably murdered the Argentine Governor, Mestivier. The civilian population numbered just 32 and we have the names of them all documented. They were a mixture of populations, and a few were from Buenos Aires. They were employed by a Frenchman named Louis Vernet who had found his way to Buenos Aires some years previously.
They were invited to stay by the British and just FOUR decided to leave. They were 2 couples and believe me, one was a Brazilian couple and the other was from Uruguay. We have their names as well, because the information was obtained from a document from the archives in Buenos Aires. No Argentine civilans were expelled.
If you listen today to Argentine politicians and petitioners at the U.N. they mistakenly talk of this mythical 'Argentine population' that was supposedly expelled. It is untrue.
Secondly the bullying and aggressive threat by President Kirchner to withdraw the weekly Lan Chile flight to the Falklands will mean that the 1999 Agreement would be revoked. This means that Argentine passport holders will not be permitted to visit the Islands; Argentine next-of-kin will not be permitted to visit the war graves; Argentine war veterans will not visit their areas of combat and hundreds of Argentines who visit the Islands on cruise ships will be forced to remain onboard. I'm sure that they will all 'thank' Mrs Kirchner for her actions!
Marvin - the UK couldn't object about the Lexington Raid because Vernet had exceeded his British licence and we were embarrassed about it. Sent a ship to get it sorted though :-)
Still no date on that article then ?
The drill bit turns!
They have to show that what they did in that period was sufficient to give Buenoas Airies a better title to the Falklands than that already possessed by the British since 1765.
In that sense you are right, as 1833 itself is not important. Even the Lexington raid is not relevant.
Of course, you are also correct in that, whilst interesting, the events of two centuries ago have been over taken by the Islander's rights under the UN Charter. Which is why Argentina spends so much time and energy attempting to muddy the waters there. The sovereignty issue has been surpassed by the Charter of 1945.
Argentina struggles to accept that.
After all, without ancient history they have nothing to argue with at all ...... except geography! A joke in itself :-)
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/
1776 ... brits are expelled from region
1806 ... brits attack on to invade La Plata
1807 ... brits are expelled from this region again
1811/15... spainiards withdrawn from region
1816 ... argentina independent declaration
1831 ... brits uses us warship to destroy the islands
1833 ... brits invade the islands to revenge of 1806/07
this is exactly formal piracy..unfortunately not anything else...!!
Argentina actually know this and this is why they avoid taking their argument for legal adjudication!
Grow a spine and move on.
The drill bit turns.
1776 ... The UK unilaterally and temporarily withdrew from the British Falklands due to other commitments, and left a lead plaque formally confirming the retention of British sovereignty and that the Falkland Islands were the sole property of George III, King of Great Britain.
1806 A small British force attacked Spanish colonies in South America as a tiny part of the Napoleonic wars - which the UK won.
1833 ... The UK expelled the illegal United Provinces military (Captain Pinedo and 25 soldiers who had landed illegally a few months before).
I don't think this South Atlantic problem is the same as Germany/Poland
have...
# 100 historic reality is well know by British admin and undefendable
BUT
for all i know British have an important trump on Argentina about on
their 70 th years “ dirty war ” !
Argentina knows this Brits trump contains blackmail. !
for all i learned the jailed 70 th years generals/some civilians have
many bribe confessions related on from British/American secret servs.
you must ask the right questions to learn deeply/correctly,
for instance that ;
why the Argentine Army attempted to 1982 Falkland Operation
despite of they know it will be unsuccessful ?? ... what for ??
Your problem is having to look from merely British eyes !!
BUT
i look to everything freely ,freely , freely ......
The UK sends close to £50 million pounds every year to support the Palestinian Authority. How much does Argentina contribute? Just words from Argentina, empty words...
Funny that lol
Read and learn - falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1823-1833/
bravo !! welldone to you !!
your post is merely your interpretation with added some tricky words !!
one of them is ;
he must show the written orders made before when you use “” illegal“”
word ..don't you ?.. illegal ? just for you ...not for me !!
Gibraltar,N.Ireland,Iraq,Afghanistan,HongKong...are all legal for you
... whereas illegal for me !!
BUT
# 100 not contains any interpretations !!
1776 ... The British were not expelled from region
1806 ... The British were not expelled from this region again
1831 ... The British did not use a warship to destroy the islands
1833 ... The British did not invade the islands in revenge for 1806/07
And yet another shining Turnip in the wast Mercopress firmament.......
He says:
”1806 A small British force attacked Spanish colonies in South America…..”
I say:
A small British force?................:
First British invasions of the Río de la Plata: ~ 8,000 British troops. About 1,300 were captured. Unknown number of dead or wounded.
Second British invasions of the Río de la Plata: ~11,000 British troops. About 2,800 killed, wounded or captured
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_invasions_of_the_R%C3%ADo_de_la_Plata
Twice defeated by what Lieutenant Colonel Lancelot Holland quaintly described in his diary as:
”The rabble who had conquered us…... They were very dark-skinned people, short and ill-made, covered with rags, armed with long muskets and some a sword….. There was neither order not uniformity among them”
More or less like the Pumas “rabble” that today trounced Scotland in a good played Rugby match….
A Masterpiece :-)))
The drill bit turns.
We all know that the u. k. will keep on conditioning to discuss about the sovereignty, it will keep on using the right to self determination to reject the negotiations, however only a judgement from the i. c. j. can affirm if that right is applicable or not, and what country has better rights. If none of the two nations propose to give that step, i think it's because actually none of the two countries are sure that their case is going to triunf, so, if they are not going to take the case to the court, what both should do, is to resume the negotiations like the u. n solicit, the solution to the conflict can't depend ony on the wishes of the islanders, and please dont insist with what our constitution says respecting our claim, because i have said one million times what i think about it.
Finally i would like to clarify what this article says, it's true that in 1833 there was not any indigenous population, but when the british took the islands, they forced our authorities to leave the archipelago, with all the families who wish to go with them, i have interesting information in my survey about it, some of you already has it, if there is some one interested on reading it, i can send it to you.
Kewin the Tipster was right.....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0hLQVJAbk4
The Napoleonoic wars involved many millions of men and 3 to 6 million dead or missing. The attacks on Spanish colonies were a tiny sideshow.
In 1982, 11,300 Argentine invaders surrendered and were shipped home.
And I'm from England - who recently trounced Argentina.
Try thinking before posting
The turnip counter- attacks!
Mentioning millions and millions………………
For your info, there where no more then 25,000 British troops at the “tiny sideshow” at Waterloo (Battle won by German troops btw).
Roughly the same amount that tried to invade the Rio de la Plata.(and failed twice)
Stop embarrassing yourself.
Ps:
Best of lucks for the Thistle against the Rose next Saturday……………..
You are a clown.
be free please be free like all global investors do !!
---------------------------------
we may make a interesting discovery on Think's #108 comment which
says from Colonel's diary that the British have never liked to battle by
“”close touch “” methods like any swords .... as we see today they are
talentless on “” close touch“” sports ( boxing ..wrestling...fencing... etc )
this shows us the Brits are not bold in contrary to common presumption.!
interesting !!
It always comes down to perspective.
How many times do you have to be told there is no UN mandate, It is a fabrication of the Argentine government. It simply does not exist because Argentina has never registered a claim with the ICJ. Britain is not in violation of any UN resolutions or mandates but Argentina is. The UN has again verified that the Falklands are a British overseas territory. The real reason Argentina wants the Islands come straight from the ex ministers mouth ”oil”.
50,000 of them were from the ”Königreich Preußen”
Another 50,000 were from the ”Königreich Hannover”, “Grafschaft Nassau” and “Braunschweig-Lüneburg”.
All four of them, German States……..
The remaining 25,000 were British rabble ……………………
“ .. Wellington claimed he had ”an infamous army, very weak and ill-equipped, and a very inexperienced Staff“. His troops consisted of 67,000 men: 50,000 infantry, 11,000 cavalry, and 6,000 artillery with 150 guns. Of these, 25,000 were British, with another 6,000 from the King's German Legion. All of the British Army troops were regular soldiers and 7,000 of them were Peninsular War veterans. In addition, there were 17,000 Dutch and Belgian troops, 11,000 from Hanover, 6,000 from Brunswick, and 3,000 from Nassau..”
And I hear that Pinky is a woman :-)
And there's no problem because the Kelpers don't exist lol
falklandsnews.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/falkland-islanders-are-british-says-pinky/
In my opinion Argentina is more of a colony than the Falkland Islands, last time I checked, most of the Argentine government consisted of 2nd and 3rd generation European immigrants. The country is a disgusting example of what happens when fascism becomes the cultural norm in government.
Anyway, I don't see why it's up to the UK to take the matter to the ICJ. It is Argentina who have the claim. They should prove their claim in the only court which can make a decision, instead of making complaints in every forum possible, even ones where the UK is not represented, but not one which can make a difference. I believe it's because Argentina knows very well that it does not have a case, so are trying to do this by political/diplomatic means instead of legal means. This is the strategy Argentina has adopted for the last 64 years, since Argentina revived its claim, except of course for a slight change in approach for a few months in 1982. Argentina's strategy is unlikely to ever have any success.
But it's worth pointing out that the Falklands and other overseas territories are already defended by the EU since the Treaty of Lisbon.
EU Treaty of Lisbon 2007 Article 42(7) (page 53)
“If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory [including the Falkland Islands, as listed in Annex II – Page 426] , the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power …”
You say:
“But Wellington was the man!”
I say:
Yeahhh... He was the man.......
An Irishman.
Chuckle chuckle™
my thought is that commodity importing from South America is more
important than ....article 2007 42(7)(page 53)... for EU ..!!
i don't say it ...article 2009/656-(22)-5 says...!!
Despacito despacito despacito... le......
www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0hLQVJAbk4
Yeahhh... He was the man.......
An Irishman.
A Anglo Irishman
Field Marshal Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, KG, GCB, GCH, PC, FRS (1 May 1769[1] – 14 September 1852), was an Anglo-Irish[2] soldier
Anglo-Irish was a term used soon after the 1800 Acts of Union to describe a privileged social class in Ireland, whose members were the descendants and successors of the Protestant Ascendancy,[1] mostly belonging to the Church of Ireland, which was the established church of Ireland until 1871, or to a lesser extent one of the English dissenting churches, such as the Methodist church. Its usage continued in the Victorian era, when it described a class composed mostly of Church of Ireland adherents who had adopted many English customs. Beyond religion, the Anglo-Irish tended to follow English practice in matters of culture, science, law, agriculture and politics. Many became eminent as administrators in the British empire and as senior army and naval officers
That where the world is going forwards,
The argentine government seems dead bent on taking her country backwards,
And very much succeeding, with their indoctrination techniques
But as it seems true,
That she has reduced her countries ability to just talk talk,
Then I suppose this would be reasonable for a leader, who can do nothing but talk,
??,
“ 1829 - ... That which I would recommend is that the government of Buenos [Ayres] should be very quietly but very distinctly informed that His Majesty has claims upon Falklands Islands and that His Majesty will not allow of any settlement upon, or any cession to, individuals or foreign nations of these islands by Buenos Ayres, which shall be inconsistent with the King’s acknowledged right of sovereignty. ...”
falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/1823-1833/
Morning all, anyone fancy a Guinness :-)
please be patient !!
Greece and Argentina are not same countries where they have
highly different economies...!!
wait & see !!
i do hope that i'll keep in touch with you in the future !!
Both the Argentine government and the British are acting out of self-interest. And if you think that self-interest means looking out for you, me, or the Kelpers, you are seriously deluded.
Spend a moment looking at the image and think about the message:
johnkary.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pale_blue_dot.jpg
Ricardo excellent reflection is to think, is very important to think about the significance of civilizations. All will be judged and accountable for our individual and social behavior.
As the world public opinion is internalized more of the Falklands conflict, many countries are sympathetic to the claim of sovereignty. And even in the UK itself believe it is possible to reach an agreement acceptable to both parties. Just so long to see newspapers and Web specialists in the subject.
It is very important to the work of these years of Nestor and Cristina Kirchner to gamble as a state policy of disarmament and non-violence and opt for dialogue and peace among peoples, the fact that Argentina is in a significantly decreased its military spending merely reducing it to what is necessary. This contrasts with the aggressive arms of Great Britain to hold a suspected nuclear base in the islands and yet still with the humanitarian bombing civilians in Libya. This has fallen badly in world public opinion.
As Luther King: There are no roads to peace, peace is the road.
Humanity has the same deep feeling. Peace, dialogue and nonviolence.
Face1354@hotmail.com
That old chestnut
Thousands of Libyans have turned out to cheer UK Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy in the eastern city of Benghazi
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14934352
Libyans Thank You UK
www.youtube.com/watch?v=468zp5deHII
- Britain's help in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi will never be forgotten and British companies can expect to play an instrumental role in rebuilding Libya, a senior diplomat told British executives Tuesday.
Exclusive: Libya assures UK of key business role
www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/27/us-exclusive-libya-idUSTRE78Q23S20110927
[why do you alway quote this man]
then insult his memory, by using your so called peace road, to attack the falklands,
[][Peace, dialogue and nonviolence[][
or, lies brain washing and peacefull insults,
You have eyes but see not, ears but do not want you to hear.
With all due respect, these doctrines so obsessed with colonialism and imperialism, they do not accept other modes of thinking, especially Latin Americans. Thinking differently is the most normal thing in democracy and freedom ..
When we say that in these years Néstor and Cristina Kirchner have been established as a state policy of disarmament and non-violence and invest in the dialogue and peace among peoples, a decision has not been unique to them (Nestor and Cristina Kirchner) .
This decision has been accompanied during the whole Argentine politician from the right to the country's political left from 1983 onwards to claim on all international forums, the truth of the Falklands conflict.
The struggle undertaken by our country and have begun kirchner is similar to the civil rights struggle led by Luther King in the U.S. or Perez Esquivel (Nobel Peace Prize) in their struggle for human rights against the dictatorship claims military dialogue in the Falklands conflict.
About Malvinas, Cristina said that must be met “the 10 UN resolutions have called for the UK to sit down and negotiate on our sovereignty” and stressed “the obligation of all members to accept” the resolutions of the Assembly.
D is that comply with resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 ( 39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm the invitation made in resolution 2065 (XX) to the parties to continue negotiations without delay to find a peaceful solution, having due regard to the provisions and objectives of the United Nations Charter and Resolution 1514 (XV), and the interests of the people of the Falkland Islands.
Thank you very much.
UN Charter:
Article 1: The Purposes of the UN are: 2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
UN Resolution 1514 (XV):
2. ALL peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development
Interests of the people of the Falkland Islands:
The Falkland Islanders decide what their interests are.
Resolution 2065 (XX)
General.Habiendo Assembly considered the question of the Malvinas (Falkland Islands), Taking into account the chapters of the reports of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples relating to the Malvinas (Falkland Islands) and in particular the conclusions and recom ¬ mendations approved by the same regarding the Terri ¬ tory, whereas its resolution 1514 (XV) of December 14, 1960, was inspired in the desired order to put an end to colonialism everywhere and in all its forms, one of which fits the case of the Malvinas Islands (Falkland Islands).
(THE FOLLOWING IS FUNDAMENTAL)
Noting the existence of a dispute between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over these islands. (Recognizing the principle of territorial integrity over self-determination by the existence of a conflict is of sovereignty)
1. Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pursue without delay the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee to examine the situation ¬ tion with respect to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in order to find a peaceful solution, having due regard to the provi ¬ tions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations ¬ das and resolution 1514 (XV) of the General Assembly and as the interests of the population of the Malvinas Islands (Falkland Islands);
2. Calls on both Governments to inform the Special Committee and the General Assembly at the twenty-first session on the outcome of the negotia ¬ tions.
1398th. plenary meeting, December 16, 1965.
Do not be afraid to debate and negotiation to resolve conflicts.
Thank you very much.
Proposal is under consideration, no time limits imposed, suggested or hinted at, so we'll let you know. Don't call us we'll call you.
Let’s get this right, so EVERYBODY can understand
What you are saying is, we have ears but don’t listen, we have eyes but don’t see,
In other words, if we, [me] and all my fellow British bloggers on this site, refuse to except your
Sovereignty over the Falklands islands, we are all deaf and dumb,
We must except, that we have no choice in the matter, that we must negotiate your
Sovereignty over the islands, until we except, your sovereignty
You will not recognise that the Falklands have any rights, and we the British are just an imperial aggressive power holding the Falklands against their will.
Is this is what you are implying then .
,
Why is so absolute in their opinions? Leave prejudice and resentment. Nobody is saying that the islanders have no rights. They have limited their rights. Their biggest problem is it does not recognize the context of conflict and social processes. Read the Resolution 2065.
Not want to hear or see that there is a problem of sovereignty, there was a war in between, because escuhar not, nor do the claims of sovereignty, made since 1833 ..
The specificity of the Malvinas issue is that the United Kingdom occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the original population and did not allow its return, thus violating the territorial integrity of Argentina. It then discards the possibility of applying the principle of self-determination, as its exercise by the inhabitants of the islands would cause the “breach of national unity and territorial integrity” of Argentina.
Still does not mean that the islanders have no rights, no one drives, but they must understand that conflict is much earlier in time and has violated the principle of territorial integrity.
They must recognize that Argentina has its truth in the conflict of sovereignty.
thank you very much
Lies and Argentine statistics
Guillermo Moreno, the thuggish commerce secretary, is moving to stamp out the unofficial, but widely trusted, price indices. To do so he has dusted off a decree, penalising misleading advertising, approved by a military dictatorship in 1983. In February he sent letters to 12 economists and consultants ordering them to reveal their methodology,?????see more
www.economist.com/node/18587317
Food, Lies, and Inflation in Argentina
www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2011/08/24/food-lies-and-inflation-argentina
Keeping “Secrets and Lies” on Argentina's Past
www.thewip.net/talk/2011/05/keeping_secrets_and_lies_on_ar.html
search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20110620a2.html
Kirchner Antics Put Argentina on Brink
www.realclearworld.com/articles/2011/04/21/argentinas_kirchner_channels_chavez_99486.html
Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics
www.globalspeculations.com/2010/08/lies-damn-lies-and-statistics/
Would believe the argentine government
Millions of indoctrinated people do, ??
The rest just laugh ..
.
The civilian population were NOT expelled from the British Falklands in 1833, only some United Provinces military (around 26 men who had landed illegally a few months before)
UN Charter: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and SEF-DETERMINATION of peoples,
UN Resolution 1514 (XV): ALL peoples have the right to SELF_DETERMINATION; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development
The FALKLAND ISLANDERS decide what their interests are..
“Our position on the Falklands is well known. We have no doubts on our sovereignty over the Islands”, said the FCO spokesperson. “It is based on the right to self determination, which means that as long as the people of the Falklands want to remain British, we shall support that position”.
Thank you very much
Not a single UN Resolution with respect to the Falklands calls for the UK and Argentina to negotiate over sovereignty. They call for something different. They call the UK and Argentina to settle their DISPUTE over sovereignty. Two very different things.
Self determination is an interest of the Falkland Islanders. Using the word “interest” is entirely consistent with the Falkland Islander rights and does not limit their right to self determination. What's more, Resolution 2065 (XX) specifically references the UN Charter and Resolution 1516, both of which have self determination as a key principle.
Totally false
The only thing repeating a lie over and over does is to make YOU a liar, Raul
And calling them “original” when they had been there for less than 4 months really is stretching the facts a bit. Only one of the civilians there in January 1833 was actually born on the Falkland Islands.
You really have to start getting a few basic facts correct.
It is clear that prior to the opinion of the resolution 2065, have been studied and tested the Argentine case, and therefore are valid, recognizing that there is a pre-existing sovereignty dispute. It is very obvious that the invitation in diplomatic and contextual, is required to resolve a dispute over sovereignty.
Otherwise, tell me because there is resolution 2065 (XX), 1965 and ratified by subsequent resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute. Ask yourself and research in diplomatic circles as the significance of this resolution.
GOOD READ PLEASE !!!!!!!! without preconceptions AND BE OBJECTIVE
(The following is essential)
Noting the existence of a dispute between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over these islands. (Recognizing the principle of territorial integrity over self-determination of the existence of a sovereignty dispute)
1. Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pursue without delay the negotiations recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee on the Situation ¬ tion with respect to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in order to find a peaceful solution, taking into account the provisions ¬ tions and objectives of the United Nations Charter and resolution das ¬ 1514 (XV) of the General Assembly and the interests of the population the Malvinas (Falkland Islands);
2. Calls on both Governments to inform the Special Commission and the General Assembly on the twenty-first in the outcome of negotiations ¬ tions.
1398th. plenary meeting, December 16, 1965.
just carry on talking,
as thats all you can do,
You continue to repeat the lie that the UK “expelled the original population and did not allow its return”, when there was no “original” population and no civilian was expelled. This is demonstrably false using contemporary accounts and documents many of them in the Archivo de la Nacion.
Just by noting a that a DISPUTE exists does not imply territorial integrity has supremacy over self determination. Show me a UN Resolution which says the Falklands were, are or should be Argentine territory...
In fact, the ICJ has made quite clear on a number of occasions (East Timor, Western Sahara, Kosovo) that self determination trumps territoral integrity. Have you read any of those ICJ cases? I think you should.
If territorial integrity limits self determination then why did the UN allow Yugoslavia to break up, why did it allow the Czechoslovakia to split in two, why was Eritrea allowed to break away from Ethiopia, why is South Sudan now an independent country?
You do a very good job of insulting your own intelligence.
You make a very good job of insulting his own intelligence.
Do not be vindictive and reactionary, leave the hate and resentment towards all that is Latin American and Argentine. Thinking differently is the essence and the most normal thing in democracy and freedom.
You keep repeating the lie that the UK ”, expelled the original population and did not allow his return.
With all due respect, because you think there is, Resolution 2065 (XX), 1965 and ratified by subsequent resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38 / 12 ), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25).
You do not want to accept that there is a conflict of sovereignty. It is clear that prior to the opinion of the resolution 2065, have been studied and tested the Argentine case, and therefore are valid, recognizing that there is a pre-existing sovereignty dispute. Refer to the decolonization committee United Nations resolutions conducted annually.
... .. That the integrity of territorial self-determination prevails over ...
With all due respect, has been wrong in writing, giving me reason.
... .. If the territorial integrity of the limits of self-determination, why the UN allows Yugoslavia to break, why allow the Czechoslovakia split in two, why Ethiopia Eritrea to break away, why is now the Southern Sudan an independent country
Roberts, continues to analyze and evaluate without considering the historical and social processes. Every case I named are all different, can resemble a bit, but definitely a different resolution. From there it is so important decolonization committee United Nations examines each conflict as the historical and social process of each case of colonialism. From there it follows the validity of the argument prevails Argentine territorial integrity over self-determination.
You can insult me all you want, I always treat you with respect and consideration.
Thank you very much.
The UK has never denied that a dispute over sovereignty exists. It is quite possible to resolve that dispute while still respecting the rights of the Falkland Islanders. In fact, both the UK AND Argentina are obliged to respect the rights of the Falkland Islanders. They have the right to self determination - that is clearly spelled out in the UN Charter, which both the UK and Argentina have ratified. It is also clearly spelled out in Resolution 1514.
The decolonisation committee can only recommend resolutions. It does not make them. ONLY the Security Council or the General Assembly can make resolutions. Not a single UN Resolution you mention above says that the Falklands were ever, are or should be Argentine territory, yet every single one of them references the right to self determination for all people - and in 1514 it references that right specifically for the Falkland Islanders as the people of a Non Self Governing Territory.
UK and Argentina have been asked by the UN to resolve their DISPUTE over sovereignty but this cannot happen at the expense of the Falkland Islanders' rights. Until Argentina accepts the Falkland Islanders have rights, there will be no progress. It is Argentina who is in breach of international law.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!