Friday, June 28th 2013 - 07:23 UTC

Falklands Referendum: Voters from many countries around the world voted Yes

By Professor Peter Willetts - In March, 1,513 people in the Falklands voted Yes to remaining a British Overseas Territory and only three people voted No. The Yes vote was a remarkable 99.8% of the voters on an exceptionally high turnout of 92.0%. The orthodox view that British voters chose to remain British is not enough to explain the result.

New tables from the Falklands census show that the 11.0% of the referendum electorate were neither born in the Islands nor in Britain. Almost certainly, some 100 to 150 foreign-born individuals, or perhaps more, voted Yes.

This is the conclusion of Professor Peter Willetts from City University, London, who went to the Falklands to monitor the referendum. Today he published a formal report on his findings, as an occasional paper of the South Atlantic Council, which was set up in 1983 to promote understanding between Argentina, Britain and the Falkland Islanders.

The idea of holding a referendum was the Islanders’ response to the increasing pressure they faced from President Cristina Fernandez of Argentina, pursuing a sovereignty claim over the Falklands. Professor Willetts concludes she achieved the direct opposite to her intentions. Instead of weakening and isolating the Falkland Islanders, they were strengthened and given a stronger basis for appealing to the global political community for support. Ironically, President Fernandez de Kirchner has guaranteed that there will be no settlement of the dispute during her presidency and she has made it much more difficult for her successors to have any possibility of being trusted as potential negotiating partners. The Islanders have become so united as a political community they should be called a “micro-nation”.

Professor Willetts agrees with the official Referendum International Observation Mission that procedures for a free and secret ballot were scrupulously followed and the result accurately represented the collective choice of the electorate. It cannot be reasonably argued by the Argentine Government that there was any unfair bias against their sovereignty claim. However, he suggests the Falkland Islands Government (FIG) information about the referendum, sent out to every voter, was “highly prejudicial against voting No to support independence”. The three No votes are widely believed to have been pro-independence and not pro-Argentine. Professor Willetts does not support independence or any other specific option for the future of the Falklands, but he recognises the referendum result has forcefully asserted the right of the Falkland Islanders to have their wishes respected. The Islanders will have to be participants if any negotiations about the future of the Islands are resumed.

The impressive turnout was due to two factors, the intense administrative effort and the enthusiasm of the electorate. The main polling stations were open for two days. Small isolated settlements and farms were visited by five mobile polling stations. An aircraft covered the most isolated places and small islands. Two people on Sea Lion Island had cast postal votes but the aircraft still landed there to collect the ballot paper of the third voter. The capital, Stanley, where 83% of the 1,650 people on the electoral registers live, had a carnival atmosphere with flags, posters and large demonstrations to support a Yes vote.

The full results of the latest census in April 2012 were published a month after the referendum. Among the whole census population of 2,840 people, 8.9% do not have British citizenship; 24.8% were neither born in the Islands nor born in the United Kingdom; and 24.0% do not chose British or Falkland Islander, when asked to “describe their national identity”. These figures cover both people with Falkland Islands Status (FIS), who could vote, and immigrants on work or residence permits, who could not vote.

It is not necessary to be a British citizen to have the vote. New immigrants, who have been in the Islands long enough, are able to apply to belong to the community, to gain FIS and to vote. Professor Willetts has invented the term “Incorporated Islanders”, to cover people who have been granted Falkland Islands Status, who were neither born in the Falklands nor born in the UK. He then asked the census office for an extra table counting the number of Incorporated Islanders. The answer was 182 people from 58 other countries provided 11% of the referendum electorate. Given 8% of the electorate did not vote, then simple arithmetic proves that a minimum of 3% or at least 45 individuals who voted Yes were foreign-born.

The largest minorities were St Helenians and Chileans, but there were also 18 Argentines on the electoral register. These new Islanders are committed to their new country. Over 100 have also chosen to become British citizens, alongside the 42 St Helenian voters who are British. Only one third of the foreign-born Islanders chose their former country as their national identity in the census and two thirds have changed to being an Islander or British or having joint identity. Professor Willetts deduces, not just 45, but most of the 182 Incorporated Islanders voted Yes with the same enthusiasm as the longer established population.

 - From ‘A Report on the Referendum on the Political Status of the Falkland Islands’, by the South Atlantic Council as an Occasional Paper.

About the author

Professor Willetts went to the Falklands from 7-15 March, to witness the referendum on behalf of the South Atlantic Council. He was a founder member of the Council, which was set up in December 1983, to promote better communication and understanding between Argentina, Britain and the Falkland Islanders – see

He is an Emeritus Professor of Global Politics at City University, London, and has studied the United Nations for more than fifty years. He has produced two books on the Non-Aligned Movement and three books on non-governmental organisations in global politics.

Professor Willetts published a South Atlantic Council Occasional Paper on “Distributed Sovereignty and the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Dispute” in June 2012. It is available from

Professor Willetts was writing solely in his own name. The views expressed in South Atlantic Council Occasional Papers are those of the author and are not necessarily shared by all members of the Council.

116 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.

1 Steveu (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:28 am Report abuse
Both the turnout figures and the proportion of the “yes” vote are, indeed, remarkable and this article does a good job going through the implications of how that pans out.

CFK has done a great job for all the islanders - well done!
2 Britworker (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:50 am Report abuse
She has certainly put pay to any dialogue whilst she is in power, it's difficult to see which angle her replacement will come from also. Way too much damage done.
3 RICO (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:53 am Report abuse
So there were 18 Argentines on the electoral register and only 3 votes against remaining a BoT.

What are the odds that all the Argentines actually voted in favour of remaining a BoT? Probably quite high, they know all too well what Argentine governments are like.
4 txiki (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:04 am Report abuse
I suggest reading Professor Willetts abstract paper on the distributed sovereignty of the islands (linked above - and look for the full version). A very interesting read and suggestions and no doubt a good way forward that will satisfy all parties, except the ultra nationalists (on both sides). Clearly the sovereignty dispute is not going to be sorted out in either of the ways either country currently champions. Time for a rethink.
5 Monkeymagic (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:12 am Report abuse

I disagree. The “sovereignty dispute” was resolved perminantly and completely in 1982.

Prior to that date, britain was prepared to engage Argentinas made up claim and hope to find a solution that suited all three parties.

That is off the table due to the military action caused by Argentina costing nearly 1000 lives.

the way forward is to provide the islanders with sufficient defence to act as a deterent to any further aggression.
6 Britworker (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:22 am Report abuse
I don't think it's an ultra nationalist view on the part of Argentina. It is written into their countries constitution, not much room for a rethink there. In addition, the UK has no means to tell the Falklanders to share anything, it's up to them.
Lastly, you made no mention of oil, matters are quite different now.
7 Rufus (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:23 am Report abuse

More than that, between the one eyed man and the old woman they've made sure that the Falkland Islanders (and everyone else, for that matter) are very well aware of the fact that whatever one Argentine president agrees to is (at best) only likely to stay agreed for as long as that president is in office.
8 Devolverislas (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:59 am Report abuse
The Emeritus Professor of Global Politics at City University, London, Peter Willetts, will scarcely “promote understanding between Argentina, Britain and the Falkland Islanders” with the views that are published today by Mercopress.

If it is the case that “the referendum result has forcefully asserted the right of the Falkland Islande s to have their wishes respected”, then why did the Islands’ petitioners go whining to the C24 meeting in New York last week? If MLA Mike Summers was confident of the support of the “global political community” for what reason – other than desperation – did he attack the very purposes, working methods and responsibilities of the Special Committee on Decolonization? The Falkland Islanders only received the support of one speaker – the representative from Sierra Leone. The representative of the United Kingdom did not even turn up. The islanders are indeed isolated.

Peter Willetts is putting his neck on the line when he says that “the Islanders will have to be participants if any negotiations about the future of the Islands are resumed”. No such requirement is stated in any of the UN resolutions that apply specifically to the Falkland Islands/Malvinas.
9 Gordo1 (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 12:16 pm Report abuse
@ 8 Devolverlasislas - have you noticed that the motley crew of the la Kretina and Timerman use every opportunity and every forum to make their mythical, fairy tale and false claim to the sovereignty of the Falklands archipelago - so why shouldn't the legitimate authorities of the territory also follow their example to emphasise how absurd is the Argentine claim?

The only solution to the problem is to take the dispute to the International Court of Justice where the Argentine claim will be seen to be what it is - total nonsense!
10 HansNiesund (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 12:19 pm Report abuse

You're right. The UN only recommends negotiations, it states no requirement at all about who should participate.

However, under normal rules of logic, it doesn't follow from this that the UN has voted that the islanders should be excluded. Only delusional Arjuntine fascists could possibly believe it means that the UN has decided to abandon every principle it stands for, on the grounds, apparently, that it hasn't said it hasn't.

The C24 meanwhile, has completely discredited itself just by giving Timerman the floor no less than three times, but it barely matters because the C24 has no weight with the wider UN. This is why the draft resolution that came out of the last meeting does not even attempt to state, far less advance, any of Arjuntina's arguments.

It is time you admitted that you have failed diplomatically, as well as militarily and legally. And in all cases, because you deserved to.
11 Dean street (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 12:36 pm Report abuse

“Peter Willetts is putting his neck on the line when he says that “the Islanders will have to be participants if any negotiations about the future of the Islands are resumed”. No such requirement is stated in any of the UN resolutions that apply specifically to the Falkland Islands/Malvinas.”

I suggest you read UN Resolution 1541..

Whilst it does not mention the Falkland Islands, it specifically mentions Article XI, which is the:

Read it and you will see that it covers all NSGTs including the Falkland Islands.

Returning to 1541, it specifies that no option will be valid, unless it is FREELY chosen.

So yes, devolverislas we will undoubtedly be the masters of our destiny, not you nor anyone else..
There’s nothing you can do, it is the law..
12 Monkeymagic (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 01:05 pm Report abuse
@8 Delvolemeanus

Why do you think that Kashmir, the West bank, the Paracel Islands, Tibet, Taiwan etc etc are not discussed at the C24?

It is because these a SOVEREIGNTY DISPUTES and the C24 is COMPLETELY the wrong UN body to make any comment, or have any opinion on SOVEREIGNTY disputes.

it is completely PROPER for the Falkland Islanders to point this out, and completely ridiculous that Argentina and her Latam counterparts MISUSE the UN C24 for their colonialist aspirations.

Britain doesnt turn up to the C24 as it is an irrelevant place to talk about sovereignty disputes.

However the C24 is about meeting the needs of the people of the self-governing territories, something they ABJECTLY fail to do. If Mike Summers did “attack the very purposes, working methods and responsibilities of the Special Committee on Decolonization” it would appear he was quite within his rights to do so.

If you wish for “greater understanding between Britain, Argentina and the Falkland Islanders” you have 3 choices.

1) Take you case to the ICJ (the correct UN body for sovereignty disputes) and ask for guidance.

2) Drop your ridiculous imperialist colonialist claim to islands that were never yours

3) Prove irrefutibly that you believe your own claims, that land militarily colonised in the 1800s, and inhabitted by “implanted” people are wrong, and withdraw unilaterally from Patagonia. Give full reperation to the Amerindians that remain post your genocidal rampage.

Either of these 3 are a “starting point”. Your current efforts and those of 1982 were an abject failure.
13 Troy Tempest (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 01:10 pm Report abuse

“If it is the case that “the referendum result has forcefully asserted the right of the Falkland Islande s to have their wishes respected”, then why did the Islands’ petitioners go whining to the C24 meeting in New York last week?”

Sorry, “whining to the C24 ” is what Timerman does each year.

The Islanders have an overwhelmingly positive Referendum result.

Now they are going publicising it to let the UN and the world know the results of the legitimate vote.
14 El capitano (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 01:51 pm Report abuse
8 Devolverislas (#)
....Just what is it that you dont seem to understand Devolverislas..?..The Islanders have spoken and they want NOTHING to do with your basket case of a country( One heart beat away from revolution)..discussion closed...!!
15 M_of_FI (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 02:08 pm Report abuse

“Why did the Islands’ petitioners go whining to the C24 meeting in New York last week” - Are you really struggling to understand why? Are very identitiy and way of life is under threat by your Government, why shouldn't we fight our own corner. You need to take your head out of the sand and embrace reality.
16 Brit Bob (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 03:12 pm Report abuse
@4 & 8

Your comments are truly irrelevant. Argentina has a 'Great Malvinas Lie' which has no legal nor moral basis. Argentine politicians have been drip-feeding the population propaganda for years. The recent abuse of the UN C24 Decolonisation Committee is evidence of this. If there is a sovereignty dispute, Argentina only has one course of action - take it to the appropriate body - the UN ICJ.

Lip-service paid to Argentina by countries around the World regarding their colonial ambitions is just that - lip-service.
17 Simon68 (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 03:45 pm Report abuse
8 Devolverislas (#)
Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:59 am

“... why did the Islands’ petitioners go whining to the C24 meeting in New York last week?...”

Because the C24 is the Decolonisation Committee of the UN, and the Falkland Islands are on the Decolonisation List. Therefore the Islanders are expected to explain there position as regards to THEIR decolonisation.

The intruders at these committee meetings are OUR mis-governmental people who have absolutely NOTHING to do with the decolonisation process.

The only UN organisation to which we could possibly present our ludicrous claims is the ICJ which is charged with mediating international disputes.

Remember that for both the FIG and the UKG there is NO dispute, we are the only interested party that believes there is a dispute over sovereignty, so it is up to our “government” to lay out our claim before the ICJ to see if we are right or wrong.

Unfortunately our present mis-government will NOT present it's case to the ICJ because:
1) it knows it will not win it's case,
2) needs the “Malvinas Myth” to blow smoke in our eyes every time the economy goes tits up!!!!!!!!!
18 Monty69 (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 04:53 pm Report abuse
8 Devolverislas

'desperation' over what? We have got what we want, which is the freedom to be governed by the elected government of our choice.
The representative of the UK didn't turn up because the UK thinks the C24 is a waste of time. It also thinks we are capable of putting our own views across if we wish. Do you really think the UK is choosing to 'isolate' us?
No-one's 'neck is on the line' in stating that Falkland Islanders will be involved in any negotiation. The UN may not have specifically stated it (it being such a fundamental right, I doubt they even considered that they would need to), but the it is UK governement policy. The UK is the administering power and they can set any policy they like.. They have said no negotiations without the agreement of islanders, and there isn't a thing you can do about it.
19 Briton (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 05:39 pm Report abuse
Well lets put it this way,
who is going to argue against us,
free will , free speech , and free democracy..

Aircraft Carrier
HMS Queen Elizabeth
The carrier’s aft island stands proud on her flight deck after an all-night precision operation
In the next couple of weeks it will be painted Royal Navy livery

The ship will require 1½ million square metres (over 16 million square feet) of paintwork
The F35 Lightning II jets which will be her primary punch will be flown by the Fleet Air Arm and RAF. But her deck will also be used by Army Apaches and troop-carrying Chinooks and Merlins ferrying soldiers and Royal Marines into battle.
not all have been attached – most notably her ‘ski ramp’ which will help the F35s into the air
20 raul2 (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 05:58 pm Report abuse
4 txiki

I agree with 4 txiki. You are right.
You need a rethink. The referendum, as it was raised never solve the problem of sovereignty of the islands. Too much damage has made UK the islanders into thinking it would solve the sovereignty dispute, when in fact it did not have the authorization of the united nations and decolonization committee also was not recognized by anyone.
To make matters worse for the Islanders, Cameron insisted on no dialogue, relying on English colonialism of the 21st century.

.. The idea of ​​holding a referendum was the response of the islanders to the increasing pressure faced by President Cristina Fernandez of Argentina, pursuing a claim of sovereignty over the Falkland Islands ...

The referendum was a reaction to intimidate the Argentine people and Cristina Kirchner and the United Nations exhibit on leave colonialism and imperialism discovered 21st century English.
England and the islanders were more isolated and weakened against world opinion. Argentina's position was strengthened by giving a position and a more solid basis to appeal to the global political community support for the principle of territorial integrity and leave uncovered English colonialism. It was supported by the unanimous support of many forums, such as the OAS, CELAC, UNASUR, MERCOSUR and African Nations Argentina had given its support through the Declaration of Malabo and the Lima Declaration, States of South America and the Arab . Unfortunately the world public opinion sees the island as accomplices of colonialism and imperialism in the 21st century English.

In the end this gives more strength to the arguments Argentinos. The referendum organized by the UK, it was a “political move” totally lacking in legitimacy and world public opinion was not fooled by racism, colonialism and imperialism of the 21st century English.

See the following link
21 M_of_FI (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:11 pm Report abuse
@Raul (20)
I see you are copying and pasting your usual answer me this...

If Argentina were to succeed in gaining sovereignty of the Falkland Islands it would inherit 2,500 Falkland Islanders. These Islanders speak English and have their own culture and identity, in essence these people would be completely different to the Argentine people and Government. The situation would create a Government governing a distinctly different group of people, a people who would also be against being governed by an alien and foreign country.

Is this not the very definition of a colony? Or are you saying because of the history you believe the 2,500 modern day Falkland Islands have to waive their human rights to right a wrong that you believe happened over 180 years ago?
22 JohnN (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:14 pm Report abuse
Sorry for spamming related articles, but not much coverage of South Georgia so here we go:

May 2013 South Georgia News and Events now uploaded:
Topics this month:

- Baited Breath
- Tsunami Risk Evacuation
- Argentine Research Survey
- Star Trails – New Stamp release
- Fishing and Shipping News
- Cry Argentina: Review
- Bird Island Diary
- South Georgia Snippets

Get all the SG News at:
23 Britworker (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:17 pm Report abuse
Blow it out of your arse Raul, we don't give a toss about your south american banana committees. Why would we care what a bunch pariah states think in the C24, there isn't a civilised country amongst them.

Thanks for posting the new pics of the first aircraft carrier, she is looking beautiful and very deadly!
24 GFace (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:23 pm Report abuse
@20. Raul I have to ask. Are you right now high on anything other than Argentine Fascist Colonialism? Because you really must be in some pharmaceutical wonderland to say things as stupid as,

“The referendum was a reaction to intimidate the Argentine people and Cristina Kirchner and the United Nations exhibit on leave colonialism and imperialism discovered 21st century English.”

Who violated BINDING UN security council resolutions and intimidate via guns to civilian heads in 1982? Oh yes. You did -- and you cheered it on until you lost.

Who is sending brownshirts in La Campora to “peacefully” intimidate LAN and cuiselines? That would be you.

Only a fascist in a country of ~41 million would be intimiated by a few thousand going out and vote.

Only a weak fascist like your Timerman would feel intimidated by democratically elected people who only want to talk to them on issues on which they could readily agree (not to mention run away form a non-biding set of UNGA resolutions calling for talks, any talks which also recognize the rights of the Islanders who want to violate). And that same fascist then goes begging for a change in the status quo in which those people are free to voice and act on their wishes to a corrupt committee to violate the UN charter and hand them a few thousand necks to stand on so they don't feel as much as a failure anymore. What resolution called for ANY explicit handover? Oh yes, the on in 1982 where you were to hand the islands back to its inhabitants and the UK.

And only a weak fascist would be desperate to try to keep the rest of us from hearing about such a vote so we can see you for what you are.. . Ill help you here... that would be you weak cowardly fascists wanting a Sudetenland to oppress like true 21rst century colonialists, or 1930s Nazis... Rather hard to tell.

But Oh. It's too late. We know about it. You lose, Raul. Again. Isn't it time that you find something that you're actually good at?
25 Anbar (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:24 pm Report abuse
lol @ CFK

Accomplished precisely the opposite of what she wanted and the weakening of her cause and her exceptionally spurious claims have fallen flat on their face..... all because of her attitude.

Its hilarious! ;-)
26 LEPRecon (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:32 pm Report abuse
@8 Devolved

The bigger question should be 'Just what is Argentina doing at the C24 Committee meetings?'

The C24 was set up to decolonise territories, not to solve sovereignty disputes.

So Argentina has NO reason to be there, unless the Argentine government has decided to decolonise Patagonia.

If Argentina isn't there to decolonise any of the territory it stole from the natives in the past few hundred years, then they shouldn't be allowed to attend at all, let alone vent their spleen.

If Argentina is TRULY serious about the sovereignty of the Falklands, then I suggest you tell your government to stop wasting your tax money by attending these committee's that can do NOTHING to further Argentina's colonial ambitions.

Take it to the International Court of Justice, just like the UK has ASKED you to on THREE separate occasions.

One has to wonder why Argentina won't attend the ONLY body in the world that can hand it sovereignty of the Islands?

Well we don't actually wonder, we all know why. Argentina's sovereignty claims are fairy tales and lies that won't stand up to scrutiny from the layman, never mind a groups of very experienced judges.

But by all means, Devolved, support your government as it waves the Malvina's lie in front of you, while all the time stuffing their personal off-shore bank accounts with lots of dollars that belong to Argentina.

If your foolish enough to fall for the lie and the distraction, then you get the government you deserve.

No wonder Argentina fails every 10 years or so. No other country in the world fails quite so spectacularly or regularly. You must be very proud that Argentina is number one in the world at something - failing.

In the meantime, the Falklands go from strength to strength, and every year that passes by strengthen their claims, and weakens Argentina's already ridiculously weak claims.

I hope that'll bring you comfort when your economy fails and your money is worthless.
27 Redrow (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:52 pm Report abuse
@ Raul2

The islanders do not need the permission of anyone to hold a referendum. Not you, not me and not BanKi Moon.

I personally was impressed they held it and was particularly impressed by the result. Even most of the Argentines on the island didn't vote No. Why didn't they when they had the chance? Aren't you curious?

While you're here, are you not a little embarrassed about CDK's comments about Uruguay and her disappointment that it is not part of Argentina? Can you not for one moment understand how insane that appears to the rest of SA and to the rest of the world? I feel sorry for Uruguay but there is nothing we can do for them. However, we in the UK can and will protect the islanders if required.
28 nota (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:59 pm Report abuse
There is actually another way round this impasse and side step Argentina completely. The UK can take Ecuador to the ICJ. Why you ask, simple The UK will take the C24 committee in the form of Ecuador which is the chairman to the ICJ and ask them to clarify the rights of the Inhabitants of the Falkland Islands, that either they have no rights because they are implanted population as Ecuador says or that they do have rights as an original population. Argentina can say and do nothing, Ecuador will be forced to use the evidence that Argentina has repeated at the C24 committee, which the uk can legally and successfully challenge.
29 Pete Bog (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:24 pm Report abuse
“ then why did the Islands’ petitioners go whining to the C24 meeting in New York last week?”

To counter Argentina.

Argentina is not a Non self governing territory so it has no right to talk to the C24

The Falkland Islanders being on the C24 list are entitled to be there.

The C24 has previously stated it is not it's purpose to discuss sovereignty disputes-yet it allows Argentina in. ?????????

“ The islanders are indeed isolated.”

No they are an associate territory of the EU (by virtue of the Treaty of Lisbon)and their position is supported by Canada.

If they were isolated, they would have no support at all.

“Peter Willetts is putting his neck on the line when he says that “the Islanders will have to be participants if any negotiations about the future of the Islands are resumed”. No such requirement is stated in any of the UN resolutions that apply specifically to the Falkland Islands/Malvinas.”

Equally, no resolution states specifically that the islanders are not entitled to take part in talks. Unless it does, your point is invalid.

If all Argentines were as sensible as you Simon, your country would be a lot richer as a result of trade with the Islands.

Sorry for you that your government isn't.

“The referendum, as it was raised never solve the problem of sovereignty of the islands”

Neither will the lies and inaccurate manipulation of Falkland Islands history by your government.

And you forget-the Islanders have life as they want it-the Argentines don't, and your country is financially worse off as a result.

“In the end this gives more strength to the arguments Argentinos.”

Clearly not as you now have the Islanders putting their case to the world when before they were quiet-and they are exposing the inaccuracies that Argentina is peddling.

Simple answer, Raul-if Argentina believes it has a completely, 'watertight' case for sovereignty, go to the ICJ, and prove your case with evidence, not manufactured emotional rhetoric.
30 Marcos Alejandro (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:08 pm Report abuse
99.8% voted yes and still failed to fool anybody, not even the British.

“Falklands referendum: Why ask British people if they want to be British?”

“This isn't self-determination. It's a Ruritanian colonial relic”

“The vote for British rule in the Falklands referendum dodges the point. It's time for a negotiated settlement with Argentina”
31 reality check (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:16 pm Report abuse
Guardian and indenpdent, the Beano had a bigger circulation but the articles were not as funny as these?
32 andy65 (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:38 pm Report abuse
Devolverislas You are truly stupid how can you say it's The Falkland Islanders that go whining to the C24 committee when Argentina drags any and almost every poor sole there every year to a committee that can do nothing-Any idea who The Russian Jew or the Nazi botox queen will be dragging there next year??? may be the od stray dog or cat or perhaps one of the many B.A hookers

33 Steveu (#) Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:57 pm Report abuse
@30 Had you held the referendum in Britain, the “yes” figure and the percentage turnout would have been lower

What does that tell you about the Falklanders wish to determine their own future (irrespective of ethnicity)?
34 puerto argentino (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 12:05 am Report abuse
why pirates lie to people, this is not true, everyone supports Argentina over Malvinas Islands, of course not uk
35 ElaineB (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 12:10 am Report abuse
And The Falkland Islands remain the same. Nothing has changed and nothing will change.

It must be so frustrating to be a Malvinista.
36 Pete Bog (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 12:10 am Report abuse
There were a proportion of the Falkland Islanders who were not born British including the Argentine Falkland Islanders who voted to remain British.

“Falklands referendum: Why ask British people if they want to be British?”

The Falkland Islanders who are multi ethnic, voted not to become Argentine.

That is the point.

“It's a Ruritanian colonial relic”

In the sense that they don't want to be a colony of Argentina, their imperialist neighbours. So they prefer to be a BOT. And with the cesspit of eternal corruption to their West, who can blame them?

”It's time for a negotiated settlement with Argentina”

As the Argentines won't enter into dialogue with Britain that's going to be difficult. But when the Argentines do agree to talk, the negotiated settlement will negotiate one where the inhabitants (not the Argentine Imperialists) decide the status of the Islands, according to 2065 and the provisions of the UN Charter.
37 Monty69 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 12:32 am Report abuse
20 raul2
''Cameron insisted on no dialogue,''
No he didn't. Your government was offered talks, the chairs were set up and everything. You refused to turn up.

''Too much damage has made UK the islanders into thinking it would solve the sovereignty dispute'' No, we didn't think that. We never thought for a moment that your government would give up trying to impose its rule on us even when none of us wanted you. We know what you are. The referendum was for us, and for the wider world.

You don't know what the 'world' thinks. People pay lip service to your colonial ambitions, but it doesn't amount to much, does it.
38 José Malvinero (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:11 am Report abuse
Desperate english pirates of shit, because most of those who write here, living peacefully in “Inca-the-bitch” (gaucho Martin Fierro dixit), how much they bribed Sierra Leone to support them in the C24? Because if anything characterized the “british” is depreciating the other countrys, especially if they are Ibero-Americans who support the cause Argentina. But as if by magic, ALL spoke here the unknown country of Sierra Leone as the country's best and noblest and highest in the world. The vast hypocrisy that characterizes the English pirates of shit.
39 dixie rebel (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:53 am Report abuse
GREAT! The eighteen argentines living in the Falkland, also voted for the Islands to remain British. Of course, they don't want 25% inflation rate in their new homeland.
40 txiki (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:08 am Report abuse
@38 - maybe you should research why Sierra Leone supported the islanders. Might be something to do with the help they got from the UK a few years ago to help end their bloody civil war. Try googling operation palliser, and the aid and assistance the country has since received from the UK, one of the biggest aid givers in the world, to help rebuild their country. That might just have something to do with it.
41 Troy Tempest (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:47 am Report abuse
@38 José Malignancy

”Desperate english pirates of shit, because most of those who write here, living peacefully in “Inca-the-bitch” (gaucho Martin Fierro dixit), how much they bribed Sierra Leone to support them in the C24? Because if anything characterized the “british” is depreciating the other countrys, especially if they are Ibero-Americans who support the cause Argentina. But as if by magic, ALL spoke here the unknown country of Sierra Leone as the country's best and noblest and highest in the world. The vast hypocrisy that characterizes the English pirates of shit.“

Bribes and kickbacks, that's all you understand, isn't it?
”Nothing for Something” - foreign concept to you.

A stable government and a growing economy, less human suffering, all good things - for everybody.
An honest return from such Aid, is Goodwill, even if it is just enough to keep Sierra Leone truthful.
Nice for them that they don't have to pander to the likes of Argentina by lying, just to get a nibble at the carrot they dangle.

I wonder how much Aid or Trade comes from Argentina?

Look at the disdain with which Argentina treated and addressed Ghana!
Ghana followed Rule of Law, and you disrespected them because of it!!
42 GFace (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:36 am Report abuse
@30 Likewise, why ask Poles and Danes if they want be governed as Poles and Danes by Poles Danes rather than by Nazis.

You fascists never change.
43 Steve-33-uk (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 06:33 am Report abuse
Interesting comment at the bottom of this article about the ICJ...
'An international problem: The Falklands ~ ...Any request for an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice on this dispute, strengthen Argentina's position on the merits.'

'A youth summit dialogue supported by Falklands - Young people involved to date the Y-8, a meeting which is held in London, supported unanimously in support for dialogue between Argentina and the United Kingdom by the Malvinas Question...'

'A National Defense ~ ...Argentina needs armed forces, not least because the world is still a place of conflict, because it has occupied part of its national territory by a power of NATO, which is the main ally of the largest military force on the planet, although it has promised in its national constitution recover the Falkland Islands through peaceful.And builds a military model, coinciding with the independence of Venezuela outlook, perspective designs extremely attentive to the civilization of their military institutions.'
44 Redrow (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:09 am Report abuse
@43 Steve

Yes, very interesting. One wonders whether the ICJ isn't ultimately where this has to go. Argentina has nothing to lose as they are nowhere currently and with no prospect of getting anywhere. If they got anything from the court they could call that progress. Whereas a total fail could be ignored and blamed on imperialists. But for some future moderate leader a fail at the ICJ could be used positively to try and move the country on from their debilitating position of constant defeat.

Although there is the Extinctive Prescription possibility given that Argentina failed to go to the ICJ within 50 years, have the ICJ actually taken on any other pre-1945 sovereignty cases since 1995? That is, is EP a false dawn for the FIs or one of Think's final nails for Argentina. I can only find Nicaragua/Honduras but they had already been to the court in the 50s so maybe that kept it alive? In any case I presume it's the Maps, 1850 settlement and applicability of Conquest in 1833 that will do for Argentina in the end? Or does the Editorial writer know something the rest of us don't?
45 Biguggy (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:45 am Report abuse
@ 44 Redrow
I quite agree with your analysis. However a couple of points:
1. The RG's cannot be relied upon to follow rulings they have agreed to abide by. Think Beagle Channel and Security Council Resolution 502. Bearing this in mind is there any reason to suppose anything would be different in this case should the Ruling or even the Opinion (if requested) not be in favor of Argentina.
2. It is my understanding that Argentina and the UK could ask the ICJ for an 'Opinion' which is non binding and therefore by pursuing that route Argentina is not obliged to follow the Opinion should it not suit them and should the Opinion not be in their favor they can just ignore it.
46 txiki (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:58 am Report abuse

You will always find contrary opinions in the press to the majority view. Didn't take me long to find a good example of sane argentines in your national press. Does this mean that the argentine governments view is going to change any time soon? No it doesn't.

For those who don't read Spanish...
47 Clyde15 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 10:39 am Report abuse
You seem to be the expert on have been talking it and eating it as exemplified by your many postings here !
48 lsolde (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 11:45 am Report abuse
@47 Clyde15,
Thats because José is a lying shithead.
@20 Raul2,
You're a funny guy, Raul. And you are as full of it as José.
You're also a liar.
49 andy65 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 11:55 am Report abuse
Nice to see there is indeed some Argentines with sense and I quote

“A critical re-assessment of the Malvinas war must include an evaluation of the relationship between our society and the direct victims of that conflict, the conscript soldiers. It must entail the admission that the use of force in 1982 was unjustified, and a recognition that the decision to use force, and the defeat that followed, have had inevitable long-term consequences. The Argentine Government's demand for bilateral negotiations on sovereignty on the one hand, while on the other hand simultaneously announcing that Argentine sovereignty is non-negotiable, is contradictory and must change. We should instead offer the possibility of a real dialogue with the British people and – especially – with the inhabitants of the Malvinas, with an open agenda and in a regional context. ”
50 Xect (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 01:03 pm Report abuse
Its funny to see some of the Argentine posts!

Where have you been Raul? I've deeply missed your copying and pasting! You're MercoPress's very own google bot!
51 Monty69 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 01:08 pm Report abuse
38 José Malvinero
A more interesting question is how you blackmail your neighbours into supporting you.

We aren't 'depreciating the other countrys, especially if they are Ibero-Americans who support the cause Argentina.' Far from it. We are very fond of the Chileans and Uruguayans, and they are very supportive of us. We just feel sorry for them for having such a horrible neighbour.
52 José Malvinero (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:15 pm Report abuse
Thanks for the explanation! That means a kind of bribe, because what counts are the rights here on the Malvinas Islands regardless of any other consideration! Bad for Sierra Leone if supported England by that!

With respect to Ghana, who unfairly mistreated La Argentina was precisely the Ghana and the Supreme Court of that country recognized this, boludo.

There you have the link falklandpress:
53 andy65 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:25 pm Report abuse
@ José Malvinero We fully understand why you were most concerned about getting your treasured piece of sailing shit back, after all everything else Argentina puts to sea or stays in port for that matter either breaks down or sinks-do you remember the home coming Cristina gave for this sailing ship???? it was so humiliating even the crew of the ship were embarrassed by it now I can see why you Argentines are so green and jealous when you see HMS Dauntless sailing close to The Falkland Islands.
54 Troy Tempest (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:43 pm Report abuse
52josé Milignancy

“Thanks for the explanation! That means a kind of bribe, because what counts are the rights here on the Malvinas Islands regardless of any other consideration! Bad for Sierra Leone if supported England by that!”

Bribe, no.
Humanitarian Aid - something Britian gives, whether they want something or not - and they have a history of doing so for many countries over many years. That is what friendship is!
You should try it sometime.

Britain did not rush out to “bribe” SL knowing that a Referendum was coming up.

I am sure though that their conscience would have made them feel it was morally wrong to LIE for Argentina.
What inducements did you offer other countries, to support you?
55 slattzzz (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:52 pm Report abuse
@34 why pirates lie to people, this is not true, everyone supports Argentina over Malvinas Islands, of course not uk. Well obviously not numpty.
@38 so it's bribes now is it, two weeks ago the WHOLE of Africa supported you. If Sierra Leone said they supported the rg cause you'd be calling them a major African power, but because they've gone the other way you pretend you've never heard of them. Do you honestly THINK that countries like South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya etc would support rgenweener against the UK you must be dreaming pal. You really are a sad blinkered fool, you don't get it do you they will say anything to shut rgenweener up it's called LIP SERVICE, CFK gets a lot of it via botox, wake up and smell the coffee
56 Brit Bob (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:52 pm Report abuse
Argentina threatens UK and Falklands oil companies with legal actions.

'Argentina again warns the UK about the illegality and consequences of this new unilateral action, extensive to all private actors involved, that they will be liable of future legal demands in the maximum tribunals, for the potential exploration and exploitation of Argentine resources,' pointed out reliable sources from the Argentine foreign affairs office quoted by the B.A. media.

It goes on, 'at the time some of the BA press mentioned that Argentina could be considering taking the dispute case to the ICJ of the Hague, but no government official ratified or rectified the news.

Source: Merco Press 5th February 2010 (two thousand and ten)
57 slattzzz (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:03 pm Report abuse
@56 and three and a bit years later they still crawl under their rocks, no court cases, no ICJ, no nothing but empty threats, rhetoric and crap. Sad gits.
58 José Malvinero (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:09 pm Report abuse
Does the Dauntless? That is the clearest explanation why Britain holds the Malvinas: The reason of force and no other reason; desperates, so the false self-autodetermination.

“What inducements did you offer other countries, to support you?”
Ha ha!, Nothing! They accuse us of “brainwashed”. The only ones that have washed brain are you. In case, could La Argentina “brainwash” all countries that support our position? Chau, silly.
59 reality check (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:14 pm Report abuse
For once you are so, so right. It and other assets are there to respond to any force you may attempt has you did in the not to distant past. It's known as a deterrent.
60 Simon68 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:55 pm Report abuse
52 José Malvinero (#)
Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:15 pm

Only a rabid kirchnerista would consider humanitarian aid as a BRIBE, shades of Lázaro Báez José, Sierra Leone has ALWAYS supported self determination in the C24 committee ever since they became members of C24!!!!!!!

The corruption in the C24 is mainly the fault of the chairman, Ecuador, our delegation should NOT be allowed to spout its lies before this ridiculous committee because we have absolutely NOTHING to do with the decolonisation of the Falkland Islands, we are claiming sovereignty over the Islands and that we should lay before the International Courts of Justice, not the C24!!!!!!!
61 Monkeymagic (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:07 pm Report abuse

of course both Cristina Fernandez and Hector Timmerturd KNOW that the C24 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with sovereignty disputes.

They KNOW that the correct forum for sovereignty disputes is the ICJ.

So the question arises, why do they keep taking their sovereignty dispute to the C24 and calling it the “UN”.

I can only think of a handful of reasons:

1) They are really really thick and think the C24 is the ICJ
2) they know that the members of the C24 are hugely weighted towards LATAM and therefore would get a more favourable hearing than if the Comittee was made up of civilised countries as the ICJ is.
3) they know that the C24 cannot act on sovereignty disputes, therefore the position won't change but it will appear to the dipshit Argentine populus that the Malvinas cause is being pursued at the “UN”
4) they want an annual “jolly” to New York, and to keep their C24 mates “looking busy” for the boys, shopping trips all round!!!

What is hilarious is that the dipshit Malvinistas keep falling for it.
62 Simon68 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:29 pm Report abuse
61 Monkeymagic (#)
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:07 pm

I think your points 3 and 4 are the correct ones. If the “Malvinas Myth” is solved either in favour or against Argentina, the administration (whatever their politics) loses its best weapon against the population, no more “Malvinas” smoke to blow in our eyes!!!!!!!!

And secondly no more excuses for all expenses paid trips to the Big Apple!!!!!
63 Conqueror (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:29 pm Report abuse
@8 Stuff the NON-BINDING UN resolutions. Get it? Not enforceable. Pointless.
@20 You poor degenerate. Do you think that the United Kingdom or the Falkland Islands will bow to your latino imperialist colonialism? Not in the next million years. But go for it. We LIKE killing argies.
@30 “The vote for British rule in the Falklands referendum dodges the point. It's time for a negotiated settlement with Argentina” Indeed. Fuck off before we bomb and missile you into oblivion. Make no mistake. The Falkland Islands will be British, or an independent Falklands, for the next 10 million years.
@34 Well, no they don't actually. But who cares. Are you ready to take 42 million “casualties”?
@38 Have you tried English? It's a much better method of communication. For the little that I thought I understood, you have to understand that shit can't talk. And you're shit. Our politicians, unfortunately, have to talk to you occasionally. I wouldn't bother. I'd shoot you, cut your throat, disembowel you, castrate you in a moment. And all together. Turn argies into sludge.
@40 Oh, so help is “wrong”?
@52 “here on the Malvinas Islands”. So you're an “enemy” fifth columnist. How about that, Islanders? What's the proper action? Having “found” it. Cut its throat? Slit its belly so that its guts slither out on to the ground. Remove genital organs. Do all three. Where''s the problem? Just argies“
@58 Oh dear. A brainless twat. Defence of the Islands by the best we have. Shame we don't have warships that don't sink by themselves. Have you ever tried telling the TRUTH, tosspot?
Here's the bottom line. I would gladly travel to the South Atlantic to exterminate 41 million+ argie war criminals. I can even take my very own kukri so that I can lop off argie heads. I'd really like to get into the Casa Rosada. So many loppable heads.
@61 ”C24” is irrelevant, corrupt and pointless.
@62 And when will that happen?
64 andy65 (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:43 pm Report abuse
@José Malvinero Now remind us all again why the United Kingdom keeps such a military presence on The Falkland Islands???? would it have anything to do with your shit hole of a country Argentina illegally invading The Islands in 1982 and ignoring United Nations resolution 502 to GET OUT??? Argentina is good at crawling to The UN but you ignored the most important resolution that went against you and that's why the people of The islands will never trust you and rightly so.
65 Briton (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 06:51 pm Report abuse
23 Britworker
From CFKs point of view,
Why is it not acceptable for the Falklands to remain British?

But accepted if they voted for Argentina,
Hypocrisy at it best is the logic of a dictator…

The doors of the ICJ is always open,
Even to potential losers..

66 Pete Bog (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 08:10 pm Report abuse
“ALL spoke here the unknown country of Sierra Leone”

”Apologies for a Wikipedia link (not very academic), but as you don't know where Sierra Leone is, there you go chey.”

In UK we get a reasonable education (without fascist indoctrination), so we know a few countries in the world.

If we don't, we use the revolutionary method of using a map or the internet.

Yes, Sierra Leone does exist, honest guv.
67 golfcronie (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:23 pm Report abuse
Off Topic but did you know that the English Ladies Hockey team beat the Argies ( Apparently No 2 in the world ) today. Look even our ladies can beat you.
68 reality check (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:45 pm Report abuse
Way ya go girls!
69 José Malvinero (#) Jun 29th, 2013 - 11:58 pm Report abuse
British “democratizing” ........ like the good old days of the colonies around the world ......:
70 Islander1 (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 12:02 am Report abuse
Jose M - Dauntless??? - she was in these waters for about 14 days - yes 14 days in total - 12 months ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Since then we had the Oldest and last surviving type 42 destroyer here for a couple of months last summer and she left in early March.
Nothing since - untl 2 weeks ago when the Oldest of the type 23 frigates arrived - and she LEAVES the area in about 10 days!

Not exactly “militarization” is it - as compared to 25 years ago when we used to have 2-4 ships here ALL the time!

FACT: Depite the current Kirschener Govt,s Defence Minister- Putricelli stating openly in public that it is only the prescence of Britiish Forces in the Islands that prevents Argentina from re-occupying the Islands ( yes that is what he has said in public) - there are LESS British Forces in- and around - the Islands in 2012-13 than there were in say 1985-87.
Very Sorry to upset the trash you have been fed - but these are the true real facts.

Self determination - an even bigger % of the NON British or Islands born people on the electoral role voted Yes - Because:
At least 5 Islanders had been send overseas medical in the 2 weeks prior to the voting days - thus they were to late to register for a postal or proxy vote and thus were unable to vote.
Another Islander- she serves in the British Army - was home on holiday and planned to vote - but was called back to the Army at short notice and thus also was unable to vote.
Another 5-6 Islanders would be those who were to old and infirm to be safely able to reasonably make up their own minds and mark a vote.

I personally know 3 of those of Argentine birth who are registered voters here who voted Yes - I have no reason to disbelieve them as I have known them a long time.

Do try and get used to it - The Islands will never be yours.
71 Biguggy (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 12:13 am Report abuse
@ 68 reality check
Perhaps they put out the St. Trinians 2ndXI

Joking apart, well done lasses.
72 Vestige (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 01:46 am Report abuse
I'm not seeing a statistic for what percentage of the pop. were born on the islands.

now why might that be ??

Separately - (24.0% do not chose British or Falkland Islander, when asked to “describe their national identity”. .... that -genuinely- puzzles me)
73 screenname (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 04:08 am Report abuse
@72 Vestige: “I'm not seeing a statistic for what percentage of the pop. were born on the islands.”

The Falklanders control their own immigration, and who they choose to join them is their concern.

What are the chances that the number of people that have emigrated to the Falklands has exceded the number that have emigrated to Argentina in any year since Argentina has existed? Do/did these immigrants have no democratic rights once accepted as Argentineans?

Why does swotting down Malvinistas have to be so easy?
74 El capitano (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 02:08 pm Report abuse
72 Vestige (#)....Yes Vestige you seem to be “Puzzled” quite easily...!!
75 Vestige (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 02:52 pm Report abuse
Thats swotting me down screenname? .... theres a statistic conspicuous by its absence, you talk around it and thats me done.

74 - Feel free to explain it to me El capitano. If you can.
76 stick up your junta (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 03:23 pm Report abuse
@69 José Malvinero

Look what I found, a Argie Dixon of dock green :-)

Argentine Police Held Over Torture Video
77 Monkeymagic (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 04:50 pm Report abuse

I am sure you could find it out pretty easily. The more important question is though what percentage of the electorate had at least one great great grandparent born on the that greater than the percentage of Argentines with at least one great great grandparent born in Argentina?

The people who live on the islands have MORE right to their homeland than the people who live in Argentina.

On the whole they've been there longer thn most Argentines, and they didn't massacre tens of thousands of indigenous people to steal the territory. They did evict 50 or so militia, who were trying to steal the islands, but in the 2 months they'd been there had on succeeded in rape and murder.
78 Vestige (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 05:41 pm Report abuse
Well the closest I could get was a 2012 cia worldbook quote saying that the majority were born outside the islands......who'd have guessed.....
the last 5 years has seen a population decrease and population growth rate is 0.01% :)

at least one great great grandparent born on the islands.... that indeed is a stat I'd looove to know

Im sure you'll find a considerable number with at least one great great grandparent born in geographical Argentina.

Those stats would make for nice comparison. Maybe you'll be eager to find them.

“ they didn't massacre tens of thousands of indigenous people to steal the territory”..... but.....they're British right ?

And what have the islanders succeeded in doing ??
Feel free to include 'GB's international relations, present and future' in your reply.
79 agent999 (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 05:54 pm Report abuse

vestige - “a very small amount of a feeling or quality” pretty much sums up most of your posts.
80 Briton (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 06:02 pm Report abuse
Interesting that these brain dead Argies think that they have a claim on the Falklands,

From that reckoning,
Does that mean that all these Argies would agree that Spain has a claim over Argentina?

And are willing to accept Spanish rule then .lol
go on,, give us a laugh ..
81 Vestige (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 06:11 pm Report abuse
Agent - how very dare you define me as such.

The correct definition is : part of an organism that is a small nonfunctioning remnant of a functional organ in an ( cough..imperial) ancestor.
82 Clyde15 (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 06:41 pm Report abuse
Vestige :-Definition
A trace of something that is disappearing or no longer exists.
Such as Argentina's claim to the Falklands.
83 Vestige (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:01 pm Report abuse
Yep ... thats a claim that will disappear quickly alright.
84 Troy Tempest (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:39 pm Report abuse
How did this become about a non-functioning Toby?

How is that important ? :-)

On topic:

Falkland residents would rather vote to be British, than Argentine.

Doesn't matter what a bad-tempered, selfish, Campora thinks.
85 screenname (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:49 pm Report abuse
Sorry, I thought you were trying to be clever I didn't realise you were a cretin. I'll try and explain
The Falklanders have every right to boost their population in order to enrich their society, and the newcomers that are accepted have every right to expect the chance to take part in the democratic process.
With regards any effect this may have on the validity of the referendum:
Since the Falklanders control their own immigration, the number of people that were not actually born Falkland Islanders is irrelevant. It's only relevant if an external force controlled immigration and implanted a population to skew the results of an island vote compared to a vote of just islanders with long-term roots. As the islanders control immigration any difference between the voting habits of new arrivals/Falklanders with a long family history there just has to be accepted. !n the case of the referendum the strength of a shared opinion was such that there can be no doubt that the results not only reflect the preference of the residents, also specifically of the islanders that were born there.
You rather stupidly expect the Falklands to standstill in some frozen state just because you desire the islands but are unwilling to go to the ICJ, but luckily you have no power so if the islanders wish to take advantage of their environment and boost their population through immigration they can. It is not their fault that they start from such a low population, and therefore the numbers they allow to join them makes a large % of the new population. As I have said, I will be surprised if the year has ever passed when Argentina has let in less new citizens than the Falklands, yet we still hear relative newcomers like Timmerman claiming the Falklands are rightfully theirs: it is laughable.
You are laughable. Why don't you show evidence that the indigenous Amerindians had an immigration policy that invited the European majority to move to what was their land anywhere in what is now Argentina?
86 Monkeymagic (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:01 pm Report abuse

So you are suggesting that there are a considerable number of islanders with at least one great great grandparent born on mainland Argentina...I agree.

Therefore in NO WAY is this “British people voting to remain British”, but people from all round the world voting to remain a British Overseas territory.

So, why do they do this if their ancestory is so diverse?

A loyaly to Britiain? Perhaps
A fondness for certain British traits and customs? maybe

An absolute loathing, contempt and disgust at anything associated with successive Argentine governments...definately.

The diverse and international islanders vote to remain a BOT because it's the safest and best way to NEVER be funny.
87 Steve-33-uk (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:12 pm Report abuse
'Before the primaries, Cristina will attend a UN meeting - It will be in August, when Argentina assume the presidency of the Security Council. - United Nations. Cristina plans to speak at the international body, but still do not know in what subject...'
88 screenname (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:04 pm Report abuse
@69 José Malvinero: “democratizing”

I am quite monolingual, but you seem to have picked a rather unfortunate youtube channel for the video in your post. I had a quick scout around his other videos, and he seems to have a rather interesting take on Argentinian democracy…Cristina Kirchner - Terrorista de Estado

Am I missing something? I find it hard to believe that malvinistas, as @69, can really be this incompetent.

Chuckle Chuckle
89 Pete Bog (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:07 pm Report abuse
“Cristina plans to speak at the international body, but still do not know in what subject...'”

International Aid for Africa? To help the world's starving? Argentina sending large forces to the UN peacekeeping regions? How to solve the Syrian problem? Global warming?

I give up, what will she spurt from those lips that could suck start a battle tank?
90 Biguggy (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:26 pm Report abuse
@ 89 Pete Bog
Perhaps she is going to further explain about migratory birds as she started that entertaining subject at last years C24 meeting.
91 screenname (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 11:38 pm Report abuse
@90 Biguggy: “she is going to further explain about migratory birds”

They are the cream of the Argentinean air force, so she might think it would be appropriate for the UNSC.
92 Marcos Alejandro (#) Jun 30th, 2013 - 11:50 pm Report abuse
“Voters from many countries around the world voted Yes” the title says
People from many countries around the world say was a farce.

“Farce of Falkland referendum”
“The question is not the self-determination of Falkland but the legality of British occupation”
93 screenname (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 01:03 am Report abuse
@92 Marcos Alejandro:


Could you really be the most incompetent malvinista fool to post here?

You do realise anyone can write an OP-ED on that website? Why don't you submit a letter saying Mike Summers has a pointy tail and horns?

hahahahahahahaha...stop it...I can't breathe...hahahahahahaha

I take it your home help could not come around and check on you today? Did the grammar in the quote you pulled at least not give you a hint to the quality of the author?

ffs..look up his 'work'. The bitter Bangladeshi with more than a hint of rascism and seemingly revels in a bit of ethnic cleansing - a kindred spirt for the malvinistas.

Luckily, not all Bangladeshi's are like him, the 3 I know are all hard working and friendly lads. But then they did emigrate to the UK for a better life, so it's not that surprising that don't hate the locals.
94 Marcos Alejandro (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 03:55 am Report abuse
Bitter Bangladeshi? Internationally Britain doesn't have a leg to stand on. Even the US government says there is a legitimate sovereignty dispute here that must be resolved through negotiation.

But of course Pocklington supports your cause.
95 Terence Hill (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 04:35 am Report abuse
92 Marcos Alejandro

“The question is not the self-determination of Falkland but the legality of British occupation”
Here's the definite answer to both, straight from the horse's mouth.

ICJ president, Dame Rosalyn Higgins, wrote: ”Attractive an aphorism though [self-determination] is, it still has to be said that the territorial issue does come first. Until it is determined where territorial sovereignty lies, it is impossible to see if the inhabitants have a right to self- determination” (Dame Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process - International Law and How We Use It, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994)

The British jurist Rosalyn Higgins arrived at a similar conclusion when she pointed out: ”No tribunal could tell her [Argentina] that she has to accept British title because she has acquiesced to it But what the protests do not do is to defeat the British title, which was built up in other ways through Argentinas acquiescence.80“ There was therefore little doubt that Britain acquired title to the Falklands by extinctive prescription. In other words, it was in this mode that the strength of the British claims resided.
80. Rosalyn Higgins, ”Falklands and the Law,” Observer, 2 May 1982.
The Falkland War : Britain versus the past...Daniel K, Gibran.
96 lsolde (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:12 am Report abuse
ls that the best you can come up with, Marcos?
You've lost & your country has lost & you know it.
For you, the Falklands are further away than ever. You'll never possess our islands & you know that too.
Just occupy yourself in trying to fix your own poor broken country.
And before you say it, no, that doesn't include OUR Falkland lsles.
97 HansNiesund (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:33 am Report abuse

But Marcos. As you know, you can have “negotiation” any time you like. What you can't have is a pre-determined outcome and the exclusion of the people most directly concerned from the process.
98 screenname (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:36 am Report abuse
@94 Marcos Alejandro: “Internationally Britain doesn't have a leg to stand on.”


Oh woe is us, the UK is more isolated than North Korea...hold on...we're not?????????

What medication are you on? I think you need to drop the dose a bit.

I take it you didn't see what your buddies at the C24 were actually willing to put down in writing.

Big at TALKING about Falklanders not having self-determination, but it all fades away in the documents for the GA. I wonder why that is?

Chuckle Chuckle
99 Swede (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:43 am Report abuse
From your postings I presume you live in Argentina. Perhaps you are an Argentine citizen. But you seem to be a dissident when it comes to the Falkland/Malvinas question. Are there any parties, lobby groups, or other organisations within Argentina opposing the official point of view? Is it difficult to “come out” as a “Non-Malvinista” in Argentine society? I mean this myth is everythere around you from the Constitution to roads signs. Could it be possible to change it in the long run?

Thank you for sensible postings from Argentina.
100 Terence Hill (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 10:57 am Report abuse
94 Marcos Alejandro

The UK doesn't need international support as it is not an issue that is reliant on vox populi. It has the legs that really count, irrevocable legal sovereignty.
101 Biguggy (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 10:59 am Report abuse
@ 98 screenname
“Big at TALKING about Falklanders not having self-determination, but it all fades away in the documents for the GA. I wonder why that is?”

Could it possibly be due to the fact that if they did support it in writing they might be asked to justify their reasoning?
I believe we nearly all know where that would lead, the fact that they have done nothing to support their stance and have taken the 'word' of the RG's at its face value, and a goodly portion of them are only to well aware of how 'good' that is.
102 Pete Bog (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 12:20 pm Report abuse
Ahhh, yes, that 'indisputable' theory of the migrating birds.

Does this mean the birds should be involved in future negotiations?

Of course there are Argentine mines on the Falklands so the proximity of the Islands to the mines must be a major legal argument in favour of Argentina.
However the mines are an implanted population so expect the 'Ships proximity theory' ie that Belgrano lies in the seabed near to the Islands therefore they are Argentinian'. We do have a counter claim with Antelope as that is nearer the Falklands and the Lady Elizabeth is nearer to Stanley.

I have a funny feeling that the Argentine claim will be based on something even more nonsensical than that.

Yes because the birds seem to spend more time in the air than the Argentine airforce.

But if they lay eggs on the Falklands do the chicks become Falkland Islanders because they are born on the Islands, or Argentinian because their parents are an implanted colonial population from Argentina?
103 Steve-33-uk (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 12:24 pm Report abuse
'That “Hawks” wrinkles not relations with the US. -
There are interests in Washington pushing to remove the Argentina “extra-OTAN partner” status. Although the country has got no visible achievements with it, nor should lose that place.
The theme of the integration of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) recently returned to generate interest in the country following the eventual request for Colombia to be a member of that; something that, by statute, is impossible....'
104 Simon68 (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 01:50 pm Report abuse
99 Swede (#)
Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:43 am

At the moment, here in Argentina, there are people who do not agree with the peronist invented “Malvinas Myth”. I would guess, because there is no way to prove for or against, that there is probably about 30% of the population that considers the Falkland Islands to be British, and probably another 10 to 15% who might consider them Argentine by right but think that the government should spend less effort on the Islands and more on correcting the terrible situation of our economy, standard of education, unemployment, street crime, etc.

I don't consider myself a dissident, just a person who realises that peronism has brought my country to its knees over the last 60 odd years due to its policies of populism and demagoguery and condoning theft of public monies.

Change will come when our politicians realise that they have left nothing more to steal, or when some honorable person or group of people decide that enough is enough and start the country on the long road back to sanity.

As a firm believer in God, I think that the day will come when our nation can hold her head up and rejoin the international community on terms of equality.
105 Briton (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 05:44 pm Report abuse
HMS Queen Elizabeth to be structurally complete this year
01 July 2013
nearly there..

106 Vestige (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 10:20 pm Report abuse
now on sale 10% off
107 Islander1 (#) Jul 01st, 2013 - 11:07 pm Report abuse
Marcos - please show the official-I repeat Official - US Govt Statement that uses the words you claim “Legitimate Sovereignty Dispute”?

I suspect like your leaders you are adding and twisting words to fantasize a bit more.
Canada-SierraLeone-Papua New Guinea-New Zealand-Australia - all openly support us. We have the official support of the EU as an associate member- yes you can quote a few individual Spanish MEPS if you like - I am talking about the official position of the EU in Brussels.
I am sure that if the islands came up on the next Commonwealth Heads of Govt Agenda - there would be a strong support for the base of Freedom and Selfdetermination. It wont though as that oragnisation could not be bothered with the rantings of an irrelevant nation.

PS - Have you found yet the official statement from the Irish Parliamentarians a couple of weeks agao that is supposed to support the Arg claim amd specifically dismisses the referendum? According to your politicians it exists - just they cannot find it!
108 MagnusMaster (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 03:45 am Report abuse
@99 As a fellow Argentinian, I'll answer: yes, there are people opposing the official point of view, but they are a small minority, and they are quiet, and not joined in any group that I know of. If you come out as a non-Malvinista, you will most likely labeled as traitor and be a pariah. That's why most non-Malvinista who expresses these views does so anonymously on the Internet, or lives outside Argentina (and won't come back). Most people don't care about Malvinas, they are more concerned about their daily lives, but the myth will live a long, long while, because what you call a myth, here it is called history.

@104 “I don't consider myself a dissident, just a person who realises that peronism has brought my country to its knees over the last 60 odd years due to its policies of populism and demagoguery and condoning theft of public monies.”
Doesn't that make you a dissident?
109 lsolde (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 10:10 am Report abuse
@106 Vestige,
Thank you for drawing our attention to this interesting item.
l'm sure that we could afford a hundred or so of these missiles for our lsland defenses(against Argentina).
l'm also sure that the Chinese would be delighted to fill our order, especially since we would pay in good hard cash that we got from OUR oil(no mickey mouse money, l mean Argentine Pesos).
l feel sorry for you in a way as l know that you'll never be able to afford them.
Bit one-sided & not cricket, wouldn't you say?
110 Clyde15 (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 10:28 am Report abuse
It has yet to be tried against a moving target. Knock out its controlling satellites and it will not work. I'm sure the USA can manage this simple act. They demonstrated it a few months ago.
111 La Patria (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 10:52 am Report abuse
Although the vast majority believe the islands belong to Argentina, I'd say most Argentines are more concerned about security and supporting their families etc rather than the Falklands / Malvinas issue. Also most educated people can see through the smoke screen that cfk is putting up to deflect antagonism from her regime. It's her joker card that she is trying to play as she continues to bring the country to its knees
112 Troy Tempest (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 02:34 pm Report abuse

to produce anything to back up his government's propaganda.

Marcos, isn't it a bit disillusioning that when you loyally spout your government's misinformation, they make you look like an ass as a reward?

Too funny !!!
113 Briton (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 06:55 pm Report abuse
Sadly once brainwashed , always brainwashed

and marcos is no exeption..
114 Pete Bog (#) Jul 02nd, 2013 - 09:29 pm Report abuse
“ that must be resolved through negotiation.”
Must be resolved or preferably resolved through negotiation?

Quotes from Bollockobama?
115 Islander1 (#) Jul 03rd, 2013 - 01:30 am Report abuse
Marcos my friend- we have been waiting for your answer now for over 24 hours? - Is there a problem?
116 zathras (#) Jul 03rd, 2013 - 10:58 am Report abuse
94 Marcos Alejandro

Isn't it strange the major of a small Yorkshire town has visited the FA.

Yet the C24 committee never have!
Surely the committee (in order to understand the issue completely) has to actually visit the islands they are debating and talk to the inhabitants in person.
They have been invited to do so on a number of occasions.

Is than not a reasonable position?

So any idea why the C24 have yet to visit the FA?

They have a whole year to visit the FA before the next session, of the C24.
I put it that only members of the C24 who visit the FA in the next 12 months should be allowed to address the C24, regarding the FA.
How does that sound?
117 Swede (#) Jul 04th, 2013 - 07:14 pm Report abuse
@ Simon 68, MagnusMaster and La Patria.

Interesting. When reading forums like this you can get the impression that most Argentines are a bunch of indoctrinated fools spitting out insults about “squatters”, “pirates”etc. (There are, by the way, also such individuals on “the other side” too) As I had expected most of the ordinary people of Argentina are not particualary interested, and with 1982 in memory they will not embark on another “island adventure”. The problem is not the people, but the governments of different political colours which always use the Falklands/Malvinas as the one issue they think can unite the Argentine nation.
118 Xect (#) Jul 05th, 2013 - 06:36 am Report abuse
Following petition to block loans to Argentina, government decides to block all loans.
119 Pete Bog (#) Jul 05th, 2013 - 09:28 pm Report abuse
Another hole appears in Argentina's feet just -how big are those feet?
120 Biguggy (#) Jul 05th, 2013 - 11:22 pm Report abuse
@ 118 Xect
Long over bloody due in my humble opinion!

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!


Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!