Tuesday, January 21st 2014 - 02:21 UTC

Argentine and Spurs old soccer stars in Falklands car crash

Falkland Islands Government sources tonight confirmed reports that former Argentine and Tottenham Hotspur star, Osvaldo Ardiles, was among those injured when a vehicle left the road between Darwin and the military base at Mount Pleasant on Monday evening.

A Royal Air Force Search & Rescue helicopter went to their aid and transferred both men to the KEMH (Hospital) in Stanley (Pic Rosie King)

Ricardo Villa and Osvaldo Ardiles in the Falklands. (Pic by Twitter_@ChrisKey3)

4x4 vehicle and on hire, over-turned (Pic PN)

Mr Ardiles, who was thought to be the driver of the rented vehicle, is in the Falkland Islands with former team mate Ricardo Villa to make a documentary for ESPN. Five other people were reportedly in the vehicle, including Ardiles's British-born son,who is leading the TV production team involved.

The accident is believed to have happened around 9pm and prompt action by local emergency services and the British Military led to those involved being flown by helicopter from the accident site to the King Edward Memorial hospital in Stanley, arriving around 9.15pm.

According to information given to MercoPress by a government source, four of the passengers have been released after treatment for minor injuries and another three have been kept at the hospital for further observation. There has been as yet no statement about the extent of injuries received or confirmation of reports that Osvaldo Ardiles was among those detained.

While the exact location of the accident has not yet been confirmed, the road between Darwin and Mount Pleasant is unsurfaced and unfenced. Early, and also as yet unconfirmed reports, suggest that Mr Ardiles may have swerved to avoid a sheep and lost control of the vehicle in the process.
 

John Fowler - Stanley

118 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. Comments should refer to article. Thank you.

1 Klingon (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 02:52 am Report abuse
Next week Maradona is going to skydive naked onto the Malvinas and plant an Argentine Flag at Port Stanley.
2 Lord Ton (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:56 am Report abuse
If it's Maradona - he'll miss :-)
3 Troy Tempest (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:34 am Report abuse
Could they have been saved by an international rescue, I wonder?
4 Boovis (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:39 am Report abuse
Is that the same search and rescue helicopter that CFK claimed was piloted by folk in the clothes of conquerors?

Ossie Ardiles played on in the football leagues throughout the Falklands War, he deserves a lot of respect for that. I wish him the best.
5 Redrow (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:25 am Report abuse
Players like Ardiles are perhaps Argentina's best goodwill ambassadors. Today, Sergio Aguero is probably the equivalent i.e. doesn't dive and is widely respected. I guess Beckham is the same for the UK. Although it's just kicking a ball around it doesn't do any harm having folk who transcend politics. Shame for whoever's car it was, though it's a story for them at least.
6 Heisenbergcontext (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:27 am Report abuse
@4 Boovis

My recollection is that Ardiles and Ricky Villa left after hostilities commenced. Everyone understood why they had to leave - it was sad - and relieved when they returned.

Great players and nice guys both.
7 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:30 am Report abuse
4 Boovis

Not entirely true. He played only one game in England during the war, on the Saturday following the invasion. This was the FA cup semi-final between Spurs and Leicester City. All the Leicester fans booed him, all the Spurs fans cheered.

On the sports page of the “news of the World” there was outrage at the way the Leicester fans have behaved “towards a footballing gentleman, who has graced the football fields of England” He returned to Argentina a few days after to prepare for the world cup.

He remains very popular in England, especially amongst Spurs fans.

I hope injuries, if he has any are nt to serious and he makes a full and speedy recovery.
8 Be serious (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:36 am Report abuse
Hope Ossie is OK.
9 Boovis (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:03 am Report abuse
Happy to be corrected, thanks :) And, yes, he didn't deserve such treatment.
10 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:35 am Report abuse
9 Boovis

You’re welcome. There is a good account of both Ricky Villa and Ardiles Falklands war difficulties in the book:

“England v's Argentina: World Cups and Other Small Wars” By David Downing (Little, Brown Book Group 2003)

Not being part of the Argentine World Cup squad, Ricky Villa stayed in England during the war. He decided against playing in the FA cup final (against QPR? Or was it Villa? Sorry can’t remember) not because of the English fans but because of the possible reaction back home. This makes sense. How would it look, or feel, to the people back home if Ricky is playing in an English FA cup final whilst his fellow compatriots are being wiped out by the British paratroops on the Falklands? The club management understood this and therefore left the final decision to Ricky himself.

Ricky Villa, like Ossie always remained popular with the Spurs fans, the Falklands war making no impact on the fans affections.

My best wishes to them both.
11 Steve-33-uk (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:11 am Report abuse
@5 Redrow

Agüero good footballer, shame about his politicial views...

'14.08.2012- “Kun” Sergio Agüero says that it would be “good and fair” that the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands back to Argentina in his interview with The powerful throat, Journal of slum culture written, photographed, directed and funded by neighbors from different Argentinian slums.
“It is subject to a political agreement, I do not know whether to solve, but we all want to be ours; they currently have the domain”, said the footballer, who plays in the English League, and added that in England“people are very respectful, in general, and we want very much to Argentines”...'
la-pelota-no-dobla.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/kun-aguero-malvinas-villa-y-che-guevara.html
12 Boovis (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:27 am Report abuse
In Finnish, “Kun” means “when”. So, Kun? Never.
13 golfcronie (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:33 am Report abuse
I imagine Maradona was also there, “ it was the hand of God that saved them” seriously good luck to all of them and may they get well soon.
14 Redrow (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 10:41 am Report abuse
@11
He is entitled to his view, as are we to disagree. It's the islanders' views that matter. But his words seem fairly measured, there are no “insists” or “demands”. He earns his crust in Manchester but represents his country internationally and therefore has to walk a tightrope. I can understand that.
15 screenname (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 10:46 am Report abuse
As already said, Ossie Ardiles was /is a gentleman of the game.

Hope he has a quick recovery.
16 BritishLion (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 11:26 am Report abuse
I hope they recover well from their accident. On a lighter note, will this be reported back home in Argentina as being caused by a sheep dressed in wolfs clothing and was, in fact, a member of the SAS.
17 Islander1 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 11:56 am Report abuse
Folks here have NO problem with a vist by 2 worls class footballers. What we do have a serious problem with though is the aim of the ESPN Film team in making a political connectied programme out of it. the 1982 war and the problems for these 2 at the peak of their career was 32 years ago and 8000 miles DISTANT from here- grow up ESPN amd move on. Make your film where they played - here it is irrelevant.
That is why our footballers have made it clear - they are happy to meet the 2- for a social chat about the sport they all share - off record and off camera ONLY.
18 JohnCFI (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 11:58 am Report abuse
From the report, sounds like he was driving to fast for the road surface, lack of experience on roads of this type and made the potentially fatal decision to swerve for a sheep. Swerving is never a good choice, just dumps you in the ditch.. I do hope they all recover.
19 Vulcanbomber (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 12:40 pm Report abuse
Hope they both recover fully

However, perhaps Aussie made the mistake of listening to the Argentine government, who dont forget tried to force the islanders to drive on the wrong side of the road.

Who knows what their travel advice is, perhaps it says something along the lines of

“when visiting the Argentine Malvinas, remember to drive as you would in BA, have a gun on your lap at all times, and ignore anything around you. Any people or animals in the street could be attackers so dont stop on any occasion. Ensure to steer well around sheep as these could be Gurkhas tying to take your ears”
20 niphotos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 12:50 pm Report abuse
And i wonder what sort of film these people are making ?? is it a sports related film or what ??????
Forever Falklands ...Forever British !
21 Livingthedream (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 01:00 pm Report abuse
Ardiles was coach of Manchester United one of the best football teams of ALL time!
22 niphotos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 01:15 pm Report abuse
Well put Islander1 , totally correct !!
23 knarfw (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 01:41 pm Report abuse
Better ambassadors for their country than Castro could ever hope to be . Hope nobody is seriously hurt and that they recover quickly. I also have fond memories of Julio Arca, another fine Argentinean who plied his trade in England for Sunderland and we have just signed Santiago Vergini on loan from Estudiantes.
24 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 02:28 pm Report abuse
Okupas judging if he is a good embassador or not? What a crazy world
25 Britworker (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 02:33 pm Report abuse
Might just be me, but what were they upto there?
26 paulcedron (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 02:37 pm Report abuse
24
they were trying to steal your sheep, you paranoid.
27 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 02:41 pm Report abuse
Is the UK so rotten that cannot absorb 2.500 people? They sent them here, they have to be responsible for their deeds.
28 inthegutter (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:00 pm Report abuse
#27 Hypocrite, is Argentina so rotten it wants to either forcefully remove 2500 people, many of whom can trace family back over 180 years of peaceful occupation, or impose foreign subjugation on them?

The answer is: YES, or maybe NO, because if they got what they claim to want they'd have nothing left to distract the population with when the economy starts to suffer.
29 Britworker (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:07 pm Report abuse
@26
You are not to be trusted, there have been many examples of Trojan horses peddled by your government, I'm sure in the fullness of time it will be established that this lot were upto no good whatsoever. Most likely a propaganda visit hidden under the guise of football notoriety.
30 knarfw (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:13 pm Report abuse
@ 24, Castro is female allegedly.
31 Faz (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:16 pm Report abuse
#27 Argentina is the okupa and budding colonialists. The Falkland Islands were occupied by Britain long before your so called nation ever existed. And, we didn't enslave and murder thousands of native amerindians like you did. Look on the 100 Peso note!
I am sure Espn has been sent by Filmus and Gollum...
32 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:17 pm Report abuse
Peaceful occupation? That is why you have more soldiers than people in the islands? At least we can agree on something, is an occupation.
33 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:23 pm Report abuse
@32 As a deterrent. I recall you had far more occupiers, and illegal and explicitly unwelcome ones at that, when you exported your Dirty War onto the Islanders against their well, international law and the UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions -- all so you could have a few more years of kidnapping, murder, torture, and all the other things the Junta did to/for you.
34 inthegutter (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:24 pm Report abuse
#32 Are you serious?

Tell me, in 1981, how many soldiers were on the islands? The garrison on the Falklands Islands only exists because of Argentina's actions in 1982. You know, when a fascist military dictatorship invaded the virtually undefended islands and attempted to impose foreign subjugation upon them. These would-be colonialists were thrown off by force of aims and sadly the death of nearly 1000 men and women.

Now, 30 years later, that same country, which has never apologised, attempts to strangle the economy of those same islanders. The same islanders who also continue to suffer because Argentina planted numerous mine fields.

I'm astounded, I really am. Do you nothing of, what seems to be, the important part of the history of Argentina?
35 Falkland Islands (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:25 pm Report abuse
there are not more soldiers than civilians, that is just an Argentine myth.
36 niphotos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:26 pm Report abuse
Argie soldiers destroyed the houses of the islanders , they messed in the houses and they urinated in the streets , the islanders knew they were about to be invaded , they could smell the Argies a mile away , get this point straight all you Argies , the FALKLAND ISLANDS ARE BRITISH, try and take them again and get another bloody nose , remember Belgrano ??
37 Rufus (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:28 pm Report abuse
@32 The British garrison “is the only element that upholds the usurpation of that part of our national territory” (or for those who prefer to cut through the BS “stops us from trying to invade our non-hostile neighbours again”) according to Puricelli.

The way it works is that you can either posture militarily, or you can try and play the victim, but if you try to do both at the same time then don't be surprised if people laugh at you.
38 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:30 pm Report abuse
Agains the UNSC! Haaaaaaa. I remember Spain and Panama voting a ceasefire that the UK vetoed. I dont have anything to do with the argentina junta. We had our share of US instigated military government but has nothing to do with the point. From 1833 the english bullies occupy a foreign island and are proud of it, they fell on the okupas sham
39 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:37 pm Report abuse
21 Livingthedream

Are you sure? Ossie Ardiles? coach at Man' United? I don't think so.

Still Ricky Villa is famous for scoring one of the greatest FA Cup Final goals of all time for Tottenham Hotspur (Spurs) in 1981 aqgainst Mancester City. Well remembered in North London.
40 Monty69 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:40 pm Report abuse
38 eliasdossantos
Pathetic; it's always someone else's fault isn't it. There was cheering in the streets in Argentina the last time you invaded and you'd be right there cheering if you did it again. You're only sorry you lost.
This isn't a 'foreign island' to the people who live here, any more than Argentina is a foreign land to the bullies who invaded it and dispossessed its rightful owners. Less so, since the Falklands had no native population.
41 inthegutter (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:42 pm Report abuse
#38

Yes against UNSC resolution 502 which demanded a complete withdrawal of Argentine forces. This was adopted with 10 votes to 1 (Panama) with 4 abstentions. Argentina IGNORED it.

UNSC resolution 505 reaffirmed 502 and was unanimously adopted. Again, Argentina ignored it.

Panama and Spain later tabled a further draft (unduly favourable to Argentina) that was vetoed by the UK and US.

Essentially Argentina was planning on ignoring resolutions until they found one that they liked, that is not how international law works.

The UK (note: not “english”) claimed the FIs before Argentina existed as a sovereign entity. Tell me, if the Falklands Islands are a “foreign island” then what was Patagonia and the vast tracks of Paraguay that Argentina stole (after 1833).

You guys really are just blinded colonialists, determined to subjugate another people.
42 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:47 pm Report abuse
I didnt even live in argentinea at the time so you are really far away. Who is victimizing huh? “oohhh they invaded us”. If the british hadnt expel the argentinean guarrison in 1833 nothing would have happend. You want to validate 150 years of occupation with the 1982 invasion? I understand the argentinean people, they were really tired of the bullies always ignoring them or treating them like nothing. I think that will eventually happen again, lets see how more argentinean and british die to defend to 2.500 arrogant okupas
43 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:48 pm Report abuse
@38 502 left NOTHING to the imagination. You were told to get out. Plain and simple. Not hand it to “Peacekeepers” who would hold it for “arbitration” in the ICJ where you still refuse to go because thou have no case. Not asked to stay but be “nice” to the islanders and not bring in fascists storm troopers like Dowling (who can't even get asylum in Ireland because of his crimes against Argentines and Islanders alike) even though before the invasion the islanders made it clear that you were not welcome there. No. You were told to hand it back to the UK administration who treated the Falklanders with respect and to the Falklanders themselves. You didn't. Instead you flew in your troops, your occupiers, your land mines, your guns, and yes, your gestapo. The UK did what any other responsible government would do as per the UN charter permitting the defense of ones people from aggression. They rescued people from your Dirty War, your dictatorship, YOUR problem. And oh yes, the Junta “wasn't yours” and nothing's ever your fault. Yes we hear that a lot here. But you cheered for it in April 1982, even though just before you were clammering to get ride of it just before the invasion -- that's why they did it. They knew if they gave you some necks to vicariously step on (via their jackboot) you'd let bygones be bygones. You even celebrate that “Hail Mary pass” that could have been with a coin! (Nice steel claw clutching the Islands, by the way, that's a nice touch for people who talk about peace).
44 Pugol-H (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:49 pm Report abuse
@6 Heisenbergcontext
Ossie went back to Argentina, saying he had no problem with the UK that had been good to him, but felt he should return to Argentina while the current situation lasted. But he hoped to return at some point.

Ricky stayed throughout, even walking onto the pitch at spurs on occasions.
To the cheers of the Yids, you can imagine the reaction of the other fans.

I won’t bore you with the songs they used to sing.

@10 rupertbrooks0
It was the FA cup final against Leicester City, he did walk onto the pitch though, as described above.

@32 eliasdossantos
Free Patagonia, remove the Criollo planters.

Arm the Mapuche, one settler one bullet.
45 Troy Tempest (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:52 pm Report abuse
38 Elias

“ From 1833 the english bullies occupy a foreign island and are proud of it, they fell on the okupas sham”

The Falklands have been attacking and threatening brave Argentina since 1833???

LOL !!
46 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:56 pm Report abuse
The mapuche are chilean. First: research history. Second: Talk. Poor guys, they put yourself in the same level as a lot of opressed people around the world who really deserved self determination. You are the opressors, not the opressed. Someday the british realize who are they defending, and with what moral backing it. We surely keep the continent aware of your intrussion
47 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 03:58 pm Report abuse
As for 1833 it use to be amazing (but now just boring) how that always is the start of “your” history (as Argentine even though you “were not argentine back then”, we inherit our history just as our successive government inherits our treaties) when the UK and a number of powers had dibs on the islands. The UP occupying force was there with the knowledge at one point permission and then protest of the UK when it was clear that the UP was pulling a fastie and the UK protected their claim with little force. That was how it was done then. In 1850 you signed a treaty that said fine. And not until “you” saw free Europe (and the UK) faltering to the Nazis did you consider rebooting the claim (hell you even considered joining them and just taking the islands but thankfully for all parties, especially Argentina, you didn't). Flash forward to a world where colonies were given self-determination with the start of the UN (which you folk always lie about here). Then flash forward to the Islanders having their interests taken into account by the UK and ignored by you, leading to 1982's illegal and bridge burning invasion. Then flash forward again to the 21st century the will of the people are sacrosanct and free of cynical cold war politics. The Islands are the Islanders. To do as they please. Free of you. Free forever. Join the 21st century and get over it.
48 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:03 pm Report abuse
Bla bla bla.. they UK hadnt ocuppied the islands in more than 60 years and what right did they have? The french had settled there first. You just saw the opportunity to snatch the islands from their rightful owners and took it. Your history background is as poor as the moral one, which a huge military show to bully the southamerican countries. Go back to Europe, where you belong

P.S: we joined the 21st century ;)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17272716
49 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:05 pm Report abuse
@48. As genocidal occupiers of the New World, you first. Give it back to the remaining First Nations people. Oh... Sorry... that's different when it's you isn't it?
50 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:11 pm Report abuse
Juaaaz. We have a saying in my country: “anyone can talk about first nations peoples right except the british, who occupied half of the world through murder and blood” Dont you see you are making a full of yourselves talking about them? Just look for another point, like “the right for self determination” of british people in occupied islands. I guess british will deserve self determination in any country they invade
51 Livingthedream (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:17 pm Report abuse
@39 rupertbrooks0 Yes, my bad it was Tottenham but Manchester Untited is still the best team in all history!!
52 Troy Tempest (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:21 pm Report abuse
48 Elias

So now you say they were French, not British, not Spanish?

At the same time, you say you inherited them from Spain?

Is that the same Spain that you rejected and revolted from. The UP did not have possession of any territories except those they stole, around the River Plate.

The Falklands were 1000 miles away.

Spain was still signing treaties regarding their South Atlantic 'interests' in the 1850's, when they ceded they had no outstanding issues with Britain regarding the Falklands and South Atlantic.

“Argentina” became a state in 1853, and did not move into the area adjacent to the Falklands until they dlaughtered the Anerindians of Patagonia in 1888.

Learn some history
53 Conqueror (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:21 pm Report abuse
@24 The best country in the world judging a couple of argentines? Seems reasonable. Best wishes Snr Ardiles. Not many argentines I would say that for.
@27 No need. Falkland Islanders are in “their” country. Where they will stay. Because NO-ONE is big enough or tough enough to say otherwise. The world's ONLY “superpower” should remember that it has NEVER beaten the UK. The best it managed, with assistance, was a draw. Bottom line. WE don't know HOW to surrender. And they haven't done anything. Except live and harvest their own resources.
@32 Oh dear. YOU invaded. YOU occupied. YOU started a war. YOU committed war crimes. YOU lost. Because Britain and British troops were so much better. British troops are not in occupation. They are there to defend. and you're a fart.
@38 No. From 1690 the British occupied territory that they discovered. They allowed the peaceful French to co-occupy. Then the asshole Spaniards BOUGHT the French settlement. Nothing else. Just the settlement. Then tyrannical Spaniards tried to evict Brits. Failed as the Spanish king didn't fancy a war. A litle bit of rebellious shite on the continent tried to steal British territory. How lucky for the shite that Britain hasn't seen fit to exterminate them. I'd exterminate the lot tomorrow!
54 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:28 pm Report abuse
44 Pugol-H

Almost. The semi-final was against Leicester City and was played at Aston Villa’s ground in Birmingham on 3rd April 1982; Tottenham Hotspur winning 2-0.

The final was against QPR, played at Wembley on 22nd May which ended in a 1-1 draw. Tottenham won the replay 5 days later 1-0. Ricky walked out to wave to the fans at Wembley on the 22nd. Don’t know about the replay.

Both Ossie and Ricky always speak with deep affection about their English football playing days. Both also speak about how well they were treated by English people in general and Tottenham football club and fans in particular.

Both Ossie and Ricky are of course Gentlemen, who always conducted themselves, both on and off the football pitch with grace, good humour and dignity. The high regard with which they are still held in England is well merited.

There are many contributors to Mercopress, both Argentine and others, who would do well to model themselves on these fine individuals.
55 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:28 pm Report abuse
Juazzz. So when argentinean independed it was actually “stealing” lands from spain. You should hide better that you agree with all the empire thinking if you are claiming for the right to “self determination”, how can you understand a colony if you werent never one? Because you only know how to force your way.

Everybody knows that french gave their rights to spain. Where did the uk get there rights? Nowhere? That is why i thought: okupas. 60 years later the UK remembered those islands that had never had a right to and expelled the argentinean government with the use of force, like then.. like now

P.S: Spain gave its rights to uruguay and argentina in 1841 and 1861. Everybody knows that
56 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:31 pm Report abuse
@50. Why am I not surprised. How cynical and self serving of you. But then again, I'm not British. So I can talk about the First Nations. And I will: Spanish culture committed genocide in South and MesoAmerica, and (no matter what they say about those silly milk serving Vikings who didn't really say long) you through the Spanish claim pretty much hold the patent on New World Genocide.

So once again: You First.
57 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:38 pm Report abuse
So you can seize any land you want because of that Genocide? Let me know when you are trying to occupy florianopolis. Just fill it of british and then claim self determination, we love the show
58 Jack Bauer (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:42 pm Report abuse
#38...“”We had our share of US instigated military government but has nothing to do with the point“”...Elias sounds like a Brazzo, who thinks he's an expert on world history...and has sided with the poor Argies. Obviously he has a big chip on his shoulder and thinks that the UK and/or the US owes him something...poor twat !
59 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:45 pm Report abuse
@56, I have no territorial intentions in the 21st century, neither does the UK which has been shedding their empire, one NGST at a time when they are ready and want to go it on their own. I only care that basic human rights, including self-determination are respected, unlike Argentina and it seems people in Brazil. If Florianopolis, Buenos Aires, Santiago or Stanley, wishes to be Brazilian, Argentine, Chilean, British Falklander or Jedi, it is each their decision and theirs alone. That is what seems to separates you from the rest of us living in the 21st century.
60 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:53 pm Report abuse
You have to parrotly repeat the selfdetermination sham, voted by people brought by the occupiers. Did anyone bought it? We are not dumb people, we do agree to the importance of selfdetermination but know it was not worth even the money spent in the circus. I loved the clowns though

i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article1755382.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/A%20Falkland%20Islander%20wearing%20a%20suit%20with%20the%20Union%20Jack%20colours%20gestures%20before%20casting%20his%20vote%20at%20the%20Town%20Hall%20polling%20station%20in%20Stanley-1755382.jpg

I guess the naval base in guatanamo will also vote to “keep being part of the US”.
61 inthegutter (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 04:53 pm Report abuse
#57 You really don't get it do you?

I think very few of us here are suggesting that Argentina relinquish land it stole from Paraguay and the native inhabitants of Patagonia. What I'm sure most of us agree with is the idea that things changed in 1945 with the signing of the UN charter which supports self-determination above all else.

I brought up the case of Paraguay and Patagonia because I WANT YOU to tell me how they are different, or more justified, than the UK re-asserting sovereignty over the Falkland Islands in 1833.

But another way, YOUR Argument for Argentine sovereignty over the Falklands Islands relates to the fact that the UK apparently stole them in 1833. Well, since then Argentina stole most of Patagonia and a decent chunk of Patagonia. To be consistent (and not just a raving nationalist) then surely you have to see for Argentina to be entitled to Falkland Islands, Paraguay, at the very least, is entitled to its territory back. In fact, taking this to its logical and consistent end, most of the worlds countries should swap territory with their neighbours. IS THIS what you're suggesting?

The only acceptable consistent solution (i.e. one in which not only Argentina gets its way) is to fix the borders in 1945 and apply the principle of self-determination to non-self governing territories.... but wait, that is almost exactly what happened.
62 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:02 pm Report abuse
You know that to reassert something you have to previously assert it. Did the UK had any sorveignity? When? You never did, spain only allowed you to go back in 1771 without relinquishing its true rights to the islands and after that you left. You should study history that is not written by raving nationalist like the ones you have, we study the correct one.

Wars come and go and territories can be win or lost, but are eventually settled in a peace treaty. Not an invasion without declaration like the 1833 one, they didnt even have the guts to do it. Nor the straight face
63 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:03 pm Report abuse
@60, the world “bought it” and rightfully so, in the vote and it was pretty clear on it. As I said elsewhere the world was asked to vote on it and it explicitly cited even by countries that are hostile tot the UK and “Norte/NATO” block that the *Argentine* ploy to put conditions on self-determination would be disastrous for a number of active scenarios around the world including the Israeli-Palestinain conflict (and one of those objections came from Egypt, not Israel). There would be no camels noses under the tent to keep 21st people exerting 21st century will. This isn't just about LatAm solidarity. Such a cynical block applied as proposed could have been used to scuttle East Timorese independence, the Tibetan cause, god knows what it would do with Kashmir/Pakistan/Indian/China dry-erase marker borders, the 19th province of Iraq, and of course the most “important conflict in the whole world” between the Israelis and Palestinians. That is how myopic and cynical Argentina (and Spain) were. And the adult world said no. And so did some of the emerging powers who knew what it was like to be colonies coveted by bigger neighbors.
64 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:09 pm Report abuse
44 Pugol-H
Hi, Rupert here again. I do hope you don’t find my pedantic corrections too irritating ‘cos here’s another one.

I think you will find that Ossie had already made an arrangement with Tottenham that he would end the season early. This was so he could fly home to Argentina to train with the Argentine football squad for a few weeks, before they flew off to Spain for the world cup finals. This arrangement was made before it was known that Spurs would be FA cup finalists.

On the back sports page of the News of the World on Sunday 4th April 1982 there was a photograph of Ossie at a farewell party at Tottenham, surrounded by his Tottenham team mates and manager thanking him for all that he had done for them before he headed off for Argentina. The News of the World also condemned the Leicester City fans who had booed Ossie at the previous day’s semi-final.

Meanwhile over on the front page of the self same newspaper there was a banner headline declaring “ITS WAR” and a picture of an aircraft carrier which was also heading off for Argentina. Such is the sometimes surreal quality of life.
65 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:13 pm Report abuse
Sure it is GFace. Imagine Israel calling for selfdetermination in the settlers that they have in palestine territory? That is as ridiculous as claiming the okupas have any right in our continent
66 Pugol-H (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:17 pm Report abuse
@55 eliasdossantos
Everybody knows, the Mapuche were in Patagonia long, long before you Spanish Planters turned up.

Everybody knows, the Criollo Conquistadors then wiped out (ethnically cleansed) the Indian population of Patagonia and TDF, long after the British recovered the Falklands in 1833 from the Argy invasion in 1832.

Everybody knows, the truth is you have run out of S America to conquer from the Indians, so you try and take British territory in the S Atlantic/Antarctic

And now you know, the British have more than just bows and arrows with which to defend their territory, you’re not dealing “with a handful of savages” this time, boots on the other foot as we say. Whoooosh!!!!!

@62 eliasdossantos
“spain only allowed you to go back in 1771”

BAHAhahahahahahahahahahaha

Nothing to do with a fleet of English warship gathering off the Isle of Wight, about to set off on their “ClubMed” holiday.

The Spanish signed what they were told to sign, or else.

Read the treaty, it’s a matter of public record here.
67 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:27 pm Report abuse
From the records I have, the mapuches are chilean and were sent to Patagonia by the chilean merchants, to steal cattle. After suffering constant malones the argentinean defended and recovered the patagonia. After that, the chilean wiped the mapuches, a conflict that still survives in that island. Argentina “only” killed 1.300 indians and got over 12.000 prisioners. How many innocent aborigens have the UK wiped? Millions? Billions? ”Anyone can talk about first nations peoples right except the british, who occupied half of the world through murder and blood”

Its funny how you try to talk about history with no clue. In 1771, the spanish ambassador added the sentece which clearly said it didnt mean it gave any sorveignity rights. Just reaserch a little bit, you can come to Itamaraty if you want

So, the 1765-1774 UK settlement never had any rights to the islands and eventually was abandoned. That is the UK claim to the islands? Wow, so strong! You are just bullies
68 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:28 pm Report abuse
@65 The problem there is that there have been Jews (Israelis) living in Israel/Palestine since before the Zionist movement including in areas that are now under the PA or in Occupied territories. As for South American being “your” or “Argentina's” continent while the Falklanders have no right having lived there longer than some South Americans who exert that same “my land” franchise, well that is rather... rich. Your claim is through invasion, colonization (voluntary and involuntary as it was with the US) and conquest and yes, a “little” cultural and literal genocide inherited through Spain and Portugal. But somehow it is “'your' continent.” You can't shave hairs, keep yours and discard the Falklanders' (and First Nation's) because their flowing locks which are about as long (or longer) than yours are inconvenient to your narrative.
69 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:32 pm Report abuse
51 Livingthedream

Manchester United? the best team in all history? Not at the moment they’re not. Didn’t they lose the other week to err Sunderland? Better than Real Madrid? Nine times! European champions!

Around these parts (Hackney, Arsenal territory) people hate Manchester United. Even the Somalian refugees up the road hate Manchester United and they barely speak English! I don’t think you were living the dream last Saturday at Stamford Bridge?

Still loyalty is an admirable quality. What football club wants fair weather fans? I’m sure Manchester United will appreciate your steadfastness and loyalty over the next 25 years before your champions again.
70 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:35 pm Report abuse
There is not such “falklanders”, they are british. Dont they have the british nationality? I ve read in an argentina newspaper that 95% are british or british ascent.

Every country in south america inherited the sins of it sprevious occupiers, but in every country we are a mix of colonists, native and previous slaves. We have a lot more rights to this land than you, for sure. The islanders could have come to live in the falklands under the argentinean rule if they were so interested, a lot of british came to our countries throught the years, why do you need the navy?
71 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:51 pm Report abuse
@70, “Every country in south america inherited the sins of it sprevious occupiers, but in every country we are a mix of colonists, native and previous slaves. We have a lot more rights to this land than you, for sure..”

Uh... why then do YOU have more rights than the Islanders have to theirs? Oh. yes. Because of conquest, invasion, colonialism, genocide, slavery. Is it the genocide and slavery part that puts your claim over the edge? And let's not forget the most important one. If your rights via conquest, invasion, colonialism, genocide, slavery isn't more credible than the rights of people way over on those two little islands that you want gone, well....

“The islanders could have come to live in the falklands under the argentinean rule if they were so interested...”

Uh... they ~weren't~ interested. I think that's the whole point. And I really cannot blame them.
72 Pugol-H (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 05:54 pm Report abuse
@ eliasdossantos
So the Mapuche are from Chile, and were wiped out by the Chileans (more Criollos) anyway.

Absolutely nothing to do with Argentina whatsoever.

So your part of Patagonia and TDF were “persuaded” to join Argentina, or are you saying they were completely empty “desert”.

Not to mention the BA area.

BAHAhahahahahahahahah
WHO do you expect to believe this shit???

www.mapuche-nation.org/english/news.htm

If there is no such thing as “Falklanders”, then there is no such thing as “Argentinians”, just Indian murdering bastards.
73 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:01 pm Report abuse
If the UK had not invaded in 1833! The islands would be argentina as they rightfully are, and always will be. If people wanted to inmigrate to the islands, they could have as they did to other parts of southamerica. But they dont want to be inmigrantes, they prefer to live in here with the UK army backing them. A rather expensive scheme
74 Be serious (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:06 pm Report abuse
After careful consideration and after taking all of the above comments into account, I conclude that Argentina has no valid claim and that the Falkland Islands are indeed British Sovereign Territory.
75 Faz (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:14 pm Report abuse
#73 the British never invaded. How can you invade your own territory? They threw out a few rapists and murderers who had only been there 3 months leaving the civilian population intact. You don't know your own history - all the documents are in your own national archive. Stop talking garbage - look them up!
You are the only invaders and we threw you out. 11,000 Argentinians. All our weapons are only for our defence, you dare not invade again.
76 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:14 pm Report abuse
Pugol “anyone can talk about first nations peoples right except the british, who occupied half of the world through murder and blood” After sustaining quite a lot of malones (indians attacks) the argentinean annexed the patagonia through a military occupation. Did all the murders and slaughters the UK did were because those indians were attacking the UK??

BAHAhahahahahahahahah BAHAhahahahahahahahah BAHAhahahahahahahahah BAHAhahahahahahahahah

Yes, that is what i thought. And by the way, the UK invasion was not done eight years after they signed a friendship treaty with argentina? then you got the okupas to the islands and now you want anyone to buy a worthless referendum. You are the only ones buying the scams you make
77 Swede (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:19 pm Report abuse
This artcicle is about two Argentine football players and gentlemen living in the UK for a long time, who unfortunately have been involved in a car accident. But of course many of the comments are about quite other topics which already have been discussed hundreds of times.
78 Pugol-H (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:20 pm Report abuse
@ eliasdossantos
The British did not “invade” in 1833, they “recovered” (recuperado) the Islands from an Argentinian invasion in 1832.

The Islands have been British territory since long before Argentina ever existed. As was clearly recognised by the Spanish.

“The Islands have never legitimately been administered by, or formed part of, the sovereign territory of the Republic of Argentina” – HM Gov letter to the UN

By the way in Mapusungun you’re called a “Huinca”

“military occupation”, just like the Israelis in the West Bank then.
79 Anbar (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:22 pm Report abuse
“”“” You are the opressors, not the opressed. Someday the british realize who are they defending, and with what moral backing it. We surely keep the continent aware of your intrussion“”“””

you keep patagonia despite you having forcibly colonised it....from the INDIGENOUS people.

or dont they teach you your own history in Argentina?

..its very hard to take anybody like you seriously when you are so blind to your own history and the thoroughly distorted version taught by your governments.

DO yourself a big favour and go and so some research before simply repeating jargon handed to you by your government lackeys.
80 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:27 pm Report abuse
Were a british territory???? When??? They only had a settlement in a spanish territory for 9 years and then left. I know that is a big lie in the british magical history, the spanish never recognized the british claim. So that is all you ve got? And it was sixty years ago, that is called an invasion to argentinean territory. I remember reading the invasor took back the argentinean flag before expelling their administration.

By the way in portugues you’re called a “babaca”
81 Corvus corax (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:36 pm Report abuse
eliasdossantos

Please report the facts your government intend to take to the International Courts of Justice to prove Argentinas claim to the territory called the Falkland Islands.

Have they made a case yet to present to a court?

Why was the treaty signed in 1850?

Why such a long time in between claims for the Falkland Islands?
82 Steve-33-uk (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:40 pm Report abuse
@ eliasdossantos

People have migrated to the FI from all over the world over the last 180 years. Please see the population demographics of the FI...
'In the 2012 census, a majority of residents described their nationality as Falkland Islander (59%), followed by British (29%), Saint Helenian (9.8%), and Chilean (5.4%). A small number of Argentines also reside in the islands...'
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Falkland_Islands#Demographics

So I think you are missing the point, the FI belong to the people who live there, the Falkland Islanders. Not Britain, France, Argentina or Spain! The people of the FI currently wish to maintain links with the UK, but in the future they may wish to integrate and become part of Uruguay or Argentina or become an Independent Nation, it's their choice. Also any money made from fishing rights and resources is theirs to spend developing their islands as their Govt see fit.
83 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:40 pm Report abuse
1771 Spanish ambassador “this engagement to restore port Egmont cannot, nor ought, in any wise, to affect the question of the prior right of sovereignty of the Malouine, otherwise called Falkland's islands.”

PRIOR RIGHT OF SORVEIGNITY

Read: “we ll give you back the settlement, but that doesnt mean anything on respect to our prior right of sorveignity”

poor british, brainwashed they had any rights... before, in 1833, and ever after

P.S. my government has to do nothing with the islands Corvus, only back the rightfull owner. We know history
84 ron_57 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:43 pm Report abuse
and....
troy tempest is assisting the argentine visitors with lots of care ...
hummm.....i believe troy tempest is gay!
85 Escoses Doido (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:49 pm Report abuse
Mr. DosSantos,
Know that you and your demented kind will never control the Falkland Islands.
Please continue with your amusing rehtoric though.

Cheers.
86 Anbar (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:49 pm Report abuse
eliasdossantos - in all this rabid quoting of things friendly to your argument, is there any documentation where Spain or anybody else grants the land to Argentina?..and i mean the nation Argentina, not the current colonised lands claimed by Argentina.

Can you also inform everybody why Argentina signed a treaty of perfect friendship with the UK whereupon they made absolutely no claims, whatsoever, toward the falklands islands?

(coz, you know, it might have been a good idea to raise the point then as the treaty effectively acknowledged the UKs sovereignty)

also: can you link to the Argentine governments' current schedule for returning the stolen lands of Patagonia and paying restitution to the indigenous descendants that were murdered , raped, tortured and thrown off their land so that corrupt pigs like CFK could become millionaires off the earnings from that land by the squatting european descendants (most of ten called “Argentines”)?

coz.. you know... we wouldn't want you to be being all hypocritical now would we?
87 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:54 pm Report abuse
We dont believe in bedtime stories Steve, “decide being part of Argentina or Uruguay” ¿? They would have to pay taxes! They obviously love to be part of the UK as they were brought by them and can exploit all the natural resources without giving anything back to the central government. Who wouldnt? 2.500 okupas exploiting a rich land. But that doesnt give them any legality, like it wouldnt if the UK decide to invade other islands and bring more okupas. Eventually the UK will mature and offer the okupas a place in the british islands if they dont want to stay under the rightful owner rule
88 golfcronie (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:54 pm Report abuse
@83
Go back to your hut, the FALKLAND ISLANDS are a British Overseas Territory, so just get over it. The FALKLANDERS want nothing to do with the Argentines, how would you like it if I burst into your house and had a shit on your lounge floor, would you be happy with that, no I don't think so. Why would the FALKLANDERS want anything to do with a 3rd world country such as Argentina. All they do is verbally attack the FALKLANDERS. They( the FALKLANDERS ) have made their decision, just live with it.
89 Pugol-H (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 06:59 pm Report abuse
@ eliasdossantos
I am working with a bunch of Portuguese at the minute, so I will ask the question tomorrow, “babaca” you say, in Tuga.

Pretty sure that like the Brazilians, they just refer to you as “wankers”

www.falklandshistory.org/

“cannot nor ought in any wise to affect the question of prior right of sovereignty of the Malouine Islands, otherwise called Falkland.”

“That statement left the respective claims of both countries exactly as they had been before the Spanish seizure of Port Egmont. It did not specifically reserve Spanish rights, although many writers have wrongly asserted that it did.”
90 Troy Tempest (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:00 pm Report abuse
70 Elias

“Every country in south america inherited the sins of it sprevious occupiers, but in every country we are a mix of colonists, native and previous slaves. We have a lot more rights to this land than you, for sure. ”

Some of those “colonists” were British, as Paul Cedron likes to point out.

So, Elias, you are saying that because you are a group of diverse European peoples, their slaves, and surviving Mapuche (from Chile ) living in Argentina, for 200 years, it is yours and only yours?
Is that correct?

And the inhabitants who have lived in the Falklands ( Note: there was not any indigenous population), inhabitants who were British, Chilean, Spanish, French, German, UP refugees, and Free descendants of SA slaves, and lived there for 200 years - they are NOT the rightful owners of the Islands, right?

Hmmm,
Can you tell me the difference?
91 Monkeymagic (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:04 pm Report abuse
@87

Simple question:

You mention the Argentine garrison expelled in 1833 as the basis of your sovereignty claim

1) how many people were expelled (according to your National archives)
2) how long had any of the expelled been on the Falklands

I am not interested in the Spanish population who returned to Spain in 1811.
Nor am I interested in the Vernet business which had almost failed and was under the leadership of the British Matthew Brisbane in 1833.

Just those expelled as part of the Argentine garrison. how many and how long had they been there?

Should be easy for you...
92 ron_57 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:08 pm Report abuse
@90
Ms. Isolde is posting now...
because Troy Tempest is busy loving the argentine visitors...
93 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:19 pm Report abuse
Yes, somebody showed the “falkland history” once, full of lies you like repeating to yourselves. The spanish reserved rights, the english only wanted their honour washed. Thats it. That is why they abandoned the setllement after only 3 years of almost going a war for it. They forgot for a lot of years until they saw the united provinces (argentina and uruguay) claiming the islands they had administered for so many years. They saw their chance and went for it, like mere bandits. It really doesnt matter if the UP guarrison was there for 1 month or 10 years. There had been 60 years since the last british.

And now they like to repeat they are an “overseas territority”. What is that if not more than an outpost in south atlantic? The okupas that then like to boast for something they dont pay

We are talking about sorveign nations here, and one bullies the other. Should Argentina give back the patagonia? should the normands give back england to the celtics? As stupid as it can sound
94 GFace (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:44 pm Report abuse
@76 Pugol “anyone can talk about first nations peoples right except the british, who occupied half of the world through murder and blood”

And there it is again. Elias, to mix metaphors, I think we really need to talk about that elephant of a mass grave under that room your sitting in. I'm not a psychologist but I'm not british either so I can talk about this serious case of cognitive dissonance of yours.

You have no moral perch on which to sit in South America in 2014 in a westernized former European colony founded by displacing, often terminally, the local indigenous population AND tell people in the middle of the South Atlantic on two remote islands that they have no right to live there in 2014 in an arrangement that seems to be working for them, so much so they dressed in whacky costumes (as you pointed out) to celebrate voting democratically and overwhelmingly to retain it. I mean the least you could do is diplomatically and professionally offer them a more attractive alternative (good luck by the way). That or take them to the ICJ (and good luck there too by the way).
95 eliasdossantos (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 07:56 pm Report abuse
Bla bla bla. The thing is, you cannot judge anyone

“I am not interested in the Spanish population who returned to Spain in 1811.”

I would like to point this one, eviden lie. Do you really think all the settlers in 1811 returned to spain? Where have you seen it?? Actually most of them didnt and at least two of them died fighting us during the invasion of 1816 from what i know. The real owners of the islands stayed in uruguay quite a lot and were part of the UP when they resettled the islands in 1828
96 Monkeymagic (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:02 pm Report abuse
@93

So we have established that the Argentine garrison was there for one month....or more accurately 6 weeks.

How many we're evicted?

Let me answer for you....54.

So, your sovereignty claim is based on 54 people for 6 weeks.

Interesting though, because you deny the Amerindians rights in Patagonia because of their Chilean origins...we're there more than 54 and had they been there for more than 6 weeks?

I am very sorry, but if your undeniable rights to sovereignty are based on 54 people for 6 weeks....54 people who incidentally had already mutineed and murdered the Argentine appointed “governor” and raped his wife in front of their children....we cannot feel too guilty 180 years later.

I'd like to help @93, really I would.

But your “claim” is pathetically weak.

Should the Falkland Islanders “give back” the islands to the last civilian population?

I am not sure the Spanish who left voluntarily in 1811 really want them.

Your claim is based on the Spanish population, the Vernet business and the murderers of 1832 being “the same people”, because they were not British.

But only the murderers were Argentine....and only 6 weeks....

Oh dear!
97 Monty69 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:14 pm Report abuse
93 eliasdossantos
98 rupertbrooks0 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:19 pm Report abuse
eliasdossantos

The Falklands were never abandoned in 1776. Merely the garrison was withdrawn for financial reasons. The UK left a plague repeating its claim and authority to all. The islands were in fact in continuous use by Britain. Indeed there is more evidence of British use of the islands than Spanish.

For example on 1st April 1776, questions were asked in the British parliament regarding the possibility that the islands be used as a penal colony. A few weeks later parliament passed the Whale Fishery, etc. Act 1776 which extended the bounty system of £2 per ton to the Whale fisheries based on the Falkland Islands.

In the years 1786-87 Lt. Thomas Edgar of the Royal Navy sailing in the whaler Hope spends 18 months in the Falklands, surveys the Falklands and produces the first accurate naval chart of the islands, a chart which is still available today.

There are records of dozens of British whaling ships using the islands between 1776 and 1833 including: the Amelia commanded by Capt. James Shields (1787), the Lucas, under Captain. William Aiken, the Intrepid, under Capt. John Leard and the Quaker under Captain Shadrick Kearn. *(1788). The Sydenham under captain Eckstein, (1791).

Indeed such is the amount of sealing going on that Captain Leard writes to Charles Jenkinson, the President of the Council for Trade and Foreign Plantations, suggesting seal conservation measures be put in place to conserve stocks. There are also records, letters and ships logs of British ships using the islands for water, repairs and even of British sailors growing vegetables and the building of huts.

Your claim that Britain abandoned the islands is therefore plain wrong.
99 Think (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:22 pm Report abuse
(17) Islander1

You say...:
“..... the 1982 war and the problems for these 2 at the peak of their career was 32 years ago and 8000 miles DISTANT from here- grow up ESPN and move on.”

I say....:
I “Think” it is you that should “Grow Up”, Mr. Islander1....
Mr. Osvaldo Ardiles “Problem” with Malvinas is much CLOSER than you “Think”...
His name was Lieut. José Leónidas Ardiles .....
QEPD
100 Monkeymagic (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 08:22 pm Report abuse
Whoa....woah....@95

Are you volunteering “new information”

Actually, not new...but hardly helps your case.

According to you “the real owners” of the islands left in 1811 and went to Uruguay.

I agree

Some of “the real owners” of the islands died fighting Argentina in 1816. Yes, some of them did!

Some of the “real owners” stayed in Uruguay...perhaps...this is possible...

BUT BUT...hang on...the Treaty of Montevideo was in 1828....we should know, the Britsh helped broker it.

So in 1828, Uruguay was an independent state and not part of the UP...and certainly not part of the UP in November 1832.

Surely then, by claiming the islands for the UP in 1832 you were in fact...stealing them from their “rightful owners”, who would have been Uruguayan.

Goodness me, thanks for the new information (sic)...further destroys any Argentine claim.
101 Islander1 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:05 pm Report abuse
Tink, am fully moved on and up to date, the poor lad you refer to was lost at sea i believe and is not buried at Darwin. - therfore nothing to see there that he cannot see in Buenos Aires where the replica memorial wall is. Have no problem though with him coming to pay respects top his fellow countrymen who are there at Darwin - But coming with ESPN to make a film that they can sell- ie it has to have an “angle” - No time for it nor have the great majority of folks here, that,s why the great majority here - whilst sorry to hear of the injuries of course and wish a speedy recovery - we all had a damned good laugh about it.
Sad for the footballers - they were duped- or well paid by ESPN.

Elias 2 Saints - what is an okupas? my family has 7 generations born here - we have no home but our Islands - of which we are very pround, proud of the way our ancestors settled them and developed them, proud also of the heritgae we have. Who did what to who 200-300yrs ago? Yes both sides can probabalt make a case- but do grow up- using armed force to settle territorial disputes died well over 100 years ago! In the 2oth and 21st Century it is the PEOPLE of a land/territory that matter - their democrativ Rights of their choice.
102 Corvus corax (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:12 pm Report abuse
Thank you for your reply eliasdossantos

Though you failed to answer the 1850 question, just like many Malvinistas have never done.

As your ilk have never answered, amongst many other 'points of contention'.

I'm done with this forum, the Falkland Islanders deserve their rights to the land they live upon.
103 Think (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:17 pm Report abuse
(101) Islander1

Please don't play that “Ilslander beyond propaganda and merchandising” card......
The only thing annoying you Kelpers ist the fact that that ESPN Docu-Soap will quite probably have a strong Argentinean inclination......
104 ron_57 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:23 pm Report abuse
You see,
anyone can enter the slum islands regardless of nationality,,,
but,
what's happen with Conqueror aka Captain Poop ....
it seems Old Poop Conqueror have changed his mind about shooting all the “args”...
jiiiiiiiji
105 Monkeymagic (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:27 pm Report abuse
Islander

I wouldn't worry about Elias....we now have further Argentine historical information.

Thanks to Think...we know that only 55 people were evicted in 1833...and they were the crew of the Sarandi who arrived in November 1832. Argentina know this.

Thanks to Elias..we know that the Spanish settlement that left in 1811, went to Uruguay, fought against the Argentine uprising, and then either returned to Spain or became part of the Uruguayan state founded in 1828. The Argentines know this.

So...it seems that two of the fundamental pillars of the Malvinista myths...they KNOW are bollocks.

No inheritance from Spain
No usurption or eviction of Argentine population

The final pillar...that the islands are geographically closer to Argentina is true...so when all island groups 300 miles from the mainland cede sovereignty against the will of the population to the nearest mainland country...we can talk again.

UK will be French, Cuba will be American, will New Zealnd be Australian or both be part of New Guinea...or Indonesia...oh crap...this rule gets complicated...LOL

Or perhaps we will let the inhabitants choose...because self determination works everywhere else in the world.
106 Jack Bauer (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 09:52 pm Report abuse
Elias, #62 : “Wars come and go and territories can be win or lost, but are eventually settled in a peace treaty”.....that wasn't the norm in the 1800's . In those days things were somewhat different than today ; if you fought a war and lost, lump it....and it's no bloody use crying over territories lost 180 years ago.....IF it was, what have you got to say about the “Cisplatine War ” (Guerra Cisplatina, to you) ?...was no more no less the the “Imperio do Brasil” taking - by force - rogue territories under Spanish rule , which would otherwise, today, belong to the successors of the United Province of the River Plate“....this took place in 1825-1828, so I suppose you believe that Brazil should now, almost 200 years later, return Rio Grande do Sul to its ”rightful owners” ? not a chance ! that's the way things were back then and all your whining ain't gonna change an iota.
Yr #67 is so stupid, doesn't even deserve any comments. Yr #80 ? just more crap...and btw , in English, you and your type, Brasileiro, are known as 'cunts'...
107 Conqueror (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 10:14 pm Report abuse
@95 I've been reading all your comments. I don't blame you for your views. You don't blame a psychotic for being “disturbed”. A short period of research will show you how spaniards spent hundreds of years justifying themselves in the face of reason. Arseholes....sorry, argies do the same because they know no better. Just take a few minutes of your precious time to identify all the lies that argieland has told the UN in its “case”. www.falklandshistory.org/false-falklands-history.pdf
Take a few more minutes to identify all the lies titface/gollum/timwoman told when claiming that Britain was “militarising” the South Atlantic.
All we're saying is this. If you come anywhere near the territory that is jointly owned by Britain and the Falkland Islanders, we will kill you. More than that, we will track back to where you came from and kill all those left there. Then we will destroy all traces of your occupation.
What you don't seem to understand is how much you are hated for what you have done and your lies. If, after 1982, you'd kept your stupid mouths shut for about a thousand years, we might have decided not to make an issue of the 255 British servicemen and 3 Falkland Islanders you killed, the 775 British servicemen you wounded. But you keep dragging up your lies. Don't mention the 649 argies we killed or the 1,657 we wounded. They deserved it. And, in the future, the corpses will probably be dug up and used as fish food.
Just, as in 1982, we sent 5% of our armed forces to give you a smack, you should consider what we CAN do.
Try to get an idea of your worth. On a scale of 1 to 100, you're zero. Quit lying and whingeing. You are irritating people's ears and eyes.
Don't bother with a “response”. I wouldn't defile my keyboard by arguing, debating, discussing the matter with you. One doesn't argue, debate or discuss something with a brain-dead cretin!
Incidentally, this article is about Osvaldo Ardiles. You might want to spare some seconds thinking of him.
108 dab14763 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 10:36 pm Report abuse
1771 Spanish ambassador “this engagement to restore port Egmont cannot, nor ought, in any wise, to affect the question of the prior right of sovereignty of the Malouine, otherwise called Falkland's islands.”

PRIOR RIGHT OF SORVEIGNITY

Read: “we ll give you back the settlement, but that doesnt mean anything on respect to our prior right of sorveignity”

Elias,

In 1771 Spain had established no rights to the Falklands whatsoever, prior or otherwise.
109 ron_57 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 11:09 pm Report abuse
@107 old poop conk
It seems you have change your mind about shooting the argies in the islands...
>well, we all know you are full of stinky cr*p...<
_____________...don't bother to “skare” anyone..___________
is just a waste of time!
110 Troy Tempest (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 11:18 pm Report abuse
70 Elias

“Every country in south america inherited the sins of it sprevious occupiers, but in every country we are a mix of colonists, native and previous slaves. We have a lot more rights to this land than you, for sure. ”

Some of those “colonists” were British, as Paul Cedron likes to point out.

So, Elias, you are saying that because you are a group of diverse European peoples, their slaves, and surviving Mapuche (from Chile ) living in Argentina, for 200 years, it is yours and only yours?
Is that correct?

And the inhabitants who have lived in the Falklands ( Note: there was not any indigenous population), inhabitants who were British, Chilean, Spanish, French, German, UP refugees, and Free descendants of SA slaves, and lived there for 200 years - they are NOT the rightful owners of the Islands, right?

Hmmm,
Can you tell me the difference?

Please Elias, I have laid this out clearly for you, and it is the 2nd time I have asked.

I have to conclude that you are unable to tell me the difference .
111 ron_57 (#) Jan 21st, 2014 - 11:31 pm Report abuse
@110 TT s
now he sounds like Isolde
112 Islander1 (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 12:52 am Report abuse
Tink, actually I have no time for British slanted and biased programmes/films either! I prefer to see open non-biased programmes that present a bit of both sides versions and concentrate on the PEOPLE themselves who live in the Islands - and then leave it up to the viewer and general public.
113 Troy Tempest (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 01:36 am Report abuse
109, 111 Ron 57

And you sound like “Sussie”, the Argy anally obsessed pervert who says he is a woman:

Sussie Rant
@19 sussie/Sybil/susanna brown/guzz

“Cristina looks like me after a day of work. As a working woman I understand her. I am a strong Argentinean woman and not matter what you say I will be here for 4 more years.
Those people who copy me...///... you can’t copy me, I am Susana Brown.
I do live in US. I came here to escape from my town in Patagonia. I grew up there but when was I very just being sexually active girl I was looked after by a Peruvian worker. He used to pick me up on way back from school. I didn’t like him first but then I like to call him papi. When I got pregnated for the first time by him my baby looked like a Peruvian. My parents sent me to USA. Here I have to work real hard turning lots of tricks, lots of man...sometimes 15 a day. But im proud, im gonna get back to Patagonia and buy some land better than the falklands.

BUT LETS FACE THE FACTS:
I miss my Peruvian papi, he liked my rossy arse. He used to screw my arse all day
Bang, bang, bang, pppuuurrrrrrfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff!
But now my arse get screwed all day by many men and some don’t pay just
Bang, bang, bang, pppuuurrrrfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff!
Drip, drip, my poor rossy arse.”

I thought you claimed that one of your personalities did not write this, but it has appeared under your “sussieUS” identity on at least, two threads now!

You seem very proud of your activities. :-D
114 Heisenbergcontext (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 02:26 am Report abuse
@7 RopertBrookes0 & 44 Pugol-H

Thanks for clearing up my foggy 30yr old memories. My sole visual memory is of Ardiles at the airport surrounded by a phalanx of T.V. cameras looking suitably grim. Another victim of Galtieri's great folly.
115 Redrow (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 07:27 am Report abuse
“poor british, brainwashed they had any rights... before, in 1833, and ever after”

Elias - if this is true then presumably the ICJ could put us right? After all, you have had 70 years to take your case there. Your posts suggest that you are 100% certain that you are right and that the British are entirely wrong and yet you cannot answer any of the issues other posters raised above regarding the 1850 peace treaty or the fact that your own country later did in patagonia what you accuse the british of doing in the Falklands. Instead of ranting like a religious zealot you would be wise to look at the evidence from both sides. If you truly think that the UK has no case then get your government to go to the ICJ. The reason they won't is because if they tell the judges in the Hague what your teachers told you in school, they know that the judges will want to see evidence and not just listen to assertions. They also know that unlike in your Malvinas lessons, the British will be able to present their own case and also refute yours. That's why your government won't go. So be careful before throwing words like “brainwashed” around.
116 HansNiesund (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 09:30 am Report abuse
Let's recap a little.

Argentina has a territorial claim to the islands based on a colonial inheritance that was never left to it, by a country that never owned the property in the first place, and which claim Argentina abandoned by treaty in 1850 anyway.

In pursuit of this claim, Argentina explicitly rejects the application of international law, as well as any notion of democracy, human rights, or dialogue with the actual inhabitants of the islands. It chose instead to launch a war in 1982 which it lost heavily but still celebrates.

Thirty years later, its strategy is based on telling lies about all the foregoing to anybody who will listen, and then claiming their support. This strategy has brought no practical benefit, so it now proposes in the words of the Secretary responsible, to “strangle” the islands' economy.

Argentina wishes us to believe that it is a democratic country which only wishes to “give peace a chance”, and that all this constitutes “decolonisation”.
117 Monkeymagic (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 11:13 am Report abuse
@115

It seems elias's statement would be more true if we replaced the word British with Argentina. it should read:

poor Argentina, brainwashed they had any rights... before, in 1833, and ever after”

Nobody sensibly disputes that Spain had some rights, most obviously to East Falklands, and possibly to West Falkland after the British left.

Spain is not Argentina.

The Spanish rights Perhaps transferred to Uruguay, perhaps transfered to Spain, most likely disappeared upon their evacuation in 1811.

The Argentine rights certainly had nothing to do with the Spanish settlers, so nothing...before 1811.

Jewitt didnt gain the Argentine rights as he at very best had a sporadic visit in 1820, which is no more or less than any number of British vessels who also assumed rights to be there.

Vernet is an interesting one....he accepted a title from the UP whilst he was there in 1828, but he left prior to the lexington raid. There is no evidence that anyone had the title transfered to them, and indeed the leader of the business after Vernet left in 832 was British. Doesn't sound like Argentina had too many rights then either.

So, I guess you could debate Argentinas rights between November 1832 and January 6th 1833.

These are the key dates:

Were 50 militia, sent from Buenos Aires, who arrived on the islands...claimed them for the UP...ignoring and British, Spanish or indeed Uruguayan claims...who murdered. raped and mutineed sufficient to be a “irrefutible sovereignty claim”?

They we peacefully evicted after 6 weeks.

It is BEYOND WEAK.

Argentina overplay their hand.

The Spanish settlers are not Argentina..they are spain/Uruguay
The Vernet community not Argentina...it was a business led by a Brit
The “garrison” was 50 people for six weeks...who murdered and raped

The British discovery was British
The settlement at port Egmont...british too
180 years of settlement of a peaceful civilian community...British
118 ilsen (#) Jan 22nd, 2014 - 08:35 pm Report abuse
Thank you Monkey for a brilliant summation.

Proves the trolls just talk rot. Will they ever learn? (rhetorical Q!)

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

Advertisement

Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!

Advertisement