MercoPress, en Español
Get our news on your inbox! Suscribe x
Montevideo, November 16th 2018 - 08:27 UTC
Pope Francis made a forceful call to combat corruption in Peru, calling it a social “virus” a month after the Andean nation’s president pardoned a former autocratic leader who had been jailed for graft and human rights abuses. Read full article
Let's audit the vatican banco!
Reference the Falklands - Pope Francis, the first Latin American pontiff, said in 2012 when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires that Britain had usurped the Falkland islands from Argentina. In 2011, he said the islands were ours, a view most Argentinians share. Seriously, have you heard of a territory being usurped in the 19th century? Neither have I.
Falkland Islands – The Usurpation (1 pg): https://www.academia.edu/34838377/Falkland_Islands_The_Usurpation
Brilliant and clever intervention from the Pope - even badass, like his friend Cristina =) Peru is a disaster area politically right now, the right wing anti-populist President just managed to avoid impeachment by 2/3rds of Congress by splitting the right wing populist Fujimori clan then pardoning their dictatorial dad. If only Veronica from the Broad Front, to the left of the disappointing Humala, had got into the 2nd round as she very nearly did, then it might have bucked the depressing trend in Latin America; well, there's still next time, and the banker and the Japanese authoritarians aren't making themselves or each other look good right now...
Pssst Chronic, it is said that the Vatican Bank is one of the richest in the world, but alas we will never know as they will NOT audit their accounts and let the plebs know the score.
The South Atlantic sovereignty conflict, should’ve always been an argument over which government/s have earned settlement rights, or what country/ries should have sovereign rights to the Islands. This (in my view intentionally) is overlooked and replaced by an These Islands belong to me fight between Arg and G.B. Though in truthful appropriate historical category, the matter should be a discussion about who has settlement rights to which islands, which then leads to a discussion of proportion and quality based sovereignty rights. G. B. has always since the undiplomatic usurpation of their Arg. administration, astutely not been keen on ‘that’ discussion (obviously). Instead it seeks to fire everyone up with ”a fight over the entire region, which Argentina stupidly continues to walk right into, making the mistake of reacting with the same language, instead of nipping in the bud immediately the loosing detour caused by the overwhelmed notion of facing the British Empire.
The confrontation ought to be about the question and argument of how much right was/is deserved and earned, where, when and why. Yet subsequently, instead of the definitions of this conflict being corrected as well as corrected at the UN, Britain astutely continues to push a confrontational fight, which of course favors Britain as it is 'the' well armed war and conquest experienced one of the two, hiding its hostile non responsiveness in the strategy of taking the shallower position of supporting the current inhabitants rights (inhabitants Britain strategically herself brought onto the islands) over what in reality are merely everyone's natural human rights to the land they live on, which is the same for anyone, including Argentinians and their right for their country to protest sovereign political matters against another country (that part that Britain as well as the Islanders ignore and pretend doesn't exist nor is in the same bag as their abstracted yet propped up rights to self determination)
More gobbledeygook! Get a life Patrick.
Britain astutely continues to push a confrontational fight, which of course favors Britain as it is 'the' well armed war and conquest experienced one of the two, No we are quite happy to sit on the sidelines and let Argentina do all the shouting. Of course you are right in one thing and only one thing. We as a nation will not let the FALKLANDERS down as was seen in 1982.Christ just get over it.It is done and dusted.
Case and point, thank you very much.
And by the way ... I can see the call for transparency also makes you very nervous. I think that what makes you most nervous about the Catholic religion, is its focus on recognizing your lies and selfish acts. It seems quite obvious as your cultural personality is one that always seeks to have control over this aspect of human nature, and administer or suppress it, rather than acknowledge it. Thats why what seems to come through in your political and legal manners is something best described as official cheating
Patrick, we dumped to Pope and all that catholic mumbo jumbo centuries ago. Most people in Britain are not Christians and have no religion. As for cheating what about your national pastime - Vivenza Criolla! We have no equivalent. Here we say Honesty is the best policy and thats how most of us live... You have been brainwashed with lies, dishonesty is revered in your homeland and viewed as clever, a very sad state to be in.
J. Bergoglo blasts corruption, calls for greater transparency in public entities...a ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....
Definitely, the worst Pope ever..
”Pope Stephen VI (896 - 897) held the Cadaver Synod of 897. Pissed off at his predecessor, Steve 6 dug up the rotting corpse of Pope Formosus and put it on trial. You know, like a crazy person.
Sergius III (897 - 911) put a hit out on two popes. He fathered a bastard child with a 15-year-old girl. He founded a pornacracy. Most absurdly, he retrieved that mutilated dead body of poor Formosus for the second Cadaver Synod, where Sergius beheaded the corpse and threw it back into the river for good measure.
Pope John XII (955 – 964) was charged with raping pilgrim girls, converting the Lateran Palace into a whorehouse, stealing church offerings, praising pagan gods, and toasting to the devil – total pope no-no's.”
But anyway, isn't a bad pope a good thing for you, since you want to get the Catholic church out of Argentina?
Having a politically awkward Pope who, crudely, promotes certain political ideas in detriment of others is, clearly, beneficial for those who see the Vatican State as a foreign State intruding in internal affairs. Clearly, J. Bergoglio harms Catholicism in South America.
But let me correct you. I do not want to get the Catholic Church out of Argentina, I just want a country without religious privileges. Each church, and each priest, must be funded by the believers and followers. I just want to have an absolutely free and secular country without any interference of religion in secular issues.
Each person has the right to believe in their God and, as a result of this right, some duties arise. Such as paying with their money their beliefs.
I just want a country without religious privileges.
Sounds reasonable. I just looked it up in Wikipedia and it says the federal state pays a salary to Roman Catholic bishops, so I can see why you'd object, even though it's not a large amount of money.
The USA probably has the right idea here, keeping religion separate from the state.
Haven't all popes promoted some political ideas in detriment of others though? It's just most of them promoted conservative ones, and also some very self-serving ones, as we now know.
I need some clarification from a few you, for any of this to make any sense to me since it sounds like most people today spew lot of unrooted wordage with very ephemeral unspecific substance.
What's the Purpose and Sense of Religion, throughout time including today, to you?
What are concretely secular matters where Religion should be not concerned and Why?
What's the difference between separation of State and Church, and are some not confusing something being seen and treated secularly, with something actually being of secular nature? Is it not part of our freedom and personal will, the choice to apply a religion to any aspect of life we wish to, without imposing an expectation of it onto my others? I agree that government should not back, nor be backed by Religion. There needs to be no-mans land between Religion and the graceless weapons bearing Military Institution. Nothing else makes any sense
Good lord Patrick, do you expect an essay?
You probably learned about separation of church and state at school in America, but I didn't. In my country there is an official state church, and the same person is (unelected) head of that church and head of the government. Twenty-five Bishops sit in the House of Lords, where they have the power to scrutinise bills, investigate government activity through committee work, and question government through oral questions and debates. They can also claim generous expenses, AFAIK. There are religious schools which are funded by the taxpayer, and all state schools are required to hold an 'act of collective worship' each day.
A little different to the US, isn't it? I've never had to worry about any separation of church and state, let alone whether something is actually of a secular nature, or just being seen and treated secularly. What is the difference?
Maybe Pgerman can answer your questions, and also tell us more about how things currently work in Argentina vs how he would like them to be.
In Argentina there was a democratically elected President, Julio Argentino Roca (possibly the best president ever) that had to create a modern state based on the principles of the separation of the Catholic Church from the State. In order to allow compulsory public education, he had to expel the Vatican Ambassador since the Catholic Church wanted mandatory religious public education for all the citizens. He also had to remove to the Catholic Church from the administration of cemeteries and marriages. Thanks to these laws, non-Catholics were able to get married and be buried in public cemeteries. He even modified the law that promoted the immigration (applicable only to Catholics) applying the benefits to Jews who entered the country in great numbers.
Currently, the Argentine State subsidizes scholarships for seminarians, bishops collect the same salary as a Federal Judges, religious education is also subsidized by the State and numerous laws of equality, education and sexual health are not accepted by pressures of the Catholic Church. The State recognizes Canon Law as a source of law applicable to crimes committed within religious establishments (it is true that the latter is not always accepted by the Judges). Catholic temples do not pay taxes or public services. There are, in addition, countless transfers of public funds for maintenance and expansions works in Catholic Church owned facilities. Finally, the Argentine State declares Catholic religion as the official religion.
All these privileges must end for two reasons: they do not correspond to a republic country and in Argentina just a little more than 30% of citizens declare themselves practicing Catholics.
Sounds like there was a power struggle between the government and the Catholic church in Roca's time, but it didn't end as drastically as the one in Britain. ;)
Anyway, I can see why you'd object to your taxes going to fund the church and religious education, and having an official religion privileged over others. Does that canon law thing mean you can get away with some crimes if you commit them inside a church?
All these privileges must end for two reasons: they do not correspond to a republic country and in Argentina just a little more than 30% of citizens declare themselves “practising Catholics”.
That's sort of interesting. Do you see the US as the 'model' for a republic? And you think that is the best form of government?
”Julio Argentino Roca (possibly the best president ever)”
No, that was Cristina =)
What Britain does sounds very interesting, and brave to some extent .... depending of course on how much opposition leverage the Church does have on Parliament. It sounds it is more like an auditor and observer, and ends up creating in the end, in conjunction mass with monarchy and government, an autocratic environment. It occurs to me it would be interesting for countries to have a forum of equally important church houses with no one being the official one and them having argumentative open yet powerless platform, or sessions.
I'm surprised you'd think that, but it's not really brave. The church used to have more influence in the past, as did the monarchy, and the presence of both in government is a relic of how our system of government has evolved, rather than something planned or deliberately chosen like in the US or Argentina. If we started from scratch, I'm sure we'd end up with a completely different system, but as it is most people prefer to change gradually rather than risk breaking everything.
Not sure what the point of your open yet powerless platform would be. If it's powerless then the different religions could just get together and set it up themselves right now if they wanted, they wouldn't need anything from the government.
I don't think anyone want's to get the Catholic Church, out of Argentina, by the way...
I've always been really curious about something, I wonder if anyone here can explain it to me.
Why exactly has so so relentlessly and for so long Britain or England attacked the Catholic Church?
It's so odd, one never hears of a country hating a church or Religion, except the English speaking cultures, but principally Britain. They use the media to propagandisticaly war on Catholicism, ... on Islam, on Hindi beliefs sometimes, but mainly Islam and Catholicism. Why do you thing this contrasting difference exists? ...
While Muslim rebels and Islamic extremists attack to defend what essentially amounts to their perspective on what is their Sovereign and Political integrity, Britain, NATO and the U.S attack their Religion. They pursue a war against a religion, as stated by our own leaders and news medias. Yet not the Jewish religion at all, all though we all know that Israel is a Jewish State and so, you could say Judaism is just as warring and murderous as Islam, dropping bombs on children like the next militaristic society does, including your own. But Britain never says anything about them. They do attack the Catholic Church and its Popes. A completely passive religion, that is fundamentally sourced from Judaism. Don't you find that odd?
Could one say that basically Britain hates the world, or hates all countries that will not go along with whatever it wants or whatever it does?
Why exactly has so so relentlessly and for so long Britain or England attacked the Catholic Church?
They don't, not any more. But in previous centuries, yes, and it was because the Catholic church also had a lot of secular power and as such was a rival to the British monarchy and government. Over the years the papacy variously supported and was controlled by Britain's main enemies, France and Spain, which made it also a threat to Britain.
I daresay some people also opposed it due to religious ideals.
They pursue a war against a religion, as stated by our own leaders and news medias.
You are very wrong about this. Our government and media have gone out of their way to say they are not fighting a war on Islam, but on Al Qaida/IS/terrorism/etc. (Much to the disgust of many ordinary people here.) And the US government and media, until Trump, was similar. It is rather the extremists themselves who claim it is a war on Islam, in the hope of getting support from their co-religionists.
As for Israel, Britain hasn't always been friendly and has generally voted the same as other EU countries on the frequent UN resolutions, but Muslim terrorists have attacked and murdered many people in Britain since the start of the century (done in the name of their religion), and Jewish ones none. What else would you expect?
They do attack the Catholic Church and its Popes.
No, they don't. Give some examples if you want me to take you seriously. And Britain doesn't hate the world; our government puts their own country first, but all governments do that, it's natural.
Could one say that basically Britain hates the world, or hates all countries that will not go along with whatever it wants or whatever it does?
YOU COULD AND DO from your biased perspective.
I don't think our population, as a whole, hates any country. Certain factions do but most of us are really indifferent to hysterical rants from countries such as Iran.
There is no war against Islam...to say that is just to confirm your ignorance on the matter.
We are at war with Al Qaida/IS who are at war with other Islamic states. They hate them
as being outside the precepts of Islam.
I take it from your point of view, it is British policy to bomb children....again, that fits in with your erroneous point of view.
As to the R.Catholic Church, it is a fractured history. It is often felt that Catholics owe their primary allegiance to the Church of Rome...even if it contradicts their government's policies.
The R.C. Church is monolithic and it's followers have to believe in the infallibility of Papal pronouncements. It certainly is NOT democratic.
The Established Church in England may be advisory but can be ignored...and generally is.
It cannot change the law of the land.
In Scotland there is NO established Church .
So, PE please inform us of your next load of fallacies which you present as truth.
YOu're just lying DT, deflecting by answering through a different interpretation what I said. You know damn well what I mean ! I mean today ! Right now ! Yes, we know how your medias and official communications try to save face and compensate. But it's too late, your culture shows what comes out in the wash anyways. I can see it just by reading the prejudiced sarcasm and meanness you have for Argentina. When you cover it on one end, it comes out the other. You people just think you're better and others are less. It's very subtle, and people get used to it, try to act like you when they go live there, but those whose values remain objective among all nations and all peoples, see it.
Even you people on this publication. It's just so typical of all the British that pretend they want to interact on the internet, when in reality they use it as yet another tool to coerce, deny, study the opponent and just be hostile against arguments others bring to the table, always just trying to make people sound like they don't know what they're talking about. You're country has simply become unique in its quiet underhanded constant strategic belligerence against all the people who are finally starting to add two an two together. It's just going to get worse for Britain ... I can feel it . BuHt, ... I guess you won't listen to reason.
No, I'm telling the truth. I've never seen Britain attack the Catholic church in my lifetime. Give us some examples or I will assume YOU are lying.
And if it's Islam you want to talk about, that is a more complicated subject, but hatred of a religion is the wrong way to look at it. The cold war, oil, influence, and terrorism would all be more relevant.
those whose values remain objective
Who would they be? The Martians? I'm not objective, you're certainly not objective. You appear to think that all British people are the same:
It's just so typical of all the British that pretend they want to interact on the internet, when in reality they use it as yet another tool to coerce, deny, study the opponent and just be hostile against arguments others bring to the table, always just trying to make people sound like they don't know what they're talking about.
Come to Britain. Talk to some people. A few will be hostile, most will not be *unless* you start accusing them of underhanded belligerence or something else bad. We're not a hive mind. People on this website are not typical at all, they are unusually hostile to Argentina. Most people in Britain won't care if you don't bring it up.
Dude ! They guy here is saying The Church the State and Public Institutions should be more transparent, and everybody here has something nasty to say regardless !! WHAT DO YOU CALL THAT?!
Julio Argentino Roca (possibly the best president ever)? Really? I believe history will confirm he was a mass murderer of the indigenous peoples of Argentina!
You certainly have a hate fixation on Britain. Maybe we just ARE better.
You seem to think that all the invective and bile come from the UK posters and all the Argentine supporters are sweetness and light....think again.
I think I came onto this site about 6 years ago and was initially shocked at the downright lies and invective from the Argentinian side. Against my nature I found that I was replying in a tit-for-tat manner.
Most people in Britain don't give a toss about Argentina except when they hear rumblings about the Falklands.
Any mention of the Falklands by your side is usually accompanied by what could be termed racist remarks. From these posts we incorrectly assume that the whole of Argentina is like this. Your politicians in T.del Fuego saying that they are the true government of the Falklands and issuing edicts. Anti-British tyre burning ceremonies in Ushuaia and B.A.
Trying to kill the Top Gear team.
Of course we feel better than people like this !
If you say Why exactly has so so relentlessly and for so long Britain or England attacked the Catholic Church? and They use the media to propagandisticaly war on Catholicism, I'm going to assume you mean the government and the media, not random people commenting on a website.
Looking at the start of this thread, I only see two Brits criticising the Catholic church (golfcronie and The Voice), plus one American and one Argentine, and one Brit praising the current pope (BK). That's not much to draw a general trend from. My post was a reply to Pgerman and was intended to point out how silly it is to say the current Pope is the worst one ever. I'm not a fan of the Catholic church but I've said on other threads that I think this pope is pretty good.
If you want to know why ordinary people in Britain may not like the Catholic church, you can look at what they said. But I think the main reasons are the child abuse scandal, the perceived hypocrisy of a church having so much wealth, and their insistence on certain policies and beliefs that don't make much sense to many people. Added to that lots of people here are either not very or not at all religious and do not have respect for other religious authorities, plus there is the view that it is foreign and therefore a bit suspicious.
You had asked me about Canon Law but I was overworked so I couldn't answer. Canon Law is extremely complicated at the point that there are lawyers whose their specialization is Canon Law. Take for instance taht, based on the Canon Law the Pope can nullify a religious marriage. As regards my post, it is supposed, based on Canon Law, that most of the Catholic Church entities, and their members, are protected from local Judicial Power as if they were embassies. So, only Canon Law can be applied on them. No matther some old agreements between the Argentine Government and the Vatican about the recognition of the Canon Law most of the Judges ignores them and applie the argentine law.
Take for instance, that there is a priest convicted for child sexual abuse in jail whose Canonic Law trial haven't started yet. So, if the regular law haven't been applied he would be free waiting for his Canonic Law trial.
Catholics always like to play the role of the victim. They say that they have been under attack by the freemasons, by the jews or even by the anglosaxon countries. The real thing is that the Vatican have always been a foreign power acting inside the countries perotecting its priviledges.
Unlike the Protestants, they prefered alliances with disctatorships (Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Francisco Franco, etc) to protecting freedom and democracy. Catholic Church, unlike Protestants, prefers to keep human beings beneath its wings and delay human being progress.
Catholic Church is clearly an enemy of republican principles.
It is just the opposite. Argentine history couldn't proved he was no matter the efforts of some catholic nacionalists historians. He was not President of Argentina during the called Campaña del Desierto. This militar campaign was ordered by President Avellaneda after a law was passed in the Congress. No mass graves were ever found. In addition, 1/3 of the Argentine Army were aboriginal people at that time.
... I'm RIGHT. yOU're WrONG. ... Everytime a couple of you reply, it just gets reinforced. lol Why dabble and waste time arguing.
Come on Patrick. That's what children say when they know they have no more arguments left but don't want to admit they are wrong. Why not engage honestly and listen to what other people have to say? You might just learn something even if you don't change your mind.
Allowing the canon law to override the Argentine law in some circumstances sounds like a bad idea, too complicated and undemocratic. I don't blame those judges for ignoring it.
And I don't know about Catholics in general, but PE sure loves to play the victim. It seems to be common in Argentina and it's not an attractive trait.
I guess you were just pretending you wanted to interact on the internet. Really you are just here to spread your 'pearls of wisdom'/2000 word rants, but you have no interest in what anyone else says.
¿Por qué eres tan cerrada de mente?
I agree with you. Why waste time with someone who does not wish to discuss but just wants to air his prejudices. You do that time after time. Why don't we wish to discuss things with ARGENTINA...you are the example as to why not. Not a discussion but a series of unfounded demands
If you do come back on, will you write your piece using paragraphs and spacing. Half way down it becomes incomprehensible.
There's just a wealth of material ! ... Why do you think they can't stand me in fcbck ?
Why do you think they can't stand me in fcbck ?
Maybe it's because you don't find Blackadder funny? Unconscionable!
But surely you liked the end of the video?
George: The war started because of the vile Hun and his villainous empire-building.
Blackadder: George, the British Empire at present covers a quarter of the globe, while the German Empire consists of a small sausage factory in Tanganyika. I hardly think that we can be entirely absolved of blame on the imperialistic front.
Blackadder: the prerequisite for any battle was that the enemy should under no circumstances carry guns
I always notice what people laugh at.
I don't like that British people want to imply that Argentine are racists, or colonialists, or invasive ... Interestingly enough, all things traditionally asociated with the British. If there is one thing a life time of learning from my two cultures, is that the Spanish culture is much more respectful and honoring of foreigners. Not coincidentally Spain or Argentina is not known for being always interested in deploying its armies to foreign countries.
Historically, the current suspicious nature of the Falklands has been attributed to the insensitive self destructive aggression from its Kleptomaniac Southern neighbor who in desperation has continuously slandered their good nature and willingness to live independently. The islanders feel Argentines themselves have not yet learned to take care of themselves, so why should they unite with a populace of land grabbing bipolar psychotics? Argentines as we all know still dwell close to the primitive survival instinctive egocentrically selfish mind...
You know this Patrick to be true, be honest in your frankness...
Sweet heart. Argentina is not trying to Conquer, or Take, nor Have the islands. They are not trying to convince the Islanders of becoming part of their country.
It really is incredibly blatantly obvious how steadfast the British and Clone Drones such as your self are trying to install that defense version. No doubt because it comes with the handle of being adequate for military intervention need be, and or enforceable keeping of the islands. For 30 years now Argentina has stressed in every single channel that the its sovereign right was usurped by the British in 1833, and it has since then been denouncing that country through its claim at the UN and everywhere else, including its Constitution. YET as if none of you possessed any ears, you keep arguing back as if you were defending the islands from Argentina's desire to have them. Which has always been inapplicable in this conflict dispute matter as a course of discussion. I and most of us know why you, this publication, and other venues, including elements of the British government are constantly trying to hammer that perspective in, especially inside the heads of the Islanders... Do You?
One link per post, Patrick. All your links are the same. Take off the 'http' if you want to include more.
I don't like that British people want to imply that Argentine are racists, or colonialists, or invasive
Of course you don't like it. But that doesn't mean there isn't an element of truth to it.
If there is one thing a life time of learning from my two cultures, is that the Spanish culture is much more respectful and honoring of foreigners.
'Spanish culture?' Do you mean Argentine, or Latin American? I don't believe they are the same as Spanish, any more than British and American culture are the same, although there are commonalities.
I don't know if you are right, but I think all cultures have their good and bad points.
Not coincidentally Spain or Argentina is not known for being always interested in deploying its armies to foreign countries.
Spain certainly used to be known for that! That was how they built an empire and Argentina was part of it. That exploitative, conquering and colonising culture was the one Argentina started out with, but it's different now. And Spain has also changed since they lost the remnants of their empire in 1898. They were no longer powerful enough to do that kind of thing, so they stopped. Argentina has never been powerful enough to do that, but was not shy about deploying its armies to fight its neighbours.
As for this: Argentina is not trying to Conquer, or Take, nor Have the islands. They are not trying to convince the Islanders of becoming part of their country.
They have tried to do all those thing in the past, and they certainly do want to take the islands in the present, regardless of what the islanders wish.
Why would you mistakenly deflect the truth by answering through a different interpretation what we have already said. You know well what we mean simple mind! I mean today you realize you are wrong my friend, admit it! Yes, we know how your posting and obtuse methods of communications try to save your face by compensating for your ignorance, but when will you compensate for the lack of evidence you've presented so far? But it's not too late, your lack of civilized culture shows what comes out in your ignorant posts anyways. I can see it just by reading the prejudiced sarcasm and meanness you have for The United Kingdom and it's people. When you cover it on one end, it comes out the other. You pro-Argentine zealots just think you're better and others are less. It's very subtle, and people never get used to it, try to act like you when they go live there, but those whose values remain objective among all nations and all other nations like Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay and Brazil completely see it. Even your posts on this publication, shows a typical slander of all the British that want to interact on the internet, when in reality you Patrick try to use it as yet another tool to coerce, deny, study the opponent and just be hostile against valid logical arguments to the table, always just trying to make people sound like they don't know what they're talking about. Argentina and it's insane zombie supporters have simply become unique in its quiet underhanded constant un-strategic belligerence against all the people who are finally starting to add two an two together. It's just going to get worse for Argentina... We can all feel it . Patrick listen to reason! You have lost the argument, repent before it's too late for redemption!
You are coming from the standpoint that the islands have ALWAYS been Argentine property....even before Argentina was formed.
The UK is equally adamant that your claim to title is false.
What is the point of the UK talking to Argentina when you will only except one outcome..... that of handing over the islands. It has been suggested that you take your case and prove it to the ICJ. This you flatly refuse to do.
So, what is in it for us ?
The military presence is a direct consequence of Argentina's attack on the islands in 1982.
The garrison has no offensive capability but is there to dissuade any further adventure by whatever Argentine government decides to raise its popularity among its deluded masses.
I would say that it would be remiss of any UK govt. to totally trust Argentina in this matter.
” I don't like that British people want to imply that Argentine are racists, or colonialists, or invasive”
Prove us wrong by removing your claim to the Falklands from your constitution.
As far as we are concerned until you get a stable government than it's pointless having any talks.
*And it also means there could be an element of truth to it. ... So? Are you always just going to aim at building the opposing phrase for every reply?
*You can't be more correct than the witnessing of someone's personal experience. This is the fundamental reason why people are able to make points. When I was a child, I was well familiar with the Spanish culture's contrasting differences to our English speaking cultures. I was because I would spend months in only place, immersed in its cultures, and then months in the other just as equally immersed in ITS culture. We are equal in human respects, and yet our cultures manifest different expressions of our respectively contemporary thinking. For instance, there was hardly any gore, war, gun violence, or cruelty arts in media tv or literature in Argentina when I was growing up there. That all came from the English speaking world. I actually saw it with my own eyes seep in slowly more and more each passing year. And still my point becomes enforced when seeing how hard it is for it to stick to us. Unless you are a toddler that spends day after day playing weapons loaded war video games. And then too, I see those toddlers starkly contrast their entire surrounding environment when they speak and physically play games with other ones. They are more prone to swing their fists at one another. Just like all those comedy bits I just shared with you. You might have heard jokes about different peoples on the street when I was a kid, but our culture would never indulge in it to the point of making a movie about mocking foreigners. The point I'm trying to make is that cultures do think differently. Some countries would have great misgivings before acting militarily against another, where our English speaking cultures have truly become facetiously trigger happy and think its just a casual aspect of the world to bomb and invade another country. Or maybe I should say, we have recently become a lot more that way.
So? Are you always just going to aim at building the opposing phrase for every reply?
I'm trying to find a way to say it that you will listen to and not dismiss. There IS an element of truth to it. I'm not saying the cultures are the same, but you clearly don't understand British culture or our point of view. You see us as a bogey man rather than as a country and people that has been shaped by our experiences, just like Argentina.
You are convinced Argentina will not invade again, and you could be right, but that's exactly the point. We don't have that knowledge and so we remain prepared.
Patrick, Patrick, Patrick,
Why would you mistakenly deflect the truth by answering through a different interpretation what we have already said. Argentines are a very violent society based on corruption, inferior to its neighbor states of Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay and Brazil. Certainly you can't be more correct than the witnessing of someone's personal experience. This is the fundamental reason why people are able to make points. We are well familiar with the English culture's contrasting differences to your evil cultures. If only you could spend a few months in only place, immersed in its cultures, you'd realize you're all wet. Admit there is no equal in human respects, and yet our cultures manifest different expressions of our respectively contemporary thinking. Anyone watching an Argentinian football match will attest of its gore, violence, and cruelty. speaking cultures have truly become facetiously trigger happy and think its just a casual aspect of the world to bomb and invade another country. Or maybe I should say, we have recently become a lot more that way. You know well what we mean simple mind! I mean today you realize you are wrong my friend, admit it! Yes, we know how your posting and obtuse methods of communications try to save your face by compensating for your ignorance, but when will you compensate for the lack of evidence you've presented so far? But it's not too late, your lack of civilized culture shows what comes out in your ignorant posts anyways. I can see it just by reading the prejudiced sarcasm and meanness you have for The United Kingdom and it's people. When you cover it on one end, it comes out the other. You pro-Argentine zealots just think you're better and others are less. It's very subtle, and people never get used to it, try to act like you when they go live there, but those whose values remain objective among all nations and all other nations like completely see it. Even your posts on this publication, shows ignorance!
I should know better than to try and argue in a place where people can safely not have to physically expose their moral conscientiousness, their awareness of truth or misgivings. You would be surprised to see just how swiftly a human being will rob wrong or harm another when he has absolute and infinite certainty he will never be known or held accountable. Hence why so many people turn into monsters on the internet, behind the safety of their keyboards.
Did you infer I was a monster??? Are you insanely suggesting that I've physically exposed myself? What an outrageous insult against my moral conscientiousness!
Despite your ignorant olive branch of peace and enlightenment, you brusquely deny the awareness of truth! You would be surprised to see just how swiftly an Argentine would steal someone's property being when he has absolute no claim. We've shown you an infinite patience and we certainty find ourselves severely disappointed in you stubbornness to accept truth. Argentines are a very violent society based on corruption, inferior to its neighbor states of Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay and Brazil. Frankly you mistakenly deflect the truth by answering through a different interpretation what we have already said, look in a mirror and see the reflection of your pitiful Latin soul. Friend, it's not too late, despite your lack of civilized culture and what comes out in your ignorant posts can be forgiven. And yes?.. We all can conclude you already know in your heart that we see your emotionally prejudiced sarcasm and meanness you have for English and it's people. REPENT Edgar before it's too late for redemption!
Hence why so many people turn into monsters on the internet, behind the safety of their keyboards.
Yes, anonymity can lead to bad behaviour. For example, would you still have called me a liar if we were speaking face to face?
Aren't you tired of teasing him yet?
I just feel he's abused his identity to pummel our minds with a relentless diatribe of biased excessive lengthy verbiage.
Darn, I still have more than 1800 characters left...
An ignorant Olive Branch, of Peace and Enlightenment? LOL Now THAT'S an ignorant remark!
Let me remind you Chiquito Curro, if anyone stole anything here in factual history, it was the British and the Islanders.
When you can just go and take something that is being argued over, simply because you can militarily beat whoever argues over it belonging to them, it is called Stealing. When you hurry to fix some form of ownership title by having your family move in someplace that is still disputed and unyielding, it is called Stealing. When you are openly and actively arguing ownership of something, and the one who opposes your aggression against their settlement, yields to another then more deserving, but you now opportunistically move in to take it, is called Stealing.
And just in case you wrongly want to construe the last thing I said; The Argentine Junta, no matter what hideousness they afflicted Argentina with, did not wait for Britain to not be on the islands, like Britain did with Spain. They openly removed the bogus FIG and British soldiers sending them back home with precise orders to not harm the islanders afflicting or interfering with their lives as least as possible. By the way, the drive on the right side instruction to the islanders was done for their own safety, since there were going to be Military Argentine driven vehicles around Stanley and in the country side. But you will never hear an Islander or British Internet forum participant say that, because your logistical cultural war thinking society, is well indoctrinated in the M.O. of playing the good guys, righteous victims in every way possible, like saying that the Argentine want to conquer the Islander's home, instead of the truth which is that Argentina has always rejected the British usurpation of their sovereign presence on the islands, because that way your government is always able to justify defending itself with military force, and hence cover up its invasive aggressions in the world
Now look what you've done, you've got him back on the Falklands again.
Did they exile and imprison the more troublesome Islanders for their own good also? And send round men with guns to threaten them? Close the school and send the teachers to Montevideo? Arbitrarily change the name of their town (twice), announce that Spanish was now the official language, and change all their money to worthless pesos? That was all for their own good?
Whatever you think of Argentina's legal claims, you have to realise that the people living there experienced it as a conquest, and by a military regime that frequently murdered its own citizens.
My, you certainly have a warped view of the truth. There is no point in talking about sovereignty in the Falklands as it has been imbedded in your DNA from birth. You are certain you are right and we think that you are talking nonsense.
We can at least talk about facts and your country's invasion and occupation of the Falklands. You believe that it was benevolent and the islanders were well treated. No one was threatened or mistreated. The islanders tell a different story. Trashed houses left with human waste. Goose green occupants locked up in a shed.
Trying to compare Argentina's invasion by the non-action of the UK against Spain, over 200 years ago is a fatuous statement. In those days it could take a year for news to travel to Europe and back before any action could be contemplated.
As for your definition of stealing....how was a European colony on S.America formed if it had not stolen the land on which it was formed ?
Again, what is the point of talking about sovereignty with someone of your persuasion.
You are adamant that sovereignty belongs to Argentina and that all trace of UK involvement must be erased. Argentina is also the holder of sovereignty to S.Georgia, the sub-antarctic islands and Antarctica despite any legal claims to any of this area.
You demonstrate your wish to be a colonial power while berating the UK for historically filling this role.
Argentina is acting like a petulant child and you are just confirming this in your postings.
You are a perfect example of a hypocrite.
Chiquito Curro? Now you've gone too far with an unforgivable insult!
How dare you, you miserable swine!!!
@DT, so then considering what they did to their own people, one can conclude they showed restraint and were kind to the islanders. I'm not too sure what significance you're attaching to those points. They sent school teachers to Montevideo? I don't get it. I'm sure there was a peculiar reason behind it, nothing more. None of the things you mention harmed any one. I believe not a single islander was physically hurt in any way. I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It was an invasion to take back the islands militaristically. What did you expect? Invitations and horderves?. Yet they did not ignite the war that ensued. They had to be forceful in taking back the islands. But the actual War on the archipelago which ended up taking the lives of three islanders, was created and ignited by G.Britain.
I will agree however with the fact that even so, the Junta was stupidly tactless and brutal. They could've done things completely differently, to where it would have put Britain in such a position of exhibiting their own self serving hostility, that the war would have never come to the islands, and maybe even today, the islands might be free and independent. With Argentina looking over them and providing support. Obviously because the weakening of the Argentine military and demoralization of the country would never have occurred, yet the military would have had to leave and democracy would have returned sooner or later, after the country had simmered down and returned to their previous state of loathing the Generals.
As said, Argentina is acting like a petulant child and you are just confirming this in your postings. You've failed to prove your points miserably! Apologize for you pathetic ignorance and grave insults!
The bottom line is that the islands are BRITISH and will remain so until the islanders decide otherwise.
So you can huff and puff , rant and rave but we don't give a damn...to paraphrase Rett Butler
Clone Drone 1> callaááteee FALSsOO!
Clone Drone 2> ... lol wow. Such intricate logic or reason ! That's like saying As long as obese State employee workers keep going to Mc Donnalds for lunch
, we're going to keep our doors open !
Rand and Rave roflmao!
Ya Clyde... I guess you're right! ... As we say as kids in the States If you can't beat them, join them!
Here!, to show my good sportsmanship and graceful acknowledgement, allow me to offer a little something you can add to your South Atlantic Constitution” effort.
Are you still insanely suggesting the majority of us here don't know the truth! What an outrageous insult against our moral conscientiousness! Despite our offers of an olive branch of peace and enlightenment, you brusquely deny the awareness of truth! You would be surprised to see just how swiftly an Argentine would steal someone's property being when he has absolute no claim. We've shown you an infinite patience and we certainty find ourselves severely disappointed in your stubbornness to accept truth. As you have already agreed however with the fact that even so, the Junta was stupidly tactless and brutal. They could've done things completely differently, to where it would have put Argentina in such a position of exhibiting their own self serving thievery and the war would have never come to the islands, and maybe even today, as islands are free and independent. With Argentina looking like a spineless mongrel hound leaving them alone. Obviously because the weakening of the Argentine military today and demoralization of the country a retaking of the Falklands will never occur. Q.E.D.
Yeah, the Junta ordered their soldiers not to hurt the Islanders, and even not to damage their property, though they tended to ignore that one. They knew it would look bad internationally if they started killing people. And also, the leaders of the Junta tended to be racist, and the Islanders were white. They may not have been so careful otherwise.
It was an invasion to take back the islands militaristically. What did you expect?
That was exactly my point. It was an invasion, and they intended to force their culture and laws on the islands. It's not expected to be pleasant and it's natural for them to complain, it's not a part of some sinister plan.
And my opinion is that if the Junta had not invaded the Falklands would be Argentine today. The dictatorship would have ended eventually even without losing a war, like it did in Chile.
PS. callaááteee FALSsOO!
... lol wow. Such intricate logic or reason !
A perfect reply to yourself. ;)
What does 'chiquito curro' mean?
...sort of like Patrick's argument.
I don't think the British would have ever let the islands just be Argentine. All those gestures were a front. The British are an invasive expansionist nation too wealthy to not depend on continuing to exploit the world one way or another. It could never do what Spain did, simply because it never hit rock bottom and thus the hidden blessing of being able to start a new the right way. It's effort would have to be monumental to match the sober equality among nations that now Spain is. All Britain does is face value, it's continuous changes of music score are just meant to appear it is doing things for the right reasons. So names and definitions change. Official statements are meant to sound righteous... but in the end, the proof is in the podding, as another child molester used to say. Hmmm I wonder if their is a subconscious link there to way Britain has been bent on attacking the Catholic Church with pedophilia charges. As if the Catholic priests are the only men in this world who have tried to take advantage of the young and trusting. What is most compelling for me in that subject is how both Britain and the US focus on pedophilia yet, skirt around mentioning their outstanding constant characteristic; homosexuality. OH NOO! Homosexuality is irrelevant here, right? jajajaja Yet all cases are about boys. Why do you think that while Obama and Cameron were slandering and attacking Russia about their own rightful views on human homosexuality right during their Olympic games with one hand, and attacking the Catholic Church with the other, they suddenly stopped the later one, when they noticed the first was making its absence in the second one obvious? ... You people just need to stop wanting to control and dominate other nations, and start loving countries as equals to our countries. It's so sad how we once had the world's admiration love and respect. Not at all that long ago, yet gone now for good after so much betrayal and warring against countries like Argentina
It could never do what Spain did
What has Spain done that is so worth emulating? Tried to hang on to its colonies by force? Lost the remaining ones after losing a war with the USA? Treated its colonies in the Americas as sources of gold, silver and other resources while failing to develop their internal economies, and installing a caste system that still persists today?
Or are you talking about after it lost its empire, when it fought a bloody civil war which was won by the fascists and remained a dictatorship until 1975? Or maybe you admire their 'interference' in ex-colony Venezuela's affairs, which has recently resulted in Venezuela kicking out the Spanish ambassador?
If you mean Britain could never lose a war for independence with a colony, we did that before ever Spain did, and unlike Spain learned something from the experience.
As for the rest, it's nonsense. Britain has not been bent on attacking the Catholic church; so far as I remember the scandal started coming to light in the US and Ireland, and the church hierarchy brought this on themselves with their selfish protection of the their own ranks and callous contempt for victims in moving guilty priests to new parishes where they could rape more unsuspecting children.
And Yet all cases are about boys.
Not all, but priests would have much more and easier access to boys, wouldn't they, especially in these historical cases that are now coming to light. Plus, with its repression of homosexuality, becoming a priest seems an obvious choice for a guy who's already been condemned to a life of lonely celibacy by his religion.
But I see you share that view, you are homophobic too. It's a fault in the 'machista' Latino culture that also devalues women. It seems like weakness to me, wanting to push others down to make yourself look better.
Besides being homophobic, racist, anti-Anglo and suffering from delusions of Iberian-Argentine grandeur, his English language composition skills are atrocious.
Patrick seems to dwell a lot about homosexuality and persecution of the Catholic Church makes me wonder...
It's so sad how we once had the world's admiration love and respect.
In this context who is we. You speak in riddles.
Are you Argentinian, Hispanic American or a fabrication of A troll's imagination
A woman goes in to hijack a bank with her posse of other criminals, who have recently all become gun happy after discovering a warehouse full of armament, so they started strutting around town intimidating onlookers and putting everyone on guard, taking cellphones from adolescents and candies out of the hands of toddlers.
As they are about to make their getaway, one of her crew shouts the town's people are starting to surround the bank with torches riffles and clubs, they're angry and more are joining them! Her gang, all make a dash for the back door dropping their guns on the floor. She starts looking around her in a panic, and picks up a couple of the largest guns she can spot, hysterically aiming randomly and everyone in the bank. One of the men who was in line, tries to sternly and calmly talk her down, saying Madam! Get a hold of yourself, it's alright, ... you will be alright... But she continues looking wildly around then needling with her eyes at as many people as she could screaming I know what you're thinking! I'm not going to let you hurt me!! Then one of the children that were huddled in a corner musters up the courage to cry at her Aunty, its us Jake and Chris!! Sadly she turns for the worse and explodes at them I don't know either of you! Do you want me to kill you?!”
... and here we are.
Your attempt at writing a short story is pathetic. I suggest you spend your time more usefully by taking English composition lessons...
I was just wondering ....
How much do you think I care about 'your' opinion ?
In which case Patrick, you are just writing monologues. As to your post at 3 above. I haven't a clue what it is about and of any relevance to the main topic.
Your mind seems to go on a wander.
What the heck was that all about? Patrick, you make less sense with every post. Who are Jake and Chris?
Yes, it makes me wonder too...
I can't think why they objected to him on Facebook. ;)
That was about how the South Atlantic war, was Britain's war. Britain's War of Shame against a Friendly Country. Argentina has not gone to war with anyone in nearly two centuries. It is about how Britain brought full out war onto the Falklands to secure dominion over its own people living on the Islands, taking advantage of Argentina's occupying military dictatorship falling stupidly into the trap of invading the islands as a means to finally commencing on some sort of negotiation to bring an end to this then 150 year old territorial dispute.
... I know, I went about it a round about way. Sóhry. !
You need serious professional help. Your delusions are manifesting your apparent insanity, and really now, you make no sense at all.
The Falklands issue seem to burn inside you like many other Argentines, but now we've seen a much more pragmatic approach by President Macri and most notably the Holy Father Francis on his recent trip to Latin America noted that the inhabitants of the Malvinas have the right themselves to determine their destiny.
I sound unusually different? Unlike the Status Quo? ... I come out of left field to you ??
... Well to me you don't. You sound identical to thousands. One of us thinks of his own mind outside the box sort of say. The other one is an indoctrinated Clone Drone taking sides with what he has come to believe is the winner's argument. Guess who is who out of the two?
Everyone has the right to the determine their own destiny, and yet we can't always can we? But that's besides another matter. No one is telling the islanders to do anything. Argentina is simply requesting G.Britain, not the islanders, to face the matter of BOT's territorial sovereignty dispute to these islands in order to resolve it. It's funny... for some odd reason, like programmed computers almost in unison, you all keep talking about the islanders' rights and their aspects of self determination. I'm glad so many seem to care about this human aspect that they too have. When has Argentina said anything about their rights to self determination? Even if it were their country, which it isn't because it's a British oversees geopolitical outpost base, disguised as god knows what ! A giant fishery/cruise ship moor, I guess, the Argentine would still not be suggesting an infringement onto their sovereignty rights of self determination, because it would still be asking them instead of the British doing it, deal with the matter of this territorial dispute. Yet you people like zombies keep repeating the same thing.
... I'm just trying to help you wake up friend. Don't you see that?
A braying mule should be so stupid! Many PSYCHOTIC Argentines like you are unconscious racists and don't even know it as says an increasingly accepted body of academic opinion based on international studies. You've repeatedly demonstrated being homophobic, PSYCHOTIC, anti-Anglo and suffering from delusions of Iberian-Argentine grandeur, with your English language composition skills being absolutely atrocious. Why is it you tend to dwell a lot about homosexuality and persecution of the Catholic Church? Are you still insanely suggesting the majority of us here don't know the truth! What an outrageous insult against our moral conscientiousness! Despite our offers of an olive branch of peace and enlightenment, you brusquely deny the awareness of truth! You would be surprised to see just how swiftly an Argentine would STEAL someone's property being when he has absolute no claim. We've shown you an infinite patience and we certainty find ourselves severely disappointed in your stubbornness to accept truth. To remind you once more, Argentines are a very KLEPTOMANIAC violent society based on corruption, FAR inferior to its neighbor states of Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay and Brazil. Frankly you mistakenly deflect the truth by answering through a different interpretation what we have already said, look in a mirror and see the reflection of your pitiful Latin soul!!! FOOL it's not too late, despite your lack of civilized culture and what comes out in your ignorant posts can be forgiven. And yes?.. We all can conclude you already know in your heart that we see your PSYCHOTIC emotionally prejudiced sarcasm and meanness you have for English and it's people. As you have already agreed however with the fact that even so, the Junta was stupidly tactless and brutal. They could've done things completely differently, to where it would have put Argentina in such a position of exhibiting their own self serving THIEVERY and the war would have never happened!!!
Waht are all those things you 're calling me??? ... I'm a Californian Argentine. Y un Argentino Americano both of Italian /Iberian /Arab decent . Sorry, couldn't get past the first few lines. Very uninteresting read.
You are either an ARGENTINIAN or AMERICAN. Which is it...I would say ARGENTINIAN as you don't seem to think much of the States !
Sorry, couldn't get past the first few lines. Very uninteresting read.
I literally ROFLed. Surely you realise that he is copying your style, Patrick, and we have just as much of a problem reading it.
During the Malvinas War, the Chilean Navy signal corps flooded its radio transmissions with massive communications that drove the Argentines to near madness, as they also noted increased mobilization of men and material to our southern borders. This caused the Argentines to divert part of their defenses to counter against a possible Chilean offensive, driving them crazy. It's no secret that Argentina had deciphered both our military and naval codes, but Argentina didn't know was that Pinochet secretly knew it! One of the many arts of counterintelligence.
I'm currently flooding poor Patrick with the same BS...
It's funny that those two governments were so hostile, when they were so similar ideologically. I guess it's a symptom of letting the military run the government, they want to solve every problem with force. But Chile wouldn't really have invaded, would they? Unless Argentina invaded them first...
If you knew your codes were no longer secure, did you find another way of transmitting the things that really needed to be kept secret? You wouldn't want them to know that you knew that they knew, and switching to a different code for certain messages would have been pretty suspicious.
I was not in active service, so what I know is third hand. The Argentine Junta needed a war to distract the growing unrest of Argentines regarding the economy. If there were a war with Chile, they knew casualties would be high. So that's why they then chose the Falklands only protected by a small garrison. Chilean intelligence learned by accident that both our naval and army codes had been deciphered in 1981, and our government decided to sacrifice intel in order to mislead Argentine intelligence crazy. Anything of ultra top secret was sent by courier and with semaphore. When the war started in 1982, Chile secretly worked in tandem to drive the Argentines crazy, expecting a counter attack while fighting the British.
With your missive to PE, I though that someone had hacked into your correspondence ...namely PE. It wasn't until half way down I realised you were taking the piss !
Who was the other Argie poster who used to write one sentence about 20 lines long.
I was often gasping for breath in trying to read them.
Naval message. I saw an Astute class submarine two days ago making its way down the Clyde heading for the open sea. I wonder if any Ruskis were off the N.Channel trying to pick it up. Rumour has it that they have been active in this area.
As you are still interested in Naval matters, here is an interesting web site on all things naval...historical and current.
Trying to compose PE similar diatribes, takes at least a half of a bottle of Cabernet...
Don't be fowl @Clyde. America is my country. How can you presume knowing what I feel for my country from looking at someone's typing on a social network? I could just be looking to obtain some kind of effect from you bozos! Hell-ow!!
I'm also an Argentine. That's right, I'm Argentine and I'm American equally as significant for all that concerns an individual human being. Hard for you to wrap your mind around that one? Well, add to that, that I'm Italian, more than just by legal paperwork. Yet I wouldn't say as equal as my other two main nationalities. There is no measuring these things Clyde, and there is certainly no if not one then the other rational about it. One could however create a sensible ordering hierarchy that gave your curiosity some peace, if you had the time to listen, and if it were curiosity. You could just be loathing and meaning to spar. So I gave up explaining high concepts to people whom I simply don't know if they respect me or care at all for my time. Moreover it's an area I have learned instigates people to be very rude or invasive with the presumption of knowing who you are. ... Very interesting.
In the '90s, I took reserve training at the HMS Ferret of the Royal Naval establishment located at Chicksands, Bedfordshire. At that time the RN had the capability of tracing specific Russian submarines nearly precisely due to the different distinct sonar profiles.
Many PSYCHOTIC Argentines like you are unconscious racists and don't even know it as says an increasingly accepted body of academic opinion based on international studies. You've repeatedly demonstrated being homophobic, PSYCHOTIC, anti-Anglo and suffering from delusions of Iberian-Argentine grandeur, with your English language composition skills being absolutely atrocious.
Yeah, although they came very close to invading Chile at one point. Guess they thought Britain wouldn't fight. I've heard the war described as two bald men fighting over a comb, and there was little practical reason for Britain to retake the islands. Plus according to the US army analysts, it would be impossible.
What Chile did definitely helped, keeping most of Argentina's best troops in Patagonia and dividing their attention. Quite lucky for Chile though that you found out about the codes being compromised. How did that happen?
Do you respect us or care at all for our time? It has to be reciprocal.
I actually do. Too much sometimes perhaps.
It does not appear so, when I write a serious response and you reply with zzzzz, or some incomprehensible story about a bank robber.
There was an underwater listening sonar chain from Iceland to Scotland to pick up soviet subs and record their sonar signal from the propulsion system and cavitation noise. I am lead to believe that RN and USN subs were equipped with the sound signals from all the Soviet submarines. As a by product of this, they discovered that Blue Whales were passing down the coast of Scotland, something that had never been known
This is a story straight out of a Tom Clancy novel.
There is also the story if an RN sub, which was sent to monitor the maiden voyage of the Kuznetzov and bring back info. The sub trailed the Kuz. and then sat under her hull as she exercised with the Northern fleet. Photographs and sound recordings were made and then she quietly slipped off home. The USA wanted the info. but none of their subs was considered qualified to carry out the task.
I regularly visit that naval website I posted. It covers world wide topics back to WW1 and before. There are hundreds of pictures of ships and naval aircraft. I lose track of the time when I am on there. It makes a change from the bitter, nasty posts made on here !
As a matter of interest, I searched Chilean Navy and came up with about 30 forums !
DemonTree & Clyde
Yes, each submarine type has a distinct fingerprint and the British helped Chile with similar listening devices in the Magellan Strait.
Interesting story you would have difficulty finding on the WEB:
In 1981, Chilean Naval inteligence, A2 was running a double agent working inside the Argentine Secretariat of Intelligence (formerly SIDE) who discovered they had the keys to our military ciphers. Instead of changing them, the intelligence service started feeding a mix of truth and carefully crafted fiction throughout the '80s which ended after the Argentines became highly suspicious.
Wow, that's damn impressive. But it doesn't say what they found then they analysed the sonar array; did the Russians steal the technology or develop it themselves?
That SIDE are more trouble than they are worth, it seems almost certain they had something to do with Nisman's death.
Britain went to great lengths during WWII to hide the fact we had broken the Enigma code, and the Germans never realised it, they thought it was all human intelligence. I wonder what made the Argentines realise?
Commenting for this story is now closed.If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!
Get our news on your inbox!