MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands’ representative to address challenge of sovereignty in small states
“The challenge of sovereignty in small states” is the issue to be addressed by Falkland Islands member of the Legislative Assembly Dick Sawle at the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) meeting in Kenya. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules“While the Falklands are not a small state, the political arguments were, he said, pretty much the same.”
Sep 12th, 2010 - 10:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0No you're right, you're not small, you're microscopic. And you live in a state of Argentina, remember that.
“He said it would be a great outcome if even a few Commonwealth colleagues left the conference a little wiser and perhaps a little more sensitive and sympathetic to the difficulties that were continually faced from Argentina.”
That's funny, I thought we were completely ineffectual and “all things go as normal”.
Fernando,
Sep 12th, 2010 - 10:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0You confuse being a pain in the as with being effective, being petty, vindictive and irrational is usually ineffective.
And again no, they're not part of Argentina. They never have been, doh! Just because Argentina has constructed elaborate historical myths and uses patriotic indoctrination of its children to unite the state doesn't make it so.
@Fernando_A
Sep 12th, 2010 - 10:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0“No you're right, you're not small, you're microscopic. And you live in a state of Argentina, remember that.”
Wow so many things wrong in that sentence
1. The Falkland islands are not part of Argentina(Don't know how you came to that decision), the islands have never been argentine and
never will, of course if the islanders wish to be part of Argentina then they can.
2. If there so small then why are you always talking about them.
3. The islands are not Argentine, seriously it doesn't take a genius to work that out
@ Fernando
Sep 12th, 2010 - 10:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes the Falklands are microscopic compared to the land mass of Argentina, so why dont you f##k off and make something of that before bullying a microscopic success
The fact that we affect your life so much, without even entering your “EEZ” proves just how vulnerable your are. It's not like Gibraltar where it would be virtually impossible to blockade it, erase Argentina, erase Chile and you are all alone in a big empty ocean.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes we're vindictive, it's also called retaliation, get used to it.
The history of the Falkland Islands, and British sovereignty, begins in 1690, long before Argentina was even thought of, never mind existed. In 1770, the Spanish Empire forced British colonists to leave the Islands, nearly leading to war. In 1771, the British returned. In 1776, Britain left the Islands due to financial pressures elsewhere, but did not relinquish sovereignty. The Spanish left the Islands in 1811. In 1820, the United Provinces, a colony in rebellion against the Spanish Empire, illegally occupied the Islands. They undertook various illegal actions resulting in the intervention of the United States in 1831, the removal of the population for piracy and the declaration that the territory was free of all government. The United Provinces subsequently returned to set up a private venture with British agreement. They then, illegally, appointed a governor and installed a military garrison. In 1833, Britain returned and required the military garrison to leave. The colonists were given the alternatives of leaving or remaining under British sovereignty. The majority chose to remain. In 1850, “Argentina” and Britain entered into a treaty “settling all outstanding disputes”. As the then Argentina did not extend much beyond the current province of Buenos Aires and the Falkland Islands was not mentioned in the treaty, it is obvious that it was not a matter of dispute and the Islands were accepted as British sovereign territory. So matters remained until 1884 when Argentina requested arbitration on the sovereignty issue. Britain refused. Argentina's next claim was made in 1945 in its opening address to the United Nations. Britain has made 3 offers for the matter to be settled at the ICJ. Each time, Argentina has refused.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The fact that we affect your life so much”
Sep 12th, 2010 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The fact that you believe that is hilarious.
I´m sure tha F.I. will survive with or without Argentina and Chile. It could be very expensive to the population to live there but tehy will do it , certainly, as they did before wen the life conditions were too much worse. The islanders have the pioneers blood running inside them...
Sep 12th, 2010 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They are a brave people, so Argentina must wait sit dwon that F.I. give up about their soveregnity....they won it through many generations living and developing their country, as well as the Argentines and Chileans and the rest of L.A. countries did.
Retaliation for what exactly Fernando, and if Argentina is so wonderful, why do you live in the States?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 01:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando, if the Falklands were within the state of Argentina, then why is this claim put in doubt by the complete absence of any vestiges of the Argentine state within the Falklands?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 02:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The best hope for a stable and prosperous Falkland under British occupation is a revival of leaseback under UN supervision. The islands must have links with the adjacent mainland. It is absurd to supply them for ever by an air bridge from Britain and Ascension. Nor should the security of British citizens necessarily entitle them to the exploitation of oil on South America’s continental shelf”
Sep 12th, 2010 - 02:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0By Simon Jenkins/London
Interesting reading very interesting
Whats more interesting are the comments below that disagree with him. What is less interesting is the Argentine habit of parroting the same set of articles constantly, like they're unable to think of a response for themselves.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What should, could or would is irrelevant! What matters is what actually is. The reality is that the Islands are a self-governing territory with many of the populace being 8th generation Falkland Islanders. I am British but my family came to the UK in 1918.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 03:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is no law preventing the Islanders from engaging in economic activity as they see fit. This includes oil exploration. If there was a legal artifact that prevented this activity then then Argentina should refer this matter to the ICJ but it refuses to do so as it has no credible case.
The bleating continues to make the Argentine leadership look increasingly weak.
Nothing they are saying or doing is having any bearing on the Islands. Any claim tp the counter is delusion.
Very happy with my RKH and DES holding and more drilling and testing to look forward to :-)
I will have to secure the video of this noble dressed rich white Falklander gentleman playing the victim in front of that Commonwealth meeting.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What will he start with ???………………..
“We took the Argentinean fishing rights by force, ...we didn’t develop a thing, ...we just sold licenses so anybody’s fleet could fish their sea empty…
With no effort or work whatsoever, we reached the same GDP as Great Britain and we have 50.000£ in the bank for each of our (British) citizens in case of need…
The fish stocks are now depleted and 5 million penguins have starved to death. This is, of course, because of natural causes and/or the Argentineans fault…
That’s why we now have to take their Oil; ... So every British Falklander can be as rich as an Arab Sheik....
But those bully Argentinean neighbors don’t want to cooperate!..
They don't want to serve us!
Primitive darkies!...
They don’t respect our human rights!...
Do you know how hard it has become to find a cleaning lady in Stanley ???
And they don’t even speak proper English !!!
Please… please…. help us!”
Think - can you point us to any legal resource that identifies the illegality of the FIG issuing licences for hydrocarbon exploration?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 04:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes....
Sep 12th, 2010 - 04:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Something called United Nations.....
Something about NOT taking unilaterar actions that could complicate the “issue”.
Like hydrocarbon exploration....
But didn't Argentina unilaterally withdraw from an agreement on joint exploration that meant the FIG had to continue alone?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Also if this apparent request was legally enforceable them why haven't Argentina taken it to the ICJ. Should be an open & shut case if you are so certain?
Unless the request doesn't actually have any legal base?
Think, the UN has never said the Falkland Islanders cannot make use of their resources.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Dear Mr.Beef
Sep 12th, 2010 - 04:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 01) Argentina withdraw from the agreement on joint exploration because Great Britain did, from the beginning, not honour the agreed terms.
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/20/world/britain-and-argentina-reach-an-accord-on-falkland-oil-rights.html?pagewanted=1
That meant that the FIG should NOT continue alone....
2) Argentina has taken the Malvinas Issue to most of the existing relevant Regional and International Fora....
3) About the ICJ.... Why haven't Great Britain taken the FalklandsIssue to the International court?
from an agreement on joint exploration that meant the FIG had to continue alone
Dear Think
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 01). Argentina unilaterally withdrew from the 1995 hydrocarbons agreement because of a change in politics in Argentina. The arrival of the first K. It is absolutely not true that the UK or FIG did not honour the agreed terms and the licences for exploration etc in Falkland wasters had all been agreed with Argentina BEFORE they withdrew. Argentina's problem.
2). Yup, I raise the Falklands issue at my monthly book club. It makes about as much difference as the fora you speak of. There is only one place Argentina can get a definitive answer: The ICJ.
3). Why should the UK take it to the ICJ? The islands are British and will remain so until the Falkland Islanders decide otherwise. There's no problem.
Think, the agreement is here:
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.falklands.info/history/95agree.html
What provision did the UK break?
If you withdraw from an agreement then that agreement becomes null & void! In this case Argentina ended the agreemtn therefore by default giving the FIG the option of pressing on itself.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The FIG and the UK don't need to go to the ICJ. They have soverignty and administration and no-one else is making a legal claim against this so there is no case to present.
It is Argentina that is crying foul si it is up to Argentina to refer. All these other forums you go to have no legal mandate so in effect are worthless.
I suppose they are a way of CFK coning the Argentine population that she is actually doing something though?
Ah yes the Unilateral actions argument? Like Argentina pulling out unannounced in 2007 and 2008 respectively of the fishing and oil deals? I thought not!
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The trouble is with this argument, nobody specified who or what a “Unilateral action” was in this case, and the resolution was in 1976 and was primarily aimed at preventing military actions, subsequently this phrase “unilateral” has been dropped in all other resolutions since then as this resolution has been made nul by the other resolutions.
But anyway there is one massive flaw in Argentina's argument, I note how “unilateral actions” only relate to the UK and Argentina, not the FIG, thus how can a unilateral action have occurred since the perpetrator and one who approved and requested the oil rig was the FIG, a body not covered by the resolution.
Another interesting flaw often overlooked by Malvinista's is this much maligned phrase, ”Boths sides must take due account of the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)“. Although Argentina may not agree it says rights, surely therefore it is in their ”interests” to develop their economy in whatever way they choose?
I notice that Think still insists upon using his Husband the much discredited faux scientist Bingham as the basis for claims that the fishing industry in the islands is engaged in the biggest deception since the Normady invasions in faking their catch numbers and obviously profits and that the current population of penguins is in fact a very rare optical illusion.
(22) Beef
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You asked:
Think - can you point us to any legal resource that identifies the illegality of the FIG issuing licences for hydrocarbon exploration?
I pointed :
Something called United Nations.....
You answer:
All these other forums you go to have no legal mandate so in effect are worthless.
What thin bloody hell do you want?
Judge John Deed?
The FIG isn't covered by the UN think, hence how can the actions of govt body not bound by the resolutions be illegal?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If it was the UK that unilaterally approved, controlled and issued the liscences, maybe perhaps then you could screech and wail about the inhumanity of it all.
But since the Falklands are not a part of the UK and are not bound by UK laws, we cannot be committing unilateral actions.
And on one final note, because Argentina refuses to recognize the FIG, how can a body which in Argentina's eyes does not exist, commit a unilateral action, in breach of a UN resolution which it as governing body is not mentioned or bound by?
If you really believe that the UN finds anything to do with the islands illegal than you should take it to the ICJ, it is the judicial organ of the UN.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We've tried to take you to the ICJ several times before but you never want to go to court. Your leaders seem content to just sit around and moan about the situation rather than doing anything about it, as far as we are concerned we are happy to leave it as it is.
Interesting that every time their arguments are undone they change to another. They eventually go round in circles and come around to the same arguments that have been unravelled.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Either their claims are flawed, wrong or they are incapable of delivering them in a coherent way.
Why they bleat on I will continue to keep on investing in the FI. Using an American owned rig that is allowed to dock in Brazil :-)
I am yet to see any tabled or resolution or even declaration saying:
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”The General assembly today expresses it's concerns.
The issue Argentina finds itself in is that because none of the resolution specify the FIG, therefore they are not bound by the resolutions and can carry out their normal state like functions pretty much unimpeded within their de facto government boundaries, they cannot committ an illegal act.
However for Argentina to get these resolutions as binding, they would have to recognize the governing authority of the islands, an act which Argentina has stated it will not and will never do, since to recognize a government would be to recognize a people who have legitimized that government.
So until such time as that happens the present situation will continue with Argentina pretending that these resolutions do this and that, when in fact they don't.
(26) Zethe
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“We've tried to take you to the ICJ several times before but you never want to go to court”
Incorrect as usual
Britain NEVER presented the “Falklands Islands Issue” to the ICJ……. Only the “other” South Atlantic Islands (South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands) …..
You could read following original document:
www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/26/9065.pdf?PHPSESSID=58e48b8d8d7f29e232b750d37e368b80
You could also google the following:
The Official History of the Falklands Campaign: War and diplomacy (By Lawrence Freedman)
“In 1947 and subsequently Britain had in fact offer to submit the dispute over the Dependencies, ALTHOUG NOT THE FALKLANDS THEMSELVES, to the court in the face of Argentine and Chilean encroachments, and in 1955 had even approached the court unilaterally on this matter”……..
You could read the comments of some of the “intelligent” posters in here (a “retired” English law enforcement officer “suffering” in S.E.A. and a “Kelper Belonger” lawyer “enduring life” in Convict Oz) about same subject…
http://en.mercopress.com/2010/06/04/falklands-thick-fog-forces-two-raf-typhoons-and-tanker-to-land-in-punta-arenas
Comments: (74), (78), (79)
http://en.mercopress.com/2010/06/04/falklands-thick-fog-forces-two-raf-typhoons-and-tanker-to-land-in-punta-arenas
Comments:(65), (70), (73)
As I forgot to say, I have as yet seen any resolution or general assembly declaration or sanctions saying:
Sep 12th, 2010 - 05:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Expresses concern and declares that the current round of drilling approved by the FIG constitutes an unilateral act, and is thus illegal”
or even
“Unanimously declares that the issuing of liscences by the FIG is an illegal act”
You see think for such an act to be illegal, you would need to first acknowledge that the governing body approving the drilling actually exists, since argentina would never let this happen because it would recognize a distinct people separate from UK law and authority, bingo in one fell swoop you loose the argument.
A veritable catch 22, a think?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 029 Think:
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nit-pick and avoid the main point of the conversation all you like think. At the end of the day if Argentina is so sure and oh so upset about the situation, and the UN is so on your side - Take it to the ICJ.
Comment removed by the editor.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando the voice of F***ing reason LOL
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(28) (30) (31)
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I knew that you were turnips...... but pleeeeease........................
The oldest trick in the book.
The “Crook”changes name and.................... bingo; in one fell swoop the UN looses the argument.
No no no Señor.... ...My name is not Ronnie Biggs.......................
I'm Ronaldo Bigotes :-)
I see Fernando has responded with the usual reply that other Argentine contributors use when they have exhausted their flawed arguments.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Such a grown up response!
Comment removed by the editor.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh Fernando, homophobia as well! Such a prime ambassador for Argentina!
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How nice that F_A and Twinky are accustomed to 200 years of Falkland Islanders living on Falklands territory and exploiting Falklands resources for the benefit of the Falklands people.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is impossible to envisage circumstances where that will not continue for AT LEAST a further 200 years.
“I pointed :
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Something called United Nations.....”
Think, UNGA resolutions are not binding in international law. And the UN has never said the Falklands cannot make use of its resources. Now, how about you answering my question? What provisions of the Hydrocarbons Agreement did th UK break?
(40)
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You didn't say please!
please
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0haha
Sep 12th, 2010 - 06:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@Think
Sep 12th, 2010 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I will have to secure the video of this noble dressed rich white Falklander gentleman playing the victim in front of that Commonwealth meeting.”
I guess that's about as ridiculous as white South Americans talking in Spanish about land theft....
Also, the comments from both sides bashing/ridiculing the other's country, really make people look kind of pathetic, and for me it devalues anything else that the person says, rendering any relevant points that they do make as biased, subjective and ignorable.
Nice one Fernando. Resort to the ad hominem. I guess you've run out of argument. Trot along now boludito. Drink your mate...
Sep 12th, 2010 - 07:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Good day Frase. Don't know how long you plan to stay but “for me it devalues anything else that the person says, rendering any relevant points that they do make as biased, subjective and ignorable.” If you plan to stay long you'll need to get used to it. It's what Argentine/South American posters usually come out with.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 07:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I have dual citizenship, both Argentina and US. I spend most of the year in the US and the rest in Argentina, it has nothing to do with the economy, not that is any of your f---ing business”
Sep 12th, 2010 - 07:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ah the bitter twisted outcome of an unfortunate joint custody agreement.
“200 years of illegal occupation and exploitation of our oceans”
I didn't know you could occupy an Ocean? I wonder what the title for the british force would be?
SAOO: “South Atlantic Army of Occupation”.
The worlds first and only entirely amphibious garrison.
I wonder when they became Argentina's Oceans? another one of those self appointed titles they like ever so much?
Good day Conqueror . There certainly is a lot of Britbashing, but to be fair it's a two way street.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have a great deal of affection for both countries, but I strongly disagree with the Argentine claim. Taking the history presented for the Argentine claim at face value (I know that most of it is debatable, but for the sake of argument, we'll assume it to be gospel), it essentially boils down to the question 'Should guilt be passed down throughout several generations?' If yes, it open's a Pandora's box of implications and repercussions not only in the Americas, but worldwide. For example, German's whose great grandparents voted for Hitler (wasn't it something like 47% of the vote, so there must be many, normal, non-nazi Germans living there today whose Great grandparents did) could be held accountable, etc.
If it's about getting a European power out of the region, the only realistic option would be full independence, which is being made more and more difficult by alienation and aggressive action.
So think if the Crook had merely changed his name, then why are the UK and Argentina referred to as two separate entities and the islands as a neutral object of dispute?
Sep 12th, 2010 - 07:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Interesting I could have sworn that they were calling for Ronnie Biggs to return and stand trial in the UK, not for the acquisition of sovereignty of his money?
(44) Frase
Sep 12th, 2010 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I couldn’t agree more............
I would certainly be ridiculous to watch, in this time and age, a rich white South-American man speaking in whatever language in front of a multiracial democratic assembly as the Commonwealth trying to justify land theft…….
Ridiculous indeed!
Tsk. tsk. tsk.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 08:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is a rich white South American from Argentina stands up at the C24 every year and tries to justify land theft.
Ridiculous it is indeed.
Ridiculous
Sep 12th, 2010 - 08:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That a country doing so well under the K's are so envious of the Falkland islanders
They removed my comment for laughing?? LOL
Sep 12th, 2010 - 11:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“haha” is not allowed.. haha ha
Think 50. -
Sep 12th, 2010 - 11:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ridiculous indeed, like a couple of months back when those white Argentina chaps were pointing fingers, complaining of their land being stolen whilst the indigenous communities marched on Buenos Aires wanting their own land back...Didn't get as much coverage though...
Don't get me wrong, I don't actually hate Cristina, some of her policies have been o.k., but when it comes to the Falklands, I think her approach is wrong, and will prove fruitless. At the end of the day she's a politician. I think that generally politicians, regardless of party or nationality have more in common with each other than with those that they are supposed to represent.
There'll obviously be a few exceptions to that, like the British ones, who are 100% selfless, incorruptable, in tune with the population and with a moral compass so strong, that not even the changing of the poles would affect it.....That was a joke by the way, if it wasn't obvious enough.....
As I understand it, the 1976 UN Resolution regarding 'unilateral actions' became null and void in 1982, when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, so any reference to such a Resolution by Argentines should be taken with a large pinch of salt.
Sep 12th, 2010 - 11:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@48 Frase. I do recognise your point of view. What I don't know is how much of this site you have examined.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 12:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0You can go at this one of two ways. You can look at the archives. You will see how historical events have been set out for our South American posters time after time. You will see how they refuse to accept those events as they actually happened. You will see how they try to twist history to suit themselves. You will see how they evade matters to which they have no answer. You will see the spite, the hatred. You will see wishes for the ability to plant a nuclear device on the Islands, to have nuclear weapons, to see Brits and Islanders injured and killed.
Or you can continue to monitor. I have little doubt that all these things will surface again. Only the names change, occasionally.
Is it any wonder that Brits/Islanders etc. occasionally “lose it” and respond in kind?
Stick with us. See for yourself.
No Fernando, your post was removed because of homophobia. Are you even able to identify your own posts as your haha is still showing?
Sep 13th, 2010 - 05:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Fernando , ha ha
Sep 13th, 2010 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Got it, he is Alan Partridge with turrets syndrome
(54) Frase
Sep 13th, 2010 - 06:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ridiculous indeed…….
But I think you are being a little bit too harsh with Mr Dick Sawle, Falkland Islands member of the Legislative Assembly by putting him in the same category of ”those” white idiots.
But if you insist................ :-)
The ”Marcha Nacional Indigena” got quite a lot of coverage in the ”Leftie” press.
”Curiously” not soo much in el Clarin, la Nación o la Prensa.
Cristina received them too…. Remember?
If you are living in Argentina you know perfectly that the Malvinas are, for the moment, a ”no issue” for 95% of our population.
Possibly you,..... me.... and some few others are”somehow” and ”somewhy” interested… That’s it.
The Kirchners are not using it to score”cheap political points”…..
They are just reacting (rightly so) to the oil exploration in the South Atlantic.
And, in my opinion, the chosen strategy is the only viable….. The Brits have stalled and reversed the ”talks” too many times…………..
Respectfully
El Think
56 Conqueror, give it a rest.. we get the same level of hatred from the Brits, so in turn you get it back, don't act like you've got it all covered..
Sep 13th, 2010 - 06:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0The only way out of this is for both parties to agree to some kind of settlement. If you react to this with the typical level of negativity then you'll get the same level of negativity back.
You pull all these articles, sub-paragraphs and treaties and you convolute the whole thing into a mess. What are you trying to accomplish with that exactly? What do you really think is going to happen? We can do the same exact thing, we can both find data that will support our claim. And no, it won't change anything.
Are you reading this? Does it compute at least? I don't need you to agree, I want to know if you understand what I'm saying.
“you convolute the whole thing into a mess”
Sep 13th, 2010 - 07:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Speak for yourself Fernando. At least the Falkland Islanders have the facts on their side.
Like the fact that Argentina inherited nothing from Spain; the fact that Vernet had British permission for his ventures; the fact that the 1832 BsAs garrision was protested by Britain; the fact that said garrison was removed without a shot being fired; the fact that most of the BsAs civilians freely chose to remain on the Islands (and have descendants there today); the fact that the Falkland Islanders have a right to self determination enshrined in international law and in the UN age that is the only thing which counts!
You keep on spouting the tired and nasty 1940s nationalist stuff you were brainwashed with at school, quoting opinion from the Guardian, fudging things and effing and blinding as much as you like. It won't change the facts. It's probably best for you to stick with the mate and not think about it too much Fernando, it's bad for your blood pressure.
Ah Fernando's initiated damage control, having gone from a jorgesce avocation of nuking the islands and sinking Merchant British vessels, too, actually I want a peaceful settlement.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 07:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0However one must ask since he put the question to Conquerer, what exactly does the intellectual heavyweight Fernando wish to achieve, other than prove he can swear?
I can recognize some flawed data in Argentina's argument.
% Population of Falklands wishing to become part of Argentina: 0%
And some flawed historical claims:
“The islands original population was expelled”, now Argentina or Ultra Malvinista's have never offered any evidence to back up this fraudulent claim, and have never offered any evidence to dispute the inconvenient evidence cited in Darwins Journal and the diary of A German Argentine settler, the record books of Brisbane detailing the colony's population and production. I think the only evidence presented to the contrary was Axel Arge saying an (unnamed) politician told him that it happened.
Some flawed Geographical arguments:
“The islands are ours because they are only 400 km away”
If such an argument existed, gaining land through Geographic proximity then why I wonder hasn't Argentina opened a claim to Chile, or vice versa, and anyway Geography is irrelevant in an age where travel and communication is measured in hours rather than days and months
Some flawed political arguments:
“The islanders aren't entitled to self-determination because they are an implanted population”
Unfortunately for Argentina no such clause exists, in international law and anyway Argentina is also an “implanted population”, so the hypocrisy is lost on no one, outside of Latin America that is. and as the recent kosovo ruling has stated (A ruling which Argentina has remained very silent over) that self-determination is a universally applicable right and that UDI's without UN mandate or consent of the other regional partners, are not illegal provided a popular vote is held in country.
We can dispute all of that, I can say that you are the one who's been brainwashed at school.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 07:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0What does it take to get the point across J.A.? Debating won't solve anything.
The only brainwashing re the Falklands I got was in Argentina. It's not even covered in the UK. Most Brits on this forum have investigated the facts for themselves.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 08:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0What does it take to get a point across? I don't know, but what does it take for you distinguish fact from fiction?
62 Rhaurie-Craughwell,
Sep 13th, 2010 - 08:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0“a jorgesce avocation of nuking the islands and sinking Merchant British vessels”
You too huh? You and Conqueror fabricating garbage. What nukes? Quote exactly what I said and tell me exactly where I said it.
J.A. The only fact is, the islanders will never know peace unless this dispute is resolved. Even you can agree to that.
Fernando, the Islanders live in peace. They have done for nearly 200 years except for a brief interlude in 1982. All they want is a normal relationship with their nearest neighbour, but until Argentina drops their irridentist claim that won't happen. Argentina is the one losing out in the long run.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 08:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0If they live in peace then why are we talking?
Sep 13th, 2010 - 08:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0There's a difference between peace as in armed conflict and peace as in a tranquil existence away from the perpetual ranting and machinations of an unwelcome neighbour.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 08:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's fairly obvious why we're discussing this Fernando. If it was not for Argentina's irridentist and unfounded claim, there would be nothing to talk about.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 09:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ok, I'll rephrase it then.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 09:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0The islanders will never know peace (as in a tranquil existence) unless this dispute is resolved.
It's intransigence and pride (on both sides) that's led us to where we are right now. The only viable solution is an agreement that will help both sides save face, if no such agreement can be made, then it's hopeless.
Pride won't change anything, debating won't change anything, neither one of us can have it 100% our way.
My thanks to Mr Roberts, Rhaurie and Idlehands for stepping in whilst I was asleep. You have said virtually all that needs to be said.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 10:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0Except for these small points:
1 - You will find no words of mine regarding F-A and nuclear devices or weapons;
2 - As for where it is, I adopt Twinky's approach, DYOR.
3 - There is no need for any “settlement” in which either Britain or the Falkland Islands are concerned to “save face”.
4 - There will never be a “settlement” as a result of which Argentina will gain control or sovereignty, partial control or sovereignty, a smidgeon of control or sovereignty.
5 - There is a way out. Argentina need but declare that, after a careful review of all historical events and available evidence, Argentina has concluded that its claims to the Falklands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands have been “mistaken”. As a result, it abandons all claims, is willing to lodge documents with the UN, the ICJ, the British Government and the Falkland Islands Government stating that it has been mistaken and that Argentina makes no claim to those territories, in perpetuity. That Argentina recognises the Falkland Islands as an autonomous nation separate from Argentina. That Argentina recognises the Falkland Islands Government and hopes to set up diplomatic relations. That Argentina hopes to establish “normal” links with the Falkland Islands similar to those between neighbouring countries elsewhere in the world.
It is to be hoped that this will place Argentina in a position suggestive of honesty, integrity and maturity.
“The only viable solution is an agreement that will help both sides save face, if no such agreement can be made, then it's hopeless.”
Sep 13th, 2010 - 10:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well where do I start? The 1989 Sovereignty Umbrella Agreement, the 1990 Fisheries Agreement, the 1995 Hydrocarbons Agreement and the 1999 Agreement, the 2001 Flights and Mine Clearance Agreements. All torn up and thrown out by Argentina, except perhaps for the parts of the 1999 which suit Argentina for the time being.
The only viable solution is for Argentina to face facts, drop its ridiculous claim and start being a good neighbour instead of the neighbourhood bully!
Hopeless it is.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0And Rhaurie-Craughwell, don't ever accuse me again without proof. I've said things out of anger, as we all have, but I would never promote something as STUPID as the use of nuclear weapons you imbecile.
62 Rhaurie-Craughwell: “Ah Fernando's initiated damage control, having gone from a jorgesce avocation of nuking the islands and sinking Merchant British vessels, too, actually I want a peaceful settlement.”
Article: Flow tests begin to probe commerciality of Falklands’ oil discovery
117 Conqueror: “F_A. Last time I looked, you were wishing for A British vessel to be at the bottom of the sea with every Brit it could carry. Me? I'm crazy like a fox!”
You also accused me without proof, I said no such thing.
Fernando,
Sep 13th, 2010 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0“I've said things out of anger”
I have been annoyed and offended by many Argentine comments but I have never wished anyone dead, or advocated nuking Argentina, sinking any ships, bombing anyone or resorting to implied threats like “The islanders will never know peace”. As a rule I don't feel the need to address anyone as imbecile, tempting as it is when so many of you seem bent on demonstrating that they are.
You say “I want a peaceful settlement”, when usually you're advocating a policy of confrontation to ensure the islanders never enjoy a peaceful existence. The statements are obviously contradictory but I have long since given up on the Argentine capacity for Double Think.
”It's intransigence and pride (on both sides) that's led us to where we are right now. The only viable solution is an agreement that will help both sides save face, if no such agreement can be made, then it's hopeless. “
Rarely can you blame only one side and yes the islanders can be stubborn but ultimately their attitude has been forged by Argentina's stance on the matter. Frequently you will hear the islanders declaring that despite everything they would welcome better relations with their neighbour. Sadly the only usual response is spiteful and vindictive, then wonder why they desire no relationship with Argentina.
And save face? Well Argentina has left itself no room to manoeuver in that respect and continues to do so, while it pushes a illogical irredentist claim based on lies and half-truths and its people are so indoctrinated that they cannot bear to question it. I've never once known any of you prepared to question what you've been taught, you'll happily simply dismiss any first hand account as ”British lies”, neglecting the fact that a lot of the first hand accounts are actually Argentine. I find it amusing that faced with Darwin's diary, the comment is that Darwin was so prescient he anticipated Argentina's 20th Century claims and planted evidence. Mmmmm.
Haven't bothered looking at MercoPress for a few weeks. Got tired of the usual distortion of history, UN Mandates, International Law, oil agreements etc from the Argentines.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Doesn't look like anything has changed.
How's that British brick wall ... still standing? Yup :-)
Falkland Islands still British? Yup :-)
And so it goes ........ :-)
This old man can cry as much as he wants, but Argentina and all Southamrica will be here to tell them, YOU LIVE IN ARGENTINE TERRITORY!!!
Sep 13th, 2010 - 12:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Kelperkistan project won't suceed! They are very naive if they think so!
If they want to negotiate the sovereignty, then face their future way of life as it will be, with Argentina pressing!!!
No Jorgebobo. They don't live in Argentine territory. The Falklands are not and have never been Argentine territory. The “Kelperistan” project has been succeeding for nearly 200 years now, so get over it!
Sep 13th, 2010 - 12:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Kelperkistan project won't suceed
Sep 13th, 2010 - 01:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It aint doing too bad jorge, better standard of living than you Argies and every day they frustrate you bullies :-)
@Jorge
Sep 13th, 2010 - 01:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It has been succeeding for 200 years, and will continue to succeed. And just reading through all of the comments, it is interesting to see how Think ignored the point made by Rhaurie-Craughwell. Think claims that FIG acted unilaterally, without Britain and Argentina, but how can they when Argentina and its citizens claim they do not exist....I believe Think has indirectly acknowledged that the Falklands, if FIG exists and can act unilaterally (hydrocarbons) is not a colony. Therefore Britain's South Atlantic imperialist actions are infact not actually happening. Now that Think believes the Falklands are a self-governing territory, surely a lot of Argentina's claims and so-called facts are irrelevant. Just a thought for Thunk.
F_A your posts are incriminating in themselves, I don't need proof to judge your mindset, you did advocated some kind of nuclear military response a few threads back, its up too you to go and adress it not me, I applaud you though it was a few months before we twigged that Jorge Rios was clinically insane, you've out shone his record in a matter of posts! You've wished death on Conqueror and described the islanders as not worthy of any common human decency, ridiculed without any thought their quite legitimate arguments to nationality and a country, fallen into the ever present trap of mixing up England with Britain, in a very adult mature manner you called thatcher and the Queen “whores” and some mad obsession with earl Grey tea, you're going to make a fine edition in my Blog's Malvinista's hall of fame!
Sep 13th, 2010 - 02:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 01. well go on then, rebut my arguments.
2. Nope I first got extensively interested in this debate less than 5 years ago, having finished school 8 years before that.
You see that is the key difference between the UK and Argentina, whereas people in the UK are constantly challenging every govt statement, in Argentina there is no questioning of your claim, those who do are likely to be branded as heretics, there is no stimulating debate on TV or in your senate and Assemblies questioning Argentina's claim, you just debate new ways in which to steal sovereignty. That is what shocked me when I went backpacking there, no one questioned the claim there were a few but they were scared to speak out, As John Pilger says “A society that does not question is a poorer society”. Carlos escude summed up the Malvinas syndrome/delusion quite nicley: “It is very hard to internally objectively challenge our claim, when by force of law these islands must be recorded as ours in every book, globe and map produced”.
I don't hope for any miracles in your reply Fergie.
What's yr blog's address Rhaurie?
Sep 13th, 2010 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Please note that, in relation to (73), I apologised to F_A on the appropriate thread. It turned out that the wish to see a British vessel at the bottom of the sea together with every brit it could carry was down to gassy.
Sep 13th, 2010 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I am able to apologise without any concern because I am British. I do not, therefore, need to “save face”.
@el Think 59
Sep 13th, 2010 - 10:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I do indeed (I think we may have overdone the 'indeeds' in this brief exchange.) live in Argentina, Cordoba to be precise (deep behind enemy lines). Alas, I've said too much and will have to terminate all readers of this thread. So if you'd all be so kind as to post your names, addresses, what time of day you're usually at home, and prefered mode of death, I would be most grateful.
I don't remember reading much about the indigenous march, except a short segment on canal 10, despite being a “lefty” myself. I'll take your word for it though. I would say however that Argentina is on dangerous ground when talking about others stealing their land.
You are right that the Falklands (you wrote 'Malvinas' by mistake ;) )is a non-issue for almost everyone I meet here, when I tell people that I'm English, they are more likely to ask me about the Beatles and afternoon tea than the Falklands, the times that it does come up, people are surprisingly indifferent to the subject. I knew little of the subject when I came here, and had assumed that Britain was the bad guy, but the more research I did, the more I came to the conclusion that only the islanders can decide the future of what is effectively their country.
As I said before, I don't hate the K's, but the recent spending of getting on for a billion dollars on laptops for schoolchildren, was definately scoring political points. My wife is a secondary school teacher, and says the schools are falling apart, and that she has 40 children in some classes. She also gets paid little more than half of what a bus driver does! Which basically says, work hard at school, study for years at uni and earn half as much as the people who never studied, dropped out of school and learnt to drive. Surely that money would have been better spent improving teachers' salaries and conditions? Although it wouldn't have been such a grand gesture, and wouldn't have been noticed as much. Thus less votes.
Saludos cordiales,
Frase
80 Rhaurie-Craughwell,
Sep 14th, 2010 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0“F_A your posts are incriminating in themselves, I don't need proof to judge your mindset, you did advocated some kind of nuclear military response a few threads back”
Rhaurie, you're a coward, Conqueror had to balls to admit he was wrong. Stick with fabricating, you'll have no credibility from now on.
The only reference I made to anything nuclear, was the prospect of NUCLEAR PROPULSION used on an Argentine submarine, specifically the use of the CAREM which is a REACTOR.
Af far as all the other things you just mentioned, I'm only denying the wish to use nuclear weapons. You're still a coward.
And I tell you one more thing, you have military vessels on what we consider to be Argentine territory. THOSE vessels I DO with would sink to the bottom of the sea with ever MILITARY SAILOR than can carry. You can quote me all you like, I really don't appreciate military vessels on Malvinas. But make sure you quote me before you shoot your mouth off.
74 JustinKuntz,
“The islanders will never know peace”
That was not a threat, it's a fact. You keep switching from “we're ok” to “no we're not” make up your minds.
(83) Frase
Sep 14th, 2010 - 03:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0I remember the Cordoba of my childhood holidays…………….
The small cozy towns with all those British chalets in Sierra Chica……..
The manicured Crocket lawns…..
The sleepy 5 o’clock tea ceremonies after a long siesta…….….
Enemy country indeed :-)
Here is a link to one of the many articles from Pagina12 about the “Marcha Indígena”. http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-146102-2010-05-21.html
Excellent newspaper…….. (Better than the BA Herald or the Argentinisches Tageblatt if you are a leftie :-)
Now…. Time to dissent….
Malvinas is not the Settlers “Country” They are British, proud to be British, and will always be British.
Fine with me…. But……………………
They are the human spearhead and excuse for a former colonial power that wants those Islands as a base for resource exploitation in the South Atlantic.
The oil exploration taking place at this very moment is more than enough proof of this.
This is unacceptable, not only for any Argentinean government but for the whole region.
Finally, I’m sure we could agree about many shortcomings in Argentine/British internal politics, demagogy etc. etc. etc.
But……………this is not the place…..
Just look at the may posts in here of British telling us to first take care of our drug-addicts or homeless or….. enjoying the news about poor Argentineans dying of hypothermia or...…posting Youtube videos of deprived children in shanty towns……
Their principle seems to be:
As your house is not in order, we have all the right to come and steal from you and you can’t do anything against it.
Well…. We can and will do something against it… Get used to it.
What, Think? What are you going to do about it? In all the time that has passed since the Islands were first discovered, the Falklands have never been Argentine, except for a few weeks of illegal occupation in 1982. You can cry into your split milk and belly-ache in front of some non-entity forums like Mercosur or the OAS, but what has that ever achieved? Nothing. Ever! The sooner you accept that the Falklands are not ever going to be Argentinian, the better you'll all sleep at night!
Sep 14th, 2010 - 03:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0THIMC
Sep 14th, 2010 - 06:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0So much for the « independent » Malvinas :-)
As said in the Presentation by Hon. Richard Swale, MHA, Malvinas Islands (1)at the 30th Small Branches Conference in KENYA on the 12 SEPTEMBER, 2010:
“I should add here for clarification that the Malvinas Islands are not independent. We are not therefore a small state.
We are an overseas territory of BRITAIN.
Sovereignty therefore rests with BRITAIN with our consent and at our request……..”
“And in the case of the Malvinas Islands, where the overwhelming will of the people is to remain under BRITISH sovereignty…..”
“The Malvinas Islands have enjoyed BRITISH protection and rule and BRITISH sovereignty ever since then.
BRITISH sovereignty goes back in fact over 250 years …..”
“It is our determined wish to remain an overseas territory of BRITAIN and it is also our equally determined wish to determine our own future. We recognise that independence from BRITAIN is unlikely……”
“I ask that when you get the opportunity to speak in those places of high authority such as the United Nations, you will support any small state – as well as us in the Malvinas Islands - in its fight to retain its BRITISH sovereignty and independence. ….”
(1) As MercoPress often replaces “Malvinas” with the “F” word…..(Even when Fidel Castro uses it and without warning!); the Author is today in the mood of reversing the process……….)
So what?! There is nothing in Dick Sawle's presentation (at least in the bits that you quote) that is news to anybody who knows how the Falkland Islands is governed and its relationship with the UK.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 07:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0The point that you miss, although you quote the relevant point, is that the Falklands are and will remain British only with the consent and the wishes of the Falkland Islanders. It is the Falkland Islanders who will decide under whose sovereignty they wish to be - be it British or as a fully independent nation. The UK understands this, as the UK respects the rights of the Islanders to determine their own future.
“They are the human spearhead and excuse for a former colonial power that wants those Islands as a base for resource exploitation in the South Atlantic.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 07:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0The oil exploration taking place at this very moment is more than enough proof of this.
This is unacceptable, not only for any Argentinean government but for the whole region.”
What a load of tosh Think.
1. The UK already has a recognised claim on a slice of Antarctica (albeit in suspension) and has done for some considerable time, certainly decades longer than Argentina (which goes unrecognised by the rest of the world).
2. Any oil found around the Falklands or the dependencies belongs to the Falkland Islanders. They issue the licences, they receive the revenues. Nothing to do with the UK, so proof of nothing!
Well calling somebody a coward is quite rich coming from someone who effortlessly is able to insult everyone and everything from the safety of a computer screen, well done F_A, I do admit it does take some cajones to type angry nasty words, if only I had your metal!
Sep 14th, 2010 - 08:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Tell you what J'apologise for making an allegation that you advocated sinking a British ship, or the nuclear device, (your post was deleted) just to prove how hypocritical Malvinista's are lol :)
I have gallons more credibility then yourself here, just ask anyone else, I haven't made an arse of myself within a matter of days!
Now a few other points on your idiocy below:
You can't station ships on land, I think you call those tanks, that perhaps explains your navies failure in the war, read the manuals wrong.
There is no such thing as a “military Sailor”, Naval sailor is the correct term, it doesn't bode well for your other fantasy of the great pan Latin American alliance of angry adolescents defeating the 2 large patrol vessels and 5 typhoons if you can't designate who what your different branches of your armed forces are.
Now are you going to bother to answer and rebut my earlier points which you seemed so confident of being able to, or are you just going to sit on your soap box orbiting planet earth and “Shoot your mouth off” about how nasty me and conqueror have been?
Now this “faggot” is going to go and have his earl grey tea, ta ta angry man
So much for the « independent » Malvinas :-)
Sep 14th, 2010 - 08:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0And you would prefer Argentine instead of British Independence
89 J.A. Roberts
Sep 14th, 2010 - 09:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0”certainly decades longer than Argentina (which goes unrecognised by the rest of the world)“
Only the UK recognizes its own claim? Gotta be a clue, don't you think?
”They issue the licences, they receive the revenues. Nothing to do with the UK“
I see, the UK sends oil rigs to Malvinas, they don't get a penny from the revenues, AND they protect you. Such benevolent souls.
The oil companies are purely British, the only ones that would support the BS that the UK is peddling about the alleged legality of these commercial operations. Desire Petroleum, Rockhopper, Borders & Southern, ”Falklands Oil & Gas” (a cover for BHP Billiton Plc), Argos Resources, and Arcadia. ALL BRITISH
The so-called “FIG” will benefit from the fees, rentals and taxes. The corporation tax has been set at 26% on profit with 9% royalty on production. You don't get all the revenues, but more than enough to pay for your protection.
Rhaurie-Craughwell, you're a coward, retract the accusation you made on post 62 or stay a coward.
Fernando. I think you'll find that the British Antarctic claim is recognised by France, Norway, New Zealand and Australia. The Argentine claim is recognised by no-one, not even Chile.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 09:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0The UK did not “send the oil rigs”, and no the UK does not get a penny of any revenues from Falkland Island oil.
British registered companies, yes, but that does not mean they are British owned. Two different things.
The FIG does get all the tax revenues. Where in the world do companies hand over all their income to the government? When people talk about the revenues they mean tax, it's self evident, but obviously needs explanation for you.
Oh I see, you meant that Argentina's claim on Antarctica is not recognized by anyone else. I'll have to look that up, not that I'm concerned. Chile though, why would Chile recognize our claim when Chile's claim overlaps with ours? I think Chile is working with Argentina on some kind of joint sovereignty, which I fully support. Ironically this negotiation was brought on by Britain's claim, currently there are 12 lawyers from both Chile and Argentina working together on this. Seems to me like the UK did us a favor, by claiming an area already claimed by both Argentina and Chile you unified us into a single cause. So, thanks.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0France, Norway, New Zealand, Australia... whatever, even if that is true I really don't care, no impact.
NO! mighty warlord of the keyboard, I defy thee, how tough thou must feel behind thine blue screen of doom! I bow down to your bravery of calling me a coward many miles miles across the sea behind a computer in your bedroom. flagellate me with more harsh words for I am unworthy of such a brave pure soul whose mastery of the keyboard will have people speaking in hushed tongues generations from now, but nay I shall not retract mine words! Because how can thou retract thine words when thou hast retracted thine slander in post 90, or does mighty Konan need pictures to help his feeble barbarian mind?
Sep 14th, 2010 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ok onto the serious bit Konan of the keyboard, (even though you apparently don't feel the point to debate but feel so indignantly angry you have to)
How can the UK send the oil rigs? They're just British registered companies, not government owned, we don't have a ministry of oil directing rigs here and here in strategic calculated fashion, or has mighty konan as yet not discovered the mystery of a free market economy? If mighty Konan can find definitive proof that the UK is the one sending the rigs and the one benefiting from the revenues, rather than just harsh angry words I would be most obliged.
One final point BHP billton is an Australian company, so there not all British Konan?
So where are your replies to my earlier points in 62, or is mighty Konan to much of a “coward” to enter into single combat against “Craughwell drinker of the earl grey”?
I don't expect much from Konan, the young padawan has learnt well from his Master Jorge!
Typical, the facts only matter when it suits you Fernando. Just like your government and their claim, facts are irrelevant, pero las Malvinas son Argentinas. Like hell!
Sep 14th, 2010 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0By the way, another inaccuracy:
“claiming an area already claimed by both Argentina and Chile you unified us into a single cause” The British claim pre-dates the Argentine and Chileno claims by several decades.
Actually, we've done you loads of favours Fernando, not least kick-starting democracy with a well aimed boot up your dictator's arse in 1982.
hmmm “France, Norway, New Zealand, Australia... whatever, even if that is true I really don't care, no impact”
Sep 14th, 2010 - 10:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0yet you claim that Chile has an impact? How could you have been unified into a single cause when you only remembered to start claiming Antarctica several decades after the UK had already submitted letters of patent and had a presence, we even kindly lent Argentina a research base which then promptly brought, apparently thats the basis Argentina bases her claim, a small wooden hut.
How unfortunate for the Argentine/South American posters with their gratuitous obscenities.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Every time they stick up some supposed “fact”, the mature intelligent contributors shoot it down with the truth. Much like Britain shot Argentine aircraft out of the sky in 1982.
Comment removed by the editor.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 11:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well, Fernando, your government bases its claim to the Falklands on a edifice of myth and national legend, so I guess facts are not all that important to you Argies.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 11:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0The ATS actually suspends territorial claims, it does not ban them, except for new ones. More factual inaccuracy.
How stupid do I have to be not to see the British claim is all about oil? Oh how stupid do you have to be Fernando. You called us “sick” once, which might be true, but at least we're not thick. The British claim dates to almost 100 years ago. Long before oil was ever a factor. Claims to continental shelves were not even heard of in 1917. You're just retrofitting your insane conspiracy theories, and it shows Fernando...
No Britain was obliged to submit a claim prior to the time limit stupulated by the UNCLOS, nothing more, nothing less. Among other things it would allow conservation measures to ensure that natural resources are not over exploited. And it was not something the UK wished to do unilaterally, the UK had tried to co-operate with Argentina amongst others to no avail. It was Argentina that tore up the joint agreement on oil exploration (a unilateral act btw given that you whinged so much about the UN resolution).
Sep 14th, 2010 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What you don't seem to understand is that mere geographic proximity doesn't actually give you any more right than any other nation. Let us also not forget that you started this nonsense waffling on about Argentina's Antarctic claim, sorry but others have already shot that down in flames so I don't feel the need to comment. Its all under the Antarctic Treaty anyway so I really don't understand the chest beating macho posturing, its just so immature.
As usual I observe Think in his capacity as grand slagger off of the Falklands to indulge in his usual distortion. I don't recall anyone ever asserting the Falklands are independent in the UN definition of the term, we have however pointed out they are a self-governing British Overseas Territory. They are responsible for all matters with the exception of defence and diplomatic representation (although even that is not entirely true since they represent themselves at various international forums and the UN). Of course, independence is theirs for the asking, or they could opt for integration with the UK. Notably they determine their choice for themselves.
Having been there nigh on 200 years, that would be longer than most Argentines who emigrated in the late 19th/20th Century, how anyone can find their presence unacceptable is sad, deluded and a racist. Sorry to disappoint you but thats the way it is.
Oh and by the way complaining of insults and calling people a “coward”.
What in the hell is going on here? My comment didn't have a single insult. What.. the word 'stupid'? Are you kidding me?
Sep 14th, 2010 - 01:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This whole site is run by Brits, obviously, so any comment that doesn't suit their goals gets deleted.
Accusing someone of advocating nuclear weapons is ok, but using the word 'stupid' no.. that's just too much.
What a joke MercoPress is
Tsk Fernando, the site is run from Montevideo, Uruguay and rather obviously not Brits. Any comment that gets deleted violates their ToS.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They are perfectly neutral in deleting gratuitous insults whether from Brits or Argentines.
If you consider MercoPress is a joke, you are not obliged to use it but don't pretend it is anything less than an excuse for running off in high dudgeon. Bye now.
haha.. yea whatever, easier to “debunk” someone after you've deleted his post, I get it
Sep 14th, 2010 - 02:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't care, you read what I said and I know it's the truth, that's why you had it deleted.
You're so weak
Ah yes, the Argentine ownership of the truth. You assert that Mercopres must be British, therefore it has to be true.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 02:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And you don't care about the truth, because you can't handle the truth.
Can't behave in a civilised manner and whine like a spoilt child when the ball is taken away. Thats more than weak its pathetic.
Mine have been deleted before without saying anything insulting.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 03:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh dear, F_A has clearly stepped over a line. But it wasn't his fault. Couldn't have been, he's an Argentine. The most victimised, hard done by “country” in the history of the world.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 03:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Or could it be that Argentina is the most self-important, arrogant country in the world?
THIMC
Sep 14th, 2010 - 03:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So much for the « Argentina can’t do anything » to get Malvinas back :-)
As said in the Presentation by Hon. Richard Swale, MHA, Malvinas Islands (1)at the 30th Small Branches Conference in KENYA on the 12 SEPTEMBER, 2010:
“In the Falklands we are now in a cold war situation facing constant and ever increasing economic sanctions from Argentina.”
“You might expect that a body such as the UN would have an independence and authoritative effect and might be able to disentangle fact from fiction and arrive at a just and equitable conclusion.
Sadly this has been far from the case.”
“The wishes of those of us who live in the Islands are conveniently ignored by the UN, yet self-determination and political and economic freedom are the cornerstone of the UN charter.”
“Although now we have the opportunity to put our case annually and we constantly rebut these claims at the UN Committee of 24 each year in New York, it appears that we are making little headway against the might of far more vociferous and powerful voices than ours.”
Poor small Malvinas sausages…
Nobody in the UN “understands them……
Why are these foreigners sooo mean?
Argentina, you are so asking for it!!!
Sep 14th, 2010 - 04:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Censorship in the Falklans/Malvinas?
Sep 14th, 2010 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In the interview done by MercoPress to Mr Governor Huckle, comments were removed and none are allowed know...hmmmm
I “Think” that it is a sensible decision to close that article for insulting comments ….
Sep 14th, 2010 - 05:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Let the Man retire in peace to his very own Country and cherish his sweet colonial memories from a far away outpost…..
No need to inflame hatred against people!...... Right…….?
They closed for comments on this other article too……
http://en.mercopress.com/2010/09/07/cristina-kirchner-puppet-of-her-raging-husband
Uppps……No, they didn’t…… But they surely wanted to :-)
Comment removed by the editor.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 05:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ale, there's nothing to stop you commenting here. The comments rarely have anything to do with the story above them anyway...
Sep 14th, 2010 - 05:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Alex Vargas. Now is that not a Spanish name? Why don't you show us how to do it Alex and go home first!
Think, I understand to remove insulting comments, however what are they afraid of?. Maybe Merco Press wants Mr huckle (a colonial Governor) to believe that he is loved in Argentina and South America.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0i am sure that he is a good man however he only represents the special interests of London in Malvinas, like oil bussiness. These colonial Governors move from colonies around the world getting rich, then they return to their “kingdom”, UK of course.
Comment removed by the editor.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 06:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(114) Ale
Sep 14th, 2010 - 08:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When reading my posts (thanks for the kindness), try always to look at them with your “irony glasses” on.
It will surely help you to grasp what this “old geezer” is trying to say.
Not easy to write sarcasticly in your own mother tongue........
Quite difficult in this “primitive Proto Scandinavian- English language”.
They don't even have a proper verb conjugation!
:-)
Sep 14th, 2010 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Dear think, I've been here long enough to analize (let's say since mercopress appeared), through responses, behaviour on both sides and believe me, every well educated argentine started to post as we were froyd trying to change their minds, but in the end we get fed up an tyred responding arguments just to lose their minds because we have already lost it.
Sep 14th, 2010 - 11:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Don't get much deeper in this forum, they are stubborn and they will always be. Let's leave this to politicians, and pray to have our Malvinas back. Again DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME! they don't even diserve sarcasm nor irony, they are stupids with luck to have a big daddy.
Comment removed by the editor.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 04:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nice, Fernando_A, Nice!!
Sep 15th, 2010 - 04:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0We Brits don't want or need negotiation. The Falklands are British and will remain so, as long as the Falkland Islanders want them to be, so what is there to negotiate?
And, by the way, Brits (Britain) and the UK are the same thing, so we kinda' expect the UK to protect us!!!!!
Don't get much deeper in this forum, they are stubborn and they will always be
Sep 15th, 2010 - 06:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0Praise indeed from the Argies
Fernando does your Mum know you use that Language
@118. I do admire your use of the English language. Particularly the accuracy of the words used.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 09:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Now I suggest you look up the meaning of the word “analize”. I happen to think that you used it quite accurately. I wonder if you will agree?
I would imagine the editors of Mercopress have taken the decision to close the comments and delete so many, sadly because the Argentine contributors cannot express themselves without resorting to childish insults and foul language. I would also imagine that they're partly motivated by the poor impression it gives and how it reflects on the rest of South America. And to be honest I can't say I blame them.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 11:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0In answer to #118, the “well educated” Argentines frequently post what they were taught but are unable to cope when that is challenged with historical facts and evidence and usually end up resorting to foul language and insults. Your arguments are always lost because they're built on pillars of sand.
What I find interesting is the utter refusal to consider evidence that demonstrates that what they claim is wrong. In contrast most Brits come to the party to find their pre-conceived ideas incorrect and radically change.
Equally how when what you think are awkward questions posted, they're nearly always answered. Yet in contrast, pose a question that challenges the Argentine monopoly on the “truth” and the silence is deafening.
I would imagine the editors of Mercopress have taken the decision to close the comments and delete so many....Mr. what do you want 1970's Videla style censorship?. May I suggest not to read comments that you do not agree or like instead of praising censorship?.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 03:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Have a good day.
Ale, yes, no one wants to see heavy-handed censorship, but I suspect that Fernando_A's suggestion that we all go forth and multiply and then not be alive and that the editor of Mercopress should commit an illegal act with his mother was probably going a bit too far!
Sep 15th, 2010 - 03:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I didn't see what comments were directed at Governor Huckleberry, but I've got a feeling that they were not too pleasant either!
One wonders why the islanders don't want to be argentine?
Sep 15th, 2010 - 03:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(118) Juanweather
Sep 15th, 2010 - 03:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I must admit that my first days ”in here” where in the ”spirit” your mention.
I couldn’t understand the incredible degree of insult, misinformation and ethnocentrism of so many posters.
But I quickly realize that most of us posting in here suffer of some kind of mental disorder…….
Question is in which degree............. :-)
I swiftly learned to sort the “Turnips” out (ladran Sancho, señal de que cabalgamos) and concentrate in the usefulness of this place:
A good compilation of Malvinas related news as “interpreted” by the “enemy” (Not kidding… quite useful to know what they “Think” they know)
An insight in the British Amateur Oil Stock Investors “universe”. (The Church of Scientology is peanuts compared to these guys…..… real fun)
An insight in Wikipedia’s “Contentious Issues” and “Edit Wars”. (Some seriuous “Nutters” in there, mostly Israelis and British)
And, last but not least, an enjoyable contact with some “normal” posters from Argentina, Brazil and Mexico; persons consequent in their manner, style and opinions, irrespective of the interlocutor.
Not soooo bad after all………………….
PomInOz, you wrote “Governor Huckleberry”. Is that his nickname or you don't like him?
Sep 15th, 2010 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0His nickname. He is a nice guy...but don't tell him that I said that!
Sep 15th, 2010 - 04:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think 85.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 04:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Apologies for the lateness of my reply, it's been a busy week.
I'm not going to guess at when those childhood years were,but that certainly doesn't sound like the Cordoba I live, for its an unkempt place full of ruffians, and not at all like that idylic piece of paradise you've described.......I've never been a big cricket fan, and had almost forgotten that the game existed. Nor have I had any particular urge to seek out or create a little Britain over here. I'm sure such places exist, but I've only ever met 2 or 3 Brits in my whole time here.
I've noticed you describe the Islanders as 'Settlers' in quite a few posts. Why are they any more settlers than the people of European descent in Argentina? How many generations need to pass before they cease to be 'settlers'? Do you need to declare independance to be more than 'settlers'?
If Oil exlporation is unacceptable, why is it ok for Argentina to do it nearby?
I'd prefer to see the Falklands as an independent country and commonwealth member, but you can't just force it on them.
I don't think it is a principle of your house isn't in order so we can steal from you, it's very debatable that the islands have ever truly been Argentine, so it's more a case of we live here, so we'll make the most of the resources available around us. Like every community/tribe/country/etc has done. Even if Britain's hand was somehow forced or coerced into negotiating and conceding anything, the most likely outcome would be a compromise, and a negotiated independance.
@127
Sep 15th, 2010 - 04:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0true all you say. But take a piece of advice, DO NOT keep the inertia you have posting, it's unhealthy. Being surrounded by squared headed brits does not necessarily makes you a squared headed but eventually will drive you nuts!
(130) Frase
Sep 15th, 2010 - 06:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you choose to live in a “scruffy” part of Cordoba, full of “ruffians” well……. it’s your own choice isn’t it?
You are not being kept prisoner. Are you?
It was not Cricket; it was Crocket, the world’s most dangerous sport.
The difference between the Settlers of Malvinas and our Citizens is more than obvious.
Even the most closed of our “ethnical or religious collectivities” are an integral part of the Argentinean State and DO NOT invite their “Mother Countries” to appropriate Argentinean resources.
Oil exploration by Britain in Argentinean territory without Argentinean permission is unacceptable.
You prefer to see the Falklands one way; I choose to envision the Malvinas quite differently.
A “compromise” can mean many things….
(131) Juanweather
Your piece of advice is received, appreciated, noted and understood…….
I tend to dialogue with the pentagonal ones…….
The rest are not even background noise anymore……
“The difference between the Settlers of Malvinas and our Citizens is more than obvious.”
Sep 15th, 2010 - 07:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The ONLY difference between the islands and argentina is that the falklanders keep the link to the UK. Apart from that there is no difference.
And it's not “Argentinean territory”. It's British territory(Disputed by Argentina).
You cite environmental issues, and YOU personally think banged on about the potential environmental issues about drilling near the islands in countless posts, now argentina is doing it... it's fine.
They have not invited the british government to drill on the islands, they have invited UK based multinational companys to drill off the islands. As YOU(again) have said, south america rejects any oil industry there, so they invited UK based companys.
Juanweather is right when he says we are stubborn, this is why Argentinas failed attempt to blockade the islands will not work except to make the islanders more resolute.
(133) Zethee
Sep 15th, 2010 - 07:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
You cite environmental issues, and YOU personally think banged on about the potential environmental issues about drilling near the islands in countless posts......................
Wooot?
As Robert de Niro asked in “taxi Driver”: “Are you talking to me?”
Please be so kind to refer to 1 (ONE) post where I mention “environmental issues” !
Alright Think.....I was only joking about it being unkempt and full of ruffians, and what you described as being like paradise.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 07:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I thought that came accross, but maybe not. I was just playing up to a stereotype.
Cordoba has got an 'onda' that I really like, and I count some Cordobeses among my closest friends, and I don't seriously consider them 'ruffians'. I like living in Cordoba very much, it's a nice city, and we're saving for a house here...
That's more like it :-)
Sep 15th, 2010 - 07:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0134: I thought us turnips were just background noise :)
Sep 15th, 2010 - 07:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(137) No......... you are less than background noise......... But one that didn't resort to “untruths” until now.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I take the“ smiley” as an admission that you coldn't find any comments by me about the “potential environmental issues about drilling near the islands”
Juanweather. I see that you are an ignorant, discourteous Argentine pig.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Was my question too difficult for you? Probably, because you're ignorant.
Why did you not answer? Because you're discourteous.
Why are you on this board? Because you're an Argentine pig.
What do you think? Have I got your attention yet?
”B (ig )P (roblem)
Sep 15th, 2010 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0www.theoildrum.com/node/6593#comment-648967
Some things deserve to be repeated.....
Imagine........Oil eventually reaching Europe through the Gulf Stream.
The consequences coud be quite “interesting” for the Offshore Oil industry everywhere, including Malvinas .
Quite relevant, I think.
Don’t you think?
Want to think?
So I Thought !”
That's it ?....
Sep 15th, 2010 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A comment about the possible global consecuences of an expert scenario of BP's spill?
That's how I (in your own words): ”Banged on about the potential environmental issues about drilling near the islands in countless posts......................
Please be so kind to refer to 1 (ONE) post where I mention “environmental issues” !
Sep 15th, 2010 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and that is one, think
Think,
Sep 15th, 2010 - 09:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All the Environmental Impact and Oil Spill Risk impact studies done here by all companies BEFORE they are permitted to start drilling show that all bar one would not result in oil coming ashore in the unlikley event of a disaster, and that other one shows a 20% possibilty IF the wind and current stayed in an unusual direction for 10-12 days non stop. Now living here I know that possibility is about as likley as us accepting Arg sovereignty.
As posted elsewhere for any offshore oilspill here - it would have to circumnavigate the world missing Austrolasia and Chile, rounding Cape Horn and then doing a cross-current sharp left turn! Yet your President still witters on about it?
On the other hand - will Argentina impose a similar rigorous wildlife and oil spill impact assessment study before it allows the companies to drill - directly up wind/current of the Falklands?
You thought it was relevant at the time, it kinda says so in the quote think.
Sep 15th, 2010 - 09:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There were other posts, but i am not willing to search for them. That particular post was spammed across multiple articals.
(143) Islander1
Sep 15th, 2010 - 10:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My ooold comment was about the GLOBAL (including Malvinas) political and economical consequences of oil from the BP spill entering the Loop and Gulf Stream and eventually reaching European shores.
www.theoildrum.com/node/6593#comment-648967
I never commented about any environmental risk for Argentina because I know quite well the patterns of the inshore and offshore branches of the Malvinas Current……
Our President, as a good politician, refers to an undefined possible ecological catastrophe. She is not saying when or where the oil will hit……
About Spill Impact Assessment Studies on the Malvinas Basin:
We willsurely choose the Big Multinational Oil Companies that give us the best economical deal and they will possibly be contractually obliged somehow to take care of all that “Greenpeace” stuff…… That should be more than enough.
And, as any future oil spill, as stated above, have not a China man’s chance to reach Argentina’s continental shores we can lean back and relax those business unfriendly demands against our Trusted Business Partners.
Gobbledy gook. Flim-flam. Also known as “pissing in the wind”. What multinational oil company in its right mind is going to subject itself to Argentine restrictive practices? There is already the example of Shell. Further north, we see the Venezuelan model under Chavez' quasi-democratic dictatorship, a model to which Argentina steps closer every day. The re-imposition of Kirchner rule in 2011 will be a clear marker that South America is heading back into its banana days.
Sep 16th, 2010 - 10:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0Think the only serious nutter's I've encountered round here are the likes of yourself, Jorge, Gassy, Fernando and Margo. Notably I use my real name, so you can stalk and skulk trying to dig up dirt, whilst you yourself hide behind a pseudonym.
Sep 16th, 2010 - 11:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0Your sole contribution to any discussion is making facetious remarks, you're a troll and a waste of space. What is also notable is the lack of moral courage to address the awkward questions.
My name is Jorge, you idiot and catholic fascist!!!
Sep 17th, 2010 - 03:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But you're clearly too stupid to realise I wasn't addressing you.
Sep 17th, 2010 - 08:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I see you have been stalking though, I am Catholic. But my grandfather fled Franco's fascist Spain on accounts of being a liberal and that being politically incorrect.
What a combination: Gallego Y Escoces. (joke)
Sep 19th, 2010 - 03:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Basque, grand father was from Gernika, though had left with his family before the bombing. Basque and Scottish, that is a combination to be reckoned with and there are a few of us in Glasgae.
Sep 19th, 2010 - 01:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!