MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
“Falklands under economic and environmental attack” by Argentina
“The Falklands are under economic and ‘environmental’ attack by Argentina” and this is having a direct impact on the South Atlantic fisheries sustainability of high seas marine resources, claimed the Falkland Islands Fishing Companies Association, FIFCA. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesAt the begining, I suspected that Mercopress was an Agency tha already chosen a side. Now, I don't have no doubts. It's something like an Agency “landed” in Uruguay by British interests, disguised as a news office about South Atlantic issues. Come on, men! Give me a break!
Dec 16th, 2010 - 05:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why the English version of Mercopress is so active and the Spanish version is abandoned, with no updates? And why we have so much articles about the Falklands? What about issues involving the African shores of South Atlantic? We just have Falklands, Argentina and Brazil in the South Atlantic? Men, you really need to be smarter. It's something like a “Fifth column” group, for sure.
Because it's patently obvious that for years now Mercopress has found a niche reporting about the Falklands. There are very few online sources of news about the islands, and this is the only frequently updated one which is free.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Look at the facebook site of Mercopress, you'll find most of the members have British surnames, for this reason.
It's a business, it's aimed at making money, and they have identified their market.
If you want to read mainly about south american issues, in Spanish, there are countless news sites for you to do so.
#1 + #2 are great comments .
Dec 16th, 2010 - 06:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0British -Public Opinion- doesn't even has aware of these Malvinas Articles' subjects !
Britain is aware of our citizens in the South Atlantic. South America should take care. We care for our own. Push your luck and South America could go the way of Atlantis. And no-one would miss it!
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Vulca's comment is a perfect example of Argentine attitudes. If it does not appeal to the Argentine political philosphy, there must be some kind of British/European/American/Western conspiracy to undermine the great, powerful and well respected country of Argentina!
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What a load of crap. Just proves the lack of intellectual wit, maturity and most importantly the pure ignorance Argentina and its population have chosen to live in.
I welcome comments. I am sure there will be some mention of nails and coffins!
#4 + #5
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0rage , despair and lack of means !
Vulca comments are the reality M_of_FI .
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0About Mr Wallace's letter, I agree with him on his last line:
“The future can’t be bad. Thank you.”
So he's saying about their bussiness “ We are f....ed. Thank you”
Of course, comment #5 shows on what side lies intellectual wit, maturity and wisdom.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You know, undermining the opponent is a well-known propaganda tactic. Does not prove anything in the long run.
rage , despair and lack of means
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0resulting from the falklands being British
#4 + #5 are proud Idiots, who show off their mental retardation when they type here their despair comments. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is truly a curse there in the UK.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 07:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Where do I know this guy from?
Dec 16th, 2010 - 08:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stuart Wallace……....................
The name does not ring any bell but that face.!!!
Where do I know this fishmonger warrior from???...................
Of Course….. !!! ..... From France......!!!......... :-)))
http://www.asterix.com/galerie/fonds-d-ecrans/50ans-en/ordralfabetix.jpg
Still smarting fido
Dec 16th, 2010 - 08:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8575717.stm
Andrew, you have reason. It's a business. But it stays clearer when you talk about it, because the site avoid this kind of presentation (and it can generate misunderstanding between readers). And I agree with you in most part of you wrote and I respect your opinion.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 08:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Now, in relation to the struggle between British citizens in Falklands and the Argentinian Government (exposed with rage by #4 and #5 comments), I don't have nothing to say about that. Moreover: I just can say that these people need to relax (and they have to remember that this division between conquerors and dominated, “superiors” and “inferiors” is not used all around the world as they are using in theirs little world). I'm not even Argentinian. I was just looking for a news site related to South Atlantic issues (South American AND African issues in South Atlantic), and I only see articles about Falklands, Argentina and Brazil. I even like Brazil and Argentina, but would like to read about South Africa, Nigeria, Angola...
Once again, Andrew has reason: I'm a wrong place (a place with a very bad energy, if you wanna know).
Comment removed by the editor.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Vulka has a point, Mercopress's 'South Atlantic News Agency' tag is a bit misleading. Their stories are predominantly based in the South Atlantic to be sure but in their regional listings are there any countries on the west African coast? Nope. Perhaps it should be 'South West Atalntic News Agency'.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What a balanced article.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@M_of_FI
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm not Argentine myself, but even for me the anti-Argentine bias - and more generally anti-South American bias - is evident. Mercopress has taken a side on the FI issue, an issue Mercopress offers way too much coverage given the FI relative insignificance for the broader region. You said Argentine posters are immature in thinking that whatever doesn't support their opinions is of necessity biased. But ask the yourself same: aren't you too willing to take Mercopress' FI/Argentina coverage at face value just because it corroborates your own positions?
Are there some relationship between the South America Atlantic coast with the African South Atlantic coast? I believe just a minimun at the International forums but between the regular poeple I think is nothing.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And, a half of the news about the Falklands Islands are provided for the Argentine Gvt. and media, so what is your claim about????
Anyway, nobody is forced to read this virtual newspaper.....so if you feel disturbed ....get dressed and go away!!! .....Be back on the spanish media (Argentine media), so simple like that...
Vulca, you'd have liked this site before they had a comments section.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Back then, you could read news, without having acres of bandwidth taken up by hyper-nationalistic retards with a chip on thier shoulder.
@Forgetit86
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Mercopress has taken a side on the FI issue”
Mercopress certainly seems to be interested in the Falklands but considering that they are based in Uruguay it could be that they'll use any stick they can to beat the Argentinians with. You could say they are more anti-Argentine rather than pro-Falklands/British. It's hardly our fault is it?
;-)
@WestisBest
Dec 16th, 2010 - 09:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Uruguay has its own issues with Argentina. If Uruguayans wanted to bash the Argentines, they wouldn't need to resort to the FI, something over which most of them probably have no strong feelings one way or another. Btw, you should compare just how much coverage the FI gets vis-à-vis Uruguay in here. Were Mercopress intent on reporting news under a Uruguayan perspective, it wouldn't be so blasé about its own alleged homeland.
Wow I thought that was just fun.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 11:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here a title suggestion to bring more Agies posters.
“According with Madness International based in London Argentineans are considered the most stupid in the world. After the Facklanders or course” haha
“ ... I need to be a bit careful here because I have a commercial interest in the existing service but consideration of what we can achieve in the future inevitably means we must look at the facilities we will need.....”
Dec 16th, 2010 - 11:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Deep sea port ?
“Falklands under economic and environmental attack”? and what is that supposed to mean? huh? You said that Argentina can do nothing, but now you're crying. This is your problem, stop bitching like women and do something if you think this is wrong.
Dec 16th, 2010 - 11:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.kick-ass.dk/page-members.asp
““According with Madness International based in London Argentineans are considered the most stupid in the world.”
Dec 16th, 2010 - 11:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That would hardly be news Nico. With your (legitimate) resources Argentina should be a superpower....but what have you made of the opportunity? sweet fuck all, what little indusrty you've managed to scratch together you're now busily selling to the Chinese. I suggest all you Argies learn how to grovel and say 'yes master' in Mandarin, you might find it useful in the future.
;-))
The gentleman pictured is married to an Argentibe citizen, and is one of the most reasonable people on the planet.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 01:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Time for a honourable settlement.
Bennie.
The Honourable settlement was achieved in 1833 .....
Dec 17th, 2010 - 01:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0get used to it!
Folks, the main issue here is not Argentine Economic Warfare - thats been ongoing sice 2003 and we survive pretty well on it here! Its an inconvenience and costs us a bit more. It causes unemployment and business closure in some parts of S America!
Dec 17th, 2010 - 01:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0They key issue is the Arg shortsightedness and total disregard for environmemntal issues, sustainability issues etc/etc.
Arg stupididty is costing the natural environmenmt a LOT of money and natural resources we as a world cannot afford.
Redboy & westie - bit rich coming from broken bankrupt poms.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 03:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Time for an honourable settlement
“Our” Malvinas - and your falklands, so life goes on. (less expats maybe)
Bennie
28 Islander1 “Its an inconvenience and costs us a bit more”
Dec 17th, 2010 - 03:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sure, why don't you tell that to the millions unemployed or suffering the economy dowturn in UK? I am sure they love to spend millions to support a few hundred rich brits getting drunk in Stanley every weekend.
“Sure, why don't you tell that to the millions unemployed or suffering the economy dowturn in UK? I am sure they love to spend millions to support a few hundred rich brits getting drunk in Stanley”
Dec 17th, 2010 - 04:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0The islands don't really “cost” us anything.
The money that goes into having troops on the islands, if we did not have the islands, would not be subtracted from the total defence budget it's a flat 2.5% of GDP and whatever that 2.5% is(Except for the next 10 years when it's gone down to 2.1% because of the cuts, after 10 years it will go back up to it's 2.5%).
The 2000 troops, four typhoons and two ships we have in the area if we did not own the Falklands, would just be stationed elsewhere around the world. Costing us the same exact ammount of money they currently do, regardless of location.
So, no. Most of us don't mind. Quite the opposite actually
Mr Preston totally disagree with you. Who should I believe?
Dec 17th, 2010 - 04:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11999601
@WestisBest
Dec 17th, 2010 - 05:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0“That would hardly be news Nico. With your (legitimate) resources Argentina should be a superpower”
Better to learn to say “yes master' in Mandarin” than to become the dog of US. Better poor than dominate like UK. Lets see a bit of history...
Argentina was there, do you remember? During the beginning of the XX century Argentina’s GDP was equally comparable with the size of Germany today. In 1920 Argentina GDP per capita was close to the US, a little bigger than France’s GDP and comparable with UK.
Then Americans made collapse the world economy in 1930 (Like today) and UK started a protectionism economy war making collapse world trade with its introduction of Imports Substitution schema in favor to its colonies. Remember that world trade, was dominated by UK on these days?
Argentina was economically badly hurt and started its policy to become self-sufficient (Imports Substitution schema) and industrialization.
Thanks to UK, France and US and the Versailles Treaty what imposed 132 billion Marks (31.5bn dollars at the time) reparation to be paid to the allies we got the disastrous Weimar Republik experiment ended in a hyperinflation mess causing in Germany misery everywhere. So we got WWII and all in Europe ended up ruined and become puppets of US Plan Marshal dollar domination. UK ended up heavily indebted with US and become its dog.
Europe ruined, addressed most of the trade to US, then cold war and all what you know.
Now history its repeating her self but with different actors (China its the New US), and we are the new allies or the new superpower.
So in 20 years time I will be asking like you do now the same question about US and UK.
Why countries like US and UK that were among the richest nation in the world ended up like Zimbabwe?
If these countries survive like Argentina of course...
#29 - Graham - how broke can we be? We've just lent the Irish 3.6 billion.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 05:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0#30 & 32 - MoreCrap, watch Mr. Preston's interview again. Please note that the interviewer at the very begining points out how many people had phoned in to say that the islands were British. Preston got no support. Even he knows his credibility is shot! So to answer your question - if I were you, I'd believe us :-)
Oh poor Argentina, once a superpower but lost it all bcs of the Americans in 1930 and British protectionism. Nothing to do with corruption and mismanagement then. Always someone else's fault...
Dec 17th, 2010 - 05:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Oh, and Maribel Alejandra. You are going to believe who you want to anyway, so why ask us? Mr Preson is just one person, and a Guardianista to boot. You believe him if you want to. I certainly don't care.
@J.A. Roberts
Dec 17th, 2010 - 08:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Nothing to do with corruption and mismanagement then. Always someone else's fault...”
Sure Mr. Roberts you are right so here my answer to prove your point on:
“Falklands under economic and environmental attack”
Oh poor Falklanders once a wealthy place but lost it all bcs of the Argies in 2011 and Argie economic and environmental attacks.
Nothing to do with corruption and mismanagement then?.
Always someone else's fault.
Lets see Yanks and Brits now.
Oh! China has to expend more, Oh China has his currency undervalued, Oh please the BRICS has to spend more, bubu baba. The developing world has to reduce its trade surplus, oh Argentina it is protectionist and ban EU products. bubu wuaaaaa!
Oh poor Amexican and Brits once a wealthy place but lost it all bcs of the China in 2020 and Chinese economic and currency manipulation.
Nothing to do with corruption and mismanagement then?.
Always someone else's fault.
This is getting interesting don’t you think so?
Che Redhoyt
Dec 17th, 2010 - 08:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Who/what is this Preston?
Time for an honourable settlement
Listen to me
BenChe
The Falklands is still a wealthy place NicoDim. The have not “lost it all”. Try reading the article again.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 09:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0THIMC
Dec 17th, 2010 - 10:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Malvinas fishmongers are rightly worried.
They are getting their Boomerang back……. Right back on their neck.
1) During decades they oversold licenses to the Koreans, Taiwanese and Spanish that overfished the Islands waters.
And spare me that “Red Herring” about “thigh control, scientific monitoring and professional management”
Reality is, that everybody catches more or less what they want and then, your Russian” Fishy Experts” write the rapports they are ordered to.
And if they don’t ………..
Well………..They can see what happened to Dr. Bingham.
2) Argentina is actively legislating and lobbying the different actors on the South Atlantic Fishing Zone to choose side……
Either Argentina or Malvinas…….
3) In the meantime and in a parallel course, Argentina is licensing and fishing the waters around Malvinas intensely to “manage down the stocks” making business unprofitable for foreign fishing fleets.
Jup,..... they have many reasons to be worried, those fishmongers :-)
“Argentina is actively legislating and lobbying the different actors on the South Atlantic Fishing Zone to choose side……
Dec 17th, 2010 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Either Argentina or Malvinas……”
Argies: “you must choose Argentina or the Falklands”
Fishing Company: “OK, Falklands it is then”
Argies: “er.....you wearn't supposed to say that, you must choose Argentina!”
Fishing Company: “No”
Argies:“er...OK then.....er...would you like to buy some fishing licences from us too?”
;-)
@J.A. Roberts
Dec 17th, 2010 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The Falklands is still a wealthy place NicoDim”
Come on mate seriously Wealthy? Are you joking?
100m GDP and only sheep, no infrastructure no nothing about what wealth are you talking about?
This building cost your entire GDP http://img297.echo.cx/img297/760/10000530di.jpg
You in 176 years under the boot of the English and you only make 100m GDP.
And you laugh about us? haha
Look Honk Kong http://img297.echo.cx/img297/760/10000530di.jpg
Why Honk Kong is so developed (compared with you of course) and you are still in the Stone Age?
Corruption perhaps? Inefficiency may be? Laziness? Little mentality perhaps? A lot of drinks?
What’s your preferable excuse for you failure ROB?
@29
Dec 17th, 2010 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Redboy & westie - bit rich coming from broken bankrupt poms.”
0 out of 3, good job.
;-)
NicoDim, you were the one who said the Falklands were “once a wealthy place”. By your own standards it is still a wealthy place. It has not “lost it all” by any stretch of the imagination. If anything, it is much wealthier now than it was once.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 12:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Join up the dots NicoDim, it's not difficult...
My comment was to encourage a response and I got what I wanted. I have tried many different approaches in debating with the Argentine posters. I tried the abusive approach, I have tried the respectful approach, I have tried the factual approach, I have tried the educating approach. But each time the response from the Argentines is always the same old myths, the same old implantation story, the same old colonial masters tale, the same old British unilateral accusations. You (as in Islanders) present facts of the Falklands and its governance. You present your experiences of living in the Falklands, and how the islands are run. But the Argentine posters reply by telling you that you are in fact incorrect, but they have the real truth, even though they have never been to the Falklands, and that truth is fed to them by their corrupt, immorale and immature government, run by a President who has a love for plastic surgery (= no credibility).
Dec 17th, 2010 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We Islanders joke because we know the real truth. We are comfortable because we have the facts. We have the insight of what is truly going on. And we know, no matter how many nails Think and Argentina's President hammer into the Falklands/British coffin, the most important and decisive nail is being held by the Falkland Islanders. The true owners of the Falklands. The Right To Determine Our Own Future. Thank you, you have been a wonderful audiance. Good Night Buenos Aries.
#37 - Graham (good old english name ) Try and keep up!
Dec 17th, 2010 - 12:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#39 - Think, still with the tin tacks? And
- lobbying won't matter a damn... the fishing fleets will go where the fish are... and fish know no borders!
- “ manage down” .... LOL, yeah, right :-)))
#41 - DIM - quite right, the Falkland Islander's are all on the pverty line and starving! How's your inflation rate doing, by the way?
Nothing seems to have changed ... must be a good day :-)
This news is armed to discredit Argentina. Can not sustain the colonial enclave. The Argentina international is gaining ground in its claim of sovereignty then:
Dec 17th, 2010 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lies, lies, lies that something remained.
There are indeed a lot of lies out there, all emanating from Argentina, but worry not little insect, the Falkland Islands will remain British, come hell or high water!
Dec 17th, 2010 - 12:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You alright Ant? you're a bit incoherANT this morning..har har.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 12:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“This news is armed to discredit Argentina”
well spotted, and what of it?
Keep going, Argentina. I wonder if you understand how many of the Articles of the UN Charter you are in breach of?
Dec 17th, 2010 - 01:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But the time will come when Britain will point these facts out to the world.
Why Honk Kong is so developed (compared with you of course) and you are still in the Stone Age?
Dec 17th, 2010 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you mean Hong Kong Nicotine? it may have somthing to do with the population 7,034,100.give or take
still in the Stone Age?
The capital's shanty town population has swelled to more than 200,000 -- about 7 percent of the population -- and clusters of slums have mushroomed in and around Buenos Aires.
Large areas of the slums are without basic amenities and go unpoliced, giving rise to crime and drug gangs, corruption and extortionist cartels.
I know the publication place of MercoPress !
Dec 17th, 2010 - 02:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the British won't pony up the money to preserve the Falklands, why not give it independence and make it a sovereign nation? It could become a member of the Commonwealth right away, and the UN as well. If Argentina would then try to invade it, it would be committing an act of war against a sovereign and independent nation, and the Commonwealth nations would respond accordingly. There are Canadian MPs that believe that Falklands should be offered incorporation into the Canadian Confederation, that might be a solution if the UK decides that the Falklands are too expensive to keep. I blame the British for the current stalemate. They defended the Falklands from Argentina's invasion in the 80s but did not lay waste to Argentina and her military proper, missing out on the opportunity of sending a clear signal to Argentina and everyone else that would violate British sovereignty. Thatcher should have pounced on the Argentine mainland and held it as an example, that would have been the pre-emptive end of all this 'controversy.' The other option would be for the UK (and maybe the entire EU) to set up a permanent base in Antarctica like the US has, and make the Falklands the refueling/re-supplying station. That would make the Falklands a lot more relevant in the eyes of British MPs who only see it as a tax drain right now.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 02:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yea, we all do Yul. It's not a secret.
Dec 17th, 2010 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(44)
Dec 17th, 2010 - 05:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Good night to you too....... London.
“If the British won't pony up the money to preserve the Falklands, why not give it independence and make it a sovereign nation? It could become a member of the Commonwealth right away, and the UN as well.”
Dec 17th, 2010 - 05:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First, we are happy to pay. Second there is no reason FOR them to want to go independance and they enjoy the defence of the UK, the only difference between what they have now and independance is that they would have no safty net should Argentina invade.
“If Argentina would then try to invade it, it would be committing an act of war against a sovereign and independent nation, and the Commonwealth nations would respond accordingly.”
But it's not assured, it's assumed. There is no guarentee. At the moment as British territory any invasion would, 100% be defended.
The british news editors who see it as a tax drain are very few and far between, it's a subject most british would be happy to go back to war over if they tried to invade again.
Plenty of savings to be made elsewhere,UK taxpayers dont mind keeping the Falklands British
Dec 17th, 2010 - 07:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://tpa.typepad.com/media/
Redhoyt - sounds non-english name - are you from India?
Dec 17th, 2010 - 08:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mate - Enough of your jingoism, trophyism and benign genocide of the islands. An honourable settlement would benefit everyone including the poms for a long long time.
If not, go home and we will send you food parcels.
Is it true the Falklands will have to take down the UK flag and fly the EEC one becuase it has an EEC subsidised abbatoir by the way?
Time for an hounourable settlement.
BenChe
Oh, Juliana Roberta. “You are going to believe who you want to anyway, so why ask us?”
Dec 17th, 2010 - 08:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The reason that I ask you guys is because whatever your answer is the truth will be the opposite. So Mr Preston is right then.
“Ditch the FalklandsIt makes no economic or political sense to hang on to the Falklands, but no one will face the truth”
Peter Preston
Is it true the Falklands will have to take down the UK flag and fly the EEC one
Dec 17th, 2010 - 09:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The only flags taken down was the argie ones in 1982,not forgetting all the white flags the Argies were waving
“An honourable settlement would benefit everyone including the poms for a long long time.”
Dec 17th, 2010 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In your oppinion, yes. Not in ours or the islanders.
@57
Dec 17th, 2010 - 10:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Mate - Enough of your jingoism, trophyism and benign genocide of the islands.”
Benign genocide????
eh?
repeatedly - called “surplus population policy” at the time. Originally to make way for sheep (still on the flag). More recently the deliberate expating of the Islands starting in the 60's to replace locals with assorted short term expats. Continues to this day. However, most who have escaped are happy to have done so, unless trapped in UK.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0No one was executed, but many froze to death due to camp clearances. so benign it was, maybe?
Time for an honourable settlement.
When will someone define honourable instead of jingoistic drivel.
And yes, EU law requires institutions receiving their money to fly their flag.
Better than a sheep one ?
Merry Xmas and a BenChe New Year Honourable Settlement.
(BenChe Patagonian land god-shaman)
On another note - Independence requires a country with citizens. The Falklands has residents with the same status as guests in a hotel. Their is no birthright so no citizens so no country. Just Euro-dependents.
However, an honourable settlement would recognise a self governing entity(The Falklands) , as is, where is, warts and all. It will also be required to have “our” Malvinas. You can come over and have a barbie in the old stone coral, or any of those places with Spanish names to celebrate.
Packing a food parcel for England now - hope you all survive the winter.
“Independence requires a country with citizens. The Falklands has residents with the same status as guests in a hotel. Their is no birthright so no citizens so no country. Just Euro-dependents.”
Dec 18th, 2010 - 12:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0your Argie prejudices and ignorance is starting to show mate. No birthright? Falkland Island Status ring any bells Graham? you can earn it to be sure but it is automatically granted to anyone born in the Falkland Islands, sounds like a birthright to me.
”However, an honourable settlement would recognise a self governing entity(The Falklands) , as is, where is, warts and all.”
we already are a self governing territory, warts and all.....so you can shove your honourable settlement Graham, what's honourable about denying ones own identity, reckon you have to be an Argie to be that hypocritical.
You don't seem to understand Greyhound, that we achieved the honourable settlement in 1833. Between us and Spain! We reasserted our sovereignty and the Spanish didn't ... pretty honourable or what. The Argentines were a nuisance then and remain so ... like flies at a picnic.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 12:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0It won't affect the ability of the islanders to seek true independence when they're ready.
Nothing Argentina can do :-)
But thanks for the food parcels ....
”However, an honourable settlement would recognise a self governing entity(The Falklands) , as is, where is, warts and all. It will also be required to have “our” Malvinas.“
Dec 18th, 2010 - 01:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0LOL, amazing statment here. ”our requirment is that the islanders are self governing...under argentine controll”
Packing a food parcel for England now - hope you all survive the winter
Dec 18th, 2010 - 09:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thanks,but look after your own first
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/arge-f22.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/arge-f22.shtml
you (66#66).....are you the sparrow of this forum ?
Dec 18th, 2010 - 11:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0you (66#66).....are you the sparrow of this forum ?.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0i say i say are you the foghorn leghorn of this forum
Besides what would argentina do with the falklands ?
Dec 18th, 2010 - 11:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0strip it /ruin it / rob it/ destroy it / fly the white flag then leg it ?
just like everything else it touches
Malvinas: Facing the provinces of Santa Cruz and Tierra del Fuego, under the province of Buenos Aires, data which did not take us out of our land and confirm the story.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Evidence Marvin, where is the evidence............... you are lost, admit it!
Dec 18th, 2010 - 04:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The international criminal court, Wikileaks.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“But America has also been hostile to the court, refusing to join it for fear its own citizens could be put on trial for war crimes..”
”One cable, sent in July 2003, three months after Luis Moreno-Ocampo(who is from Argentina) was elected as chief prosecutor..“
”Ocampo has said that he was looking at the actions of British forces in Iraq -- which … led a British ICTY prosecutor nearly to fall off his chair.” :-))))
Take to the ICC :-)))
”
You had a bad experience with ICJ
Dec 18th, 2010 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In 1977, Argentina refused to accept a ruling, which gave Chile possession of islands in the Beagle Channel. Only the intervention of the Pope prevented war.
Malvinas: Facing the provinces of Santa Cruz and Tierra del Fuego, under the province of Buenos Aires, data which did not take us out of our land and confirm the story.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here is the evidence ... front of their noses.
Don't know what your on about Malvin? The Falklands also Face South Africa and Namibia, perhaps they should have a claim as well?
Dec 18th, 2010 - 06:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you (73 # 73) ...hmmm I understood ,you are not sparrow
Dec 18th, 2010 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0but you are the of this forum !
you (73 # 73
Dec 18th, 2010 - 07:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I say i say
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnVsYw4dAIA&feature=related
@75 Bad example ... and you know it
Dec 18th, 2010 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's no more nonsensical than Argentinas claim Malvin.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@75 Bad example ... and you know it
Dec 18th, 2010 - 10:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0what about this one then Malvin
Isla Martín García is an Argentine island off the Río de la Plata coast of Uruguay. The enclave island is within the boundaries of Uruguayan waters
Maybe. I do not think that is more absurd than the British justification to be being in possession of the islands, West.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 11:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@74: Interesting to not of course that Santa Cruz and Tiera del Fuego were not Argentine possessions in 1833.
Dec 18th, 2010 - 11:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Rather, the interested part at the time was modern day Buenos Aires Province and somewhat smaller with the frontier sitting near Miramar in the division General Alvarado about 1500 km distance from Port Solitude.
The idea that somehow the Falklands were next to Argentina at the time the British asserted their sovereignty and took permanent control in 1833 is false.
The truth is the Falklands were very far from Argentine territories in 1833.
The fact is that the reason why they are closer to Argentina now, is because Argentina conquered and annexed the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia and subjugated the indigenous population to genocide and then later assimilation.
The Mapuche and other indigenous people resisted but were defeated and their ancestral lands stolen from them and colonised them with European immigrants.
No different of course, to the history of many New World states or Old World.
It's a good thing we are slowly but surely learning as mankind to settle differences by reason and negotiation and that things are no longer done this way.
The founding of the UN happened immediately after the most destructive war ever and was in the sincere consensus to prevent such wars through friendship and cooperation in a new-found optimism for the future.
It's incumbent on its member nations to live up to its high ideals. I certainly hope the AR, UK and FIG can do so for a happy outcome for all one day.
So Marvin, your 'evidence' is geography!
Dec 19th, 2010 - 12:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0LOL ......... quite irrelevant, you'll have to do better than that :-)
There are many things that obviously unknown. Argentina's claim is based on historical and legal aspects. The geographical part is a complement.
Dec 19th, 2010 - 04:15 am - Link - Report abuse 01-To regulate the communications between the islands and the mainland, was encapsulated command of Puerto Deseado (in Santa Cruz) in the government of the Malvinas and it was decided that four brigs of the colony of Rio de la Plata to sail regularly between Montevideo, Puerto Deseado and the Malvinas. This organization continued until the fall of the colonial regime. 2)- On January 7, 1779 was founded the Fort and the Port of San José de la Candelaria, in the Peninsula Valdés (Chubut).
3)- On April 22, 1779 was founded the Fort of Our Lady of Mount Caramel and Town of New Murcia, on the right bank (south) of Black River, (Río Negro) moved that year to the northern bank. 4)- In 1780 he founded Castillo de Todos los Santos and San Carlos in Puerto Deseado (Santa Cruz) 5)-April 19, 1780, New Town and Fort of Floridablanca, Puerto San Julian in the Bay of San Julián (Santa Cruz). UK believes it has sovereignty over lands that are at 14,000 km away, on the other side of the world. The Malvinas had a population and authorities, when the English no more titles that force, usurped the islands to their rightful owners. If the Malvinas was far from Argentina, imagine UK.
“The Mapuche and other indigenous people resisted but were defeated....”
Everything is true, we can go to the time of Columbus and what happened in what is now the United States or Oceania etc. etc. I do not know what is the relation of this with the Malvinas. In everything else I totally agree with you.
@83 Red, I do not write well in English. I write like Tarzan. Try to understand what I wrote. I do not know the meaning of lol,... But .... LOL!!!
I've told you before Marvin, and your information appears to confirm it, that the dispute was between Britain and Spain. Britain reasserted its sovereignty claim in 1833. Spain did not! End of story....
Dec 19th, 2010 - 06:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0@84 Malvinense. no no Mal, you do not own the Falklands. you can present as many untrue facts as you like, but you still do not own the Falklands. you never will. just concentrate on developing your own country(it has great potential)& leave the Falklands alone. the people here will NEVER accept your rule. do you not understand? NEVER.
Dec 19th, 2010 - 07:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0@62Graham. what do you define as “honourable”? how would you like to see the “settlement”?do tell
“There are many things that obviously unknown. Argentina's claim is based on historical and legal aspects”
Dec 19th, 2010 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So what you're saying is that you believe that what happened two hundred years ago out wighs the current human rights of the population who currently reside there?
Heck let's throw human rights out the window, how would you feel if we nuked Buenos Aires?
@Red,Britain reasserted its sovereignty claim in 1833. Spain did not!
Dec 19th, 2010 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 01771. Spanish sovereignty. End of story. Spain had nothing to complain. Argentina independent country, recognized by the United States and England. UK was willing to recognize the sovereignty of Argentina in 1968. But ... Chalfont go home.
@Isolde, “you can present as many untrue facts as you like” Not true.
Never lie. I read a lot to know why 2 friendly countries went to war in 1982. Why 2 countries are fighting over the same islands. And I learned a lot. I do not want to give me the reason. Simply that we can understand. An Uruguayan friend once told me: Argentina is a sleeping giant. Never say never.
Do not be angry Isolde, I am sending you a kiss from a distance.
@ Zethee, you will steal your house, the thief has no title, the passage of time gives you the reason the thief? how would you feel? Argentina will respect your lifestyle, Argentina is composed of people from many nations. You can rest easy. Nuked? is not in the dictionary, I think I'll throw in the trash.
“you will steal your house, the thief has no title, the passage of time gives you the reason the thief? how would you feel?”
Dec 19th, 2010 - 07:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So mal the theft and occupation of indigenous land is justified then? So long as it is the Argentine state doing it.
But a group of Islands 400 km from your coast which you loosely and nominally held as little more than an outpost is a reprehensible act, and despite 180 years having passed, we should override their rights, just to go and satisfy a slight to national ego?
I don't recall that any of the original settlers are alive to describe their feelings Mal, in fact anybody from Argentina from that time, considering that most weren't even Argentines, and even then 15 years previously had all been officially Spanish?
So in your logic we can ignore human rights even if the passage of time has run into several generations from the Original perceived first sin, in that case would 90% of Argentina be taking the first flight back to Europe.
After all as you said over time the Thief still has no title :)
Very weak argument to justify what they did. There is not a national ego, is a historical claim, Argentina protested the January 15, 1833, just days after usurpation. UK does not want to hear, buries its head as ostrich in the sand and leaves passes the time. Never mind that the early settlers are not living. Is your memory and the memory of what happened in 1833. We do not forget. Despite the passage of the years we claiming what belongs to us. Despite this we remain hopeful that we ever listen to us and thus able to reach an agreement.
Dec 19th, 2010 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Considering that most weren't even Argentines” That means little in the moment to discern sovereignty, the foreign investment and immigration will not change the status legal, in particularly when all the people accept the law and authority of the country. The rulers of the Malvinas were appointed by Buenos Aires, and were responsible for applying the laws of Argentina to a population that was considered part of the United Provinces.
The thief has no title, but as said Domingo : “Still hoping for a happy outcome for all!” I say: This is my dream!!!
Marvin - I see that you are still getting 1771 the wrong way around ... if you can't get that right, you're hardly going to understand the significance of Uti Posseditis Juris and its development to acclaiment in South America in 1848. Too late for Argentina's case I'm afraid :-)
Dec 19th, 2010 - 11:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Red, In 1765 Byron came in secret expedition. Made a simple takeover and went. One year after the French. McBride arrived in 1766, established a small military garrison. Two years after the French. First occupied the islands the French!!! That British sovereignty!!!. The islands had a Spanish governor since 1767. Treaty of 1771. The Spanish king in HIS STATEMENT made an express reservation of sovereignty, to safeguard its right above. Not so, the English king.
Dec 20th, 2010 - 01:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0The RESTITUTION of the PORT and FORT EGMONT was demanded and granted as COMPENSATION for the INJURY to the BRITISH FLAG. It mentions only the restitution of the Port and Fort Egmont.
No mention of restitution of the islands. Neither Saunders Island. (Trinidad Island). Were never in Gran Malvina Island (West Falkland). NEVER. Were never in Soledad Island (East Falkland). NEVER. The establishment illegal, precarious and ephemeral does not give even an inchoate title. And most important. They went home. Not for economic reasons.
Agreement was reached. The RESTITUTION of the PORT and FORT EGMONT was demanded and granted as COMPENSATION for the INJURY to the BRITISH FLAG. In turn, the British had to leave the island. Therefore, no war broke out. The British diplomatic defeat, you can see, in the debates heated in the House of Lords and Commons. Find out about what was said by Junius, Burke, Chatham, Manchester. Know its history. More information: Hansard, Parliamentary History of England. October 4, 1766 by royal certificate (cédula) establishing the governance of the Malvinas.April 2, 1767, Colonel Bougainville French handed over colony to the governor Felipe Ruiz Puente. The pavilion of His Majesty was greeted with 21-gun salute from frigate Libertad.
1774. They went home!! Fulfilled their part of the deal!!! This is evidence. The British withdrawal. 1.774-1829 silence.
1811-1820 The islands were empty. silence. 1820 Jewett takes possession of the islands. silence. silence until 1829. What are the British titl
Marvin - the British diplomatic victory of 1771 is well documented. It may have been otherwise if the French had supported the Spanish, but they did not do so.
Dec 20th, 2010 - 03:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0In any event it is largely irrelevant. What is clear is that at the end of that dispute there remained a sovereignty dispute between the Spanish and the British. The British left the appropriate marks and signs when they left the islands to indicate their claim as indeed did the Spanish when they left.
So, after both have left the dispute is still between Britain and Spain. Nobody else is involved.
The British returned in 1833 to reassert their claim. Spain did not.
Uti Possedetis Juris was not an accepted principle of international law in 1833. It was not an accepted principle of South American relations until after 1848.
Argentina did not therefore inherit Spain's side of the sovereignty dispute. They were a 3rd party only.
1833 finished it ..... the fat lady sang, everything :-)
Marvin you're full of shit, your irrational, illogical, and false argument, based on a false history will only lead to military conflict; fine, bring it on.
Dec 20th, 2010 - 04:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Be aware though, that we will never surrender any British Overseas Territory against the wishes of the people who live there, and any invasion attempt will not only be shoved back into the sea, but a second military invasion will mean that the kid gloves come off, it will be a declaration of open season to attack the mainland, and everything will become a legitimate target.
How many dead Argentines will it require for you to get it into your thick indoctrinated skulls that the Falkland Islands are British? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? One city? Ten cities? Buenos Aires?
You might claim you're not worried by the British Military, but if push comes to a shove you and your 'mates' will be pissing in their pants, and begging us not to nuke you out of existence.
Grow some balls.
Marvin - I forgot to add that the myth of a secret deal is just that, and the British leaving is evidence of nothing, why would the British have left behind the accepted marks and signs to maintain their claim if they were meeting some obligation?
Dec 20th, 2010 - 05:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0And Jewett is a non-starter. He made a feeble claim to islands that were already subject of claims by Britain and Spain, he had no authority to do so and when ignored, he sailed away and didn't even bother to mention the claim to his superiors. A funny story, nothing else.
As for silences ..... you managed 90 years without any mention in the Message to Congress. How do you explain that?
“Very weak argument to justify what they did”
Dec 20th, 2010 - 07:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0Judging by your refusal to answer my references to the indigenous question, it must be a stronger argument than you give credit.
“The thief has no title”
How can you say this when the Argentine state engaged in colonial occupation of Indigenous lands?
By your logic Argentines have no right to the state of Argentina then eh? :)
Are you just going to dodge the question and shove your head in the sand like an ostrich as you said.
Its all relevant Marvin, it shows us that your claim is a spurious massive hypocrisy.
If you claim its about “history” then history tells us that Argentina was founded on colonial occupation and genocide, in which case this wrong of history must be righted by the immediate changing of sovereignty of the state of Argentina to indigenous control.
But Argentina would never do that would you?
This thing called human rights and self-determination means pretty much your their to stay.
So why is it so hard to afford the same dignity to the Islanders that you have appointed yourselves in Argentina.
Here is a peaceful settlement I have suggested many times, we allow a referendum on the Islands and let the islanders decide, unfortunately many Malvinists found this proposal to radical, because it used such processes as democracy and self-determination
@88Malvinense. l am not angry at your posts. well l will not call you a liar, just mis-informed. really my good fellow, wouldn't you get exasperated if someone kept claiming your country? image if you like that Brazil keeps claiming the northern half of Argentina. you know & l know that they have no right to do so. but you keep getting all these half informed people saying it is their“legitimate right”& bringing up all sorts of reasons why they do own northern Argentina. wouldn't you get annoyed, even angry with them? well thats how we feel when you & your countrymen keep making ridiculous claims to our homes. you have ample land of your own, with plenty of resources. do something with it. make it rich, keep your eyes and hands off someone elses home. again and again l will say this(l'll never get tired of saying it)you do not own the Falklands & you have never owned the Falklands. hope this helps
Dec 20th, 2010 - 10:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0Dear Isolde
Dec 20th, 2010 - 11:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0What’s the use of continuously mentioning hypothetical or inexistent issues?
The reality is that Argentina has no relevant issues with any of our neighbors left.
Neither do them with us.
But we have a Big Issue with some squatters on our Malvinas Islands that constantly repeat that they “want to live in peace”, whilst, at the same time invite their atomic bully friend from the north to siphon our natural resources.
Not enough with that, many of you squatters yearn openly for a new armed conflict…
Just to “clean the air” as many of you say…..
One thousand men died in 1982……
More than two thousand committed suicide since then…..
That’s one soul on each of you…..
All because of your intransigency……
And now you want more blood….
That’s the way WE see it………..
PS:
And for all of you so concerned with the past, present and future of indigenous peoples, I sincerely recommend you to join one of the following organizations…
http://www.iwgia.org/
http://www.iwgia.org/
“ ... squatters on our Malvinas Islands ...”
Dec 20th, 2010 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0er, No! Not yours Think, never have been! This is of course the fundamental flaw in Argentine thinking ... not yours, ours! If you think you can prove otherwise try taking your case to the ICJ!
“ ... More than two thousand committed suicide since then ....
War is hell Think, but then again Argentina started that one so you'll have to accept that our sympathy for your losses is muted!
” ... All because of your intransigency ...”
Err No! It's Argentina that has the issues, not the islanders, not the British. So it's your intransigency that is the problem Think.
Your historical arguments are flawed. Your legal arguments are flawed. This is just an old fashioned landgrab by Argentina the bully. Nothing more. And doomed to failure!
Nothing you can do ........ think !
“The reality is that Argentina has no relevant issues with any of our neighbors left.
Dec 20th, 2010 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Neither do them with us.”
Whoa! check out Think the ostrich, they might be polite at a diplomatic level but Chileans spit when you mention Argentina, as do the Uraguayans.
Interesting leap of logic to say the 82 conflict was our fault Think, how was that exactly? our fault by being guilty of existing perhaps? I understand your ancestors used a similar argument to attempt to justify the holocaust.
invite their atomic bully friend from the north to siphon our natural resources
Dec 20th, 2010 - 04:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well the argies have tried in the past to have the big stick and other nasty stuff
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/argentina/nuke/index.html
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/argentina/nuke/index.html
so wasnt for lack of trying to be the argie atomic bully
The Uk prevents your true bullies getting your own way,like with your treatment of Uraguay, Argentina strong with the weak, weak with the strong
As for“ siphon our natural resources”, you havent got a great track record of making a go with what you already have, not to mention your child like tantrum, in allowing over fishing to spite the Falklanders
(99), (100)
Dec 20th, 2010 - 05:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ladies.... ladies.....Please....
Keep calm......
I was talking to Lady Isolde.....
Gentlemen protect the ladies!
Dec 20th, 2010 - 11:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's the British way :-)
“invite their atomic bully friend from the north to siphon our natural resources”
Dec 20th, 2010 - 11:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Not your resources, think. You must be referring to the Fisheries since there's no oil extraction yet.
2009 figures:
fleet: number of licences:
1) Spanish 61
2) Falklands 55
3) Korea 39
4) Taiwan 15
5) UK 6
6) Japan 1
Total catch (tonnes):
1) Spain 80122
2) Falklands 58537
3) Japan 7214
4) UK 4067
5) Korea 3317
6 Taiwan -----
I'm sure Spain will be happy to know you think of them as the Falklands' atomic bully friend.
Gentlemen protect the ladies!
Dec 21st, 2010 - 12:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's the British way :-)
And the argie way
http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=360379&CategoryId=14093
http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=360379&CategoryId=14093
@93 Red, the British diplomatic victory of 1771 is well documented. false. I gave evidence. The dispute ended with the agreement of 1771. The British withdrew. Before, France first occupant, gave the islands to Spain.
Dec 21st, 2010 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0“The British left the appropriate marks and signs when they left the islands” The French historian Groussac says: The attitude clandestine of Lt. Clayton, erecting in Port Egmont material symbols of the alleged British sovereignty, is an arbitrary act and without international significance when it is not followed by any other effect which is in formal opposition to the terms of the Declaration of 1771, the only legal instrument for the two parties interested, this board is belied by the occupation of the islands uninterrupted and unchallenged for 60 years for Spain and his heir Argentina.
Also in 1777, Spain destroyed the symbols left by the British there, they did not protest any of its rights, which is interpreted as a physical abandonment of the British claim.
They agree with this British jurists as: Westlake, Fitzmaurice, Phillimore. And Anthony Eden considered wrong and unsustainable British arguments. UK in 1833 had nothing to claim. “Argentina did not therefore inherit Spain's side of the sovereignty dispute. They were a 3rd party only.” British propaganda. Argentina was in the islands. Malvinas is Argentina. “The British returned in 1833 to reassert their claim.” If, after 60 years of silence. “Spain did not” Of course, at that time Argentina an independent country. The islands were under the sovereignty Argentina. First discovered the islands? NO
First occupied the islands? NO
First ruled the islands? NO. The big question is what is the British title?
Malvi, learn how secession worked in the first half of the 19th century. If the Falklands were Spanish before 1816 then they were still Spanish in 1820, 1829, 1831, 1833 because Spain had not relinquished them, and Argentina had not inherited them, nor established any effective control over them. In the case of secession, the territory of a seceding entity consists of that which it can establish control over, nothing more.
Dec 21st, 2010 - 02:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0British title rests on being the first to establish effective control over the whole archipelago and not receiving a single complaint from Spain, the only country that may have had a right to do so, in 177 years
And mentioning the opinions of certain people without showing what they base their opinions on proves nothing whatsoever.
Marvin -
Dec 21st, 2010 - 02:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ ... The dispute ended with the agreement of 1771. The British withdrew...”
The British withdrew their garrison as a result of other needs and not in compliance with a non-existent agreement.
Per Viscount Palmerston's letter to M.Moreno in 1834 - “ ... But M. Moreno, in the note which he has addressed to the undersigned, has endeavoured to shew that, at the termination of the memorable discussions referred to between Great Britain and Spain, a secret understanding existed between the two courts, in virtue of which Great Britain was pledged to restore the islands to Spain at a subsequent period, and that the evacuation of them, in 1774, by his Majesty, was the fulfilment of that pledge. The existence of such a secret understanding is alleged to be proved; first, by the reservation, as to the former right of sovereignty over the islands, which was contained in the Spanish declaration, delivered at the time of the restoration of Port Egmont and its dependencies to his Majesty; and, secondly, by the concurrent description of the transaction, as it took place beween the parties, given in certain documents and historical works. Although the reservation referred to cannot be deemed to possess any substantial weight, inasmuch as no notice whatever is taken of it in the British counter-declaration, which was exchanged against it; and although the evidence adduced from unauthentic historical publications cannot be regarded as entitled to any weight whatever with a view to a just decision upon a point of international rights ...”
In other words there was no such agreement! Real evidence!
“ ... an arbitrary act and without international significance ...”
If that is so, why did Spain feel the need to destroy the British marks and signs and yet felt the need to do exactly the same when they left?? Apply a little logic laddie!
Dab has dealt with your misunderstanding of inheritance!
@102
Dec 21st, 2010 - 10:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0How typical of you think, you get rattled and post something reprehensible then try to deflect attention from it.
“ many of you squatters yearn openly for a new armed conflict…
Just to “clean the air” as many of you say…..
One thousand men died in 1982……
More than two thousand committed suicide since then…..
That’s one soul on each of you…..
All because of your intransigency……
And now you want more blood….
That’s the way WE see it………..”
So that's the way YOU see it is it think, well for people who don't have their head up their ass it's possible to see things for what they really are. The conflict in 1982 was instigated by the people of Argentina, the deaths during and after the war lie at your door and no one elses. Don't give us any of that crap about what an evil man Galtieri was and how it was not us it was the Junta, people like you perpetuate the mindset of irrational hatred towards us Falkland Islanders, without people who think like you there never would have been an invasion in 82 because the Junta would not have gained any advantage in doing so.
Regarding your belief that “many of you squatters yearn openly for a new armed conflict”, what do you base that on? the jingoistic bombast that goes on on a forum such as this? you can sit in your cosy little bubble and spout such bollocks because you've never experienced existing as a civilian in an armed conflict. We know full well the price that's paid for war you contemptible hypocrite.
@98 Dear Think, l was going to reply to your nontruths and absolute rubbish but the lads have done it for me. no need to repeat it all this time. thank you to:
Dec 21st, 2010 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0# 99)Redhoyt
#100)WestisBest
#101)stick up your jumper
#104)dab14763
You've said all that is needed to be said.
Senor Think, you are wrong and you know that you are wrong. you are either a troll, an agent provocateur or an opportunistic Argentinean who thinks that he might just get some spoils if his country's strategy succeedes. well it won't , so get back to Europe you first generation Argentinean and leave the 7th & 8th generation Falklanders alone.
Isolde - Think is a company man, doing things in the company way, unwilling/unable to question the company song, uncaring about the effects that the company has on others. He follows the company line, and accepts what the company tell him .... unable to Think!
Dec 21st, 2010 - 11:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGhTr8lDCV0
Cher Isolde:
Dec 21st, 2010 - 12:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”Your (my) non-truths and absolute rubbish” you say.
Which ones are you referring to?
The one about you mentioning non-existent issues?
....From the top of my head I remember you mentioning Argentina claiming the Philippines, most of Latin America and last but not least, Brazil claiming half of Argentina.
The one about Argentina not having any relevant issues with its neighbors anymore?
....We don’t. Despite the best efforts from entities like MercoPress to blow any little factor of our daily political life into a big international crisis.
The one about Argentina having a big issue against Britain and their squatters?
....We do. That should be, by now, clear for anybody.
The one about you inviting your British compatriots to exploit the South Atlantic mineral resources whilst declaring your “wish to live in peace”?
....You did and you do. That’s why the Malvinas Issue has escalated and gained the momentum it has during the last nine months.
The one about many Islanders yearning for a new conflict to “clear the air”?
....Many of you are on record, saying that 1982 was the best that could happen for the Islands. Many of you are warmongering openly today in the Islands, in London and on the Internet.
The one about the total number of casualties of the war reaching about three thousand souls; one for each of you Islanders?
....That’s a fact.
The one about all this being caused by your intransigence?
....There was a time before 1982.
There were agreements between the Britain and Argentina about the Islands.
They were all blocked by your intransigence, backed and financed by a vociferous “patriotic” minority in London.
Curiously, many of those “patriotic Englishmen” (and/or their offspring) own today oil and fishing companies and even whole Islands down here.
It’s all on public record.
So it's 'intransigence' not to roll over and let yourself be evicted from your home or disenfranchised on the whim of someone in London or Buenos Airies is it Think? your hypocrisy is astounding, the foundation of your own nation is based on the people who would become Argentinians fighting for very similar principles against Spain.
Dec 21st, 2010 - 01:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You really would become neo-colonials if you got the chance wouldn't you?
TWIMC
Dec 21st, 2010 - 01:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0” Disenfranchised on the whim of someone in London” somebody says...
That “Someone in London” so “casually” mentioned were, not less than several successive elected British administrations; representing 60 million Britons.
They where not an occupying alien force from another planet.
They where not the Germans nor the French.
It was the elected British Government that backed out of the agreement with Argentina prior to April 1982.
And they did so because of your intransigence.
So…….Yes, you squatters are to blame for the current situation……….
The one about the total number of casualties of the war reaching about three thousand souls; one for each of you Islanders?
Dec 21st, 2010 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0....That’s a fact.
Think, how many argie civilians were killed in the war?
3 Falkland islanders were killed, yes i know they were killed by a British shell,but they died because of a war started by argentina
Falkland 1982 population of 1,820 and the population of Argentina in 1982?
Quite a hefty % casulty rate dont you think think,can you imagine the whinging if that happend to the argies, your only regret think is that more falklanders were not killed
you are realy a nasty piece of doggie do
Really Think, is that what gets you wound up? That the Foreign Office in the early 80's unilaterally thought that they could sell the islanders up the river for better relations with Argentina and then found that the islanders actually had a voice? The FCO was wrong in what it did, and once they realised they backed off as fast as they could.
Dec 21st, 2010 - 02:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Blame the FCO. Don't blame the islanders. They are not squatters Think, they are owners and it's Argentina's intransigence over that one point which has brought about the 'current situation'.
Argentina's fault Think. Not the islanders.
But then Argentines like to blame anyone but themselves .... don't they Think?
Anything else you'd like to lay at our door Think?
Dec 21st, 2010 - 03:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Global warming perhaps?....The great depression maybe?.....World war 2?
Stupid prick.
Westi, They are on sale now! You'll need very soon.
Dec 21st, 2010 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.goplaces.co.uk/
“The one about Argentina having a big issue against Britain and their squatters?
Dec 21st, 2010 - 05:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0....We do. That should be, by now, clear for anybody. ”
This from a country whose very existence is based on the theft of someone else's land, and which went on to steal even more land after independence.
“The one about the total number of casualties of the war reaching about three thousand souls; one for each of you Islanders?
....That’s a fact. ”
The blame for every single one of them at Argentina's door
“That “Someone in London” so “casually” mentioned were, not less than several successive elected British administrations; representing 60 million Britons.
They where not an occupying alien force from another planet.
They where not the Germans nor the French.
It was the elected British Government that backed out of the agreement with Argentina prior to April 1982.”
There never was an agreement to back out of. Do you seriously think it would have been acceptable to those 60 million Britons for the UK and Argentine governments to impose an agreement on the Falkland Islanders without the consent of the Falkland Islanders?
“And they did so because of your intransigence.
So…….Yes, you squatters are to blame for the current situation……….”
If you do not give in to our demands....., etc, etc. Spoken like a true fascist or a mafioso.
It is the Falkland Islanders' country. Not Argentina's, not the UK's. They can be as intransigent over it as they want to be.
@118
Dec 21st, 2010 - 05:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah yeah...whatever Marcos....(Yawwwwwn)
@118
Dec 21st, 2010 - 08:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I hear the argie army is looking for Re-equipment
http://www.united-states-flag.com/sowh3x5nyfl.html
Summer offer!
Dec 21st, 2010 - 08:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Buy your one way ticket to farming land in UK (before the Argies kick you off) and win a free ride for you sheep.
Call Us Now 00800- I wanna Fly with my sheep for free.
before the Argies kick you off
Dec 21st, 2010 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Preperation nicotine Preperation
Call Us Now, Bullets R Us 593 7892
Acme flight training 592 3490
Jaunarena claimed that following the “very poor administration” of former minister Garré Argentine Armed Forces are in a “bad shape”, with “pilots grounded” since they have been unable to comply with the needed certified flying hours and the Army has sufficient ammunition for a “two hour combat”.
”Buy your one way ticket to farming land in UK (before the Argies kick you off) and win a free ride for you sheep.”
Dec 21st, 2010 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah, LOL. Can't kick us out 300 miles away, but ofcourse you will 8000 miles away.
122 NicoDin
Dec 21st, 2010 - 11:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”Buy your one way ticket to farming land in UK (before the Argies kick you off) and win a free ride for you sheep.”
Nico since they know that they've to leave and return Malvinas they are training their sheeps to fly them back to UK with them...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vkw2DdoskPY
@Marcos Alejandro
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 03:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ha ha
But seems they have improved with pigs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBZqpuVqJeM
: )
:-))))))))
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes the good old days in 1982, rounding the argie army up like chickens,
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 09:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0and sailing them back to Puerto Madryn , cos these chickens couldnt fly home
@stick up your junta
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 07:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sticky always with his bitterness about 1982. Come mate surely if you see an Argie with a FAL you run like a rabbit.
112 Think
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 08:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0'The one about many Islanders yearning for a new conflict to “clear the air”?
....Many of you are on record, saying that 1982 was the best that could happen for the Islands. Many of you are warmongering openly today in the Islands, in London and on the Internet.'
You're talking like an idiot Think. This is pretty reprehensible stuff even by your low standards. There is a long way from acknowledging that economic and social development happened here after 1982, to actually wanting another conflict. Where, where did you hear a Falkland Islander say they wanted an armed conflict to 'clear the air'? This is highly offensive and it's crap.
As for your constant and boring repetition of the word 'intransigent', I wish you would just stop. What else would you expect us to be? If your home and way of life was under threat, you would be too. It's not an insult. We are intransigent and proud of it.
That doesn't make the atrocities committed by your country against ours 'our fault'. Resisting oppression, coercion and violence is a moral obligation and we will carry on, thanks.
if you see an Argie with a FAL you run like a rabbit.
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I would have to give it back to him first
http://www.paradata.org.uk/media/14496?mediaSection=Photos&thumbPage=1&mediaItem=6791&showZoomify=yes
lol @ loser stick
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 09:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0get a life......oh yea, i forgot, you live in sh*tty snowed in cold baren rock UK
MEANWHILE, I just got back from glorious Uruguayan beaches :D
stick is such a loser and so butthurt mad, that he spends his entire life spazzing out on the internet.
The only way he could be so butthurt by Argentina, would be if an Argentine f*cked his wife maybe, lol.
(130) Monty69
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You ask:
Where, where did you hear a Falkland Islander say they wanted an armed conflict to 'clear the air'?
I can sincerely say:
At the Pub…………………………………………….
As for you Islanders being narrow-minded, obdurate, intractable, stubborn, bolshie, unbending, pig-headed and proud of it......
Well….. I don’t expect you to be otherwise…..We don’t expect you to be otherwise.
You are a bunch of loyal colonial squatters serving your Queen and Country the way you are expected.
But the current “troubles” between us arised 3-4 decades ago when that same Queen and Country made an agreement with Argentina and later backed off, largely because of you.
That’s why you will have, eventually, to yield or move………………………..
@ master bait
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I guess I hit a nerve then lol
“ ... when that same Queen and Country made an agreement with Argentina and later backed off ....
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 11:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Discussions but no agreement Think. Or can you indicate something in writing? Argentina is very good at producing allegations unsupported by evidence!
” ... That’s why you will have, eventually, to yield or move ....”
When hell freezes over Think !
Queen and Country made an agreement with Argentina and later backed off, largely because of you.
Dec 22nd, 2010 - 11:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Then Argentina goes and invades,Britain goes to war, Why? if we made an “agreement” surely job done.
Now having gone to war do you realy Think Think,that we will allow the islands to become Argentine
(135) Hoyt
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 12:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
When hell freezes over Think !
I say:
That was quick :-)
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/aussies-kiwis-tell-of-heathrow-hell/story-e6frfku0-1225974251998
lol, stick spending it's “life” online, spazzing out about argentina
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 12:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0wonder how he got so butthurt........
@93, @108 Red, “the British diplomatic victory of 1771 is well documented” You mean the British defeat... The British diplomatic defeat, you can see, in the debates heated in the House of Lords and Commons. Rochford to Masserano change documents says: Never come to war over the Falkland Island, whose preservation has no interest in the country and experience to show to the Spanish the truth of everything he said. “In other words there was no such agreement! Real evidence!”
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Read what Chatham said the House of Lords and Burke in the House of Commons. I give him aid. Burke said the clause that Spain reserved the sovereignty of the Falkland Island, was the most disastrous that could be imposed on Britain. That more evidence needed?
“In any event it is largely irrelevant” It is not irrelevant because Britain agreed to Spanish sovereignty“. Use logic. It almost comes to war for the British presence in the islands. It saved the British honor, and in change the british had to be withdrawn. By so there was no war!!!!. Apply a little logic laddie!!!!
If that is so, why did Spain feel the need to destroy the British marks and signs and yet felt the need to do exactly the same when they left?? Logical, simple, these symbols had not to be in a place that was not British. @ 107 Dab, ”If the Falklands were Spanish before 1816 then they were still Spanish in 1820, 1829, 1831, 1833 because Spain had not relinquished them, and Argentina had not inherited them, nor established any effective control over them.“ Jewett takes possession, Spain and Great Britain silence. Another test. Silas Duncan caused a destroy on the colony. The only country that complained it was Argentina. Not Spain, not Great Britain. This proves that the islands were under the sovereignty of Argentina and also had population.
”British title rests on being the first to establish effective control over the whole archipelago” Dab pardon, but this is not a title., too after 1833.
Marvin you are an idiot. The British won the dispute of 1771. Britain threatened war and the Spanish needed their French cousins to support them. The French declined and Spain was forced to back down. How you can possible see that as a diplomatic victory is a mystery to me. Try reading some basic sources.
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 01:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0Samuel Johnson's written work of 1771 identifies the British victory although he goes on to ask whether a war would have been worth it.
Your Foreign Minister M. Moreno objected to the British action of 1833 in a letter which was replied to by Viscount Palmerston in 1834. In that letter Palmerston sets out clearly the events of 1771 including the British King's counter declaration. The information he provides is extensive and clearly indicates that the British monarchy considered that they had won the dispute.
The Admiralty instructions to the captain receiving restitution in the Falklands clearly states that the Captain is to assert British sovereignty over ALL the islands if presented with any objection by the Spanish officer making restitution. Hardly a Spanish victory. If it had of been such, they'd have trumpeted it far and wide.
The British withdrew the garrison 4 years later, not 4 months as the Spanish rumour would have it. The garrison left behind the relevant marks and signs and British shipping continued to use the islands without intereference from the Spanish and without any attempt by the Spanish authorities to tax them!
Jewett was a joke. He laid a claim when there were already 2 and, having been ignored by the British ships at anchor in the Falkland Islands, buggered off and didn't mention the claim to anyone again. Only one Englishman reported the claim and he stated that he didn't believe Jewett was really serious but after an abandoned vessel.
Your logic is seriously flawed but you are a great example of the Argentine desire to twist history to make a case. You have none. If you had then Argentina would have taken it to the ICJ long ago.
“That’s why you will have, eventually, to yield or move………………………..”
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 02:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0What's the difference think? anyway, who the fuck are you to dictate to us what we must do? you missed out the third option which is to give you the finger and rely on your so called 'allies' in Unasur to give you the finger too, which they will continue to do.
PS: why don't you drop the TWIMC shit as well think, if you've got something to say to someone then say it, no need to prevaricate like that....you useless Argie cunt.
lol, somebody's mad ^
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 03:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0:D
you can kiss my arse too, yank turncoat.
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 08:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0A little more from Palmerston's 1834 letter to M.Moreno for you Marvin -
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 09:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ ... The claim of Great Britain to the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands having been unequivocally asserted and maintained, during those discussions with Spain, in 1770 and 1771, which nearly led to a war between the two countries, and Spain having deemed it proper to put an end to those discussions, by restoring to his Majesty the places from which British subjects had been expelled, the government of the United Provinces could not reasonably have anticipated that the British Government would permit any other state to exercise a right, as derived from Spain, which Great Britain had denied to Spain herself; and this consideration alone would fully justify his Majesty's Government in declining to enter into any further explanation upon a question which, upwards of half a century ago, was so notoriously and decisively adjusted with another government more immediately concerned....”
It appears to me Marvin, that your interpretation of the events of 1770/71 rest solely upon the supposition of a 'secret' agreement. Your problem is that in the absence of any proof that such an agreement existed, the presumption must be that it did not. Moreno was unable to sunstantiate the claim in his letter of June 1833, and Palmerston has gone to great lengths to indicate that no such agreement existed.
The whole tone of Palmerston's letter, in fact, is one of surprise that Argentina could raise any objection to the police action of 1833. Argentina was obviously just not considered as being a part of the equation!
177 years and 11 months later, you're still not!
Merry Christmas everyone
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 10:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0'But the current “troubles” between us arised 3-4 decades ago when that same Queen and Country made an agreement with Argentina and later backed off, largely because of you.'
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 10:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0You're still talking like a turnip, Think. The UK thought they could get rid of us without asking us, they realised they couldn't and shouldn't, so......you just had to invade? Is that it? You had no choice because we were so naughty and stubborn? Unbelievable. And patronising neocolonialist crap.
As for hearing it in a pub, I should tell you that 'A man in a pub told me' is a euphemism in this house for 'absolute bollocks that I'm making up' When were you last in the Vic anyway?
@Monty
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for hearing it in a pub, I should tell you that 'A man in a pub told me' is a euphemism in this house for 'absolute bollocks
lol
dont be too harsh, the Argies might have a case ,if they bought the deeds to the Falklands from a man in the pub
OH, I see loser stick is here..........as always, living online and butthurting mad, for life, like the loser he is. What a sad, pathetic life, but I guess that's what happens when you live on a cold, baren rock with a failing economy.
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 02:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(146) Monty69
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I allow myself to send you a link to a dissertation that summarizes many of my thoughts and opinions about the Malvinas Issue………
http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/available/etd-04082005-174013/unrestricted/LLWDissertation.pdf
I do so in the vain hope that you will realize that not all Argentines that oppose British occupation in the South Atlantic are complete turnips and in the hope that you will find some time to read it (it’s a bit long) and reflect over your own positions……..
As for “hearing it in a pub”, I am wholly aware about its common use as a euphemism…..
That’s one of the reasons I used it :-)
The other being that I actually heard it in a Pub :-)))
And, to answer your last question……. Long time no Vic…….
It is a little long winded, but then a thesis for a doctorate is likely to be. Her history section is superficial but accurate with the exception that she fails to identify that Vernett had British permission to found his settlement. I suspect Vernett was trying to play two sides against the middle!
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 03:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Got a tad bored after the history I confess ..... :-(
Haven't had the heart to read my thesis since I handed it over either mind :-)
Didn't get to the point where she supports Argentina though Think so I'll have to take your word on that!
Personally, I've reflected on my position .................. and the islands are British !
Bloody hell think, that 'summarises' your thoughts?? no wonder you talk such bollocks.
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0An archetypal Westie….
Dec 23rd, 2010 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Few thoughts….. Few words…… and every second of them, a vulgarity………
Well I'm a vulgar person Think and my thoughts are my own, I'm secure in what I believe and I have no need to desperately scrabble for justification for my position as you do think. Nowhere in that dissertation is anything that can provide any justification for your neo-nazi approach towards us, perhaps it's time you had a few thoughts of your own instead of bastardising other peoples academic musings.
Dec 24th, 2010 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0glad l had something to do with that little debate. senor Think, you are still wrong and you still know it. did l hit a raw nerve,senor?
Dec 24th, 2010 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0mustafa mastershakejb is just a complete idiot, deluded,loco and not even worth worrying about.
but to you all,good cheer & a happy new year
same to you Islode.
Dec 24th, 2010 - 01:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cheers.
:-)
♥MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL, MAY GOD BLESS THEIR FAMILIES, OF ALL HEART. ♥ I.
Dec 24th, 2010 - 04:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I see Thunk has proven what I criticised Argentines for (54)...Mr Thunk assumed I was writing from London, but in fact I was typed it while sitting in Stanley while overlooking the harbour, but of course Thunk with all of this Argentine wisdom has corrected me....because he knows better even though he has never visited the place he seems to have infinite knowledge on. Ahhhhhh, you have to love Argentines in all of the ignorance and self-importance.
Dec 25th, 2010 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(157) M_of_FI
Dec 25th, 2010 - 05:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lad…….
You just assume incorrectly that I have assumed incorrectly… :-)
My post No. 54: ”Good night to you too....... London”
Was in response to the last line at your post No. 44: ”Good Night Buenos Aries” (Sic)
My intention was to provoke a reaction and draw your attention to the fact that there are other relevant places in Argentina for you Settlers, than “Buenos Aires”.
President Nestor Kirchner, the Nemesis of British occupation in the South Atlantic, was half Chilean, born and raised in Rio Gallegos, Santa Cruz, just some miles west of you.
Most of the proactive Argentinean “New Thinkers” currently active on the Malvinas Issue are Patagonians.
I myself are Chubutense.
I deemed you long ago…………….., together with “Mr. Islander1”, “Ms. Monty69”, “Mr. WestisBest”, “Mr. Falklandlad” and, last but not least, “Mme. Isolde” to be factual Island settlers……
I apologise for my incorrect assumption Think. I was jumping to conclusions a bit there! Happy Christmas Think and Buenos Aries.
Dec 25th, 2010 - 09:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No worries.....................
Dec 25th, 2010 - 10:53 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!