MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands determined to exercise the right to self determination and to remain a BOT
The Falkland Islands are determined to exercise their right to self determination and to remain a British Overseas Territory, a message to the international community that tells of the success story of the Falklands in spite of the attempts by the government of Argentina to impede sectors of the economy, said Falklands’ elected legislator Roger Edwards addressing a UN seminar on eradication of colonialism. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesMaybe the C24 should take notice for a change,these are the people they are supposed to listen to are they not?
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 08:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0I will save the Argies the time and effort,just fill in the blanks
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 08:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0English P.....s
M....... SON Argentine
Another N... in the Falkland coffin
Dr. Francisco Carrion-Mena has already shown his bias ..... !
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 08:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ahh yes the moving of the goalposts,not to be unexpected I am sure they want to keep the farce going as long as possible all these junkets to sunny climes and paid for not working :)why would anyone want to jack that in?
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 08:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0The C24 is a committee with no power. If it gives some people a false sense of importance as to its influence then so be it. One even needs a sense of humour in the UN.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 08:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0Beef, you are quite correct. I was mulling this over during the school run.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 09:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0The C-24 is discredited by its make-up and the declared bias of so many of its member States. In an honourable world those States would disqualify themselves from discussions and voting over the Falklands, but this is not an honourable world.
But then, it hardly matters. More importantly the C-24 is irrelevant!
It's only remit is decolonisation. It has no power to recolonise or indeed to consider boundary/sovereignty disputes. At best it provides a forum for Argentina to spue out its claims to what it sees as the international community (although few are really watching).
Of course, that forum can also be used by the FIG to state it views on the whole thing and it is to be hoped that they take the opportunity. Indeed it would seem that the FIG are increasingly inclined to do so.
But that's it.
If the islanders wanted independence, then the UK would grant it and the C-24 could do little but support it from the sidelines. They could hardly attempt to block it, and would have no power to do so. It would look rather strange for the 'decolonisation' committee to actually oppose such.
As far as 'self-determination' is concerned the islanders already have that and the C-24 cannot take it away!
So ..... as far as the Falkland Islands are concerned, Gibraltar too, the C-24 is merely irrelevant.
@ Redhoyt #6. Summed up perfectly. Well done.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0“with full marks--, a full measure of self-government based on the decolonization criteria”
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 12:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If it has attained self-government, then it is no longer under the remit of the C24. It should be delisted.
The sovereignty dispute is irrelevant.
Mr Roger Edwards, I wonder if the right you´re invoking ….is the same right that British offered to the Argentina's population legally established on the islands in January 1833 with a governor, families, children, commerce, industry, etc.
Jun 03rd, 2011 - 11:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We´re talking of > 50 people that living in peace in that place when a British Officer took the islands by force on behalf of the British crown expelling their inhabitants in a gradual process, as evidenced by the current ethnic composition of the islands.
Please i´ll appreciate if could you answer the following questions to the Latin American brotherhood I'm sure they´ll interested in your point of view.
1) The Right to Self-determination is a fundamental human right which has no expiration date?
2),That Self determination basic fundamental right is not applicable In 1833 because the absence of the United Nations ?
3) Someone asked them (the population of Argentina living there) if they wanted to be Argentineans or to be British? we are talking about more than 50 souls, men, women, children, gauchos, officers, soldiers, etc. who lived peacefully on the islands for years.
4) If the answer is yes, there is evidence of that referendum in 1833 in which they decided to be British?
5) Finally ...... why you ask and invoke the right for current Falklanders (which are a population implanted by the colonial metropolis, UK) while your own government did not permit and prevented to use to the Argentineans inhabitants legally settled in the Falklands in 1833?
The same happened also to the inhabitants of the island of Diego Garcia (Chagos) which were more than 1800 people and were expelled from their homes in 1966? Someone ask them for that right ?? btw, UN exist in that time !!!
6) You really believe that the international community lacks the intellect to see the reallity and the unsustainability of your order?
Please could you answer these questions, thanks
“ ... Argentina's population legally established on the islands in January 1833 with a governor, families, children, commerce, industry, etc....”
Jun 04th, 2011 - 12:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0What a fantasy world you live inSoFa, Vernett's settlers were there with British permission. The illegal garrison was not and had only been there two months when it was told to leave!
Selef determination did not exist in 1833. Only an idiot would believe otherwise!
Two months the garrison had been there, not years. Vernett's people had British permission ... you need to understand that. Also Argentina did not exist in its present form back in 1833 and the garrison was from BA. The settlers were from all over and would not have considered themselves to be Argentine.
You lot come up with some cr*p. Get your history right, for a start you can try looking in the Argentine archives as they tell the story of the garrison, when it arrived and how many were there.
vernett may well have been playing both sides against the middle, but he was Britain's man. He got British permission and reported back to the British on what was happening.
An illegal garison there for 2 months is insufficient for Argentina to claim soveregnty, particularly when Britain and Spain had prior claims. An no, you didn't inherit the Spanish claim.
As for the international community, well 98% of them are too busy getting on with their lives to care and the other 2% are politicians who'll blow whichever way the wind seems fairer.
Roger isn't too keen on the internet, so don't expect an answer any time soon.
Jun 04th, 2011 - 12:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0The only people who took the Falkland Islands by force were the RG's in 1982.
Jun 04th, 2011 - 12:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0When are you going to return Tierra del Fuego to the English or the Falklands? Santa Cruz and Port Desire as well?
Or everything south of the Rio Negro to Chile?
Dipsticks!
LOL
SoFa is in need of an education. I suggest the following for starters -
Jun 04th, 2011 - 01:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.falklands.info/history/unresolutions.html
http://www.falklands.inf (Check out March 1833)
http://www.falklands.inf
http://www.falklands.inf
The exchange of letters between Lord Palmerston and M.Moreno in 1833/34 is also illuminating, particularly concerning the British diplomatic victory in 1771 and the nature of the garrison's withdrawl in 1774. He also mentions the British objections to BA declaring Governor's over land that was not theirs.
Enjoy :-)
#11 Thx Chey
Jun 04th, 2011 - 02:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sometimes things deserve their wait.....thats we learnt so well.
Our day will come, no doubts about it...
So - while you're waiting, you have something to read :-)
Jun 04th, 2011 - 02:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0# Mr RedHole.....you´re funny guy...no too much brillant but is ok :)
Jun 04th, 2011 - 02:29 am - Link - Report abuse 011 Monty69 Are you related or work with Roger?
Jun 04th, 2011 - 05:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0British history site
“Three years later, the British did formally leave the islands and they passed into the Spanish Empire for the next forty years. This arrangement was formally recognised by the British in the 1790 Nootka Sound Convention by which Britain formally rejected any colonial ambitions in 'South America and the islands adjacent'. It also reflected a weakening of British power in the Western Hemisphere coming shortly after the embarrassing loss of the 13 colonies partly thanks to French and Spanish intervention.
The Spanish claim on the islands would falter with the South American Wars for Independence at the start of the nineteenth century. The Spanish removed their formal representative and settlers from the island from 1810 and completed it by 1811. The islands were left to their own fate for the next decade as sealing and whaling ships might call in from time to time to take advantage of the harbour and fresh water. It was not to be until 1820 that the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata would send a frigate to the islands in order to assert their control as part of the legacy of post-colonial Spanish claims to authority there. Buenos Aires would appoint their first governor in 1823 ”
http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/falkland.htm
Still relying on that discredited site MoreCrap ... the one with the disclaimer telling everyone that the author has made mistakes. Relying on damaged goods ... yup, that about all you are good for!
Jun 04th, 2011 - 07:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0@17 Marcos,
Jun 04th, 2011 - 09:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0You only believe anything when it suits you.Once again you are wrong.
The Falklands do not belong to you and you know it. Stop wasting our time with your ridiculous claims. btw- when is your country going to return the land that it stole from Paraguay? Soon? lf you believe in justice you will be working towards giving back that land.
@14 so_far,
-your day will not come amigo, it has already passed.
So_far
Jun 04th, 2011 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Your points about the islanders Self Determination in 1833 have a few gaping holes in them. Firstly, there was no self determination in 1833, the term did not exist. There was no UN and laws aren't retroactive.
Secondly, I don't know how you could expect us to hold a refferendum on a law that would not come into existance for over 100 years, We don't see into the future. Nor can we go back in time.
Thirdly, It assumes that the islanders of 1833 would even want to be Argentinian. The Argentinians on the islands had just gone around murdering everyone, it's highly unlikely that they would even want them there.
Your points on Diego Garcia are valid, and there is not one single British person here who supports what happened to them, many of us are part of organisations that are trying to help them get there homes back. Unlike the majority of Argentinians who would support something similar happening to the islanders while also criticizing us for Diego Garcia.
17 Marcos:
It has been explained to you on many occasions and even on that very website that the information is wrong, the fact that you still continue to post it just shows you to be a liar and a complete idiot.
17. What Governor?
Jun 04th, 2011 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Another RG load of drivel!
20 Zethee
Jun 04th, 2011 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The information is correct, you can always write to the British History teacher and tell him that. Are you having difficulties to digest the truth? Too bad.
British history site
“Three years later, the British did formally leave the islands and they passed into the Spanish Empire for the next forty years. This arrangement was formally recognised by the British in the 1790 Nootka Sound Convention by which Britain formally rejected any colonial ambitions in 'South America and the islands adjacent'. It also reflected a weakening of British power in the Western Hemisphere coming shortly after the embarrassing loss of the 13 colonies partly thanks to French and Spanish intervention.
The Spanish claim on the islands would falter with the South American Wars for Independence at the start of the nineteenth century. The Spanish removed their formal representative and settlers from the island from 1810 and completed it by 1811. The islands were left to their own fate for the next decade as sealing and whaling ships might call in from time to time to take advantage of the harbour and fresh water. It was not to be until 1820 that the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata would send a frigate to the islands in order to assert their control as part of the legacy of post-colonial Spanish claims to authority there. Buenos Aires would appoint their first governor in 1823 ”
17 Marcos Alejandro
Jun 04th, 2011 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No, I'm not related to Roger and I don't work with him.
And I don't know why you're quoting that site to me. You might have grown up in a society that believes everything history teachers tell you, but I didn't. That site is quite interesting, but it's also pretty weak academically.
Fine, if you want to believe everything a retired secondary school teacher writes about his British Emipire obsession, but don't quote it as proof of anything, because it isn't.
“The information is correct, you can always write to the British History teacher and tell him that. Are you having difficulties to digest the truth? Too bad.”
Jun 04th, 2011 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why would i need to? Marcos. he states in the very website that the information is not correct. You KNOW this because we have told you. Yet you still continue to post it knowing the website is not a factual website.
“I would like to make it clear that this site is not a rigourous academic site. I am sure there are plenty of mistakes and oversights on my part; for which I apologise in advance”
Says it on the front page.
RedHoyt accept it someone shut you up and you invent lies that you cant prove, just read the spanish and french version about malvinas and you'll see that the argentinian history about malvians ists the same that the spanish and french version, so what, france spain and argentina are all liers and you who are the only one with that version you are the right one?? jsut an ignorant can think that
Jun 04th, 2011 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 022 Marcos Alejandro (#) Jun 04th, 2011 - 04:26 pm
Jun 04th, 2011 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 020 Zethee
The information is correct, you can always write to the British History teacher and tell him that. Are you having difficulties to digest the truth? Too bad.
Did you bother to read what the author of that site had to say about his site? course you didn't did you. So for your benefit only I have just pasted what he says at the very beginning so morons like you that did not bother to read and digest can never again say that the author is writing the truth. Read it and weep Moron.
First of all, I would like to make it clear that this site is not a rigourous academic site. I am sure there are plenty of mistakes and oversights on my part; for which I apologise in advance. My interest in the subject is purely that of a personal journey of discovery; to give myself a reason to research what I regard as a fascinating subject.
So you had better find another site that can back up your claims old son, so that we can demolish those as well.
Searinox: Are you reading the same thread? He's not said anything that's wrong and provided information to back up what he's said. The only Argentinian to provide any links has provided information that the author has even said it's not correct.
Jun 04th, 2011 - 09:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0SiEquinox - and your sources are?
Jun 04th, 2011 - 11:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh, you don't have any do you! You just believe what you are told. Like a good litle loyal Argie.
The facts are indeed out there. And if we were wrong, why hasn't Argentina taken its claim to the ICJ ?
25 Searinox
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0The objection to Mr 'British Empire' is that he doesn't quote any sources at all.
If you think the version contained in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_Falkland_Islanders, including eye witness accounts, is wrong, then say so.
But don't forget to tell us where we can read your 'evidence'. Just calling people 'ignorant' won't do.
I must add that it won't make any difference to me as I couldn't give a stuff about anything that happened in 1833. I don't believe it has any bearing on present day Falkland Islanders or our right to self determination.
And what about Argentina? No Argentine delegation in that Seminar? Interesting omission by Mercopress once again!!!
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Never rely on one source. So here you go -
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ ... When the floor opened for discussion, Argentina’s representative made clear that his Government was not contrary to cooperating with the United Kingdom on practical aspects deriving from the de facto situation prevailing in the South Atlantic, under due legal safeguards and with a view to creating the proper atmosphere to enable parties to resume negotiations.... He reiterated Argentina’s permanent willingness to settle the sovereignty dispute with the United Kingdom, taking into account the interests of the population of the islands and in accordance with United Nations pronouncements, in order to end the “anachronistic” situation and fulfil its obligation as a member of an international community that condemned colonialism...”
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/gacol3221.doc.htm
Also -
“ ... In carrying out that work, said the representativeof Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, echoing the call of several speakers, the Special Committee must be guided by the will of the people in the Territories. Its role was not as an observer, but rather as an advocate — even an activist — for the fulfilment of their wishes, ...”
and
“ ... The Committee also must confront the issue of States with disputed sovereignty. It was charged with addressing decolonization, and not determination of colonial ownership....”
Oh, and “ ... The representatives of Morocco and Argentina also spoke ...”
Too boring to be noted in the press release it seems.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/gacol3221.doc.htm
And that was the end of the 3 day holiday for the C-24. Now they are all jetting back to New York in, at the least, Business Class !
Irrelevant, and - impotent!
“ ... When the floor opened for discussion, Argentina’s representative made clear that his Government was not contrary to cooperating with the United Kingdom on practical aspects deriving from the de facto situation prevailing in the South Atlantic,''
Jun 05th, 2011 - 01:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Did he really say that? What a shameless liar. I'm surprised he could get his enormous nose out of the door afterwards. Mercopress should have reported this; it's a disgrace.
Unless that indicates a change of attitude ? Looking at the Argentine response it was much more muted than has been usual over the last couple of years at the C-24. Now Nestor has gone perhaps a little realism is creeping in?
Jun 05th, 2011 - 02:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Hmmm .... we'll have to see what is said at the New York sessions.
What a fantasy world you live inSoFa, Vernett's settlers were there with British permission. The illegal garrison was not and had only been there two months when it was told to leave!
Jun 05th, 2011 - 03:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Another brilliant liie by the MASTER PINOCHIO LAdy Bug red:
Let see,all the international comunity,Brasil,Chile,UN are all idiots.They should have listen to ladybugred:
Let see what the UN draft resolution say:
UN Decolonization comitee:
Argentina had always shown a desire to resolve the dispute in line with United Nations resolutions, he said, expressing hope that the United Kingdom would do the same, with a view to arriving at a peaceful solution of benefit to both parties.
By other terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would acknowledging the special and particular colonial situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), which differed from others in light of the sovereignty dispute. Presenting the text, Chile’s representative said it reflected the main elements of the doctrine formulated by the United Nations over the years with regard to the Falklands (Malvinas) question.
He expressed support for Argentina’s sovereignty rights, citing the position of Latin American and Caribbean countries that the issue must be resolved definitively.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Full support from SA
Latin America backs Argentina in Falkland Islands drilling dispute with Britain
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Summit backs Argentine claim to Falkland Islands
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
Latin America supports Argentina in Falklands
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gacol3212.doc.htm
You are such a LIAR lady bug.....
go to sleep.......LIAR
You are refering to a C-24 DRAFT Resolution from June last year .... didn't get passed the Fourth Committee, didn't get to the UN General Assembly. Was not voted upon ... Went into the files .... forever!
Jun 05th, 2011 - 05:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0As for your support ... check carefully the words they use. I wouldn't stake my life on them backing you when push comes to shove.
You are such an idiot, SiEster ....
go to sleep ....IDIOTA
“Another brilliant liie by the MASTER PINOCHIO LAdy Bug re”
Jun 05th, 2011 - 09:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's been proven countless times that Vernett asked for British permission on several occasions.
When faced with a truth that they don't like, they resort to personal insults! Whats all this “lady red bug” nonsense? ls that the best that they can do? lt must be frustrating for the dear little things, knowing that they'll never get what they wrongfully regard as“theirs”!
Jun 05th, 2011 - 10:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0The dispute exists because of the RG's love of lies.
Jun 05th, 2011 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If they gave up with all their crap they continue to believe there would be no dispute.
There are 3 Countries in this so called dispute.
Do the Falklanders have a problem with their current status? No.
Does Britain? No.
Do the RG's? Yes.
So bog off RG's.
@31 and the like, the UN itself states again that there is a dispute on sovereignty, despite what Edwards said! That's something very telling! And we still don't know what Argentina “spoke” as there's just this short mention. Interesting, let's wait to see what they said and see if Mercopress' biased approach interferes again!
Jun 05th, 2011 - 01:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“, the UN itself states again that there is a dispute on sovereignty, despite what Edwards said! That's something very telling! ”
Jun 05th, 2011 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How is that telling? Everyone knows there is a dispute.
39 Alejomartinez
Jun 05th, 2011 - 04:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Roger didn't say there isn't a sovereignty dispute.
Exactly, he didn't say that to seek to justify his position but the UN position prevails! There IS a sovereignty dispute due to British illegal occupation of Argentina's island. The UN position has once again prevailed regardless of what this UK born guy sought to justify!
Jun 05th, 2011 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 40: the UK denies the existence of a sovereignty dispute, that's why it's very significant that the UN insists on its traditional position: there is a BILATERAL sovereignty dispute!!! Good for Argentina once again!
“the UK denies the existence of a sovereignty dispute”
Jun 05th, 2011 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No, we don't.
Dear god man you're stupid.
9 so_far
Jun 05th, 2011 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lol nice one :) the laws and action of 180 years ago are suddenly applicable today so for the sake of 30 Argentine colonists barely around for 3 years 180 years ago we should overturn the enshrined human rights of 3,500 :)
Excuse me a second, I'm just going to gather a possy and get my nigger gun....
42 Alejomartinez
Jun 05th, 2011 - 08:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Everyone agrees there is a sovereignty dispute. I agree that there is, the British government agrees, and despite your wittering on about Roger, I fail to see where he denied there was a dispute.
Why, why would you say otherwise, and where is your evidence for this 'denial'? I'm not going to hold my breath, because there probably isn't any.
''Good for Argentina once again!''
Yes indeed, especially the part where your man says his ''Government was not contrary to cooperating with the United Kingdom on practical aspects deriving from the de facto situation prevailing...''.
Either his government is about to radically rethink its position, or this is a barefaced lie intended to deceive the Committee. Which do you think is true?
Not very sure that I agree. The British Government's official position seems quite plain and clear from the oft repeated - “ We have no doubt about our sovereignty ...”.
Jun 06th, 2011 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0This appears to indicate that the UK does not recognise the basis of any dispute with Argentina over the Falkland Islands. And in effect takes the position that there IS NO dispute.
This is obvious in the refusal to engage in any bilateral discussions with Argentina over the islands. If there's no dispute then there is no need for discussions! Previous discussions regarding fishing etc were fine because they didn't raise any ownership issues.
The last time there seems to have been an implicit acknowledgement of the dispute was when the 'sovereignty umberella' was put in place which would have been what? 15, 20 years ago.
Since then any suggesion that the UK and Argentina should sit down and discuss the 'problem'has been summarily dismissed either with the regular phrase or by reference to the islander's wishes.
Food for thought!
(46)
Jun 06th, 2011 - 01:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0Good food!
Deserves to be washed down with a Timothy Taylor........
Cheers.
Much better that Think focuses his great talent on food, he's done so well convincing one and all that the fictional story his Government trots out is really the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and swears on his mothers life, so help him, God. Although as God is also an unproven character from another fictional work, I'm a tad unsure of the help forthcoming.
Jun 06th, 2011 - 02:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah right (yawns), maybe he fools one or two people here, I can 'think' of a couple of Argentine expats, but everyone else can see its a load of shite.
In short, Think AKA Oxymoron, and has a distinct lack of credibility; the cracks in the Argentine Big Lie, in which he invests his pathetic free time to promote, will be (lets get all biblical), opened and cast asunder, destroying both his very will to live, along with any claim the Peronists 'think' they have of Sovereignty to the Falkland Islands and SGSSI.
He may just as well continue to quote the SP of shares in Oil Exploration Companies operating within the FIG EEZ, at least the information is more reliable than figures quoted by his own Government on the stability and viability of the Argentine economy, as no-one has fear of prosecution in telling the bloody truth. He might be very lucky, and there will be no oil...damn, they discovered some, doh!
There's a little good in everyone apparently ..... however in Think's case I'm not so sure. Tendency to resort to torture !
Jun 06th, 2011 - 03:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0I would like to add to my musings, that a refusal to recognise any claim by Argentina could be (arguably) tracked back to the attitude adopted by Viscount Palmerston in his response the Argentina's complaints over 1833, as can be seen in his letter of 1834. In that, his surprise that Argentina considered that it was even a player is obvious. Palmerston's view is that any dispute lay between the British and Spanish only. A contemprary proof that the concept of Uit Possidetis Juris was not accepted at that time.
(49)
Jun 06th, 2011 - 04:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0Say when............
http://civitasnova.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/birra3.jpg
@50 Think,
Jun 06th, 2011 - 08:42 am - Link - Report abuse 01) Anchor beer(lndonesia)
2) Beerlao (Laos)
3) South Pacific Lager(PNG)
4) Fosters Lager (Australia)
5) Swan Lager (Australia)
6) Kirin (Japan)
Sorry Isolde, I'm with Think on this one ... Ale, hmmm !
Jun 06th, 2011 - 09:32 am - Link - Report abuse 046 Redhoyt
Jun 06th, 2011 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0I cans ee where you're coming from, but I don't think denying there is a legitimate basis for a dispute is the same thing as denying a dispute exists.
Stupid? The UK states there's nothing to negotiate as there is not such a dispute. They even claim now that the 1833 invasion didn't practically took place! Besides, it was not me who first said that this UK guy (Edwards) didn't mention the dispute. I'm not stupid, sorry, but it seems you don't quite understand your own position. It's great news that you (UK) finally admits there is a sovereignty dispute! As Argentina and the UN have always said btw. LOL
Jun 06th, 2011 - 11:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Monty .. I've been going through some past C-24 deliberations. How sad is that! But what leaps out at me is that, for the last few yaers at least, the UK government has not contributed to C-24 discussions, only making itself available to the Fourth Committee that rounds up everything and passes (or not) draft resolutions to the GA. It seems to me that the UK is effectively 'blanking' the whole thing. It doesn't address the Falklands situation other than to repeat the Stonewall phrase. It says that the C-24 should not continue and votes against the Fourth Committee's primary resolutions. Little, if any, mention of Argentina. No acknowledgement of a dispute ... nothing!
Jun 06th, 2011 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's an interesting approach and the UK uses it across the board, not just for the Falklands.
The UK Government does not attend the C-24 ... and yes I know the Argies will say they do, but we know that the FIG and the UK Government are two different things. Same with Gibraltar .. the UK does not attend C-24 discussions over Gib even the Gib party in power does not attend, only the Official Opposition goes. Caruna makes a speech to the Fourth Committee but that's all.
I still have some research to do, but it looks like the UK is just blanking Argentina! No recognition of any dispute!
Alejo .... where ? There was no 1833 invasion ... because we'd owned the joint since 1765!
“The UK states there's nothing to negotiate as there is not such a dispute”
Jun 06th, 2011 - 03:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Go read the UK governments position agaiun. Our government has NEVER(Prove it, please) said that there is no dispute between the UK and Argentina over the islands.
The UK's position is that the islanders intrests are paramount and we have no doubt about our position, therefore there is nothing to discuss.
Another thing, how on earth could our government claim there is no dispute over the islands when we've only 30 years ago had a war over said islands? Do you even know what you're saying?
(52)
Jun 06th, 2011 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0One of the charms of ”Colonial” women is their straightforward taste on ethylic beverages….
Any kind of sweet Shandygaff, bottled lager or inexpensive polish Vodka will do for them :-)
I think- as an alleged “Colonial Power” ,UK is actually barred from speaking at the infamous C24. Maybe wrong but an sure I heard this as so once. The only reason FIG attend - we are entitled to as the territiory under discussion - is to negate the lies and bullshit spouted out by the other side all the time - if one hears only bullshit long enough - you naturally believe it!
Jun 06th, 2011 - 08:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think, actually many ladies here are getting quite classy about their beverages these days - I believe the Islands are in the top 10 or something for wine consumption per head - and its not vino comun either!
Islander, no the UK no longer bothers as it considers the C24 a waste of time, since it ignores the very people it is supposed to represent. It comments at the 4th committee.
Jun 06th, 2011 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The FIG and GoG chose to represent themselves.
What gets me is why the UN C24 let Argentina attend meetings and make comments, they have absolutely no reason to attend at all, unless the UN C24 wishes to assist in the annexation of a country against the wishes of the people that live there.
Jun 06th, 2011 - 11:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The mere presence of Argentina on the UN C24 Committee indicates corruption, but allowing them to comment on a territory that they openly covert and have ignored UNSC Resolution 502 after invading the territory in 1982 IS absolute corruption of the UN C24, its reason to exist is over.
The UN C24 is so far from its purpose as to be irrelevant to the World as it exists today, since it can no longer function, it cannot recognise when a territory has a full measure of self governance because it has an outdated mandate for recognising when it has happened.
It doesn't even visit the Falkland Islands to talk with the people who live there, and find out what the people want, so how can it ever make a decision?
The UN C24 is a joke, just like Peronism is a joke.
I know what you are saying Zethee, but I'm struggling to find an explicit reference to a dispute from the British Government. Just a bland statement and a brickwall.
Jun 06th, 2011 - 11:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Uk is not alone in either voting against, or abstaining, over the Fourth Committee's draft Resolutions. The US is there too. In principle the UK is opposed to the C-24's continuation and last year demanded that ALL the remaining territories belonging to the UK should be removed from the C-24 list.
Brickwalls !
Justin, thanks for resoving that one, was not that sure. No point UK going there either as they would be listened to even less than FIG is! Its a one sided biased closed shop that ignores reality in favour of fantasy. UK has difficulties in presenting our case anywhere internationally because of peoples twisted attitudes to the past - thats why FIG is attempting to get onto the Int. scene more to put our own case into the airwaves a bit where it can be usefull.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 12:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just two small details: 1) The UK DOES attend the C24 sessions including the past seminars; first mistake of many of you. Not only the UK itself but also its envoy from the islands (UK born, sure). 2) The C24 is not important? Why all this mess then? Even the Seminar is held under the auspices of the C24 you claim to ignore (but actually you don't). Come to terms with it!
Jun 07th, 2011 - 02:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0#63 - Having to rely on the C-24 Press Releases is limiting. Anyone know the web site/link for the full minutes ?
Jun 07th, 2011 - 03:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0The C-24 is not important because it doesn't achieve anything. Those old colonied that were going to make it to independence, were going to make it with or without the C-24. The others either don't want it or are not yet ready for independence. This renders the C-24 irrelevant. Its membership consisting of so many biased nations renders the C-24 discredited.
The only thing that the C-24 achieves is that it provides a forum for some people to let off steam. Its chances of leading any more old colonied to independence are low. Its power to give the Falkland Islands to Argentina is nil. It has no such power. The only reason that Argentina is there is to stop the islands going for independence ! Not that they seem to want it.
The C-24 has been around for decades, and when was the last time it actually achieved anything ?
Fourth Committee 11.10.10
“ ... The representative of the United Kingdom, explaining his delegation’s opposition to both those texts, said the proposals for the Third International Decade and the Fiftieth anniversary of the Decolonization Declaration were “unacceptable”, as the texts failed to recognize the progress that had been made in the relationship between the United Kingdom and its territories. With regard to the text relating to the Third International decade, his delegation strongly considered the “Special Committee of 24” to be outdated, and believed that the United Nations should devote its resources to more urgent issues............. In response to remarks made by Ecuador and Argentina the representative of the United Kingdom said his delegation had no doubt about its sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. He attached great importance to the principle of self-determination, saying that those principles underpinned his country’s position on the Falkland Islands...”
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gaspd455.doc.htm
Funny how in all the delegates including Ecuador spoke in favor of Self-determination as an all encompassing principle to determine the future of all countries still on the list....Argentina seemed to be the only country who said it was applicable everywhere else, just not in the case of territory it wants :)
Jun 07th, 2011 - 07:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0And they cite 'territorial integrity' which they've never had!
Jun 07th, 2011 - 08:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0Who cares what the C-24 says. lts an old boys club. We have what we want and are happy with that.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 08:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0Think, we drink what we like, not to please self-appointed alcohol snobs.
Try moscato, you will probably love it! l found that a light lager was just great for the tropics. Don't drink much beer now. l drink Russian vodka also, just happened to have some Polish that a friend gave me.
It's me he's winding up Isolde. He knows that I live in Thailand, and he knows that I love real Ale. He also knows that I can't get it here.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 08:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0And I'm sorry but lager is just ..... lager :-)
Have you tried Philippine San Miguel stout or Laotian Beerlao stout?
Jun 07th, 2011 - 09:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0l haven't tried them myself but l have seen them. Beerlao comes in a 660ml bottle.
l have however had Anchor stout in lndonesia. lt has to be very cold. lt has a lot more body than the lagers of course. You might like it & l'm sure you could get it in Thailand.
@64: that's cherry picking. Why do you quote the odd man out, the exception to the rule? Go thru the whole text and you'll realised the UK is the only one with such an “outdated” (recalcitrant?) position. Btw, give us the number of votes adopting the resolutions!
Jun 07th, 2011 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse 063-Alejo - for the factual correct record - Elected Members of the Islands Government attend the C24 in their own 100% legal right. They are not representing the UK at all. That is a simple fact - and is recognized by the UN- that is why they are there.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 11:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Who gives a damn where their mothers happen to have been when they were born? We have a small and immigration expanding population - thus it is highly likley that not all people in all jobs may have been born here - what actually matters is that they have been ELECTED by the voters here! get used to reality for once in your life!
#70 - the majority of countries voted for the motions, although there was no motion concerning the Falkland islands. Voting against or abstaining were, generally, three members of the Security Council, all of which carry a veto of course - ie the United Kingdom, The USA and France.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So what happened to the Falkland islands motion ?? Died in the cutting room ?? :-)
(67) Cher lsolde
Jun 07th, 2011 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say:
“Think, we drink what we like, not to please self-appointed alcohol snobs.”
I say:
That's my girl! (pitty you are a British squatter). A direct punch to the liver.........
But; I hardly touch the stuff anymore...... Had my time though.
Nowadays I mostly use my archaic snobbish knowledge about spirituous beverages to wind young ladies up.
Anyhow……Good choice about Russian vodka……. It’s the only one worth drinking.
Comment removed by the editor.
Jun 07th, 2011 - 10:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“ ..Comment removed by the editor.... ”
Jun 08th, 2011 - 01:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Phunt, that's the most intelligent statement you've made so far :-)
zzzzzzzzzzzzz...
Jun 09th, 2011 - 02:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0Malvinas de “British Overseas Territory” zzzzzzz
Yes Mercopress... we know these islanders can't govern a tool shed..
Tell us something we don't know.
Boring.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100091346/another-slap-in-the-face-for-britain-the-obama-administration-sides-with-argentina-and-venezuela-in-oas-declaration-on-the-falklands/
Get with the program Mercopress
But who cares .... we don't!
Jun 09th, 2011 - 04:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nothing at the OAS meeting to cause the British any discomfort. No surprises. Nothing at all :-)
UK be smart now is good time to sitdowm to negotiate.
Jun 09th, 2011 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is time for go home with few puonds, while you can. In the future the conditions will not be favorable at all.
Dont see what international comunnity support and which side big org choose ( UN, C24 descolonization. Commitee, OAS, UNASUR, etc.).
Stot this madness squatter since 1833.
Are you guys blind ??? White coats anyone ??
UK be smart now is good time to sitdowm to negotiate
Jun 09th, 2011 - 12:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you for real?
SoFa ... sod off, we have no need to negotiate .. the OAS is irrelevant !
Jun 09th, 2011 - 02:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0C24 (Decolonization committee) irrelevant
Jun 09th, 2011 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0UN irrelevant
UNASUR irrelevant
OAS irrelevant
LatAm irrelevant
Is time to weak up lads...stop indoctrination with gettingright document which is a joke and nobody takes it seriously, except you like a Holly Bible.
Please start to read from another unbiased sources.....weak up and open your eyes people !!! ....could be ALL the world wrong ?? Please
Freud would make a party with you guys in Malvinas !!
UN C24 is inapplicable, it's only mandate is to assist the people within the Countries on the list it maintains to exercise Self Determination.
Jun 09th, 2011 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0UNGA Resolutions are a recommendation, there is no requirement for any Country to follow them.
UNASUR is modelled on the European Union, it has no mandate to decide matters relating to Sovereignty within the region.
OAS is supposed to defend human rights, therefore its primary goal in the situation is to protect the Human Rights of the Falklanders; specifically their right to Self Determination.
The opinion of LatAm is merely that, an opinion, it carries no weight, and is not going to be the catalyst to remove the Human Rights of the population of the Falkland Islands, who will determine their own future as they see fit.
Its time to wake up RGs, if you really want to gain Sovereignty of the Falkland Islands you need to submit your claim to the International Court of Justice, the body of the UN that can make a decision on your claims.
If you have verifiable original evidence that supports your claim, the place to submit it is the ICJ, since none of the bodies you have quoted are able to do this for you, and are therefore irrelevant to your claim.
So what prevents you from submitting your 'claim' to the ICJ?
Freud would piss his pants in laughter on reading your argument.
the faklanfd island company and their pirats have all the right of self determination in their cvountry of origen UK we all feel sorry that uk doesn't give the slaves any rights to self determination in uk we all feel really really sad you can't ditch your queen and the dictated governor, but in the civilized world pirats, thieves and murderers need to be executed if we want to build a civilized world, siding with pirats thieves and child murderers as uk is will not bring us a better future. mercopress can remove my comment but living in denial will not change the truth.
Jun 09th, 2011 - 06:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0but in the civilized world pirats, thieves and murderers need to be executed if we want to build a civilized world
Jun 09th, 2011 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your not right in the head are you?
if by civilised you mean this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/3673470/Argentinas-dirty-war-the-museum-of-horrors.html
PHunt - I don't mind you living in denial. Reality is obviously a problem for you!
Jun 10th, 2011 - 12:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0Aw come on, lets leave the Pork Hunt alone to stew in his own effluent, kicking kittens like him is just harsh.
Jun 10th, 2011 - 12:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0@Pirat-Hunter,
Jun 10th, 2011 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0You, my little friend, are an imbecile. You might not be able to help yourself, but please help us by going away. Can you take so_far with you and go so far away that we cannot hear or see either of you?
Thank you.
my friends British are scum of the world and should be liquidated! Argenine will crush British colonials in Malvinas and kill all! Our military will not be welcome back in Argentine until they kill ALL British colonial scum!
Jun 12th, 2011 - 04:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We must hang the traitors of 82, we need military with strength to crush liberal red scum and liquidate British from our country! Death to colonial, death to British, spit on their graves. They are sub human race!
@88Filippo,
Jun 12th, 2011 - 07:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your standard of spelling does not match your grammar.
l think that maybe Cher Think is correct & you are not Argentine.
Maybe a troll.
Please do not muddy the waters, we have quite enough idiots on here.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!