MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Polynesia in decolonization list; Pacific islands proposal supported by 193 votes in UN General Assembly
The UN General Assembly on Friday put French Polynesia on the global body's decolonization list at a meeting boycotted by France. The resolution, passed by consensus in the 193 member assembly, was called for by the Solomon Islands and other Pacific states that back the Pacific territory's pro-independence parties. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThe wording of this resolution is a complete nonsense, equating self determination with only one option; independence. What if the population decided to stay as they are? Would that not still be self- determination?
May 20th, 2013 - 03:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0I'm not sure what this has to do with us. We have said quite clearly that we don't think we're ready for independence yet. And so we don't need to be de-colonised, thanks.
So nothing has really changed for French Polynesia.
May 20th, 2013 - 04:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0To make a long story short......:
May 20th, 2013 - 06:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0The English government ”disassociates itself ” at the UN from the “Inalienable Rights of the Native Peoples of French Polynesia,... Palestine… and Diego Garcia to self-determination and independence”.
At the same time....:
The English government associate itself to the ”Imaginary Rights of the Implanted Colonial Individuals on the Malvinas Isles to self-determine their dependence to England.
Hypocrisy anyone?
PS:
(1) Monty96
You are not sure what this has to do with you?
Really???
Chuckle chuckle©
@3 Think
May 20th, 2013 - 06:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Think the people have just voted against the pro-independence party !!!
This is the attitude of those that voted for the addition to the colonialism list !!!.
Solomon Islands UN ambassador Collin Beck - “The result of elections in French Polynesia “must never be equated with a referendum” on self-determination”
Hypocrisy anyone? - Chuckle chuckle
To make a long story even shorter......:
May 20th, 2013 - 06:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0One hundred and ninety-three (193) States on Earth ”associate themselves, in a UN Consensus, to the “Inalienable Rights of the Native People of French Polynesia to self-determination and independence”.
Four (4) Colonial States..: France, Britain, the United States and the Netherlands (+ Germany) ”disassociate themselves from the “Inalienable Rights of the Native People of French Polynesia to self-determination and independence”.
The world has spoken…..
Hypocrite colonials go home….
Think
May 20th, 2013 - 06:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0The committee has 193 members in total, there is no information to say how many of theses members associated themselves with this.
When is Argentina going to be put on the UN decolonisation list?
May 20th, 2013 - 06:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0Let's have Independence for the oppressed native South Americans: let's rid the world of the Spanish/Italian Argentine murderers
How dare the French Polynesians or Falkland Islanders say what they want. Imperialism & colonialism has left them befuddled - the poor saps. Fortunately the UN knows best and will rescue them from the error of their freely-expressed wills. Now get back to whatever it is that you do while big countries move your tiny counter round our big board.
May 20th, 2013 - 06:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0What a great list for the committee meeting in Venezuela in May.
May 20th, 2013 - 07:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0Mr. Morejón (Venezuela) Chair for the current session.
Rodolfo Reyes Rodríguez (Cuba) - Vice-Chair.
Shekou M. Touray (Sierra Leone) - Vice-Chairs.
Bashar Ja’afari (Syria) as Rapporteur.
What should be more fun Argentina has been invited as a special observer.
So the UN says French Polynesia has the right to self determination. We all agree.
May 20th, 2013 - 07:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Britian, France, the US, Netherlands and Germany believe they just exercised that right in their recent elections and the C24 is a waste of time.
Fact remains, French Polynesia has the right to self determination enshrined AGAIN by the UN. So do the Falklands.
Nowhere has anybody suggested that French Polynesia should be annexed to an agreesive, corrupt and belligerent neighbour I notice?
Think hasn't got a clue what self-determination means. Think thinks that the NSGTs must be forced out of the hands of their metropolitan states regardless of the wishes of the peoples of those territories.
May 20th, 2013 - 07:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0'Four (4) Colonial States..: France, Britain, the United States and the Netherlands (+ Germany) ”disassociate themselves from the “Inalienable Rights of the Native People of French Polynesia to self-determination and independence”.'
Liar
This is what the French said
“The right to self-determination cannot be exercised against the will of the concerned populations,” said the French mission to the UN in the letter.
What others said:
The Netherlands, United States and Germany said that the General Assembly should have taken account of the election in French Polynesia which kicked the independence party out of power.
What French Polynesia's assembly said:
The territory's assembly passed a resolution on Wednesday calling for the UN vote to be postponed.
'The world has spoken…..
Hypocrite colonials go home….'
The world does not matter. The peoples of the NSGTs do.
@3 Yep. Yours. French Polynesia - the people have spoken. That's what an election is about. You must have heard of elections. Events where the people decide on who will govern them, and how. Unlike argieland, where the people get to choose whether to vote for CFK or starve. Or get beaten up by your Camporista mates. Palestine - not a country. Never has been. Palestine is simply a territory a bunch of arabs are trying to steal. But you'd support that. Given your association with places like Iran. Diego Garcia - no native people. Never have been. But it serves the interests of various criminals to say there were. Whoops, three examples of you supporting criminal behaviour!
May 20th, 2013 - 08:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0@5 Another one of those NON-BINDING UN resolutions, eh? Strange thing. Argieland breaks legal agreements, reneges on treaties, ignores a BINDING Security Council resolution, defrauds people around the world and you want to mention “hypocrisy”.
Dab
May 20th, 2013 - 08:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Think hasn't got a clue” we could leave it at that...LOL.
The people of French Polynesia have the right to self-determination, they've just had elections. There are those in French Polynesia who want independence, and their rights to pursue it should be supported by all.
However self determination doesn't necessarily mean independence if the people of the territory don't want it. It can mean whatever the population wants it to.
Perhaps the UN would support a referendum in French Polynesia to see whether they wish to remain a FOT? Theyd need to beat 99.7% though!!!!
(11) dab14763
May 20th, 2013 - 08:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say....:
“Think hasn't got a clue what self-determination means.”
I say....:
I “Think” I have a clear idea about what self-determination means.
As I have a clear idea about what constitutes a PEOPLE.
And a bunch of Individual English Crown Subjects squatting on some Islands 15,000 km from London, England; implanted and mantained in place by an English military invasion and ocupation DO NOT, by any means, constitute a PEOPLE.
Think
May 20th, 2013 - 08:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0You have no idea what constitutes a PEOPLE.
You wish for the PEOPLE of Diego Garcia to be considered a PEOPLE, you even call them the NATIVE population.
The maximum amount of time any families of the PEOPLE of Diego Garcia spent on the islands was 150 years, most considerably less, many just a matter of months, coming and going for the work.
The PEOPLE of Diego Garcia which you so vociferously support were implanted by the French/British to work, and we're in no way “Native” to the islands.
However, I agree with you, that one who stayed for generations, and didn't voluntarily accept relocation shouldnt have been forcibly removed and should either have been allowed to stay, or offered a larger relocation package.
Quite what staying would have done for them with no industry and drinking water is questionable..but it should have been their right to choose.
But I am glad you recognise a 2000 strong population, with 200 years of in habitation as a NATIVE PEOPLE.
poor Think...clueless fuckwit.
Can the UN please explain what would happen to tiny Tokelau if it were forced to disassociate itself from New Zealand? A population of less than 1500 earning less than half a million US dollars per year while spending nearly $US3 million. Who puts the 2.5 million deficit into the pot? New Zealand!! Where do many Tokelauans go to earn money which they send home to support their families? New Zealand!! They have already rejected self-determination - twice - in favour of the “free association” they have now so why not just leave the poor sods alone FFS!!
May 20th, 2013 - 08:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0The only squatters are the Hispanic-Italians, or is it Italo-Spaniards? and other Europeans, on land stolen by Argentina from the native Patagonians, Pampeans, and Tierra Fueguians.
May 20th, 2013 - 08:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0And there was no military invasion in 1833. The only people the UK government ever sent to the Falklands were 30 Chelsea pensioners and their families to form the local defence force in the 1850s.
Any UK military presence on the Falklands is entirely Argentina's fault.
There was no UK military presence on the Falklands for over a century until the 1960s when Argentines hijacked a plane and landed it there.
Plus of course the current base as a consequence of Argentina's attempt to steal what does not belong to them.
And the Falklands ceased to be grant maintained in the 1880s. Since then they have received no financial help from the UK except for a period after the war.
(17) dab14763
May 20th, 2013 - 09:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say....:
“Any UK military presence on the Falklands is entirely Argentina's fault.”
I say.......... Typical English haughtiness....:
”Any UK military presence in the Zulu Kingdom (including the Anglo-Zulu War) was entirely the Zulu Kingdom's fault.“
”Any UK military presence in China (including the Opium Wars) was entirely China's fault.“
”Any UK military presence on the Falklands is entirely Argentina's fault.”
No amount of English haughtiness can change the fact that:
It's the English that are the invaders.....
It's the English that are the baddies....
Get used to it
LOL...
May 20th, 2013 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0Any Argentine presence in Patagonia (including the genocide) is the Amerindians fault..
#18
May 20th, 2013 - 10:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, we are used to the fact that you talk a lot of senseless drivel.
Get used to the realities of life - you “country” -adopted or supported - can do nothing but whine, lie and lie again
Any UK military presence in the Zulu Kingdom (including the Anglo-Zulu War) was entirely the Zulu Kingdom's fault.“
Partly - according to some Zulu historians I talked with at Isandlwana and Rorke's drift.
”Any UK military presence in China (including the Opium Wars) was entirely China's fault.“ Incorrect.
The UK must bear responsibility for this.
”Any UK military presence on the Falklands is entirely Argentina's fault.”
100% CORRECT. I am glad that you have seen sense in this matter
No amount of Argentinian haughtiness can change the fact that:
It's the Argentinians that are the invaders.....
It's the Argentinians that are the baddies....
Get used to it
Think,
May 20th, 2013 - 10:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0What business is it of yours if the people of Polynesia have voted to stay French?
Would you like to FORCE them to become independent just to satisfy your twisted logic?
lts none of your business & of course, has got SFA to do with Argentina.
No doubt you'd like to set a precedent that can then be applied to the Falkland lsles.
lt won't wash, comrade, so butt out.
Goodness gracious, 193 votes in favour of self-determination, and none against.
May 20th, 2013 - 10:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0Last time round, Argentina managed to get about 40 votes in favour of limiting the principle of self-determination. Where have these votes gone? Has Argentina lost its support, or are the nutters, dictatorships, usurpers and fellow implanted populations of S. America who voted with Argentina last time going to be looking pretty silly at the next C24?
Think, you really are clutching at straws on this one. You hypocrisy is outrageous. You are becoming more like Marcos and Jose everyday. Lots of ranting and raving, and making grand sweeping statements about the 'English'. Stick to your nails.
May 20th, 2013 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0You say....: I “Think” I have a clear idea about what self-determination means. As I have a clear idea about what constitutes a PEOPLE.
May 20th, 2013 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0And a bunch of Individual English Crown Subjects squatting on some Islands 15,000 km from London, England; implanted and mantained in place by an English military invasion and ocupation DO NOT, by any means, constitute a PEOPLE.
I say:
You have no idea about the definition of English British UK citizens or UK Overseas Territories. PEOPLE is of no interest to us, it has no relevance to the UK. We only know that your 'country' (actually a colonised territory inhabited by Dagos, Itis and Krauts ) demonstrates on an almost daily basis that it is inhabited and run by corrupt stupid morons and cannot be trusted on absolutely anything. It is gradually morphing (another British innovation) into a corrupt dictatorship where non elected politicians line their pockets at the expense of the poor. Criminality is almost a necessity to survive. The poor live in terrible conditions, worse than in other SA nations without hope.
How your leaders can ever imagine that this mess is attractive to the people of the prosperous crime free Falkland Islands god only knows? The Pope got it right, he emigrated for life, glad to be out of a hopeless shitty country.
You say:
May 20th, 2013 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I “Think” I have a clear idea about what self-determination means.
As I have a clear idea about what constitutes a PEOPLE.”
I say:
How about providing us all with an official link from your beloved UN that formally defines what determines a “people”. With exception of the indiginous people of the “New World”, the AMericas, both north and south, everyone one of us are transplanted, inplanted, resettled, immigrated, transferred and every other word you can think of to call the Falklanders, we all are the same. Stop being a hypocrit, unless of course that is the only way you can argue your points and that seems to be that case.
It is within the realms of Think's possibilities (nay ... probabilities) that I was subliminally suggested to IMPLANT myself to North East Brasil.
May 20th, 2013 - 12:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The British government must be brain-washing millions of true-bred and upright British subjects to go forth and populate the world.
Perhaps each will be given a little flag to confuse the worryingly innocent locals.
I think it is my given duty as a True Brit. to return to England (to die), thereby allowing the UN Decolonisation Committee to have a small 'win'.
But will the vast majority-population of locals of African origin do the same? De-planted?
And will those with a 'touch of the whitewash' be similarly honourable and return to 'where the white man comes from'?
This would be a perfect example of 'De-BRIC-ing' ... but it would please the C24.
I think Think should change his name to “Thick,” he clearly does not understand what elections are about or that self-determination does not necessarily mean independence.
May 20th, 2013 - 01:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think cannot provide the answers as his statements are based on his own interpretation. If he does acknowledge the line of questions, he will just make some random statement about his views on the 'English'.
May 20th, 2013 - 01:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Plus, I wouldn't place too much stock in Think's beliefs on what constitutes a people, as he struggles to understand thedifference between the British and the English....
@15 Small point. In 1965, the UK purchased the entire Chagos Archipelago from the then self-governing colony of Mauritius. The inhabitants were the responsibility of the Mauritian company that owned the islands. They were virtually all contract workers for the company. But the company and Mauritius abandoned them. Even when Britain gave Mauritius money to resettle them, Mauritius pocketed the money and did nothing.
May 20th, 2013 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@18 So sorry. There is, of course, the technical meaning of the word “invasion”. But, objectively, Britain has NEVER invaded the Falkland Islands. The United Provinces, or argieland, has done several times. Anything else is just a delusion. If you continue with it, you seek psychiatric help. And 192 members of the UN can say what they like. The PEOPLE of Britain stand with the PEOPLE of the Falklands. And always will. Ask Hitler, Mussolini, Kaiser Wilhelm, Napoleon how successful they were.
@28 I suggest that an important consideration as to what constitutes a PEOPLE is the matter of LANGUAGE. The United Kingdom has no “official” language. The question doesn't arise. The UK speaks English. Other languages are permitted but have no status. If they are spoken as the first or only language, they define the speaker as “a foreigner”. The official language of the Falkland Islands is English. Thus defining the people as a PEOPLE. The “official” language of argieland is Spanish. But that doesn't define a PEOPLE because it is an imposed European language overlaying the proper language of native or indigenous people. Only present because it was the language of the foremost invader during the systematic extermination of the indigenous people. But, as a state, argieland, despite its racist policies, is mongrel. Proven as there at least 40 languages. Including Italian, Levantine Arabic, Quechua, German, Yiddish and Mapudungan. Then there's Chinese, Welsh, Mocovi, Mbyá Guaraní, Pilagá and Iyo'wujwa Chorote.
@7
May 20th, 2013 - 02:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Never. Might makes right. hahahahaha, how do you like it, pizza-faced anglo? Your zit is oozing.
@29
May 20th, 2013 - 04:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0i dont doubt your version of history, but its an issue which requires permanent resolution.
What is always interesting to me about the “Chagossians” is that very very few wish to return to Diego Garcia.
Many have already signed and accepted relocation payments, which were additional to those paid to the Mauritius government.
Many wish to be relocated to Britian as their alternative “compensation” fancy that!
Many wish for a greater level of compensation...hmmm!
Those that actually wish to return out of the original 1500 or so, and their descendants are numbered by Mauritius as “a few dozen” and that is more than likely to gain greater leverage on greater payment, it is primarily a litigation and compensation case, not one of self-determination.
Britian made a mistake in thinking that Mauritius would use the original payment as it was intended, rather than dealing with the Chagos islanders directly.
Had the same money been spent agreeing the correct and voluntary relocation in 1971, all this litigation could have been avoided.
A good decision. On another note, how time flies; hardly seems a full year since Cristina was at the committee in person, setting the heather on fire as we say in Scotland!
May 20th, 2013 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Once again the stupid UN now run by lunatics, mmmm
May 20th, 2013 - 06:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Has screwed it up again,
All this does is plays into the hands of dictators , uncivilised states , and ambitious little men who [or women] who want to rule the world against the opinion of the people,
Still,,
Nothing has been or will be gain by this vote..
The UN should concentrate on more important things …
.
BK once.....just freaking once can you take your excited little penis out of you hand when talking about the made cunt from Argentina.....aka Cuntina Kirchner? You might gain some credibility.
May 20th, 2013 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No wonder you have no wife.
No matter what we all think about self determination, the status quo will not change, who in Europe or the FREE WORLD is going to say that the FALKLAND ISLANDERS cannot determine their own future, get real folks.
May 20th, 2013 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I see Think is thoroughly on side on this head too. The English squatters are now supported in their right to self determination by none other than Argentina.
May 20th, 2013 - 08:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What a glorious victory for those Islanders.
Can't wait to see French Polynesia hold a referendum exercising their right to self determination. Seems this might be yet again an own-goal by Argentina.
The FIG should write and thank all these UN members for supporting the right to self determination and then ask French Polynesia to hold a referendum. They could probably even help comsidering their recent expertise.
Think- agree with you 100% that all territories and their peoples have the right of selfdetermination.
May 20th, 2013 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0just that the folks in french Polynesia appear to have voted strongly that their self determination wish is to be French!
What is so terribly incorrect about that?
Also can you please tell me and list the evidence that there has ever been a formal wish here in the Falklands to remain “English”?
Jesus you sure love insulting all the Islanders with Scottish,Welsh and Irish blood!!!!
El Thinko has been really struggling over the last few days.
May 21st, 2013 - 01:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0I 'think' it might be time to lay off the serious stuff and revert to the DoD/Thinko comedy show. El Capitano's entertainment value is not working any more...go on, bring back DoD.
We demand some 'chuckle chuckle'!!!!!!!!!!!!
El thicko must be talking about the Tasmanians @ 14 when he says ..'And a bunch of Individual English Crown Subjects squatting on some Islands 15,000 km from London, England; '
May 21st, 2013 - 06:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0Think's lost his fire.
May 21st, 2013 - 08:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0He's like a burned out shell now with his pathetic arguments.
Ah well, c'est la vie.
So it looks like the turnips and beaten the carrots [Again ] lol.
May 21st, 2013 - 05:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#40
May 21st, 2013 - 09:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Baby, light his fire ...
Life would be less fun without Think stirring the pot.
OK, so he suffers occasionally, but most of us do when we comment 'beyond the comfort zone'.
Often there is substance, so let's go with the lapses;
for, when he is on form, he is good value for money.
@42 GeoffWard2,
May 22nd, 2013 - 08:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0He's entertaining & fun to stir up, Geoff, l'll give him that.
But his posts are getting bitterer than normal.
Could it be that at long last he realises that he's backed the wrong horse?
Saw it happen with Forgetit also .. both people I enjoyed to chat with.
May 22nd, 2013 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0I guess people get tired of re-running the same old arguments to every new entrant.
But you can't help liking people.
Wow I thought I was the only one that felt that way Geoff and Isolde.
May 22nd, 2013 - 12:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's like we broke a favourite toy. I miss the old Toby too.
And what do you think of me =) Hope you recognise my desire to argue reasonably and without rancour...
May 22nd, 2013 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@46 B_K,
May 23rd, 2013 - 08:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think that you are mis-guided.
You probably mean well but you are enamoured with a monster & don't realise the damage that you are doing to us.
At the start, your mooning over madame Cristina was romantic, but it wore thin when you couldn't or wouldn't realise that the object of your desires was an amoral(as against immoral)creature that wanted our land & was prepared to put in place all the horrors of ethnic cleansing.
For whatever you say or think, Argentina has no moral, legal or legitimate right to OUR land.
l will say that until l die.
And l believe Cristina knows that too but fans the flames of malvinistaism(is there such a word? lol!)in order to distract her suckers..err subjects.
You must be blinded by love because l can't find any good in the woman.
lt seems like she loves her son, so she can't be all evil, lol!
btw-apart from the hot pants you have for Cristina, what are your reasons for siding with Argentina in our little “dispute”?
47 lsolde (#)
May 23rd, 2013 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0May 23rd, 2013 - 08:29 am
The answer to your final question is:
BK is a La Campora troll tryimg hard to put across a persona of an old school Scottish socialist, but failing dismally because any real socialist can see hat CFK has about as much socialism in her as Adolf Hitler!!!!!!!!!
#47 Thanks for the considered response. My reasons for broadly supporting Cristina's line in the dispute (NOT all Argentine actions ever in it, I condemn the 1982 invasion) is that it is a peaceful and reasonable request for negotiations, and it would be in the real interests of Britain and the Falkland Islanders to respond positively, especially given her other projects to disempower and punish the Galtieri gang of which both her people (the Arg left) and yours were victims. The wider reasons I support her are political, she is one of the fieriest and most inspiring socialist leaders in the world today, but I can't help also noticing she is a very beautiful woman. We can agree, and hopefully be able to cordially argue out our disagreements, on all of that - the Falklands/Malvinas dispute, her personality, left v right wing politics, even her looks - but I must object to one part of your otherwise reasonable post where you say she is willing to use ethnic cleansing. This is a complete falsehood, without anything in the real world to back it up, and the fact you seem to really believe it (I'm not saying you're spreading lies) is a sad comment on the less than than informed political climate the British establishment seem intent on stoking around this issue =(
May 25th, 2013 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#49
May 26th, 2013 - 10:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0I do not believe that Argentina would use “ethnic cleansing” in the Serbian model. However, there are other ways that this could be carried out.
The people of the Falklands have made it abundantly clear that they do not want to have anything to do with a political association with Argentina.
IF -(“and a big if ”) - Argentina was ever granted sovereignty over the islands, then things would radically change.
There would be an influx of Argentinian “advisors” to establish interlinking of laws, schools, language etc.
Gradually, the Falklands way of life would be eroded until it corresponded to the Argentinian model. I would imagine that this would be intolerable to the bulk of the population and that within a generation they would have to leave to a country whose values and culture were the same as theirs.
In effect a “de facto” ethnic cleansing.
As to CFK being a socialist, I don't see it. Possible national socialism and we all know where that led . Having a “youth” movement headed by your son sounds a bit like the Hitler youth. To me she is one step from a dictator trying to set up a dynasty in her or her late husbands image. It smacks of ancient Rome and the usurpation of the Republic.
I am always suspicious of the cult of personality.
As to her “looks”, I have said before that I find it sad that a woman getting on in years has to result to plastic surgery to “enhance” her image. You are besotted with a barbie doll.
It is not real. You can alter a face but the rest of the body still ages. Posture changes, skin loses its elasticity and muscle deterioration is inevitable. In a few years time she will look grotesque. Look at some of the society women and ageing actresses in the USA for confirmation of this.
Bye the way, I am still awaiting some confirmation of your “Scottish roots”. I have quite happily given a resume of mine. What have you got to fear ?
@49 B_K,
May 26th, 2013 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't think that her “request”(read-demand)for “negotiations” is reasonable at all.
What she means by “negotiations” is a time-frame for the hand over of OUR lslands to Argentina--and that's NOT going to happen.
There is nothing to “negotiate”.
We own these islands--Argentina does not.
Argentina has nothing that we want--but we have plenty that they want.
What could they possibly offer us that would make us surrender our sovereignty to a foreign power?
They have no rights here in any case so their offer would have to be extremely substantial.
Maybe if they vacated & handed over to us Santa Cruz & Chubut Provinces, we'd think about it---and maybe not.
As for ethnic cleansing, Galtieri planned it, many Argentines have recommended it.
What makes you think that Cristina wouldn't do it also.? We cannot & willnot take that chance.
lts all academic in any case as we refuse to “negotiate” our sovereignty.
lf you are indeed, Scottish, would you “negotiate” Scottish sovereignty with a foreign power? l have asked you this question before but you never respond.
l think that Clyde15 is right, l don't think that you are Scottish at all.
l think that you are Argentine.
btw-she IS oogly.
#50 “In effect a “de facto” ethnic cleansing”
May 26th, 2013 - 07:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If the Islanders wanted to leave no-one could stop them, and they'd be most welcome here, but as Cristina and Alicia have said their rights and culture would be respected in Argentina; the other things you talk about, if they were a serious problem, could surely be blocked or mitigated in a negotiated settlement?
“Having a “youth” movement headed by your son sounds a bit like the Hitler youth”
Hitler never had children. He said it would be too hard to be the child of such a genius as himself! Of course I and most people am glad he's not my dad for the opposite reason!
“I am always suspicious of the cult of personality”
Cristina sure has personality, she doesn't need a cult =)
“You can alter a face but the rest of the body still ages. Posture changes, skin loses its elasticity and muscle deterioration is inevitable”
Don't know if I want to argue these details, but here goes. Everything about Cristinita for now exudes youth and vigour. Of course she'll age, eventually, but it seems that some women are taking longer to these days, Cristinita of course but also others in the public eye. Surely thats good news for the fairer sex?
“ In a few years time she will look grotesque. Look at some of the society women and ageing actresses in the USA for confirmation of this”
The ones who don't have Cristinita's inner beauty can look grotesque, but I expect when she finally does age, Cristinita will do so gracefully and remain striking and classy =)
#51 “There is nothing to “negotiate”.”
But there are so many scenarios between the status quo and the full Argentine claim, surely its worth a go?! If only to try and negotiate them round to the British position, however unlikely that would be =)
“As for ethnic cleansing, Galtieri planned it, many Argentines have recommended it.
What makes you think that Cristina wouldn't do it also.?”
Because she puts bastards like that in jail =)
#51
May 27th, 2013 - 10:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry, but you are so besotted that you are blinded to any flaws in her personality - you would not admit that there are any.
“Christinita” sounds creepy to me as it implies some form of intimacy and I am sure that would apply to many people on this forum. Madame President would sound more fitting.
The main stumbling point against your argument is - can Argentina be trusted to keep its word? From past and current behaviour I would say no. You expect the Islanders to risk everything on Argentina's word ?
Even if your sainted CFK agreed to let them keep their way of life and be self governing within an overall Argentinian sovereignty, what happens when she leaves the scene ?
Argentina's history is dodgy, to say the least !
Lastly, she refuses to talk to the Islanders so how can talks ever
take place ?
My question about your “Scottish identity” has again been ignored. WHY ?
@52 B_K,
May 27th, 2013 - 12:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Answer Clyde15 re your supposed Scottish roots.
My Dad's grandmother was from Dumfriess, so that makes him one quarter Scottish & makes me one eighth.
l'll bet London to a brick that l've got more Scottish blood than you have BK.
And l haven't got much.
************************************************************************
“There is nothing to negotiate”, BK, says it all.
Argentina starts out with nothing TO negotiate with & has NO RIGHTS here at all.
So what do YOU think Argentina should bring to the “negotiating table” IF we ever decided to “negotiate”.
l must warn you, threats are NOT “negotiating chips”. Provinces are.
#53 Do you think everyone who called Eva Peron Evita was on “intimate” personal terms with her then? I just think Cristinita deserves the same honour =)
May 28th, 2013 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Even if your sainted CFK agreed to let them keep their way of life and be self governing within an overall Argentinian sovereignty, what happens when she leaves the scene ?”
If she solved the Falklands issue, do you think there'd be any doubt about her re-re-election then =)
#54 “Answer Clyde15 re your supposed Scottish roots.
My Dad's grandmother was from Dumfriess, so that makes him one quarter Scottish & makes me one eighth”
My dad was from Edinburgh, with roots in the Borders; mum from Dundee with roots in Angus =) I wish I was one eigth something or other myself, but alas I'm quite boring, 100% Scottish as far back as I know...
“So what do YOU think Argentina should bring to the “negotiating table” IF we ever decided to “negotiate”.
l must warn you, threats are NOT “negotiating chips”. Provinces are”
Well provinces aren't realistic are they, but that doesn't just leave threats. How about investment, demilitarisation, a good relationship with the wider neighbourhood, swift, conflict free progress on the oil exploration, etc. Plus the fact that in negotiations, the sovereignty issue doesn't have to be immediately given by our side to Argentina, Cristinita has always stressed she isn't even asking for that!
“Hitler never had children. He said it would be too hard to be the child of such a genius as himself! Of course I and most people am glad he's not my dad for the opposite reason!”
May 28th, 2013 - 01:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You certainly shirted around the content of is statement and avoided a response.....so answer it?
”The ones who don't have Cristinita's inner beauty can look grotesque, but I expect when she finally does age, Cristinita will do so gracefully and remain striking and classy =)“
One would need to know someone personally to kow their ”inner beauty“. Another reason why most everyone believes you to be Argentine.
”Because she puts bastards like that in jail =) “
When they are nearing 100 years old and means nothing to them. They lived out their lives in comfort.
”Well provinces aren't realistic are they, but that doesn't just leave threats. How about investment, demilitarisation, a good relationship with the wider neighbourhood, swift, conflict free progress on the oil exploration, etc.”
They have no money to invest, no military to demilitarize, no good relationships with even the neighboring SA countries. Brazil won an arbitration award, Dilma bitch slapped Kirchner a few weeks back, Uruguay is pissed on by Argentina, Paraguay was ousted from Mercosur and is seething at the teeth for still no invite to the June summit, Chile and Colomba.....pleae show me how well their relationship is? The falklands have a swift conflict free oil exporation process that leaves Argentina on the outside looking in.
They can always buy out the Islanders, they can start by placing an excrow of perhaps 10 million per islander, plus the going market rate for land and infrastruction and buildings and the future value of oil reservces, but I suspect Argentina cannot pay it's debt and oil for heat, they are hardly in position to buy a wealthy island.
@55 B_K,
May 29th, 2013 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0But even if we wished to surrender our sovereignty to a belligerent obnoxious foreign power like Argentina to get these benefits that you say Argentina can bestow upon us, as Capt Poppy points out, Argentina cannot come up with the goods.
An IOU from Argentina wouldn't even be good enough for toilet paper.
Just in case you got your hopes up, we won't even contemplate rolling over for Argentina to have our bellies tickled.
So solly, B_K, so solly. me no like things belong Argentina too much.
Translated as:- “you have no hope, bucko OR ln your dreams, Argentina”
You'll have to kill us all first.
So, NO NEGOTIATIONS ON SOVEREIGNTY.
Thank You,
#55
May 29th, 2013 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0If she solved the Falklands issue, do you think there'd be any doubt about her re-re-election then =)
My point was not about her re-election BUT having a life span.
She cannot live forever.
None of us know when the Grim Reaper will call. When she has shuffled off this mortal coil, previous agreements and decisions can unravel. Unless she will have been made president in perpetuity - posthumously.
The nub of the argument is can the islanders trust Argentina to keep to any agreement they have signed ?
Considering their track record on this is, the answer must be a resounding NO !
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!