MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Preserving independence for the Falklands
By Mike Summers (*)
Published in The Washington Times
In 1776, a group of American patriots wrote a letter to their king informing him they were unhappy with their political status and had plans to change it. Americans know this story well. That letter, the Declaration of Independence, formed the United States' profound belief that we all have “certain unalienable rights,” including “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWriting to Americans about liberty, the right to choose the life you live and the the way you choose to live it, for you, your children and their children!
Jun 26th, 2013 - 03:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have a feeling those idea might resonate with some Americans.
Time to fight back guys, you have been taking too much for too long!
Nice one Mike!
Bravo!
Jun 26th, 2013 - 03:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They are seriously lucky to have people of this calibre, only 3ooo of them, truly inspiring!
Jun 26th, 2013 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/26/preserving-independence-for-the-falklands/
Jun 26th, 2013 - 03:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The current state of affairs will remain. Argentina have played all their cards and precisely nothing has changed.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 04:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The situation will remain as it is now until the collapse of the Argentine economy or if they are stupid enough to carry out a hostile act beforehand - I wouldn't put it past them.
Once the oil starts coming ashore, Chile, Uruguay and Brazil will be tripping over themselves for a share of the wealth. It will take generations for the Islanders to even begin to trust Argentina.
Well put Mike.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Americans cannot deny the very rights & aspirations that gave birth to their own country. To do so would be to deny their right to exist as a sovereign nation.
The Americans have long held that Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is the inalienable right of every American citizen.
Moreover they have worked tirelessly to give these same rights to many other nations, most recently Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan.
It's inherent in the American national identity that they are champions of freedom. Yet all American Presidents have to pay homage to the Latino vote in elections.
Latinos represent the fastest growing section of the American population, with more than 16.3% of the current electorate & a dominant number in Florida & California, 2 of the biggest states in terms of electoral college votes, both of whom normally vote democrat. So naturally a democrat candidate has to seek the Latino vote, even if they support the very undemocratic Argentine aspirations to seize land that does not belong to them.
Though the biggest problem of all is history. The United States had a key role in the history of the Falkland Islands during the disputed occupation by the Vernet colony & when the garrison of the United Provinces arrived. If Britain had not asked the garrison to leave, then the States would most probably have attacked them & wiped them out altogether, to prevent more attacks on American ships.
The claims by subsequent United Provinces & Argentine governments for compensation for the USS Lexington raid meant that the States could not take a stand on either side. If they supported the Argentines, they would be forced to pay billions of dollars, but if they supported the British, they would alienate the Latino countries. So they decided to support neither and sit on the fence.
Now time to get off the fence, before the fence post gets permanently lodged up their posteriors & support the Islander's democratic rights to Self-Determination.
Well done Mike-at last the MLA phoenix arises from the ashes of complacency-a few nice Argentine lies about history dispelled at the C24.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 04:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Though they turned a deaf ear others will not have
Perhaps we won't have to get the BBC to make a true documentary about 1833 after all.
Let's hope the lies about so called Spanish Inheritance, and 1833 will be relentlessly exposed.
Argentina's idea to rachet up their attacks on Falklands/UK by quoting mistruths a good idea?
No-as it's let the Falkland cats out of the bag
I wouldn't be too reliant of the US having an epiphany regarding Falklands sovereignty. They will support the path of least resistance, sit on the fence, then stick a leg out on either side depending on whose help they need the most at any given time.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 04:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oil will be the game changer, if there is a chance that US companies can profit from oil extraction in a safe democratic fair environment with the rule of law and in their own back yard, then the Falkland Islanders may see some more overt support.
Until then, business as usual.
Excellent article, it covers all the key points.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is good to see the FIG are trying to assert themselves on the world stage. But more work to be done.
#1 they already resonate with Americans that are aware of the situation....I am one of them. My hope is that you can get the messagea across to the politicians to pressure the asshole that currently heads my government.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0btw
“Oil will be the game changer, if there is a chance that US companies can profit from oil extraction in a SAFE democratic fair environment”
as opposed to BP cutting corners, killing people for profits.....destroying fishermens livihoods. Yes, it must be aweful to do it in a safe and fair environment. Can you sent the piece of information to BP? I would really like to see Tony Haywood behind the bars in Levenworth, BP can have their fine money back save for the cleanup costs.
When will the Americans of the United States understand that argieland LIES. It always LIES. Look back to its antecedents. Spain LIES. It has always LIED. Italy LIES. It has always LIED. Germany LIES. There was a time when it was honest. A short time. Then 30-40 years when it committed some of the most horrendous crimes in human history. The antecedents of argieland.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 05:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@10 Yes, Poppy, we know you're anti-British. Some thoughts for you. According to a papal bull of 1493, something that argieland relies upon, despite it being dismissed by the current catholic church, the Falkland Islands are legally Spanish. And so is the United States. Both “inherited” by argieland. By a means that has NEVER been recognised in international law. Where does your legal system come from? Even your system of government is based on that of Britain. As is “your” language. But not to worry. Carry on letting hispanics in and you'll be a catholic-ruled country before you know it. On the subject of BP, you do realise that it's a multinational company, don't you? Most of its “ownership” is American. No criticisms of Transocean or Halliburton? Why would that be? Put in one of those thousands of fraudulent claims, have you? Isn't that “the american way”? The “fast buck”. Legal or otherwise.
Conqueror, I am the farthest thing from ANti British.....if you ever read my posts. But like when I denouced the concept of royalty as being anti democratic, Brits did not sit around feeling they were insulted. I get sick of a lot brits with their nose in the air thinking they are better then the world.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 06:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And Yes.....read my previous posts about BP the NA is 80% of BP assets.....again read me posts. Read my posts on yahoo about AMerican businesses, you think I am critical of on brits?
As to Halliburton, formerly ran by Dick Cheney whom I lovingly refer to as Dr. Evil.........do you want to hear my opinion on them?
As for the fast buck being the American way, is that like Brits never seeing a dentist? Of melt in the sun hence the excessive white skin? Same thing right?
@12
Jun 26th, 2013 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You Americans started the blame culture, did you not, everyone now thinks they have a claim. It doesn't matter if truthful or not, the company that is being blamed is the one that has to sort the wheat from the chaf.
Captain Poppy, You really should be ashamed of your govermant,you only have to see how much America is hated with the spying scandal no country wants to help you and America is reduced to making threats now this also applies to The UK we are also far from the worlds favourite unfortunately The American people through lack of a good choice elected an idiot twice for President.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 06:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@10
Jun 26th, 2013 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It was an American rig rented by BP, oh and the US owns half of BP. It was your mess not ours.
I thought this story was about him appealing to the yanks sense of liberty?
Jun 26th, 2013 - 06:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I am sure the trolls are loving this! I think its quite clear that the US government takes the stance on the Falklands because of the Hispanic vote and because it wishes to trade more with SA. The USs foriegn policy is governed purely by what is in its interests are not by principles like so much of Britains. But, we know that, and we know that the vast majority of US citizens are pretty ignorant of other countries and world affairs, at least that is what all my American pals tell me. America is run very much by corporations lobbyists in Washington. The Falkland Islands are an annoying mote to these companies.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 06:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Steady on, Guys.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Captain Poppy is hardly “anti-British”. You do him a disservice.
If you follow his posts, he is steadfast in his support of the Falklands and British interests there.
It is actually refreshing to meet an American with such an understanding of the issues, who is interested and cares enough to take a stand.
The average American, or Canadian for that matter, have not got a clue about South America, the Falklands, the British, or any of the issues.
Bear in mind that Capt Poppy is NOT British and he must deal with fellow Americans and their issues from an American perspective.
I am quite sure that Capt Poppy is sympathetic, as Bourne out by his posts.
Lets not have in-fighting.
My, My my....... Come everyone!!! Lets get the Yank bashing out of the way and then let's get back to the Story shall we.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yeah, Yeah, Yeah... Those bl**dy Yanks!!! Over paid, over sexed, and over here!! OK?? there? Happy everyone?? Now, move on for F**ks sake!! OH I can imagine the likes of THINK and A_Voice looking on at this thread and laughing.
Who needs them when we are all so quick to turn on each other?
14 andy65
Why should he? Is Obama in any way better than George W Bush? Was Brown better than Blair and was Blair better than ( tee hee.. Major )??
15 Britworker
So?? a few sea birds got oiled boo hoo!! was it any worse than the “Torrey Canyon” or the “Exxon Valdese” Or Chernobyl?
Come on!! Stop Jumping on the individual ( like you are going to do with me after you've read this post ) and lets have a real dabate on whether on the News story
BTW we all know that the oil companies do not have a soul and American business is just as ruthless and cut throat as anywhere else in the world.... Enron anyone?
Getting back to the point... Good on you Mike. I think the Argies are running scared. Look at the way they keep changing the frame of reference, or altering the lies they tell about history. Seriously the Pope drew a line on an incomplete map and everything discovered or even undiscovered one side is Spanish, the other side Portuguese...Laughable. The Falklands Islands should make a submission to the UN to be removed from the C24 as you HAVE made your democratic free and fair choice. In fact a letter direct to Ban Ki-moon may have a surprising positive outcome. Remember this guy is from South Korea and knows a little about being threatened by a militaristic communist state. The C24 is supposed to be about decolonisation, NOT sovereignty. You should also make a formal complaint for that during the committee meeting virtually none of the countries thanked you or even acknowledged your attendance. If you are forced to again next year, during each countries opening statements should they fail to acknowledge you. You should stand up and make a fuss and remind them you are there, and have human rights. Recalling the Soviets from many years back, banging a shoe on a table is memorable. If not a little silly, but not as silly as the C24.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@18 & 19
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Agree, divide and rule. They would like nothing better.
Cap and Yankee are right to comment on what they think effects their life's but I would not class either as anti Brit, pro American maybe.
Hardly ferkin suprisising considering that is what they are.
You can accuse the yanks of many things! But you can never accuse them of not being proud to be American.
Not sure you can call it yank bashing but we do certainly find it hard to understand Americas double standards at times.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think the annoyance is that, there is no doubt that the US government do support the Falkland Islands self-determination, they are just afraid to voice it, which is odd considering how loud they usually like to.
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The American government is afraid of upsetting the Hispanic vote, simple has that!
Jun 26th, 2013 - 07:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Remember the time we had Hilary Clinton stood with kirchner suggesting she would be happy to mediate (Gordon Brown politely said NO THANK YOU) then when back on American soil Hilary was questioning Kirchner's sanity-hardly good pollitics
Jun 26th, 2013 - 08:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 022 andy65 & 23 Britworker
Jun 26th, 2013 - 08:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Certainly the “Special relationship” has been somewhat “off” as of late. I don't think that anyone could have been more surprised at the White Houses reaction ( or lack of it ) to the Falkland Islands referendum.
Certainly if they had been welcoming of it, championing the under dog would have be seen as a welcome boost for the FIG as well as a gentle warning to Argentina.
I think that Obama ( for whatever reason ) missed a chance to so real leadership on that one.
@ 18 Troy Tempest
Jun 26th, 2013 - 08:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Come on I'me a Canadian!
As for the yanks being
“overpaid, oversexed and over here”
just to keep thing even what about the yanks rejoinder, very rarely heard nowadays, of the Limeys
“underpaid, undersexed and under Eisenhower”
That being put out of the way - Good job Mike, Well Done.
That's it boys……. give it to them Yanks
Jun 26th, 2013 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”the United States' profound belief that we all have “certain unalienable rights,” including “life, liberty and the pursuit of a Tax Free Haven.”
Twas Greed nothing but Greed………..you are wasting your time Mike……..
It's like casting Pearls before Swine……………Flu :-)
27 Biguggy
Jun 26th, 2013 - 09:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“underpaid, undersexed and under Eisenhower”
Damn!!! I hoped that no one would bring that up... oh well... :-)
28 A_Voice
“That's it boys……. give it to them Yanks”
What does the “Good book” tell you about “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”?????
'cos we all know that Argentina has never done anything wrong.........LOL
The conversation has moved on, Sock Puppet, please do try to keep up with the rest of the class.
27 Biguggy
Jun 26th, 2013 - 09:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0With respect Mr. Uggy, I think you should read my post again.
I am not being critical of the Yanks, nor am I being critical of the Canadians. I am NOT insulting or finding fault with anyone.
I am trying to let the Brits and the Falklanders, and those others who are close to the issue, that North Americans as a whole, are not aware of what is going on in Argentina or The Falklands.
It is not even on their radar.
I am sure that you have never in the past 20 years heard it brought up in general conversation in Canada or the US.
I am British and grew up in Canada. I have dual citizenship, now, and I am very pleased to be a Canadian!
I can tell you that apart from my “very English” acquaintances, nobody in Vancouver has any idea about the Fslklsnds.
That is not because they are stupid or morally bereft, but because the islands are very far away, 1982 was a long time ago, Csnadians did not lose lives there, and there is next to no coverage of the modern-day Falklands in the Canadian news.
Yankeeboy and Captain Poppy are to be commended for taking an interest in the Falklands and above all, for speaking out and refuting the lies of Argentina CFK, Timerman and the Malvinistas.
@30
Jun 26th, 2013 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nah! Troy it's because they are stupid...............
“but because the islands are very far away, ”
Ask them if they have heard of the Sun............that's 93 million miles away ;-)
@A_Voice, don't take heart my friend we love our American cousins we might even grow to like Argentines once you have flushed that piece of crap Kirchner and her dead beat followers down the toilet
Jun 26th, 2013 - 10:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@32
Jun 26th, 2013 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's all one sided ..............this is what the State Department said about you
“There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.”
Wise up and ditch them!
Thinko and his socks have been running the divide and conquer play for god knows how long now.......
Jun 26th, 2013 - 10:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0His socks say..........
a.UK should hate the US for looking out for their own interests
b.UK should hate the Falklander spongers...
c.Irish should hate the Brits
d.Scots should hate the English
he has probably been feeding the pro-Falklander/anti-Catholic stuff as well.
A_Voice (Think)...... people might have a bitch and moan at each other, but your tactic to divide will not prevail.
#32 Think - wise up and ditch them?
Jun 26th, 2013 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ha haha, that's what you have done and look at the mess RGland is now in. Off to the knackers yard shortly....
'The special relationship' is like RGlands ability to pay its debts - it doesn't exist!
@34
Jun 26th, 2013 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is nothing for me to divide.........
Scots do hate the English
Irish do hate the British
UK Public don't give a toss about the Falklands
US don't give a toss about the UK
Go on....you know you want to......except it.......
You'll feel better.....“Onest Guv”
Screenname
Jun 26th, 2013 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Think and Sockie's comments? Childish, even for him.
In the same spirit - Argentina is off the radar because they are insignificant.
Think's had enough attention now, forget him.
Well done, Mike.
A very clear message.
The Fslkland Islands:
“It is time for those nations around the world who respect human rights and democracy, and who are not afraid to stand up for justice and freedom, to lend us their support, too. In the spirit of the Fourth of July, we Falkland Islanders demand the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness.”
Thank goodness someone posted............I meant to type “Accept” not Except.....how embarrassing.........still not quite as embarrassing as BORING Troy @18........with “Bourne out”
Jun 26th, 2013 - 11:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Would that be Jason Bourne????
Has Think posted on this thread? I couldn't see any!
38a-Voiceof Thinkedover
Jun 26th, 2013 - 11:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes he has, Think.
I was hoping someone would post besides you, so that I could take you to task over “except”.
You are becoming careless as your arrogance increases.
Back on topic:
Does Argentina offer, “the right to pursue life liberty and happiness” to the Islanders?
No, I didn't 'Think' so.
@39
Jun 26th, 2013 - 11:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You had your chance @37 to take me to task........why didn't you take it?
Back on topic, the Islanders have ”the right to pursue life liberty and happiness”
............In Britain
Pack your bags and head for Blighty
41 Thinkedover
Jun 26th, 2013 - 11:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“
Back on topic, the Islanders have ”the right to pursue life liberty and happiness”
............In Britain
Pack your bags and head for Blighty”
So, the answer would be “no”, right ?
Good thing they are Independent and not part of Argentina. Right??
@41
Jun 26th, 2013 - 11:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Squatters rights..........that's all
This pertains to East Falkland........
Squatter.........
a settler with no legal title to the land occupied
Squatting consists of occupying an abandoned or unoccupied area of land and/or a building – usually residential –[1] that the squatter does not own, rent or otherwise have lawful permission to use.
- I read right? Independence? But if it was “riveted” the DEPENDENCE with the referendum.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0- We all have “certain unalienable rights”. Argentines also. And if we think of the treatment inflicted by the British to the real inhabitants of their colonies along its colonial history, is not very convincing. For example dissidents bind India to the mouths of cannons and shoot ....
- They have every right to choose their political status, but not in Argentina.
- “our homeland” he says. British, your homeland is Britain. They should not steal the islands in 1833.
- For the umpteenth time, is a matter of territory = sovereignty. No autonomy and independence without territory, no? The UN never changed, nor can it do so, the status of the Malvinas Islands. If it was a territory capable of independence, the UN itself had taken up the matter, as in East Timor.
- 92% participation: see, 8% of 1,514 voters, are 121! A no small number of settlers anything not interested in the referendum! And that you had to have British citizenship to vote! There is much talk of the 3 who voted against but not these 121!.
- So since when 1,393 British (1514-121) will decide on game 3.500.000km2 in land-sea territory? Very lively central government U.K. becoming olympian the boludo.
- “... based on mutual respect and democratic values...”, yes, yes, yes, blah, blah, blah.
- “The Argentine government dismissed our referendum before a single vote was cast...” Not only the Argentine government, no?
- We can talk to the Kelpers but only if they are going to speak for and on behalf of the British government and sovereignty.
- The last paragraph of this “Verano” (in Castilian) is to affect almost! And the rights of the Argentine people mocked for 180 years? The victims always kelpers.
In the case of the Falklsnd Islands however, according to your fellow Argentinian Troll, “Vestige”, the C24 has stated that the Islands are officially a “Colony” and the UK is the Landlord.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0The noble homesteaders living on the Falkland Islands have been granted ownership of the lands they have improved, in perpetuity, by the Crown.
Argentina wants “negotiations” and possession of the Islands, but as you say, Argentina will not grant the current inhabitants “ the right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness”.
Sounds like a non-starter.
@44
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0The Crown has never had any legal entitlement to East Falkland..........Yep a non starter
AVoice has left the building...............good night!
Ah, well, left with the old obsolete “squatter” argument.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0You're washed up.
:-D
Can someone explain how the Spanish, then various colonial Europeans came to legally own bits of South America?
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0I would prefer answers that do not include references to a pope, as I lose bladder control if I laugh too hard.
@ 43 José Malvinero
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0Utter claptrap!
Should you be so certain of your case take it to the ICJ, not for a decision as Argentina would not abide by it should it not go the way Argentina wants, we all know that, but for an opinion, which is none binding. Should the opinion be in Argentina;s favor, just think of the boost it would give your 'cause'. Should the opinion go against Argentina well just carry on as normal and ignore it. So why not what have you got to loose?
45thinkedover
Jun 27th, 2013 - 02:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0“@44
The Crown has never had any legal entitlement to East Falkland.”
Nice of you to admit that it has entitlement to the West island.
Please explain why not the East island?
Argentina has never had entitlement to it.
You british are so brainwashed, so brainwashed. Do you think that in the times the british murdered, enslaved africans and colonised territories your government told its people that what they were doing was wrong?.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 02:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0Your government will make you believe that the colonialists are the argentines, that the nations with opposed views are the evils, that form the axis of evil, that the UN is useless becouse they dont take sides in the sovereignty dispute in british favour.
Well, you should know that Argentina is not a nation recognised as colonialist, quite the contrary. We were a colony that independized from the colonial power. Thats is not the case of britain.
The axis of evil, the evils, the terrorist states are adjectives your government use to make you hate that nation, that people, to legitimate wars.
Nations are all equals. There are some more developed than others, but all nations are equals with the same rights and obligations. You think Iran is evil becouse they said they would wipe Israel from the map. But what about those kind of nations that invaded Iraq and Afghanistan for its natural resources? what their definition? isnt that real evil?. Who should the iraquians call you then?.
And the UN recognise to ALL people on EARTH self-determination rights, not only for the colony list of the c24 committe. The problem is that there is a sovereignty dispute that is recognised not only by the UN, but by the whole world. Ergo, the UN can take sides and believe in what the british says that the islands belongs to the british. Until there is not legality of british sovereignty proved, there is no british self determination rights to be apply on a disputed land.
Are you deranged? What a ridiculous rant. Your also ignorant about British colonial history. The British state never colonised anyone. The British colonises were aquired by diplomacy and private enterprise. Britiain was the first country in history to ban slavery and liberated tens of thousands of slaves, mostly from the Portugese who dominated thetrade. Of course Argentina is a result of colonisation. How big was Argentina in 1825? or 1850? How did it get so big? by military conquest and stealing land from the Indians. The world does not recognise the sovereignty dispute. It is Argentina who would strip the Falklanders of their rights and turn them into colonial subjects of Argentina in flat contradiction to their democratic wishes. They would be forced to pay Argentine taxes, to be ruled by Argentine laws, be forced to use Argentine money. They would be a colonised people. History proves British sovereignty. Spain recognised it with an official visit to the islands in 1863. Argentina signed the Treaty in 1850 “resolving ALL outstanding differences” Peaceful possession for near 200 years is accepted as sovereign under the law of prescription. The citizens of the islands have the same rights under the UN charter as all other people.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 02:29 am - Link - Report abuse 050 Liberato
Jun 27th, 2013 - 02:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ But 'WHAT ABOUT' those kind of nations that invaded Iraq and Afghanistan”
Classic “whataboutery”!
@50Liberato
“ Until there is not legality of british sovereignty proved, there is no british self determination rights to be apply on a disputed land.”
Actually, it has been administered and populated with a permanent British settlement for 181 years. The inhabitants and Britain have been there continuously for that period of time.
The UN C24 declares that it is a UK “Colony” (owned by Britain) and they address the British government regarding that ownership.
There are historical records, maps, and legal documents recognising them as British, both in the UK and in Argentina.
They will remain British until you can prove that they are legally owned by someone else.
The proper place to do that is UN International Court of Justice.
Argentina has NOT applied to them and refuses to do so.
Therefore, they have NO LEGAL CLAIM.
Therefore, they stay British.
Argentina protests before the UN C24 De-Colonisation Committee, but that Committee has no power to decide ownership or sovereignty.
Any negotiations with the C24 is between the Administering Power, the UK, and the “Colony”, the Falklands - Argentina is an unrelated third party with no involvement or say in those affairs.
Sorry.
@50 Liberato:
Jun 27th, 2013 - 03:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0I take it from your very desperate rant that you either cannot or will not explain how the Spanish, then various colonial Europeans came to legally own bits of South America...
Thank you for at least not remaining quiet, as any neutral third party reading this thread will see the sort of nonsense the Falklanders are up against.
@50 Liberato
Jun 27th, 2013 - 03:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0It would appear that some Argentinians at least are very aware of Argentinas colonial past, particulary the forcible incorporation of Patagonia into the Argentine republic by armed conquest in the 1870's. A friend of mine who recently travelled through the City of Rio Gallagos in Santa Cruz noticed that the statue of General Julio Argentino Roca in the town centre had been vandalised with red paint thrown over it and graffitti scralled all aroung accusing the man of genocide.
Maybe he will soon be removed from the 100 Peso note (and replaced with Charles Darwin? who explored the Patagonian coast in the 1830's)
50 Liberato- We Falkland Islanders have never voted anything to do with British self-determination - THAT is the affair of the people of Great Britain.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 03:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0The people of the Falklnd Islands recently exercised our right to vote on an issue of OUR Self Determination as the people of the Islands.
And do stop all this Argentine Crap about the whole world supports your territorial claims and dismisses the referendum.
Ask the nations of Western Europe, ask Canada, ask USA, Australia,New Zealand, Sierra Leone,Papua New Guinea,
Ask their Governments formally- and show the written formal replies please.
Dont go and quote what your Foreign Minister says - he has been shown to be an open LIAR many times!
Argentina doesn't have a colonial past!!!!!! I have heard it fucking all now!!!
Jun 27th, 2013 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0ARGENTINA IS COLONIALISM!!
A bunch of Europeans who STOLE their country, COMMITED GENOCIDE, and has continued to expand STEALING more land and committing more GENOCIDE.
The idea that the conquistadors who STOLE “INDEPENDENCE” from Spain were some sort of heroes is LAUGHABLE. They were murdering thieves who wanted Spain's strength to steal the land but wanted to keep the stolen loot for themselves.
The Falklands were stolen from NOBODY, they were uninhabitted. Spain vacated east Falkland in 1811 and have accepted British rule.
The murderous and genocidal Argentines, no more Inheritted the Falklands than they did Uruguay or Paraguay.
P.s.
@36
What a racist and stupid turd you make of yourself.
50 Liberato
Jun 27th, 2013 - 06:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Until there is not legality of british sovereignty proved,...”It is.
ICJ judge, Dame Rosalyn Higgins, wrote: “Attractive an aphorism though [self-determination] is, it still has to be said that the territorial issue does come first. Until it is determined where territorial sovereignty lies, it is impossible to see if the inhabitants have a right to self- determination” (Dame Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process - International Law and How We Use It, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994)
The British jurist Rosalyn Higgins arrived at a similar conclusion when she pointed out: ”No tribunal could tell her [Argentina] that she has to accept British title because she has acquiesced to it But what the protests do not do is to defeat the British title, which was built up in other ways through Argentinas acquiescence.80 There was therefore little doubt that Britain acquired title to the Falklands by extinctive prescription. In other words, it was in this mode that the strength of the British claims resided.
80. Rosalyn Higgins, ”Falklands and the Law,” Observer, 2 May 1982.
The Falkland War : Britain versus the past...Daniel K, Gibran.
It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared
in 1970 that the modem prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created 'prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law'
Akehurst's Modern Introduction to International Law By Peter Malanczuk
Liberato - surely, after the German inspired holocaust of the mid 20th century, the genocide in Argentina in the late 19th century committed against the native population of the pampas was one of the worst examples of colonialism in the history of mankind? All Argentina should be hanging their heads in shame!
Jun 27th, 2013 - 07:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Even IF Argentina (or Spain or whatver contry) administreted the islands for a decade or so 200 years ago it is just of historical interest. The wishes of todays inhabitants are that counts for the future. Otherwise East Prussia is still German, Argentina still Spanish, and the USA still British (and partly Spanish or even French.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0@18 “as opposed to BP cutting corners, killing people for profits.....destroying fishermens livihoods. Yes, it must be aweful to do it in a safe and fair environment. Can you sent the piece of information to BP? I would really like to see Tony Haywood behind the bars in Levenworth, BP can have their fine money back save for the cleanup costs.” Sorry, Troy, sounds pretty “anti-British” to me. Okay, he tried to claw back of credibility @12. But I didn't see him condemning the fraudulent claims. Didn't see him condemning Transocean and Halliburton failures during the event. And, let us not forget, Obama consistently referred to BP as British Petroleum.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0@42 Whoops! The British DISCOVERED the Islands and began settlement in 1690. Formal statement of sovereignty in 1765. No credible challenge. EVER. First challenge in 1770. Defeated. So “title” existed 120 years before argieland was even “thought” of.
@43 Never mind, girlie. One day you'll come up with a credible argument. “British, your homeland is Britain.” Marcos, your homeland is Spain or Italy. The Falkland Islands are not “in” argieland. On what do you base your “claim”? In 1833, Britain had been sovereign for 142 years. And argieland puts forward how many? Six WEEKS. The only “Malvinas” are in Cordoba. You can have them. For the rest? Don't waste our time.
@50 Go away, girlie. You don't have enough brain. But one point. OUR education system doesn't have compulsory indoctrination sessions!
#43
Jun 27th, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0The victims always kelpers.
At last I have found something in your posts with which I can agree.
“Sorry, Troy, sounds pretty “anti-British” to me. Okay, he tried to claw back of credibility @12. But I didn't see him condemning the fraudulent claims. Didn't see him condemning Transocean and Halliburton failures during the event. And, let us not forget, Obama consistently referred to BP as British Petroleum.”
Jun 27th, 2013 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Actually conqueror, I stated my position that i fully support GB as an ally on numerous occassions and posts. If you think coming down on BP is anti-British you are mistaken. To me in my humble opinion, if I were saying things against the Bristish government, that would be more indicative of being anti British.....but your are free to assume.
I have posted numerous posts of the USA prosecuting and sentencing Americans and American businesses for fraudulent claims and it is an ongoing endeavor. Apparently because I wave an American flag and not a British flag makes me anti British........my bad...being an American, but I think you are more a jingoist than I.
I have condemed Haliburton many times, as well as Bush and Cheney, perhaps not here as during my time there was not an article to post. However I have posted a list of American CEO's that I would love to see behind bars here.....do some research.
Again, if you think that I am anti-British because I do not wave a British flag being an American.....go figure. I say that your and a few other American's tear in to American AND the people more than Yankee and I and a couple other American's rip into Britain......
@José Malvinero (43)
Jun 27th, 2013 - 01:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“They have every right to choose their political status, but not in Argentina.” - and that is why we want nothing to do with Argentina. We want to exercise our human rights like everyone else on the planet, which would be denied by your country. Thanks for confirming that.
@Liberato (50)
Complete nonsense. Your statement only confirms that you are the brainwashed one.
63
Jun 27th, 2013 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“They have every right to choose their political status, but not in ours Malvinas Argentines Islands.”
#62
Jun 27th, 2013 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You would have had to be in the UK at the time to see the rhetoric coming from US sources....press, TV, Congress, Senate and Whitehouse aids and spokesmen. Our TV programs were full of Americans attacking the UK. Either to air a grudge or to win votes.
The inference was that it was the entire UK populations fault and Americans should boycott UK goods, services and cancel any holidays booked here.
The emphasis was not on BP but “BRITISH”
So maybe you can see that it touched a raw nerve.
#64
You have no Malvinas Argentinas Islands.....what makes you think you have ?
@64 José Malvinero
Jun 27th, 2013 - 04:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have carefully searched two atlases in my possession - one in Spanish and the other in English - and I am quite unable to locate the ”Malvinas Argentines Islands.”. Exactly where are they situated? And please give distances and map coordinates.
Thank you.
some interesting maps.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/view/all/where/Argentina
#65 C lyde perhaps you are correct because at the time, the Gulf of Mexico was still bleeding.....I can't deny the rhetoric at that time. And assmouth was the new president at the time too. But I do not think that is the sentiment of most Americans but it makes a great news story.....good news does not sell.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for BP.....I feel as much sorrow and sympthy for them as I feel for Bank of America, Merrill Lynch ( I lost two asses worth), Enron CEO's, Tyco CEO, Worldcom, Adelphia, Quest and the many more AMerican business CEO's that went to jail. I am all for free enterprise and capitalism, but I also personally believe in criminal negligence and CEO's and boards doing time.
@62 Then quit assigning “blame”. BP, as a company, was not responsible for the Gulf oil spill. I will not countenance you making wild accusations. I will point out the Transocean, Halliburton faults. And the Juneau-inspired fraudulent claims. I want to see the U.S. government condemn the Juneau-inspired “claims” and rip his head off. Tell me I'm wrong. Don't care. Obama and Juneau deserve a bullet.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 05:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@62 Captain Poppy:
Jun 27th, 2013 - 05:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well I am pro-US...there might be quite a few things wrong with the US and the UK, but they still offer a life that most asprire to and actually have a habit of stepping forward when some of the more expensive and dirty jobs around the world need doing.
Don't worry, the World knows that UK is a BIG roober of lands and countries, discuss with the Vernet Family, my friend, GO OUT TO UK it is better for u and this is your true land. Do u know the pirate history of UK?
Jun 27th, 2013 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't care either...deal with it. Yes BP is puuuurfect.....no culpability at all.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Texas City was who's fault?
What exactly happened at Prudoe Bay?
Caspian Sea?
Lisbon Bay was who's fault?
Colorado last year?
Yes.....it's everyone else's fault but their's.
I hardly accept negligence in American companies and are happy to put them in jail.
Again I am not anti-British.........but definitely take exception to big business, be they American or British in negligent actions. But as a jingoist, I understand your defense of them, you feel it reflects on your people.....I do not.
'Confirm the official trip to Colombia - Foreign Minister Héctor Timerman yesterday received his pair of Colombia, Maria Angela Holguin Cuellar, who advanced in the preparation of the trip that Cristina Kirchner held in Bogota on July 18. It was reported yesterday that the ministers officially “reviewed the various aspects of bilateral and multilateral relations” and “Latin American integration.” The governments of Juan Manuel Santos and Cristina have had differences on trade issues and Malvinas.'
Jun 27th, 2013 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.clarin.com/politica/Confirman-viaje-oficial-Colombia_0_945505468.html
'Hard questions to desinación Milani as new army chief'
http://www.clarin.com/politica/Confirman-viaje-oficial-Colombia_0_945505468.html
'Three Latin American Parliament committees held meetings in El Salvador ~ ...The Political Affairs Committee, Municipal and Integration will address topics such as the media and the Falkland Islands conflict between Argentina and the United Kingdom, said the statement from the Salvadoran parliament...'
http://www.clarin.com/politica/Confirman-viaje-oficial-Colombia_0_945505468.html
'Spain needs a slap down'
http://www.clarin.com/politica/Confirman-viaje-oficial-Colombia_0_945505468.html
#70 as I am as well and also of the UK......despite our differences of our leaders.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 09:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#71 do you always speak like a fool or are you just an idiot? We who live in the “new world”,North, Central and South America know how we got here historically.......pushed the indigenous people out and inplanted a population. That was then, except that in SA the government still persecutes the indians.
Why don't to stick to what is happening now like your Argentine president stealing from the masses and whoring the country for persoanl wealth and gain, all the while chanting jingositic claims and calls against the Falklander's only to hide her crimes and the building misery in Argentina. Get a life by dealing with reality. Cuntina kirchner is going to bring a world of hurt, misery and soon....undoable damage to the people of Argentina....get rid of her while you can.
#71
Jun 27th, 2013 - 09:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stick to making cakes. They are much better than your postings
Ever since 1982 when the Falkland Islands came on the map outside the most involved countries I have been rather fascinated by this topic. A group of rather small windy islands with an even smaller population leading to a full scale war between two major western countries. This was a traditional, old-fashioned war, just about territory, not the east/west ideological conflict like other wars of the time (Korea, Vietnam &c) I have tried to grasp the nature of ths conflict. 30 yaers ago it was much more difficult to follow the arguments from the different actors. With the Internet I can sit at home get updated instantly.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 10:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As I see it there are three parts in this coflict.
The one most easy to understand is the people of the Falkland Islands. It is about their homes, their history, their lifestyle. Everything, really.
The UK was, I think, rather indifferent towards the FI, prepared to sell them away in the 70-ies and early 80-ies. It suddenly changed when the invasion was a fact. I can also understand that.
Argentina's involvment was for me the most difficult to understand. Why should they bother about some piece of land they perhaps have ruled for a short period more than hundred years earlier.
The islands were quite unimportant for everybody, but for its own people. Someone discribed the confllict as “two bald men fighting over a comb”, meaningless.
The first question I want to put to the “Argentine side” and it supporters here on this page:
1) In which way are the people living on the FI more “implanted” than any other people of European origin in the Americas? Yes their ancestors arrived to the FI in the 19th and 20th century from Europe. But it is the same with the Argentines, the Chileans, the Canadians, and the US-Americans &c. Just a few countries are dominated by the idigenous Amerindian population. So what is the big difference between the Falklanders and the other peoples of the “New world”??
I just wish a frigging few nuclear missiles would land all over that frigging country they call Argentina and get rid of all the shit who live there. They deserve to be exterminated every last one of them, no fucker would miss the shitheads.
Jun 27th, 2013 - 11:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@77 Britishbulldog: “They deserve to be exterminated every last one of them”
Jun 28th, 2013 - 12:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0No they don't, but they do need to sit down and REALLY think about what Argentina is and where it came from.
#77 And they call asslips kirchner a nazi.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 12:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0@77 Britishbulldog
Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Don't be foolish - any wish or threat of violence brings you down to the level of the trolls and their mistress, la Kretina.
@76 Swede
Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0You shouldn't expect an answer to that on here, or at least not one that makes logical sense. But you can find sane Argentine discussion of the topic elsewhere if you look :
http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/AV-ENG.HTM
http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/AV-ENG.HTM
#77
Jun 28th, 2013 - 09:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think your expressed sentiment shows that you require psychological help. No sane person would express this as a rational act. To advocate a nuclear strike on a people because they annoy you is ludicrous ! So, it would be OK for Russia, China,Pakistan et al to nuke us on the basis that we annoy them ?
Argentina are a pain in the arse and are behaving like a spoilt child...we can live with that.
@76 Swede
Jun 28th, 2013 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0That is a question that has been asked on these pages many times but I haven't seen it answered yet.
Yes. I have just been here on this forum for a short while, but I have seen terms like “squatters”, “pirates” “pelotudo” (which I do not know what it means, but I presume it is some insult) &c used by the more vulgar and extreme of the Argentine users. But, I had anyhow expected to get some clarification from some of the more decent ones.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 01:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0it's like Argentine's “dumbass”
Jun 28th, 2013 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well said Mike Summers, clear and sensible and no bullshit, unlike the pro-Arg posts on here that continue to post nonsense and lies.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 04:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 076 Swede (#)
Jun 28th, 2013 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Jun 27th, 2013 - 10:34 pm
In answer to your question, there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between the form of settlement of the Falkland Islands and the settlement of the rest of South America, EXCEPT that the settlers on the mainland had to deal with the native peoples, either killing or enslaving them, but definitley by stealing their land whereas in the Islands only the wildlife was affected.
Sadly, in the case of Argentina, our children from the age of 6 years onwards are indoctrinated with the “Malvinas Myth”, which is very hard to get over. So we have a large proportion of our populace shouting “Las Malvinas son Argentinas” at the tops of their voices because they don't know any better!!!!!!
Ah, the “Malvinismo educativo” starts already at that age? That explais a lot.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 05:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Heads up guys - May 2013 South Georgia News and Events now uploaded and ready to read!
Jun 28th, 2013 - 06:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Topics this month:
- Baited Breath
- Tsunami Risk Evacuation
- Argentine Research Survey
- Star Trails – New Stamp release
- Fishing and Shipping News
- Cry Argentina: Review
- Bird Island Diary
- South Georgia Snippets
Get all the SG News at: http://www.sgisland.gs
.
This is great. Now Summers needs to get that OpEd into other papers. The Washington Times is the US conservative paper of record (ala The Telegraph) and get a much wider audience. Most people here are unaware of how Argentina is misbehaving.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For people who ARE aware of the current bullying by Argentina, the support for Falkland Islands current relationship with the UK (and potential for independence that goes with it) resonates across party lines on the American street as it did in 1982 regardless of what ass-hattery goes on at US State or in the current administration, even more so now that Cold War Realpolitik is no longer a distraction.
The only people who don't are those who are frothily anti-british on either side of the aisle (and no that does not include Poppy :-). That and those on the fashionable “Daycare Center Left” (and that's coming from me as someone who's more Left/“Liberaltarian” than Center or Right on most issues) and think that anti-Norte marxism/authoritarism/fascism is like, way kewl -- and as I found when I was a TA in grad school, probably can't find the place on a map (or for that matter, most other places they have to be seen caring-about-more-than anyone-else).
76 Swede
Jun 28th, 2013 - 07:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Max Hastings says in the opening lines of his book “The Battle for the Falklands” :- The Falkland Islands' misfortune has always been to be wanted more than they are loved...... Indeed, his first chapter is entitled “Forgotten Islands”.
He goes on to say that:- The Falklands was essentially a Political War, a war of Pride, a war to save a governments skin. It taught a Dictator a lesson, but not dictatorship.
There is, locked away in the vaults of Westminster, a statue dedicated to the Falklands War that bears the iscription “They died to save her face” and is destined never to see the light of day...
The Falklands War shows us all that :-
1/ The word “Impossible” gives British Commanders a Hard-on
2/ even the lives and wishes of 3,000 people ARE important.
3/ The British are the Conscience of this world.
Remember the First Gulf war?? remember how Saddam Hussian was stopped? The US state department was gearing itself up to accept this Larger “Iraqi state” that included Kuwait and was about to deal with Saddam as the new leader of Kuwait until M Thatcher met George Bush in Bussels and told him that the invasion of Kuwait “Should not be allowed to stand”
www.conicet.gov.ar/corriente-de-malvinas-jets-veloces-y-nutritivos/
Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It seems we are making sea research with the french. Nice.
85 Captain Poppy
Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I have only just got onto this post and can only apologise for the idiot @11 Conqueror's post that in no way reflects the Brits view of you at all.
This guy even had a go at me and seems incapable of understanding who are the good guys here.
Perhaps he's going through a mid+++ life crisis but as I have said to him before he needs to get real.
Summers needs to get the US cable news networks to interview him in their cause for US support and the lack of it from my countries administration and Obama's outright disregard to the Falklander's right to self determination versus bring my country, once again into the shitstrom in the middle east by supporting a tribe that eats human hearts.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@63
Jun 28th, 2013 - 08:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“They have every right to choose their political status, but not in ours Malvinas Argentines Islands.”
The Falkland Islands aren't Argentinian.
If you disagree, go to the ICJ
@71
” discuss with the Vernet Family”
Vernet received compensation from the UK for loss of business, but none from the USA or Argentina.
Vernet was kicked out by the USS Lexington(that's a USA ship by the way)-not by the Brits who gave permission for his settlement to continue in 1833
One of Vernet's problems is that he committed piracy, not the UK-so Vernet was a thief-that's why the USA kicked him out in 1831.
@92malen
Jun 28th, 2013 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“It seems we are making sea research with the french. Nice.”
Yeah, sure Malen, you won't get into 'trouble' from French-fishing, right??
#92
Jun 28th, 2013 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0By inference that must mean that the French have now given support to your claim for the Falklands?
Pete Bog,
Jun 28th, 2013 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Vernet was not kicked out by the Lexington. Vernet and his family left in November 1831. The Lexington arrived in January 1832.
Malen - and -its International Waters! The Falklands Current - the name you will see on most atlases of the world other than in Argentina does indeed cover a large area on International High Seas.
Jun 28th, 2013 - 09:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here we focus more on the French-Italian Oil Company that has bought a stake in OUR Hydrocarbons zone.
So, so, sorry Isleño Uno
Jun 28th, 2013 - 11:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You cant steal the current too, it is and will be Malvinas Current, and it gets up near to Mar del Plata, blasts with Brazil Current and affects all our patagonic current and platform. These currents are very important and from the research they have a great function on the atlantics fisheries.
You see we are taking care and researching our seas.
Try not to get out, there south of “your” zone, not an mm to find oil, as it happens when fishing.
Your seas, your seas only exist as far as you ships can sail in them.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 07:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0Which going on past demonstrations Is about thirty metres from the side of the dock!
Out of interest, who was providing the research vessel?
You or the French?
Joke headline..........
Jun 29th, 2013 - 12:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0PRESERVING INDEPENDENCE FOR THE FALKLANDS
They are totally dependent on the UK and subsidised to the tune of about £40,000 per head per annum!!!............By the UK..... the ignorant tax-payers... :-))))))
This ignorant UK tax payer thinks it is worth every penny, just for the satisfaction of watching them crawl year in year out, every single penny well spent!
Jun 29th, 2013 - 12:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@103
Jun 29th, 2013 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That's right.......YOU .........are you the British public?
The Public on the whole have never been asked, even when a pole was conducted........the majority opted for............wait for it..........a deal with Argentina!!!
check it out yourself!
102 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 01:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This is not a subsidy pal. We don't depend on it either; your government has repeatedly said it wouldn't resort to military action. Surely you aren't saying you don't believe your own government?
No, the UK very conveniently wants a military base here to defend its own interests in the South Atlantic. Lucky us. I'm sure it does deter your crackpot government from doing anything stupid, and we are very grateful for that.
And it's poll not pole, you know, the one that has never happened but still voted for a deal with Argentina.
Assuming that only half of us pay tax, the cost would be £1 per head per annum, less than the ost of half a pint of Guinness.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 01:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What poll, no one ever polled me and I certainly never read one, provide the link and I will check it out, or are you referring to the poll conducted on line by the telegraph? We all know responded to that, don't we?
@71 Ever heard of the Treaty of Tordesillas? You know, the one where the corrupt pope Alexander VI had directed that everything west of a certain meridian would be Spanish and everything east would be Portuguese, for the purposes of trading and colonizing rights. Perhaps you should go tell Canada and the United States that their territory is really yours. Britain didn't take control of anywhere near as much territory as you tried to.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 01:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@76 Please. When did argieland become a “major western country”?
@78 It is necessary to differentiate between those I refer to as “argies” and Argentines. The numbskulls I refer to as “argies” still like to trumpet about a “bull” issued by a corrupt Spanish pope. I think we can take it that “bull” is short for “bullshit”. After considerable reading, I conclude that, apart from the “bull”, argieland's “claim” is based on 6 weeks occupation at the end of 1832. In other words, trespassing.
@82 One question. Who are “we”?
@93 Don't apologise for me, TRAITOR. Not to mention gutless as well. I am still here in MY country, living and paying taxes. You've RUN. Running is what argies and other latinos do. So you're probably in the right place. DON'T come back! Good guys? YOU aren't one. I have the knowledge and experience that is probably double yours. At least. REAL British people don't RUN. They stay and work to make things better. As I have done.
@98 Quite true. So what you're saying is that Vernet realised that what he'd done was illegal and RAN. Mind you, the captain of the USS Lexington did arrest seven of his employees/accomplices.
@100 Sorry, girlie. We are well aware of how dictatorial, totalitarian, thieving, lying “regimes” like to rename things in an attempt to give themselves credibility. The Japanese renamed Manchuria as Manchukuo. The nazis renamed Czechoslovakia as Bohemia and Moravia.
@104 WE, the British public are fine with it, thanks. And the only deal that you can have is the one where you f*** off. Or die.
@105
Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My Government???
@106
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/04/10/falklands-war-britain-and-argentina/
More British people would support opening negotiations with Argentina over the future of the Falklands than would oppose it – 37% would support negotiations, with 25% opposed. The overwhelming majority (83%) of Argentinians would support negotiation.
@107
Wrong again.........follow the above link.......just you and the rest of the Racist bigots and jingoists........
The free thinkers would like this to have a fair conclusion to all parties.
@108
Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Where do you get this funny idea the UK opposes negotiation?
The UK just opposes the imposition of a pre-determined outcome on the islanders without their participation and consent.
@109
Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0True.
I for one would like to read the question posed in the on line poll.
Did it make any reference for supporting negotiations, WITHOUT the participation of the islanders?
@109
Jun 29th, 2013 - 02:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0To negotiate what exactly?
@109
All BOT's do not conduct foreign policy matters.......why should the Falklands be any different? That is the job of the administering power........The UK, they represent British Citizens and local governments.
Argentina threatens UK and Falklands oil companies with legal actions.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0'Argentina again warns the UK about the illegality and consequences of this new unilateral action, extensive to all private actors involved, that they will be liable of future legal demands in the maximum tribunals, for the potential exploration of Argentine resources,' pointed out reliable sources from the Argentine foreign affairs office quoted by the B.A. media.
It goes on, 'at the time some of the B.A. press mentioned that Argentina could be considering taking the resources dispute case to the ICJ of the Hague, but no government official ratified or rectified the news.'
Source: MercoPress 5th February 2010 (two thousand and ten).
http://en.mercopress.com/2010/02/05/argentina-threatens-uk-and-falklands-oil-companies-with-legal-actions
@111
Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Negotiate whatever you like. The only precondition the UK has ever set is that it won't negotiate sovereignity without the consent and participation of the islanders.
Compare this with the Arjuntine position, article in the Constitution and all :
“Argentinean Sovereignty over the Malvinas is not negotiable. That is the starting point of negotiation.” (Dante Caputo, Argentine Foreign Minister, 13 November, 1983. Quoted in House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, 1983-4, Report, Vol. 2, p 149)
Dante Caputo was one of the saner ones, too.
But it should be clear from this that the term “negotiation” is one of those terms that does not have its normal, everyday meaning in Arjuntina.
111 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0' they represent British Citizens ' Err, yes. I think the word you're struggling with is 'represent'. In the case of sovereignty, this is both foreign policy and a domestic issue. Relations with Argentina are foreign policy, our chosen form of government and democratic representation is a matter for us. According to our constitution, the form of our government cannot be changed without our consent. Hence no negotiations without our participation. Simple.
And this is not the UK. Our government is not the same as local government in the UK, because we do not have representation in the UK parliament.
@113
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So you are admitting there is a basis for negotiation?
@114
Do the Falklands have something different from this?.......
Foreign affairs of the overseas territories are handled by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London. Some territories maintain diplomatic officers in nearby countries for trade and immigration purposes.
The Falkland Islands and Saint Helena have elected legislative councils, but the governors appointed by the Queen are the heads of government
HMG guarantees the defence of all BOTs and handles their foreign relations.
So you are saying the group of islanders has the right to determine sovereignty issues…….I think not……they have the right to protest to the Governor or the administering power, but no right to participate in foreign relations with a foreign country.
BOT's do not negotiate with foreign powers that is the role of the UK. Simple
That is the problem with the Falkland Islanders......because they are caught up in a possession struggle over the Antarctic they delude themselves into thinking they have more rights than the other BOT's.........they don't!
Their desperation is evident from the pleas to the C24 and the Yanks via the Washington Post, whats wrong are you not confident in the UK defence and promises.......can you not trust the words of politicians?.......Watch your back!
Appealing to the Yanks, of all people......they would buy and sell you at a drop of a hat.
@115 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“but no right to participate in foreign relations with a foreign country.”
I believe you know that is in error because Timberhead refused to meet with the British Foreign Secretary because said Foreign Secretary had informed Timberhead that representatives of the FIG would be present.
115 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Washington Times actually- a much more conservative publication than the Post.
Desperation!!!
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You have been watching a different live stream from me! Or you live in an alternate reality?
Timmerman is given the floor three times!
Cuba, Venezuala, chile, Syria, etc, etc, etc, etc. All speak for Argentina, for how long, any idea?
Summers gets a five minute presentation, out of a two and a half hour meeting and you you say, get this, they where showing desperation!
Yeah, all of the never ending five minutes of it.
What do you do for an encore?
You people are a part of GB, nothing more, GB citizens on disputed land.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your local mock referendum is illegal and irrelevant, thus nobody recognizes it.
You Argentine people on the mainland are just that!
Jun 29th, 2013 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0On the mainland! and that is where you are going to stay, because you are never going to usurp the territory belonging to the Falkland Islanders. Not through the
uselessly, irrelevent and ineffective C24 or anywhere else.
@115
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Of course there's a basis for negotiation. There's nearly always a basis for negotiation. That's why there were negotiations throughout the entire post-war period right up until the 1982 invasion. And indeed agreements in place even after that until Nestor walked out on them.
But it remains the case that Arjuntina could have the islands tomorrow, all it has to do its convince the islanders that that's the best option for them. Why is that so hard, I wonder?
I guess it's because the scope for a negotiated solution is somewhat limited when you're dealing with a 1930's stye populist klepto-demagogracy with a disdain for universal human rights, democracy, the founding principles of the United Nations, and the islanders themselves, but a clutch of useful idiots here and there to cheer them on.
You're never going to get any recognition for your bunker enclave.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Three thousand part time seasonal residents, squeezed into 1 sq kilometer on land 1.5 times the size of New Jersey state, coming from 12,000 km away for a couple of months vacation each year.
Market it under the guise of democracy all you like.The world see's it for what really it is.
@116
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh I very much doubt it was an error on the British part.......they certainly had no official right to be there.........Are we there yet??........think about it.
@117
Opps now why was I thinking the Post.
@121
I agree with everything you say in almost all your posts.......except......you very much underestimate Argentina and her Government, they are very much playing their hand well......winning the propaganda war, almost the whole of the C24....the UN calling for talks, the USA doing what it does best......play both sides.
Why go to the ICJ and commit to a win or lose situation......when International pressure will eventually bear fruits.
The Brits are also playing it well, they know that Argentina cannot negotiate......
Result...... Status Quo
Which so happens to be what the Islanders and the Brits want!
Argentina just needs to keep up the pressure until the balance shifts. Simple!
@82
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wow you must have really ferked up their 1982 vacation season.
Your off your head!
@122 & 123 How's dear old Hector Simpleman doing with his legal action against oil companies legally drilling in Falkland waters. It's been over three (3) years now and the oil's coming ashore - no sign of legal action.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What's happening?
Next up.... your lan flights.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 114 Monty69
Jun 29th, 2013 - 05:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Hence no negotiations without our participation.”
Just to clarify, I do not believe your physical presence is required at the 'negotiations' but certainly the Islanders' views/position, obtained from the FIG has to be put by the UK Govt., acting on your behalf. A bit like a defendant not being 'in court' but represented by his/her lawyer.
Of course it is usually better if 'you' are physically present at the negotiations and in fact I believe it is your right to demand that 'you' physically be present.
@ 118 reality check
Please note that the speakers you name are 'supposed' to be considering ways to ensure the Falklands are 'desalinized' and not the relative merits of a sovereignty claim. Further they are supposed to dispassionately review the relevant statements/evidence given, they are not supposed to be petitioners no matter what their Government thinks. The lot of them should be removed and a fresh start made.
@123
Jun 29th, 2013 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Pressure, what pressure?
You think with all that is going on at home and around the world, the UK government considers what Argentina is doing, is pressure?
They have an election coming up soon and I can assure you, they consider winning that much more pressure, than anything Argentina could ever do.
@119
Jun 29th, 2013 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Your local mock referendum is illegal and irrelevant, thus nobody recognizes it.”
What is your definition of' nobody' exactly?
@122
“any recognition for your bunker enclave.”
What is your definition of 'any.?'
An enclave is surrounded by land,the Falkland Islands are not surrounded by a land mass, they are situated in the South Atlantic.
@126
“Next up.... your lan flights.”
The FIs have been without these before. However the Chilean workers there would not be impressed with a 32,000 mile return trip.
Nor would the Argentine war veterans wishing to visit the war cemetery, unless they too wanted to fly a 32,000 round trip.
Chile would loose out on several £millions which would not be alternatively spent in Argentina, but most likely Europe.
The Falkland Islands would get someone else to fly there, which could be done over the Antarctic, or across the South Atlantic.
Money Talks.
@ 123 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I was not referring to an error made by the UK Foreign Secretary, I was referring to your statement that they could not take part in their own foreign policy making, which clearly the UK Govt. believes they have.
Now where do you get the idea that old Timberhead can dictate the composition of a UK delegation, in the UK of all places?
Or that they have no official right to be present, where does that come from?
Jun 29th, 2013 - 07:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The UK is discussing their islands and they invite them to be present, there, it's official!
Is he saying the UK can not legally do that?
@130
Jun 29th, 2013 - 07:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I know fine well what you were saying……..and told you to think about it……….
UK invites FIG to be present at talks with Argentina when they have no legal entitlement to be there under Britain's own policy concerning it's territories………and foreign affairs.
The net result……..no talks!……Politicians spin their webs of deceit everything has a purpose and every reaction is anticipated.
@131
I am saying that there has been no recent amendments to the constitutional relationship of the UK with it's territories!
So what part of this, “Foreign affairs of the overseas territories are handled by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London”…….includes the attendance of FIG reps?
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/party.html
Jun 29th, 2013 - 08:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If this will open you may find it of interest
132avoiceof Thinkedover
Jun 29th, 2013 - 08:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“UK invites FIG to be present at talks with Argentina when they have no legal entitlement to be there under Britain's own policy concerning it's territories”
Surely it is within Britain's power to decide which of their own policies to follow and when.
You, as a foreign power, have no say over that.
What a ridiculous idea.
What is natural justice? definition and meaning
Jun 29th, 2013 - 08:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Definition. English legal system ... which may be declared to be of having no effect (ultra vires) if found in contravention of natural justice. See also natural law ...
www.businessdictionary.com/definition/natural-justice.html - Cached
Principle of natural justice.
@ 132 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 08:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“when they have no legal entitlement to be there under Britain's own policy concerning it's territories………and foreign affairs.” Just where is that gem found?
@134
Jun 29th, 2013 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And what would you know about Britain…….......Canadian marionette
Yes it would be ridiculous if Britain could change it's constitutional relationship with it's territories and let the BOT's conduct their own foreign policy…….because a spokesperson of the foreign office says so………and don't bother quoting…….“It would be unthinkable ” or it would be “right and proper”……..or “we are massively disappointed”……..blah blah…….spokesperson.
@132
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“UK invites FIG to be present at talks with Argentina when they have no legal entitlement to be there under Britain's own policy concerning it's territories”
But Britain has a duty according the UN policy on decolonisation to devolve more powers to its BOTs. The increase in responsibility the FIG takes for its Foreign Policy , is in line with the continual surrender of powers by Whitehall to the FIG.
If Argentina wants the Falklands, it will have to talk to the Islanders at some stage, unless it plans to invade with a military force or plans to carry out ethnic cleansing.
Argentina's policy of denying the Islanders exist is a pointless charade.
If they really want the Falklands to be a colony of Argentina, they are going to have to talk to the Islanders at some point.
I am not sure why Argentine politicians are frightened of talking to Islanders unless they think they will be outwitted by them during an argument. If Argentina is sure of it's history, logic and feels backed up by the UN as it claims, what's the problem?
Ah here we go, name calling, must be getting to him!
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Particularly liked the first sentence of the definition.
“English legal system doctrine that protects against arbitrary exercise of power by ensuring fair play.”
Says it all really. The UK by including the islanders are simple adhering to one of the fundamental principles of our law.
So there you go Argentina, you are the party requesting negotiations, they have been offered, you are the party refusing them.
Personally I would call it a day and withdraw the offer until such times they come forward and state they have amended their position.
@136
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You show me the change in legislation where a BOT can conduct it's own foreign affairs….
…..or state an instance where a BOT government has conducted it's own foreign affairs or policy!
@137
“The increase in responsibility the FIG takes for its Foreign Policy , is in line with the continual surrender of powers by Whitehall to the FIG.”
Show me this legislation and where it was debated in Parliament and motions put forward to change this constitutional relationship with BOT's
@ 140 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“state an instance where a BOT government has conducted it's own foreign affairs or policy!”
How about the meeting in February in London that Timberhead failed to show up for? That suffice for conducting their own policy of ”No negotiation on Sovereignty'?
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office are a department of Government.
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Government formulates foreign policy, not Parliament.
This is all irrelevent anyway, because modern UK foreign policy has always been the same as the islanders, sovereignty not negotiable, no negotiations without the Islanders being present.
This does not require legislation, why would it?
@107 Conqueror
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You seem to go through periods of reasonable behaviour followed by stretches that could see you Sectioned under the Mental Health Act: are you seriously ill?
I will ignore the stupid abuse but look at this little ditty:
I have the knowledge and experience that is probably double yours. At least. HOW do you know? Surely you must know my background because I have never made any secret of it unlike you.
REAL British people don't RUN. They stay and work to make things better. As I have done.
Mmm we moved for the health of my wife if you bothered to read my posts and it should have been Australia. But guess what? The cunt Brown and the dyslexic duo of your hero “Dave” and Osborn managed to reduce my net worth by 50% so I could no longer afford the AUD 1.5 M that you need to retire there for 4 years and hope you can continue with your money held ransom by the prats in the UK.
AND, if you REALLY think you have made a difference in the UK then you should most certainly be sectioned.
This will be the last time I respond to you.
@141
Jun 29th, 2013 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The FIG didn't arrange the meeting, London did!
@142
Parliament is responsible for legislation changes......
This is the most recent legislation.......
International Support: the UK is responsible for the external relations of the Territories and uses its diplomatic resources and influence to promote their interests;
But we believe that the fundamental structure of our constitutional relationships is the right one: powers are devolved to the elected governments of the Territories to the maximum extent possible consistent with the UK retaining those powers necessary to discharge its sovereign responsibilities.
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm83/8374/8374.pdf
Give it up..........it was an excuse......the Foreign Office were aware that Timmerman had Sovereignty on the agenda........the Brits didn't want to talk......clever move.
No that is most deffinately not an act of parliament or legislation if you prefer?
Jun 29th, 2013 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is a Government Paper.
This is legislation.
Theft Act 1968 - Legislation.gov.uk
“steals” has the same meaning as in the Theft Act 1968, ... The Criminal Appeal Act 1968. In section 30, in subsection (1) ...
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60 - Cached
I will give you a real simple clue.
It's all in the name, ACT.
What was that about giving it up?
@145
Jun 29th, 2013 - 10:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0.........and how do you think the Constitutional relationship with BOT's comes about?
Oh the guys in the foreign office just make it up as they go along.........or .....the White paper is based on the legislation from the British Overseas Territories Act 2002 and all those previous to it. The white paper explains it all......layman's terms.... the British Governments position.
What part of .......the FIG has no Foreign Policy........don't you understand?
Or .......There is only British Foreign Policy and no other.......
Or......The FIG will be represented in Sovereignty issues by the FCO......???
@ 144 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It matters nor who arranged the meeting, your question was:
“Show me....or state an instance where a BOT government has conducted it's own foreign affairs or policy!”
I gave you an example of where the policy of the Islanders was very likely, by your own admission, going to be required to be emphasized. The policy in question was sovereignty, and the Islanders' position, at this point in time, is no negotiation, we are happy as we are.
That I believe answers your question. There is nothing in any of the documents that you have quoted that gives any indication whatever that representatives of a BOT cannot be present at any negotiations concerning their territory. In fact it would seem to be the common sense thing to do.
146 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What part of 'There will be no talks about sovereignty unless the Falkland Islanders wish it'...don't you understand?
The FCO are doing a fine job of representing our wishes. And our wish is to be involved in any talks about our future. If their policy is to include us in any talks, then that is none of your concern. The UK government is free to have any policy about this that it wishes.
You don't seem to understand that Argentina are the ones who want something out of this. That means that you either include Falkland Islanders, or you get nothing. Chances are you'll get nothing anyway, but you won't even get the start of nothing.
FIG might not have a foreign policy, but we do have a constitution, which guarantees our right to self determination and the right to be governed by the elected government of our choice.
“This is the most latest legislation.”
Jun 29th, 2013 - 11:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Quote, unquote.
Now you agree it's a white paper.
How many white papers do you think pass through all stages in their original format?
What part of principle of natural justice don't you understand?
@ 146 A_Voice
Jun 29th, 2013 - 11:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I love this quote from the link you referenced in your post 144 above:
“Where it is appropriate we will continue to include representatives of Territory Governments as part of UK delegations.”
I do believe that rather 'knocks on the head' your claim that including representative(s) from the FIG in UK delegations is somehow against the law.
> Why go to the ICJ and commit to a win or lose situation......when International pressure will eventually bear fruits.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 12:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Let's be serious.
The most significant international pressure that could be put would be a judgement of the ICJ, and we all know that Argentina won't go there because it knows it would lose.
The UN is no better. Despite its claims and pretensions, Argentina can't carry the entire UN, any more than it could carry the ICJ. Even with the C24 in its pocket, it doesn't dare put its main arguments (“implanted populations have no rights, etc” ) up to the UNGA, because they will surely fail, as we already saw in 2008. And this not just because they are comically bad arguments, but because hardly anybody in the UN really wants to get into questions such as what constitutes a people, self-determination vs territorial integrity, etc, etc, and even fewer want the precedent of turning one arbitrary clock back to one arbitrary date, just to suit a persistent agitating nuisance. This is why the UN consistently votes for a “peaceful settlement”, or in other words “sort this out between yourselves and stop bothering us”
The C24, meanwhile, has sacrificed all credibility by flagrant disregard of its own mandate, as is evident to anybody who follows its proceedings, including the Secretary General and some of its own members.
Putting all this together, this means Argentina has failed diplomatically amd legally, as well as militarily.
That leaves the “propaganda war”. Personally, I would like to see a more robust response from the UK, but I can also see why they would't want the bother , since the only people fooled by the practice of presenting support for “negotiation” as support for Argentine sovereignity, are the more cognitively challenged elements of the Argentine domestic audience.
And as for the US, the US has nothing to gain by coming down off the fence. The Brits don't need support and Argentina has already failed.
@148
Jun 30th, 2013 - 12:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0“What part of 'There will be no talks about sovereignty unless the Falkland Islanders wish it'...don't you understand?”
I don't see your point…..it still means the UK will discuss the sovereignty with Argentina, not the FIG……the FIG don't have Sovereignty but their views and wishes will be represented by the FCO.
@150
Quote taken out of context…….it was referring to this…..
“Territory representatives have joined UK delegations to special UN meetings and UN conferences, including the UN Conference on Women and the World Summit on the Information Society as well as UN meetings related to the situation of Small Island Developing States. The UK will continue to look for further opportunities for the Territories to attend relevant UN meetings.”
and this
C24
“some democratically elected Territory representatives wish to present their own positions directly to the Committee, and to the Fourth Committee of the General Assembly, at annual meetings of these Committees. The UK Government will continue to support this and these Territories’ right to determine their own futures.”
The UK believes the Sovereignty of the Falklands belongs to Britain not the Islanders and that is why Britain has retained those powers necessary to discharge it's sovereign responsibilities. At this moment in time the UK does represent the territories and the FIG cannot discuss sovereignty with anyone but the UK!
If you do not agree try discussing British Sovereignty with Argentina without the UK......that would be a laugh!
@ A_Voice
Jun 30th, 2013 - 02:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0Seems you are in error yet again”
From page 9 of the document referenced above”
“The UK is committed to supporting Territories which aim to strengthen their societies and economies by forming links with international and regional organisations or other countries. In some cases they can pursue these links themselves; in some cases the UK will represent the Territories.”
You have stated
111
“All BOT's do not conduct foreign policy matters.......why should the Falklands be any different? That is the job of the administering power........The UK, they represent British Citizens and local governments.
& #115
“BOT's do not negotiate with foreign powers that is the role of the UK.”
& #123
“they certainly had no official right to be there”
& # 132
“they have no legal entitlement to be there under Britain's own policy concerning it's territories”
@ # 152
Here is the full paragraph taken from page 80 of the doc. you referenced above. There is no way that is out of context.
“Where the UK Government is leading internationally on issues of concern to the Territories we will make every effort to ensure the Territories are consulted and their interests defended. Where it is appropriate we will continue to include representatives of Territory Governments as part of UK delegations.”
Stop lying, in addition to making everything you say questionable, just like the RG Government, it is extremely annoying.
@153 Biguggy: “Stop lying, in addition to making everything you say questionable...”
Jun 30th, 2013 - 02:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0This is one of Think's alter egos, to stop lying would be to stop posting. Asking him not to take part just because of a little thing like the truth seems a bit harsh. It's not like you are even asking all the malvinistas to stop, and let's face it, they all have trouble with reality.
@153
Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nice one, you obviously took time to read it.
@ 155 reality check
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Don't you just love it when the opposition provide you with the ammunition to shoot them down in flames? I had not seen that document before.
Thanks Think.
@126 We've had this debate before. Unless you are seriously suggesting that Chile is in the thrall of Argentina to such an extent that it will allow it to dictate Chile's foreign policy and cease all flights to the FI.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0LAN would simply fly around Argentine airspace - plus there would be no stop at RG for the Argentine relatives so CFK would shoot herself in whatever part of a foot she still has left.
@108 A “poll” is not a vote. Try something else. Like where Brits are told the FACTS and argies are told the TRUTH. I've researched the lot and argies have NOTHING. You can “negotiate” all you like. You still won't get the Islands. Because you have 200 years of lies to redress. Broken treaties. Lies to the UN. And, most important, the lives of 255 British servicemen. Wiping the whole of argieland off the face of the planet wouldn't be enough to redress that last. Don't try to blame “the junta”. It was YOU who celebrated the deaths of those British servicemen. Don't think about our politicians. They try to get the best situation they can. Think about US. The British people. Who watched you dancing in the streets. And still watch you celebrating your DEFEAT. We wanted to recover OUR territory and make sure OUR people were safe. If logistics had permitted, we should have gone on and flattened argieland. Leaving no brick standing on another. And nothing alive except, possibly, insects.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@111 Strange how the Falkland Islands Government have negotiated things before.
@115 No, no basis for negotiation. Try a bit of comprehension. Argie government writes to UK government about air links. UK government refers subject to Falkland Islands government. Argie government won't talk to Falkland Islands government. Subject closed. And FIG doesn't “plead” with the corrupt C24. Argies do that.
@119 And you're a failed wanker. So?
@122 That's 12,173 square kilometres. Still can't tell the truth, can you?
@123 Could you give us a date on which you'd like to die? The UK will NEVER buckle to a cesspit.
@132 Aaaah, an Irish slug. Explains why you can't understand a proper language.
@140 Don't have to. BOT's have the right to be consulted. Unlike totalitarian, dictatorial argieland. British government can't, and won't, dictate.
@143 Good. Nobody needs a treacherous tosspot. A cowardly RUNNER. Becoming an “ex-pat” should mean automatic removal of nationality.
@158
Jun 30th, 2013 - 03:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“@132 Aaaah, an Irish slug. Explains why you can't understand a proper language.”
I'm not seeing your deductive logic there???.....Irish??.......Please enlighten!
Conqueror has Churchill syndrome.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 03:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As do many in here.
Listen to me, when you dig in your feet it doesn't automatically mean you're the good guy...... nor does it make you something special.
I know you like to think that, because you grew up watching the dambusters every Christmas rather than Gandhi or something about the Chagos islanders, or massacres in Kenya or Michael Collins. Some stories where Britain wasn't the plucky underdog being bombed by the nazi's but rather some story where Britain was acting more like a rapist.
Those stories are ones you didn't see on boxing day, this is why you're entrenched and willfully ignorant and come out with ...em stuff... like “A cowardly RUNNER. Becoming an “ex-pat” should mean automatic removal of nationality” (or tooold's post #91)
North Koreans are positive of their noble cause against the manipulative capitalists, as was Saddam, as are the jihadists who will purify the world of the evil ones, apparently.
Anyone can play the part. 'Merica fk yeah... giving you freedom.
For the emperor ...banzaiii.
As for me.
I will never give up, I will never give in to the evil ways of the usurping, imperial pirates, no matter what trickery they try, they may take my life but they will never take ...MALVINAAAAAS.
But I know you shall never give up, you shall fight them on the beaches, you shall fight them in Diego Garcia, you shall fight them in Ireland, you shall fight them in Kenya, you shall fight them in the transvaal, you shall fight them in Hong Kong, because wherever it is chances are its British sovereign territory.
@160
Jun 30th, 2013 - 04:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stand back, everybody, Vestige is going to fight caricatures of his own devising.
But who's going to be Sancho Panza?
Caricatures?
Jun 30th, 2013 - 04:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh I think theres plenty of noble wannabe Winstons in here, standing their ground against tyranny ...... as they see it.
Genetically different of course, almost Ubermench like in their qualities.
@160 - Vestige AKA TTT AKA Tobias
Jun 30th, 2013 - 04:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is no such place as the Malvina's. However, the British have the Falkland Islands, South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands AND the 1st registered land claim in the Antarctic, namely Queen Elizabeth Land.
Argentina has...debt, civil unrest, a useless government and a brainwashed population.
No wonder you are upset that Britain is standing in the way of Argentina's Imperial Colonialist ambitions, but to be fair you'd just bugger it all up anyway so we really are doing you a favour.
You see, in order to have a successful empire, you 1st need unity and stability in the country.
That is why the former British Empire was so successful, and why Argentina's attempt to build an empire is doomed to fail before it's even begun.
But never mind, at least Argentina's No 1 at something in the world...namely failing. You must be SO proud of yourselves.
@ 160 Vestige
Jun 30th, 2013 - 05:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So what? It matters not who slaughtered the most indigenous peoples or whatever. The RG's have failed, frequently and ignominiously to 'prove' their claim, and at the end of the day that is all that matters.
163 164 ... not addressing what I was talking about at all.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 05:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@165
Jun 30th, 2013 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's because we've been through all these logical fallacies, adolescent obsessions, and inferiority neuroses many times before with Tobias, and they don't get any fresher with repetition.
Troy Tempest Said.............................................
Jun 30th, 2013 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The land they have never set foot on, the land that 9 generations of their forefathers have never possessed or likely ever seen, the soil they've never sifted through their fingers or turned with a shovel, the well-cared for homes built not by them, but several different cultures of Northern European people, homes where children and grandchildren played and grew up, sharing memories with families that were never Argentinian, laughing in English, visitors from 'home', the UK, traditions, the Anglican Church, the Queen?
Are THOSE the Islands the Argentinians yearn for, The Falklands???”
I say.....................
Are you sure?
Pirates deprived a nation and a people to continue working the land.
You know where you were born Malvina Vernet?
How can you have a stone face and say that nobody of Argentina set foot Malvinas ?
Read page 8.
http://www.embajadaabierta.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/vernet.pdf
Thats funny 166... I get the same sense when it comes to your posts.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Although I don't see a logical fallacy in my post 160.
Some more hip trendy words to try 'strawman'..... 'confirmation bias'....ad hominem....god it feels so good to be cultured.
@167
Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As Raul would say, excellent document.
This is the one presented by Marcelo Luis Vernet to the C24 in June 2012, wherein Mrs Luis Vernet describes how Mr Luis Vernet first decided to take possession of the Falklands for proto-Argentina in August 1829.
Curiously, this testimony is in flagrant contradiction to a letter distributed to all members of the UN by Argentina in just a couple of months before in February 2012, in which it is claimed that it was “Argentine naval officer David Jewett” who took possession in 1810.
http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willetts/SAC/UN/A66-696.PDF
Apparently this testimony of Marcelo Luis Vernet has now disappeared from the site of the Argentine Ambassador to the UN.
I wonder why that is?
Thank you, Hans. I am also learning with their excellent documents.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I honestly believe that there is no contradiction.
Jewett took possession in 1820.
And Vernet takes office as Prime Political and Military Commander of the Malvinas Islands, Cape Horn and adjacent Islands en 1829.
That is, takes over as Commander.
@170
Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The question I have is, if the UP had already taken possession in 1820, why were they taking possession again in 1820?
@168
Of course you can't see the logical contradiction, because it's you that suffers from it. Sheesh, does everything have to be explained to you?
@ 169
Jun 30th, 2013 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is still available here:
http://www.embajadaabierta.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/vernet.pdf
The English version is a little over half way down.
170 Malvinense 1833
Should Jewett have done 'it' in 1820, why did Vernet need to 'do it again' in 1829?
@171, 172 I do not know, maybe it does on his new position, First Commander.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@173
Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Doesn't it imply that the UP did not believe they had possession before 1829?
A newspaper report of a pirate captain reading a letter is a rather odd basis for claiming sovereignity, after all, especially when there is no evidence it was ever recognised or even acknowledged by the UP, and the pirate captain slung his hook, so to speak, shortly thereafter.
167malcontent 1833
Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 01829 - Vernet asks the British for permission to set up business in The Falklands.
So, even Vernet did not believe they were a colony of UP, in 1810, 1820, or 1829.
The settlers, of several different nationalities, under Britisher Brisbane, were allowed to stay in 1833, when the UP military garrison, 'criminals' in the eyes of the UP as well as the UK, were sent HOME to the UP for trial.
Those settlers became the 'original Fslklanders', administered as British, and permanent residents, inhabiting the Islands ever since.
The original settlers were never deprived any material property or any opportunity - they inhabited and improved the land for over 180 years, continuously - and NO Argentine contribution or investment in those lands.
End of that myth - not even the Argentine gov't tries that on anymore, they acknowledge that only the criminal UP garrison was 'expelled' and after being there for only 2 months.
Check your own website.
@174 Exactly Hans, The U.P. has possession since 1820, the pirate captain took possession by order of the government of the United Provinces.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@175 are you sure?
reread website
@176
Jun 30th, 2013 - 08:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Isn't it just a little bit odd that the United Provinces never actually tried themselves to tell anybody they now had possession? And they only found out they had possession by chance a year later when an American told a journalist and a report appeared in the UK press? And the pirate captain never though to mention it in his report to the UP? And indeed the pirate captain spent some six months at sea failing to be a pirate, before he decided to undertake the mission supposedly entrusted to him by his masters? And then nine years later the UP's Commandant apparently isn't aware that the UP already has possession, and so decides to take possession again? And in the interim the UP commandant has been asking British permission for all his activities in the islands?
The important thing is that neither Jewett taking possession, nor Vernet taking possession established any sovereignty.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 177 All you mentioned, does not invalidate the takeover of the United Provinces.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In any case it is strange that the UK, the queen of the seas, the great power of the world, did not know the takeover of the Malvinas Islands.
@179
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Indeed, isn't that strange? In fact, if the all-powerful UK didn't know there had been a takeover, it's yet another indication that there was really no takeover at all.
179 Malvinense 1833
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I wonder if it's because you are a bunch of lying twats?
Yes, that's that done with.
@177 HansNiesund:
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...and lets not forget Hans, the CFK-led delegation at the C24 in 2012 also seemed unaware that the UP were in possession of the Falklands pre-1829.
Could it be that if the UK sovereignty claim was maintained throughout the period where it would seem the Spanish had the only continuous settlement on the islands, Argentina realises a ragtag bunch of stranded pirates led by an American reading out a letter is not going to get you very far (but might raise a few chuckles).
@180 No, it is an indication that the takeover Argentina existed and was legal.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Taking possession is only relevant to sovereignty if the territory is terra nullius (ie doesn't have any sovereign). If the territory has an existing sovereign, taking possession is not going to change that situation.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@176 Malvinense 1833
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“@175 are you sure?
reread website”
I do not know to which website you are referring. However the following RG Govt. website give both versions:
http://cancilleria.gov.ar/es/history
In one place it states:
“This is because the specificity of the Question of the Malvinas Islands lies in the fact that the United Kingdom occupied the islands by force in 1833, expelled the people that had settled there and did not allow their return, thus violating the territorial integrity of Argentina.”
And in another:
‘Once order had been restored in Puerto Soledad, on 3 January 1833 a British Royal Navy corvette, with the support of another warship in the vicinity, threatened to use greater force and demanded the surrender and handover of the settlement. After the expulsion of the Argentine authorities, the commander of the British ship left one of the settlers of Puerto Soledad in charge of the flag and sailed back to his base. In 1834, the British Government assigned a Navy officer to remain in the islands, and only in 1841 did it decide to “colonize” the Malvinas Islands by appointing a “governor”.’
Seems the RG’s cannot make up their mind what they are going to claim actually took place.
@184
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Does a newspaper report claiming a pirate captain claims to have claimed a territory on behalf of the UP count as taking possession, one year after the event, when it is neither validated, corroborated, commented nor accompanied by so much as a cheep from the UP themselves?
Could Argentina now be downplaying 1820 because if they claimed it is simply a matter of landing, making a declaration and leaving then the UK trumps them by over a century?
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@187
Jun 30th, 2013 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lol, excellent point. But I don't think they are downplaying 1820, the story of this “argentine naval officer” is all in the letter they sent to the entire GA in February 2012. More likely nobody thought to check Marcelo Luis Vernet's testimony in June was consistent with what they'd said before. They're not noted for their notions of consistency, after all.
@186 No is problem of the Government of the United Provinces if the press, the UK, or ... know the fact a year later.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The fact existed and that's what matters.
@189
Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's not a fact, it's a claim. And there is no evidence that the UP ever had anything had to to do with the claim, and plenty evidence that it didn't.
@189
Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The fact existed and that's what matters.”
Like the fact that Britain landed, claimed and left the Islands in 1690-that pre-dates 1820.
If the claim by a single pirate who's reason for landing in the Falklands was that his crew had scurvy, is valid so is the British claim in 1690.
In 1690, no one else was on the Falklands, therefore by your reasoning 'the fact existed and that's what matters' to 1820 also applies to 1690.
@191 Pete Bog:
Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You could say that not only was Jewett a pirate, he was a usurping pirate.
@191 Another pirate John Strong, landed in search of water, named the canal Falkland Sound but did not claim the islands.
Jun 30th, 2013 - 10:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Anyway acts of a corsair sent to violate existing treaties between Spain and England does not have any legal effect.
It has been reported by a poster on mercopress that Timmerman brought up the Pope giving South America to the Spanish at the UN.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 03:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Since quite a few Malvinistas are throwing around the word 'legal' over the past few days, can someone explain to me how taking land through armed force from Spain is legal in their world, if they claim the land was legally given to Spain?
This is not some sort of trick. I really cannot understand the Argentine interpretation of justice: it seems (from my perception) to be based around 'I WANT' and then warped to fit whatever selfish outcome suits.
@ 194 screenname
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Not all Roman Catholic countries followed the bishop of Rome either. Henry VII sent out John Cabot to see what he could find and the French King did the same
@195 Biguggy:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0I think the idea of the Pope telling nations how they can carve up the would is a joke...but if Argentineans are going to try and use it as part of their arguement as to why they believe the Falklands CANNOT be British, I'm just interested as to how they can marry that with taking land by force from Spanish rule.
@ 196 screenname
Jul 01st, 2013 - 10:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0“I think the idea of the Pope telling nations how they can carve up the would is a joke...but if Argentineans are going to try and use it as part of their arguement as to why they believe the Falklands CANNOT be British, I'm just interested as to how they can marry that with taking land by force from Spanish rule.”
My opinion, they cannot, it is the same as the implanted population theory, by their definition, they are also implanted therefore they did not have the right to self determination.
The (RG's) seem to have this horrible habit of finding some reason to support their 'cause' but when it is pointed out, by the same reasoning in another incident/situation, that their 'reason' works against their 'cause' the quoted 'reason' no longer applies to 'them'.
Two old-time quotes come to my mind:
'As slippery as a basket of eels'
and
'What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander'.
Incidentally I believe that the Vatican's stance on any of the old papal 'bulls' is that they are not longer relevant and the nations concerned need to sort the situation(s) out for themselves. I have not seen/found a reputable reference for that yet, so it may not be accurate. Can anyone help in this regard?
@193
Jul 01st, 2013 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Another pirate John Strong”
Interesting, I was not aware Strong was a pirate.
What were the names of the ships he plundered/took into possession then?
“Anyway acts of a corsair sent to violate existing treaties between Spain and England does not have any legal effect.”
Interesting.
What treaty did Strong violate?
And why was it violated by landing at Bold Cove?
And what exactly has Strong's claim to do with Argentina who did not exist in 1690?
And as you say if someone who is a pirate (Jewett actually did capture ships and steal their cargoes) makes a claim, it is invalid, therefore by your own statement you confirm Jewitt's claim was invalid in 1820.
@198
Jul 01st, 2013 - 01:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are wasting your breath with malvinese1833. He once told me that the islands were Argentine because an Italian “might have seen” the islands first in 1500s.
On that measure the moons of Jupiter are also Argentine!!
It really is quite simple, Argentina “acknowleded 3 UP ”governors”:
Jewitt could claim sovereignty all he wanted, he fucked off, making his claim no more relevant than the far older and stronger British or Spanish claims.
Vernet also fucked off, leaving the British Matthew brisbane as his agent. All the Vernet community we encouraged to stay, and Brisbane accepted (welcomed) british sovereignty.
Mestevier was murdered by his own men.
The Argentine claim is weaker than the British, Spanish, Uruguayan or Chilean claims.
The British claim is the oldest and strongest.
Spains claim is next, then Uruguay and then Chile, if there were an independent Patagonia that'd be next.
Argentinas claim is 206th, due to their illegal invasion and attempts to ethnicly cleanse the territory.
Club falklandcana dreams come freee, sheep and crosswinds theres enough for everyone, oh pirating the southern seeeeas but dont worry we're all from GB
Jul 01st, 2013 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@200 Vestigial One:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 04:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As satirical sea shanties go that could definitely use some work. Incidentally that could just as easily describe The Shaky Isles ( otherwise known as N.Z. ).
lol. im tryin.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#202
Jul 01st, 2013 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You certainly are !
200toby
Jul 01st, 2013 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Club falklandcana dreams”
LOL, they are only “dreams” for you - you will never 'belong' - same for Think
Apologies in advance.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If you see a faded sign on a London road that says
8000 miles to the.... turnip Shack! turnip Shack yeah
I'm headin' down the Atlantic highway, lookin' for yet another colonial getaway
Heading for the turnip getaway.
I got me a liner, it's as big as a whale and we're headin' on down
To the turnip Shack
I got me a liner, it seats about 3020
So come on and bring your English retirement money
The turnip Shack is a little old place where we can squat together
Turnip Shack baby, Turnip Shack bay-bee.
Turnip is a patented term belonging to Think inc, any reference to turnips is strictly on condition of approval from Think. No pirates were harmed in the production of this wonderfully witty inspired parody.
Malvina's Blues in the key of E ( as are all the best blues songs )
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I got dem old Malvina's blues ( cue Muddy Waters stop-time riff )
I got PTSD from that war we had to lose
I am Argentine here me roar
I know y'all think I'm just a bore
But it's just dem old Malvina's blues
Y'all say our economy's down the tubes
But I tell ya it's just a ruse
It's just so hard to think clear baby...
When you got dem infernal damn ole Malvina's Blues.
haha ...very good very good.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0However........Ive found the new islands anthem... beat that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oncmL69ZEJ8
205toby
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“wonderfully witty inspired parody.”
says Toby.
Give me a break - nobody but Toby brags like this.
well, maybe Think, but Think has left Patagonia
205
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ah B52s awesome!
@207 Vestige:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cheers... I need a Thesaurus.
We know that “the Love Shack” ain't Argentina.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 06:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0205 Vestige
Jul 01st, 2013 - 07:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If your inane parody of “Love Shack” is your idea of the new Falkland Islands anthem then what is Argentina's new national Anthem???
My vote is “Can I play with madness?” By Iron Maiden
Or what about
“Daydream believer” ?????
OR even
“The Lunatic's have taken over the asylum” By the Fun Boy Three....
With apologies to Lennon, McCartney, and Eleanor Rigby.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 07:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Cristina Kirchner
Sucks up to the Pope in the hope he's a good Argentine
Lives in a dream
Waits at the window
Wearing the face that she paints with three coats like a door
Who is it for?
All the Malvin-istas
Where do they all come from?
All the Malvin-istas
Where do they all belong?
Horrible Hector
Alone at the table waits for UK to appear
No one comes near
If he talked to the Falklands he'd have to admit they exist
His boss would be pissed
All the Malvin-istas
Where do they all come from?
All the Malvin-istas
Where do they all belong?
Cristina Kirchner
Said the Malvinas were hers, you just had to look up at the birds
Nobody craned.
Horrible Hector
Thought he'd do better by playing the colonial card
Still the islands are ours
All the Malvin-istas
Where do they all come from?
All the Malvin-istas
Where do they all belong?
@213HansNiesund:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 07:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think you hit the ball out of the park. In the spirit of Wayne's World I can only say “I am not worthy”.
@214
Jul 01st, 2013 - 07:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No way, dude!
@215:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 07:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thunderbolt and lightening very, very frightening...
@213, i think you just won the internet!
Jul 01st, 2013 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0213..very good very good
Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My shot.
Elton John, Yellow Brick road.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDOL7iY8kfo
When are they gonna go home
when will they get off that land
They should have stayed in England
Should have been nice to Timmerman
You know you cant hold them forever
They never belonged to you
They're not a present to Cameron from Thatcher
The flag is destined to be white and bluuuue
Ahhhah
So goodbye port Stanley road
Where the redcoats make their fall
You cant keep hold of your bunker
Grab your tickets and cricket balls
We'll give you a shed in the Patagonian woods
If you promise not to be bold
Oh Ive finally decided your future lies
Beyond port Stanley rooooaaaad aaaahaahaahah
@218 Vestige:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Better, but don't break out the Cubano's just yet. As Malcolm Young says “If it don't swing it don't mean a thing.”
Oh dear ....Maybe I chose the wrong song .............
Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@2211Vestige:
Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You need to work on your rhythm chops. Think syncopation. Try it, it works.
Its something else Im worried about..... never mind
Jul 01st, 2013 - 08:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0213
Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Brillamt
I can't get no Falkland Islands
Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I can't get no Falkland Islands
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm flying in Tango One
And Hector comes on the radio
He's tellin' me more and more
About some bird flight information
Supposed to fire my imagination
I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey hey hey, that's what I say
I can't get no Falkland Islands
I can't get no Falkland Islands
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm watchin' my T.V.
And Maximo comes on to tell me
Just how black my clothes should be
And he's eaten all the pies again and
and he's nearly as fat as me
I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey hey hey, that's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction
I can't get no UN reaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm ridin' round the world
And I'm bitchin' about this and whinin' about that
And I'm tryin' to hit some shops
And that pelutodo Cameron says come back next week
'Cause you see I'm on a losing streak
I can't get no, oh no, no, no
Hey hey hey, that's what I say
I can't get no, I can't get no
I can't get no Falkland Islands
No satisfaction, no satisfaction, no satisfaction
@213
Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Waits at the window
Wearing the face that she paints with three coats like a door
Who is it for?”
PMSL.
Excellent!
“And Hector comes on the radio
Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0224 HansNiesund: He's tellin' me more and more
About some bird flight information
Supposed to fire my imagination ”
oh joy! Comic genius.
223,225
Jul 01st, 2013 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0LOL !!!
Other titles come to mind,
Crazy Train, for one
No lyrics for this one so I cant parody
Jul 01st, 2013 - 10:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0but look out for yankeeboy around the 1 min mark
one or two of the islanders in the background too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myhnAZFR1po
Ermm…Frank Sinatra anyone?
Jul 01st, 2013 - 10:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Start spreading the news
You're leaving someday
You can not be a part of it
Malvinas Malvinas
The UN has said
your Empire is dead
You're going to have to talk about
Malvinas Now!
We want to wake up on an Isle
That doesn't Bleat
and see the view of the hills
without any Sheep
Antarctic for you
is melting away
We'll make a brand new start of it
in Argentina
C Twenty four will make you share
Don't cry to the Yanks, coz they don't care
It's up to you
UK! UK!…….la la la la la…….la la la la la
Nothin like a bit of musical warfare.
Jul 01st, 2013 - 11:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Unless of course.... a rap battle.
But that can wait til tomorrow.
Too much discussion.
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 01:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0Meet Silverland
Meet Staten Island.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuNM8yt8Jqg
229 Think
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 03:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0Sinatra???
You must have one foot in the grave.
Good news for us ;-)
@ 229 A_Voice
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 08:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0“C Twenty four will make you share”
The C24 does not have the authority to ‘make’ the UK ‘share’, and neither does the Security Council, as per Article 37 it can only ‘recommend’.
Incidentally I have a strong suspicion that the SC is where CFK is heading in August, with Argentina as the President of the SC for the month, my best guess is she will try some manoeuvre under Chapter VI of the Charter, this will nullify the UK veto and vote, Article 27 refers, by the same token it will also nullify Argentina' vote.
The only thing `wrong` with my supposition is that Article 36 states:
“In making recommendations under this Article the Security Council should also take into consideration that legal disputes should as a general rule be referred by the parties to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court.”
However as Argentina has, in the past, refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the court that would seem to be a non-starter.
As I see it, should CFK try to go this route the best she could hope for would be a ‘request’ (not a demand) that negotiations on the matter take place. The UK counter to this would very likely be to point to Timberhead’s empty chair at the meeting arranged in February. Even if CFK could get a SC Resolution calling for negotiations without the Islanders being represented, which I believe is extremely unlikely, it would still make no difference to the outcome of said meeting.
Should this be the ploy CFK does take it will be interesting to see how her new ‘friends’ Russia and China handle the situation, my money would go on them abstaining in vote with conditions outlined above.
It will be interesting to see how/if CFK can get the 9 votes need to pass a Resolution.
So, a British Citizen (or Subject) wants to appeal to the US by invoking the “spirit of 1776”? Does the author not understand that the Declaration of Independence was a declaration denying the UK sovereignty in America?
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 01:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The author does not seem to understand that the UK abandoned the Malvinas Islands in 1774 for one reason, which was to free up the resources necessary to slaughter even more American Patriots. Does the author think that Americans do not know their history?
The arguments presented in this article are not going to induce Americans to say to the UK, “Sure, do whatever your want to further your imperial fantasies in America.” I don't think that the author has thought this through at all.
Oh dear the liver disease is back here.
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#234
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 04:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Americans do not know their history?
It appears that you don't.
There were many “Americans” who did not support the revolution. In many cases, they were slaughtered by the “Patriots”
While the Patriots were ultimately victorious in the American Revolution, choosing sides and deciding whether to fight in the war was far from an easy choice for American colonists. The great majority were neutral or Loyalist. For black people, what mattered most was freedom. As the Revolutionary War spread through every region, those in bondage sided with whichever army promised them personal liberty. The British actively recruited slaves belonging to Patriot masters and, consequently, more blacks fought for the Crown. An estimated 100,000 African Americans escaped, died or were killed during the American Revolution.
Many of the Patriots' slaves who sided with the British were promised their freedom. They sailed to New York, England, and Nova Scotia. In New York, the British created a registry of escaped slaves, called the “Book of Negroes”. The registry included details of their enslavement, escape and service to the British. If their claim was believed the slave received a certificate entitling them transport out of New York. By the time the “Book of Negroes” was closed, it had the names of 1,336 men, 914 women, and 750 children, who all resettled in Nova Scotia. About 200 former slaves went to London as free people.
Indians fought in the Revolution for Indian liberties and Indian homelands, not for the British empire. But the image of Indian participation presented in the Declaration of Independence prevailed: most Americans believed that Indians had backed monarchy and tyranny. A nation conceived in liberty need feel no remorse about dispossessing and expelling those who had fought against its birth.
The above extracted from various “American sources”
You must be thick if you think that a US citizen thinks that the Falklands are in America, they are in the S.Atlantic !
@234 Hepatia:
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 05:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I believe you'll find that the readers of the Washington Times are already well disposed to sympathize with the views contained in this article if previous such articles and editorials are any guide.
As to the your other comments it seems pretty ambitious to me to attempt to distill The American Revelolutionary War into two brief paragraphs as Clyde15's post would seem to confirm.
Please do not forget that even after the War of Independence, the U.S. tried to take over what have become Canada. The War of 1812, in which British forces occupied the Capital and burnt numerous public buildings.
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@238
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 06:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Please do not forget that even after the War of Independence.........The War of 1812, in which American forces occupied York (Toronto) and burnt numerous public buildings.
@240_Voice
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You're just bored aren't you? Go on, admit it.
@240 Heisenbergcontext
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(shrug)...Maybe.......but I couldn't understand why his comment was there or what it was supposed to mean and who he was trying to trash........so I lopped that ball right back at him......I'm a defender of the defenceless or underdog!
@242 A_Voice:
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The Clarence Darrow of the internet!
cuddles and orville of the internet
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@243
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0More of a Rod Hull and Emu!......I go for the throat
@244 “I go for the throat”
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 07:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0deep throating Think..I assume.
@213 and 224 Hans Ha ha ha very good
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 08:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@218 and 229 jua jua excelente compañero very very fuuuunyyyyy
Today I could see better the comments and I really liked the musical war.
Very very funny.
Yesterday showed that anything is possible.
@ I was not trying to 'trash' anyone. I was merely pointing out that even after U.S. independence it still had territorial ambitions in what became Canada some considerable time later.
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I do not dispute the burnings in York, just trying to emphasize that although they had been defeated in the War of Independence they were still a force to be reckoned with. So much so that when the war ended there was no victor and both sides went back to where they were before it started. Whilst there was no 'victor' as the US failed to gain, and hold, their objectives they could easily be considered the vanquished.
@247
Jul 02nd, 2013 - 10:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nah you are like all Canadians........they think they won..........I notice you have avoided the word........SAY IT.........British........there was no Canada it was British!!
The British won with the help of the locals and the French and the First Nation.
Was that too hard to swallow.......I know the Canadians don't like to admit it.
There there that's a weight off your shoulders I said it for you!
@ 248 A_Voice
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 12:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Actually it was Canada, 'Upper Canada', the Dominion did not come until later, and yes it was British.
Are you happy now?
Yep........thank you......as long as you are!
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 12:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0@249 Malvinas, Canada and the British alibi.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 12:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0Only in Spanish.
http://www.infobae.com/notas/653479-Malvinas-cacerolas-y-la-coartada-britanica.html
http://en.mercopress.com/2013/06/26/preserving-independence-for-the-falklands#comment258316: The Washington Times has readers? Other than Moonies I mean.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 02:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0I imaging that there is a plank in Unification Church theology that states that the Malvinas Islands are forever a little corner of the UK and that they should publicize this in their propaganda outlet. I wouldn't know. I don't give the Washington Times any credibility on any subject at all. I'm surprised that anybody does.
I made no attempt distill the American Revolution into two paragraphs. I simply focused on the fact that the US won its independence from the UK and that county's homicidal and dishonest history.
@253 Hepatia:
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 06:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Tsk, tsk, even Moonies have feelings you know, no need to be mean. Once again I refer you to Clyde15's comprehensive dismantling of your comments. Details have more weight, in my book, then empty point-scoring rhetoric.
#252
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 09:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0All you can produce is anti-British rhetoric with no serious facts to back it up.
Save your self the bother of posting - all you need to say is, “everything British bad, throughout history up to now”
Do you mean the US's homicidal and dishonest history ?
@252
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 12:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“homicidal and dishonest history”
One of the reasons that the colonists in USA wanted independence is that Britain wanted the natives to hold on to vast tracts of their territory, and prevent it from being colonised whilst the colonists purged the native population.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!