MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Malvinas war veterans appeal abuses case to Inter American Human Rights Commission
Malvinas war veterans have taken their Human rights abuse case against Argentine officers to the Inter American Human Rights Commission, IHRC, following on Argentina's Supreme Court decision rejecting the case because of time limit. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesYou brainwash them about islands hundreds of miles from your shores, you starve and torture them , while the Officers hide under the roofs with the red crosses. you,d be better off staying at home and fighting the real evil....
May 14th, 2015 - 09:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why the USA ,
May 14th, 2015 - 10:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0why not the UK ,
just asking.
@2
May 14th, 2015 - 11:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0Where is the USA mentioned?
Pricks were blocking off Rividavia yesterday when I drove through past Congress. Thanks for wasting 30 mins of my life A holes. Next time protest outside Kristina's compound!
May 14th, 2015 - 11:57 am - Link - Report abuse 03
May 14th, 2015 - 01:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Maybe he was confused by the fact that it's headquarters are located in Washington DC...
....USA...
Rividavia? Nabo! Bad treatment? Bad soldiers, they lost, turnip
May 14th, 2015 - 01:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 03 gordo1 (#)
May 14th, 2015 - 01:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0first paragraph “the Organization of American States”
Members of which include the US and Argyland.
Just wondering can the People of the Falklands also make a claim given they were held at gunpoint , threatened and forcibly removed from their homes.
@7 The OAS is not very popular with people like la Kretina, Correa, Morales and Madura - it will be interesting to see what happens.
May 14th, 2015 - 01:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@2 Briton
May 14th, 2015 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0IHRC is part of the OAS, based in Washington.
Although as the alleged crimes were committed on British territory, it may be possible to prosecute under British law.
Would make for some interesting extradition proceedings.
OAS is filled with SoAms who are either too dumb or not politically connected enough to get a job at WB IDB IMF etc.
May 14th, 2015 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0rotting roadkillians are some of the world's most prolific WHINERS.
May 14th, 2015 - 04:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“KICK A TROLL TODAY.”
It seems to me the “veterans” didn't put their case soon enough, or is that me being logical?
May 14th, 2015 - 04:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So now they want the world to know the argie officers were just a bunch of cowards, like the “veterans” in fact.
GHURKAS!
That's scared the shit out of them!
@9 Pugol-H
May 14th, 2015 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It would be interesting indeed, because first they'd have to admit that it was British territory, although for these veterans it may be the only way they'd see any movement forwards on their quest for justice.
However, it is despicable that the current Argentine government, you know the one that NEVER EVER under ANY circumstance SUPPORTED the MILITARY JUNTA (except every April 2nd when they celebrate them and their actions), won't appoint a special commission to investigate these crimes.
Unless, of course, any investigation might be embarrassing to those in power.
Just a thought.
@13. Where's the bit of international law that says a war criminal can claim 'human rights' abuses? There are some examples of war crimes in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime
May 14th, 2015 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Every single member of the argie forces is guilty of initiating a war of aggression.
A considerable number will also be guilty of 'murdering or mistreating prisoners of war or civilian internees'. As in taking photographs of stepping on the backs of Royal Marines ordered to surrender. The confinement of over 100 civilians, including children, in a hall. Without food or water. And no protection.
How nice of these argies to provide the evidence that will enable them to be tried. Just relax. Who knows where they'll be when a 'snatch squad' takes them!
Thank you all, Briton did not read it properly,
May 14th, 2015 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I was merely wondering, that surely the brits would have some evidence of abuse, when they took over positions or captured prisoners telling stories of abuse by their officers.
so that's why I asked why not the UK,
but I see your point,
thanks.
In one of its most callous decisions to date, the Argentine Supreme Court has denied justice to former soldiers who were tortured by their own officers.
May 14th, 2015 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Most of those officers had been involved in the kidnapping, torture and summary execution of thousands of argentines during the 1970s. Most of them were good at acting against unarmed civilians but were unwilling to risk their life fighting a real war.
As a result, the veterans are forced to seek at the international level the justice their country has denied them.
I wish them success--to the assassins, I wish punishment fitting their crimes.
16. Oh are those pretty pretty Falcons bothering you still?
May 14th, 2015 - 07:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you wake up with a jolt when car doors slam?
I hope so.
“...the appeal had prescribed because of time limit for its presentation...” oh the old 'extinctive prescription' at work again. It's hard to imagine why the claimants waited until 2007 before bringing suit. There most have been a prior prohibition.
May 14th, 2015 - 11:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wrong again Terry....
May 15th, 2015 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0Extinctive Prescription is not applicable for crimes against humanity and war crimes...there is no time limitation....
19 Voice, Vestige, Think, et al
May 15th, 2015 - 12:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0“.. you have no legislation only opinions....”.
No majority of argentine forces were conscripts so not guilty of starting a war of conquest.
May 15th, 2015 - 04:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0The argie officers should have had their sidearms taken when captured and let natural justice happen problem solved.
Wrong again Terry
May 15th, 2015 - 05:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0”Argentina’s Law on the Implementation of the 1998 ICC Statute (2006) states:
“The prosecution and punishment of the crimes provided in articles 8, 9 and 10 of this law [genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes], as well as of any other crimes that may eventually fall within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, are not subject to statutes of limitation”
22 Voice, Vestige, Think, et al
May 15th, 2015 - 10:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0So even if the Argentine courts have made an error, and the plaintiffs prima facia where wronged, but time limits are acceptable to the IACHR and they are limited in intervening to wit:
'OAS :: Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
REPORT Nº 108/06 PETITION 4680-02 INADMISSIBILITY MIGUEL ALBERTO VILLANUEVA SÁNCHEZ PERU October 21, 2006
39. Under the preamble of the American Convention on Human Rights, the protection that the organs of the inter-American system for the protection of human rights offers is intended to complement the protection afforded by the local courts. The Commission cannot take upon itself the functions of an appeals court in order to examine alleged errors of fact or law that local courts may have committed while acting within the scope of their jurisdiction, unless there is unequivocal evidence that the guarantees of due process recognized in the American Convention have been violated.[12]' http://www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/2006eng/Peru.4680.02eng.htm
Moreover, as there accusation is against their own military they may not conform to the legal definitions that they're claiming were violated.
I think this should be heard. A lot of the Argentine 'soldiers' were ill-informed, poorly educated, conscripts. They were sold a lie, sent off to fight an illegal war, behaved like the ignorant people they were and then ill-treated by superiors. It was an appalling aspect of an appalling war. Maybe we will also hear how the majority of Argentines celebrated this war - and still do to this day - and then how the veterans were ill-treated and ostracised when they returned because they did not win - no other reason.
May 15th, 2015 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0They continue to be abused as they are used as political pawns by successive presidents. Worse still the Argentines that died are misused.
This takes nothing from the plight of the Falkland Islanders who suffered this terrible invasion.
23
May 15th, 2015 - 11:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Thank you for overstating the obvious...Sherlock...
It's a fairly obvious conclusion to draw that if an Argentine limit has been placed on this claim then the Argentine Supreme Court do not class the claim as a Crime against Humanity or a War Crime...Doh!!
....you are great with the quotes, but a little lacking with the brains....
I can say, as always, you are a glutton for punishment...
25 Voice, Vestige, Think, et al
May 15th, 2015 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well it's sufficient to catch you shooting from the hip when your only accomplishment is to place the bullet firmly in your own foot. As I haven't failed yet to show that all of your legal assertions are invariably wrong, at least in this instance you acknowledge that I'm correct.
26
May 15th, 2015 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The only thing you are right about is....your GUESS that their claim does not conform to the legal definition of Crimes against Humanity or War Crimes...according to Argentine Law, hence their appeal to the Inter American Human Rights Commission.
This case is not about Extinctive Prescription it's about recognising that their claim conforms to a legal definition of Crime against Humanity or a War Crime, both having no time limitations....ergo no Extinctive Prescription...
As always you... Guess and offer opinions and I state the simple facts of the case...
27 Voice, Vestige, Think, et al
May 15th, 2015 - 12:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It wasn't a guess, it was solely based on deductive logic. Oh yes it is about 'extinctive prescription' aka 'time limits', which is is natural application of law in all jurisdictions. To avoid the abuse of a claimant's failure to bring suit in reasonable time. As for example Argentines claim to the Islands.
Doesn't anyone else wonder why a “Scot” from the as*end of nowhere care about Arg conscripts?
May 15th, 2015 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Odd...
29 yankeeboy
May 15th, 2015 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Thats probably because he isn't whom he claims to be, especially when frequently engaging in behavior that emulates precisely viveza criolla. Apply the Duck test as inductive reasoning. “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test
Distraction.
May 15th, 2015 - 02:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Pay your debts - deadbeats.
28
May 15th, 2015 - 03:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh dear Terence the reason they are taking it to “Inter American HUMAN RIGHTS Commission.
...I'll give you a clue...it's in the name....
Stuff it...you'll never get it without a bigger clue....
...because their claim...they believe...is a HUMAN RIGHTS issue and this is being denied by the Argentine Supreme Court....
...I might have given it away then....
and now for my next trick....
...bury Terry's argument that it's due to Extinctive Prescription....
”In November 2009, however, the national court of appeal upheld the claims of the defence teams in two of the reported cases that the actions of the officers were not part of a systematic or premeditated attack against their own troops, and therefore did not conform to crimes against humanity.*
*[Update: In February 2015, Argentina’s Supreme Court rejected an appeal from CECIM to treat the accusations as crimes against humanity, thereby effectively closing the case. CECIM says it will now take the appeal to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.]
Oh dear oh dear...what can I say ...me old son....
..better luck next time....;-)))
If it spells like a foreigner...lives in a foreign country...it's probably a foreigner...
That's called my Terry Hill test.....know what I'm saying....Terry Hill of Brazil...;-)
32 Voice, Vestige, Think, et al
May 15th, 2015 - 03:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What are crimes against humanity?
“Crimes against humanity” include any of the following acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population....“
http://www.icccpi.int/en_menus/icc/about%20the%20court/frequently%20asked%20questions/Pages/12.aspx Well it's not this as they weren't civilians.
ICRC Definition of War Crimes ”The conduct endangers protected persons or objects. ...” http://www.icccpi.int/en_menus/icc/about%20the%20court/frequently%20asked%20questions/Pages/12.aspx
Nor this, so the claimants do not fit either definition. So Argentina's Supreme Court must be right. So meanwhile “...from the Federal Cassation Court ...the appeal had prescribed because of time limit for its presentation...” and after the dust settles they are not an entitled party, who have run out time, like you and Argentina. So just keep your duck walk up to snuff. Slam, bam thank you ma'am.
@16. Sorry? Since when has argieland had 'soldiers'? Based on the 'Falklands Experience', argieland has criminals, gangsters, gutter scum. Now, I wonder why British troops didn't force argie scum to lie face down and take pictures of each other treading on their backs? Why couldn't there have been some argie civilians to lock in a hall without food or water? If the day comes, imagine how the people of the Falklands and Britain will respond if asked whether British forces should bomb, missile and/or shell argie military installations sited within argie civilian areas.
May 15th, 2015 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@21. Conscription changes nothing. If it was wrong, stand up and be counted.
@32. Let's go with 'Extinctive'. If there's any of these 'veterans' under the age of 52, shoot them. They're lying. And then shoot the rest for being war criminals!
24 Elaine B
May 16th, 2015 - 01:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0A sensible posting contrasting with so many ignorant ramblings piled up here.
Not only you are right saying that most soldiers brought to Malvinas were conscripts; they were 18-year-old kids who followed orders, went to the front, suffered from hunger, lack of training, improper equipment, and had to endure harsh treatment, even torture, from their own officers, a bunch of cowards and assassins like sadly remembered Navy lieutenant Alfredo Astiz.
@35
May 16th, 2015 - 03:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And as if that wasn't enough, it was all for an ignoble and unworthy cause.
14 Conqueror (#): On Mt Longdon, six Argie POWs were executed: Privates Ramón Quintana, Donato Gramisci, Aldo Ferreyra, Enrique Mosconi, Alberto Petrucelli & Julio Maidana. The Paras also deliberately buried the Argie dead in unmarked graves, despite the fact the conscripts either had dogtags, family letters, photos & plastic ID cards identifying them, now these are real war crimes.
May 17th, 2015 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 024 ElaineB (#) & 35 Enrique Massot (#): Argie officers did the right thing in applying Field Punishments to wayward conscripts, Aussie & Kiwi officers also brutally punished their soldiers that went AWOL but we don't call them torturers, so stop being hypocrites. Also the 5th Marine Bn, 25th 'Seineldin Commando' Regt & Brigadier Oscar Jofre's 10th Mech Inf Bde (3rd 'General Belgrano', 6th 'General Viamontes' & 7th 'Coronel Conde' Regts were properly trained & that explains why so many British Paras, Commandos & Guardsmen returned home in body bags, in wheelchairs, on crutches or were condemneed to wearing adult nappies for life. You talk about Astiz but what about the commies that started the Dirty Wars in Argentina (Semana Trágica 1919, Patagonia Trágica 1922, etc & later in the 1970s)?
34 Conqueror (#) What about if we shot all the British veterans of the Malayan Emergency for the countless war crimes committed there?
#37
May 17th, 2015 - 07:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you have proof of these allegations ?
As to the treatment of Argentine soldiers by their officers, it's of no particular interest to us. Sort it out yourselves !
@37 What the hell has your country, Val Verde, to do with the Argentine illegal invasion of the Falkland Islands?
May 17th, 2015 - 08:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 01 lornefirth (#): The conscripts ate like Kings compared to other armies. Private Altieri says the commander on Longdon allowed the conscripts to live off ratpacks:
May 17th, 2015 - 10:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Subteniente Juan Baldini recibía la orden del oficial Mayor Carrizo que estaba más abajo, de abastecernos de raciones frías” http://www.taringa.net/posts/noticias/5141854/Entrevista-a-Jorge-Beto-Altieri-sobrevivie.html
The coy that defended Two Sisters, according to Private Agretti, initially had hot food but in the end had to live off ratpacks:
“There we had hot food, built excellent positions and were quite ready for when the British attacked. Then around the 27th May we were suddenly told that we were to abandon Wall Mountain and that we would have to defend Dos Hermanos instead. Nobody explained why, we were just ordered to move. Some walked to the mountain and some of us were taken by truck. It was a crazy decision because we never really had time to build good positions on Dos Hermanas, also we did not have a Field Kitchen so we never had any hot food anymore. We had to eat from our ration packs and it was terrible having no hot food day after day.” http://www.taringa.net/posts/noticias/5141854/Entrevista-a-Jorge-Beto-Altieri-sobrevivie.html
Nick Taylor of 45 CDO has this to say about the Argie ratpacks:
‘We all recognised that and we were grateful to have avoided more bloodshed. But we were equally grateful for what they left behind. We only had the uniforms we stood up in and the equipment we could carry; no extra clothing or food. We were out of everything. We had to take boots and other items from their dead. We also took their ammo, weapons, rations – it was corned beef – and whisky and orange powder. We mixed it with water out of bomb craters and it was lovely. We found blankets and woolly hats.’ http://www.taringa.net/posts/noticias/5141854/Entrevista-a-Jorge-Beto-Altieri-sobrevivie.html
#37 General Esperanza
May 18th, 2015 - 12:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0Two wrongs do not make a right. Torture of “wayward” Argentine soldiers by their own officers is unacceptable. Justify this by alleging British brutalities would be laughable if it were not tragic.
“You talk about Astiz but what about the commies that started the Dirty Wars in Argentina...?”
I know this is not the best forum to discuss this, but what those so-called “Dirty Wars” were not wars. The first two were events in which thousand of unarmed or poorly armed civilians ended up being killed by armed forces.
Bringing about the kidnappings, torture and illegal executions that Astiz and the Argentine armed forces as a whole committed against unarmed civilians in the 1970s is an attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
Astiz kidnapped, tortured and murdered a number of civilians during the 1976-1983 civic-military dictatorship. He was tried and condemned in 2011 to life in prison for crimes against humanity.
France tried and sentenced Astiz in absentia for the kidnapping and murder of French nuns Alice Domon and Léonie Duquet.
Astiz was also involved in the murder of three Italian citizens and the theft of the baby of one of them. He wounded and captured 17-year-old Swedish citizen Dagmar Hagelin; she was never to be seen alive again.
Astiz and a small group of commandos under his orders surrendered to British forces on April 23, 1982.
41 Enrique Massot (#) Please google & read about Field Punishments before calling them 'torture'. They are necessary in conscripts armies during wartime. If the company & platoon commanders didn't keep their men in line, more conscripts would've died like Privates Carlos Hornos, Pedro Vojkovic, Alejandro Vargas & Manuel Zelarrayán who deserted their coy on Wireless Ridge on the night of 8-9 June to go looking for food in a nearby Shepherd's house & were killed when their boat set off an anti-tank mine when returning from their stupid venture. And sorry I don't agree, the disappeared in the70s were either left-wing guerrillas, active collaborators & their supporters who provided them food, shelter, etc in order to convert Argentina into another Cuba.
May 18th, 2015 - 02:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0@42 Pretend General
May 18th, 2015 - 11:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps you should read about Napoleon. He said that 'an army marches on its stomach.'
That means in order to have an effective fighting force you need to ensure that they are properly provisioned.
If the Argentine commanders had kept their men properly provisioned then Ptes Horns, Vojkovic, Vargas & Zelarrayan, wouldn't have felt the need to go looking for food. Food that is vital for their survival.
And it was the Argentine commanders who didn't provide that food, even though they had tonnes of it in storage at Stanley.
Field punishments are an outdated, and have been outdated since mid-20 century, way of punishing men, often without being given due process.
In civilised countries there are no such thing as field punishments, and haven't been for over 70 years.
I'm also quite interested to know how a boat could set off an anti tank mine? How is that possible? Especially as anti tank mines are buried in land, and boats tend to float on water.
Please enlighten us to how an anti tank mine can float? Or how a boat can drive across land?
It seems that you really don't know what you are talking about, fake General.
#43 LEPRecon
May 18th, 2015 - 05:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We often do not agree, but I must say I am pretty impressed by this extremely thoughtful post. I totally subscribe to it. The Argentine military in 1982 were used to act more as death squads than as an army, and that showed up in the treatment of the poor 18-year-old conscripts they send to the islands.
43 LEPRecon (#) Argie field punishments took place only 10 years after the Anzac field punisments in Vietnam. Hornos, Vojkovic, Vargas & Zelarrayán from A/RI 7 were killed hiding their wooden boat on land. Despite commie propaganda, RI 7 had plenty of food. Pte Altieri says the commander on Longdon allowed B/RI 7 to live off ratpacks:
May 18th, 2015 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Subteniente Juan Baldini recibía la orden del oficial Mayor Carrizo que estaba más abajo, de abastecernos de raciones frías” www.taringa.net/posts/noticias/5141854/Entrevista-a-Jorge-Beto-Altieri-sobrevivie.html
Before the British landings, Pte Miguel Savage says C/RI 7 regulary ate barbecued meat:
“Savage spent nearly two months huddled in holes in the peat at the foot of Mount Longdon, with the Seventh Mechanised Regiment of La Plata, waiting and hoping not to have to fight. At first, the regiment passed the time shooting at sheep and roasting them on an old bed frame they had found nearby” http://www.scotsman.com/news/you-never-get-over-it-but-i-have-a-double-problem-i-was-fighting-against-brits-people-who-were-as-good-as-family-1-501332
44 Enrique Massot (#) You pick on Argie army punishments meted out to deserters, but ignore the six Argie POWs the Paras executed on Longdon & practically all the conscripts the Paras deliberately buried without their dogtags & plastic ID cards at Goose Green & Longdon???
@45 Fake General
May 19th, 2015 - 05:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0Ah, so you completely ignore just about everything in my post. So, according to you, the Argentine soldiers feasted like kings prior to the British Task Force arriving, but what about AFTER the British Task Force turned up to liberate the Islands? Why weren't they supplied? How can any man be expected to fight without provisions? Please explain that? Explain why the Argentine commanders weren't doing their job to keep Argentine soldiers supplied in the field? I mean their supply lines were ridiculously short. The British managed to keep their soldiers provisioned and their supply line was 8,000 miles long. So explain that.
Please enlighten us all on how a boat could be destroyed by an anti tank mine. Don't avoid the question.
I also see that you are now desperately trying to divert attention with false, and unsubstantiated claims against the British. Which is a usual trick of people like you.
It's funny how none of these claims weren't made at the time, just decades later. There is no proof that the Paras executed anyone, let alone Argentine prisoners, but there is plenty of proof of Argentine violations of the Geneva Conventions, that include waving the white flag, then opening fire on the British soldiers who came to parley with them. The random and unmapped laying of landmines, which are still in place today. The hiding of Artillery equipment and munitions under the protected Red Cross symbol. Booby trapping the children's desks in the school with high explosives.
In fact, as the British advanced on Stanley many Argentine soldiers wanted to use the civilian population as human shields, which was also against the Geneva Conventions. Fortunately General Mendoza, realising that he'd be facing war crimes tribunals if he allowed his men to do that, surrendered. The only decent act he did in the war, and it was all to save his own skin.
So stop trying to divert and answer the question. How can an anti tank mine destroy a boat?
46 LEPRecon (#) Proof of Brit crimes on Mount Longdon:
May 19th, 2015 - 06:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Jose Carrizo said British soldiers shot him in the head after he was taken prisoner ... Nestor Flores, said he saw British soldiers shoot a wounded, unarmed soldier called Quintana; stab to death with a bayonet another one named Gramissi; and toss a grenade into a foxhole where a soldier called Delgado lay” http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/argentinians-raise-spectre-of-war-crimes-1.712547
Proof anti-tank mine killed 4 deserters:
“decidierdon ir en busca de provisiones hasta una casa kelper y se toparon con una mina antitanque. En el mismo episodio murieron los soldados Pedro Vojkovic, Alejandro Vargas y Manuel Zelarrayán” http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/argentinians-raise-spectre-of-war-crimes-1.712547
Proof RI 4 conscripts lived on ratpacks in the final days:
“There we had hot food, built excellent positions and were quite ready for when the British attacked. Then around the 27th May we were suddenly told that we were to abandon Wall Mountain and that we would have to defend Dos Hermanos instead. Nobody explained why, we were just ordered to move. Some walked to the mountain and some of us were taken by truck. It was a crazy decision because we never really had time to build good positions on Dos Hermanas, also we did not have a Field Kitchen so we never had any hot food anymore. We had to eat from our ration packs and it was terrible having no hot food day after day” http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/argentinians-raise-spectre-of-war-crimes-1.712547
Ofcourse Argie commie propaganada overlooks Brit war crimes & focuses on the necessary field punishments painting them as 'torture'. Commies in Argentina would also like you to believe the conscripts were only given 'water soup', conveniently overlooking the fact Argie commanders allowed the concripts to live off the cold tinned rations.
Jose Carrizo said British soldiers shot him in the head after he was taken prisoner ...
May 19th, 2015 - 10:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am sure that a shot in the head would kill you. Was he contacted by seance ?
48 Clyde15 (#) “According to Adrian Weale, the man who shot Corporal José Carrizo twice in the head was Sergeant John Pettinger” http://nottinghammalvinas.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/accounts-of-mount-longdon.html
May 19th, 2015 - 11:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0British helicopter pilots also refused to evacuate badly wounded conscripts after the Battle of Darwin Hill & Provate Horacio Giraudo from RI 25 died as a result:
“Last week, this newspaper was told of another allegation, that after the battle a British helicopter pilot, acting in defiance of the conventions of war, refused to evacuate a badly wounded 17-year-old Argentine despite protests by medical staff” http://nottinghammalvinas.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/accounts-of-mount-longdon.html
#49
May 19th, 2015 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you saying he was shot in he head TWICE and still lived ? I cannot believe that for a moment.
@ 50 Clyde15
May 19th, 2015 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But he was an argie: no brain to damage!
The “General” is of course nothing but a La Camping It Up troll.
That “blogsite” is a real load of shit.
50 Clyde15 (#) He had a helmet on at the time, but I guess you weren't smart enough to even investigate more about him via google.
May 19th, 2015 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 051 ChrisR (#) I guess if it was a British blogsite exposing made-up Argie war crimes you'd be all for it, you hypocrite.
@52:
May 20th, 2015 - 08:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0Unlike you, we have no need to “make up” the war crimes of Argentina, the evidence is already there, as LEPRecon pointed out:
“...plenty of proof of Argentine violations of the Geneva Conventions, that include waving the white flag, then opening fire on the British soldiers who came to parley with them. The random and unmapped laying of landmines, which are still in place today. The hiding of Artillery equipment and munitions under the protected Red Cross symbol. Booby trapping the children's desks in the school with high explosives.
In fact, as the British advanced on Stanley many Argentine soldiers wanted to use the civilian population as human shields, which was also against the Geneva Conventions.”
Not to mention that there were documents reported here that suggested the Argentine invasion force was to send the Islanders who objected to their ill-treatment to Argentina, no doubt to be quietly murdered.
Your allegations of British “crimes” pale in comparison to the facts showing Argentina's blatant disregard for the Geneva Conventions, especially since it was a war *Argentina* started on false pretences, the greatest harm inflicted so far by the Malvinas lie.
#52
May 20th, 2015 - 08:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why should I have to waste my time checking google when you are doing such an effective job ! I am smart enough to know you are a Troll talking crap.
To quote from your article published in 1992 !!!!!
A senior military figure who saw most of the Falklands war and the Paras' performance at close hand, summed up his feelings thus: 'The great majority of this material is someone's wild imaginings. 'Isolated incident' is a phrase I can live with. The rest is fantasy.'
Were YOU actually there during the fighting? Pure conjecture.
A high velocity bullet fired from a SLR would easily penetrate the helmet and take half your head off so I STILL DON'T BELIEVE IT.
54 Clyde15 (#) So historians Adrian Weale & Christian Jennings got it wrong when they explained in their book Green Eyed Boys that it was Sergeant Pettinger that fired the shoot that took an eye off Corporal Carrizo?:
May 20th, 2015 - 10:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Catorce años después de los hechos, el historiador inglés Weale, junto a Christian Jennings, reconstruyeron su historia y pudieron determinar que efectivamente se trataba de John Pettinger” http://edant.clarin.com/diario/96/05/26/infrec5.html
What about the close range shot to the head that Pvt Horacio Benitez from A/RI 3 survived during the Battle of Wireless Ridge?:
“I was trying to get some ammunition from a dead man ... I looked up and the British were right in front of me; one was pointing his rifle at me and he opened fire. The bullet hit the side of my helmet, entered and ripped my ear and lodged at the back of my head. That finished me off” (Argentine Fight for the Falklands, p. 267, By Martin Middlebrook)
And what about the high velocity round that 2nd Lt Ernesto Peluffo from A/RI 12 survived on Darwin Ridge, entering his helmet & leaving a nasty scars just 1 or 2 inches above his right eye still visible today thanks to this youtube upload where he recounts the Battle of Goose Green: http://edant.clarin.com/diario/96/05/26/infrec5.html
54 Clyde15 (#) “You Cn't Handle The truth!”, just like like Jack Nicholson says in the movie A Few Good Men.
#55
May 21st, 2015 - 09:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Whatever ! You started the war and had tosuffer the consequences. Tough titty.
@ 55 Corporal Esperanza
May 21st, 2015 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I watched that video.
You do know that the rifles used by the British Forces were FN SLR' don't you.
They are chambered for a 7.62x51 NATO cartridge of which I have very much experience of shooting in all conditions and bullet configuration and can state this unequivocally that how it is described he would be dead.
No if's and but's DEAD.
I have a scar very similar to the one you can almost see on this liars forehead but on the left side: I fell off my pushbike when I was 13 and struck my head on a granite kerb stone. I was told I was lucky to be alive; if it had been a 7.62 I would have been dead. How lucky was that?
You bunch of tossers lost the war, you will never win a war against the UK of that you can bet no matter what happens.
I realise that having this mean spirited attitude may be due to your constipation problem so I will help you out with that.
GHURKAS!
Feel better now that's scared the shit out of you?
#57
May 21st, 2015 - 08:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As I said !!!
57 ChrisR (#) You really should wake up & smell the coffee. 2nd Lt Robert Lawrence from the Scots Guards Battalion during the Battle for Mt Tumbledown also survived a high velocity bullet fired by a conscript from 2nd Lt Augusto La Madrid's platoon from B/RI 6 & BTW, Lawrence was only wearing a beret!!!
May 22nd, 2015 - 02:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0I suppose you too “Can't Handle The truth!”, just like like Jack Nicholson says in the movie A Few Good Men.
#59
May 22nd, 2015 - 10:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Yes and it ruined his life. So, an Argentinian can survive TWO bullets in the head without a great deal of trauma. I would suggest that they were glancing blows and NOT deep penetrating wounds.
If he had worn a helmet, the chances are that the bullet would have penetrated the skull with reduced momentum and lodged in the brain instead of exiting.
Certain death.
Having spent a significant part of my naval career in the Chilean signals corps, I can reliably assure everyone that the first thing we learned about Argentine communications was is that our Andean neighbors are generally pathological liars. ...How can you tell an Argentine is telling a mistruth? When you notice his. Lips moving...
May 22nd, 2015 - 09:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ 59 Corporal Esperanza
May 23rd, 2015 - 02:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Clearly, you are completely uneducated in 'exterior ballistics' as the science of firearm cartridges is concerned.
Modern RIFLE bullets (those used in bottle-neck cases) typically considered to be the Mauser 1898 (P '98) and the P 30.06 from the American rifle of the designation kill by hydrostatic pressures either inside the body or closely associated to it.
The projectile (the bullet or head as it is known) travels hypersonically for about one mile (1.6 Km) after leaving the muzzle. The bullets are known as 'ball' meaning they do not expand upon hitting soft targets (people) and therefore are supposed to be more 'friendly' than softpointed bullets.
In front of the bullet is a pressure wave and it is this pressure wave that pierces the clothing and the skin of the target in making it's way THROUGH the body. Make no mistake, even a Kevlar armoured helmet is no defence to a 7.62x51 NATO rifle bullet, though it can and has stopped the puny 5.56mm NATO rifle bullet (these were not available to the forces in '82).
As the bullet passes through soft tissue an immense pressure wave is set up which completely destroys the tissues, blood vessels and other organs. This destruction carries on whilst the bullet travels at least another half a mile unless it hits something capable of stopping it.
A bullet passing near to a body gets the effect of the pressure wave without even the bullet hitting flesh.
Now tell me again that these liars were hit with full-size rifle bullets and I will call you for what you are, a LIAR.
ChrisR (#) I guess it's acceptable for Brits to survive HE rounds to the head via the helmet, but not okay when Argies make the same claim:
May 23rd, 2015 - 10:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0According to Mike Southall from 3 Para:
“Three of us then gave chase but we were fired on again and one bullet hit my mate, Dom Gray, in the helmet and carved a groove across the top of his head. Blood was pouring down his face. He wanted to continue but had to be ordered to go and get treatment.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150343/Falklands-The-Battle-of-Mount-Longdon.html
Clyde15 (#) Steve Tuffen from 2 Para was shot TWICE in the head & survived:
“Steve Tuffen was lying on the ground after being shot twice in the head ... Then aged 18, the soldier was injured during the battle of Goose Green ... He had to wait four hours for help because he was too close to the enemy and too exposed for any rescue attempt to be made.”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150343/Falklands-The-Battle-of-Mount-Longdon.html
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!