MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Malcorra confirms Falklands' representation in UK delegation to Red Cross discussions in Geneva
Argentine foreign minister Susana Malcorra confirmed on Tuesday that next month there will be a meeting with representatives from the British government to advance in the agreement to start rolling the humanitarian mission headed by the International Committee of the Red Cross, ICRC, for the identification of former Argentine combatants buried at the Darwin cemetery in Falklands and which remain as unknown soldiers. The minister also said that Falklands will be part of the UK representation. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesCall it how you will, the Falkland Islanders are fully represented, and ultimately hold a veto over proceedings. However, unlike the awkward neighbour I have no doubt that they'll take the humanitarian approach, not the propaganda way.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 09:39 am - Link - Report abuse +9Argentina, on the other hand, will not be able to help itself.
@ RL
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:17 am - Link - Report abuse +5Like a confident adult dealing with an insecure adolescent.
Malcorra Transplanted population MercoPress 10 Nov 2016
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:19 am - Link - Report abuse +6Malcorra said that historically the Argentine position was not to acknowledge for this case in particular the “self determination of peoples”, because 'kelpers' (Falkland Islanders) are a transplanted population, not aborigine.
Incorrect. Paragraph 4 contains legislation: https://www.academia.edu/17799157/Falklands_-_Some_Relevant_International_Law
Boo!
Looks like Ms Maria Teresa Kralikas and Ms Susana Malcorra should sit down and talk before making statements, nothing looks more amateur than conflicting statements from the same governments.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:32 am - Link - Report abuse +5I suppose the Fictional 'Malvinas Office' has to say it is upset, but then the important people in the process need to get on work to find the grown up solution.
The Falklands have jurisdiction so it was puerile to think that they would not be fully involved in the process.
Well it's good to see common sense prevail. As I've alway said an MLA will be present and involved in both meetings.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 01:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +7It would have been a big pity to see the chance of this humanitarian project break down due to politics.
“However, said this the people of the Malvinas..”
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 02:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +4I just figured out who writing this stuff and it's Yoda.
---------------
Lordton
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 02:46 pm - Link - Report abuse -10“and ultimately hold a veto over proceedings.”
What are your sources for this claim...?
Is it your opinion...?
I hope your historical contributions are not littered with those kind of unsubstantiated opinions...
..wait a minute....
Voice....Mr Lorton opinions so far on this subject appear to have been correct, yours on the other hand have been falling woefully short.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 04:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +5I thought you said the Islanders don't have a say and that HMG and Argentina are the only two parties the ICRC need to speak to, as the Islanders are 'Johnny come lately's'. Where was your source for that statement?
But keep clutching at straws, by the law of averages you can't be wrong all the time.
I'm sure that Think and Voice plus a few others will come up with something or other to deny that the Falkland Islands Government has any part to play other than being subsumed into the UK Government delegation. Oh... just to forestall you, Hepatia; England doesn't have any Malvinas to give back and couldn't, even if they did have some.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +5ICRC are an International organisation...
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 04:57 pm - Link - Report abuse -9Job for the FCO....
My source...easy... the FIG didn't exist till 1985....
I've changed my opinion....
Benny come lately's...
Voicey, you would try to sell coal to Newcastle; only trouble is they wouldn't buy it from you. 10/10 for perseverance though. Do your shoulders feel weighed down with all of the chips on them? Of course there is a key role for the FCO in this but only someone as bitter and twisted as you (Think) could say there is no role for FIG in negotiations.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 05:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Clearly there is a role and the FCO, ICRC and Argentine Governments have willingly said so.
Do try to remember the objective here... you sill old fool. ;-))))
Of course there's a FIG role...
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 05:20 pm - Link - Report abuse -10Someone needs to provide the refreshments....
:-)))
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 05:27 pm - Link - Report abuse -10...and there is a role for you on MP: every internet news site needs a bitter and twisted village idiot... :-)))
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 05:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +7Don't give up, you are surely making a tangible difference to the dispute. ;-))))
Poor old Voice and Think, spending the last few days valiantly defending their mistaken beliefs, only to be undermined by the Arg. government statement. Oooh that must hurt..
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 06:01 pm - Link - Report abuse +7So logically according to Voice, the sovereignty issue is not between GB and Argentina, but between GB and The Republic of BA. As Argentina are 'Jose come lately's'.
You appear to fixated on a point...that I called the Islanders Johnny come lately's...
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 07:30 pm - Link - Report abuse -12I didn't....
I said the FIG were the Johnny come lately's...as they didn't exist until after the conflict and the remains were buried...
So your above post doesn't make any sense...
Embarrassed...?
You should be...
Imagine thinking to yourself...
I've got just the retort for Voice...
Should've gone to Specsavers...
Should've..., that sheepherderlover...
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse -11https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DV2qiOeUT9E
If that is all you have to criticise, then the only embarrassment I feel Voice, is for you,just for you.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 09:46 pm - Link - Report abuse +5Specsavers....Hmmm, Voice not being able to read the intro or signatures on the 1999 Agreement and Think not being able to read the Letters Patent properly, my word, Patagonia - a south Atlantic Island, chuckle, chuckle. Now that would save you a lot of embarrassment.
So, Voice... “Johnny come latelys” are not welcome to the party then? Are you talking about Argentina here? When last I heard and read, the creation of Argentina was a “Johnny come lately” when compared to the Falklands. “Pipe”, “up”, “it”, “your” and “shove”. I'm sure that someone as fluent in English as yourself can rearrange those words into a useful phrase.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 09:59 pm - Link - Report abuse +4I see the names Voice and Think on various posts above but all they appear to have written is “blah blah blah blah blah.”
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:34 pm - Link - Report abuse +4“Blah blah blah blah blah blah.”
So FIG will be in the talks and Argentina, at this stage, seem keen to not try to muck the ICRC project up. Either they really do appear to have more empathy since the crazy bitch has gone, or, they want the next meeting (trade deals with the U.K. in exchange for flights between Brazil and the Falklands) in London to go ahead.
I'd say it's a combination of both.
Poor old Think.
Think Thought people Thought he Thought FIG wouldn't be in the ICRC talks.
People didn't Think Think Thought FIG wouldn't be in the ICRC talks
Think didn't really Think people Thought he Thought FIG wouldn't be in the ICRC talks
FIG knew FIG would be in the ICRC talks
Think knew FIG would be in the ICRC talks
Think didn't Think
Don't be like Think.
Thou protesteth too much Voice - feeling insecure? The MLA's have been around as the Islanders representatives for a very long time,1846 saw the formation of the Legislative & Executive Councils I believe.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +5As for the veto, that they've had since 1968. Acknowledged by successive governments ever since - they get to decide on matters affecting the Islands.
You want to think before you exercise your voice, Voice....... but when I say 'Think”, no good relying on that bitter old man. Amusing to see you pissing into the wind though Voice.
... and because the silly old fool has a complex about the - and + votes on his posts I even gave his last couple of “blah blah blahs” a positive + each in the name of friendship and good neighbourly support, and still he's in the red.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +5I have to say I am surprised you have such an issue about the - and + votes Think. You didn't really Think anyone was going to like your bullshit did you? ...and what happens when the votes plummet into the red, as they invariably do? He does a Trump and cries rigged votes. How fucking pathetic have you become.
Silly old fool. ;-)))))
Depending on the dates (and on the person's hatred of Argentina or the Falklanders), who is the senior entity in the negotiations is debatable, what is not debatable is who is the junior member of the talks: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, entity who was only recognized officially internationally starting in 1922. They are the children in the geopoltical stage.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 10:54 pm - Link - Report abuse -5Toby
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +5I don't know whether to laugh with you, laugh at you or just feel sorry for you. WTF are you on about now and what has this site done to you? Remember that every nasty thing people say about Argentina isn't all being said by the same person and it is not personal.
What is the problem with you? Where did I insult anyone? You are are temporarily blind, blindfolded and wearing sunglasses in a closed light proof room at midnight reading through edited out lines from a book that isn't in the room to begin with.
Nov 23rd, 2016 - 11:06 pm - Link - Report abuse -9I simply stated a completely accepted and well-known fact. Why would that fact offend or “itch” on anyone?
Huge juan sheet....
Nov 24th, 2016 - 12:51 am - Link - Report abuse -10Shove your pipe up it...
...Is that it...?
Voice- do please check facts and read history- you will find that FIG has actually been around since BEFORE Argentina as it is called today actually existed.
Nov 24th, 2016 - 01:29 am - Link - Report abuse +6FIG like Arg Govt has modified and altered and become more locally democratic over the decades and century or two - but very much in existence since mid late 1840s.
As regards a possible veto in Geneva - yes the Islands MLA will indeed have one- because if Arg says it wants to do “x” as the process of exhumation etc - Arg will have to apply to the Falkland Islands Govt Environmental & Planning Dept for the relevant permissions.
And if said Dept,s Committee decides it does not like the way“x” is prposed - then it simply has the power to refuse it. full stop.Nothing UK Govt can do nor would want to do In such a case it will of course likely suggest some changes that would make the application more likely to be passed.
Such is the Law I am afraid - wether Arg likes it or not.
Trolly, you ain't helping Voice here, he thought he had the best retort, untouchable, come on give him some slack, he rarely gets the chance, you are just embarrassing him, stop it, you're killing me.......
Nov 24th, 2016 - 07:51 am - Link - Report abuse +9They always say that imitation was the sincerest form of flattery, I guess on this site and thanks to Think and Voice, can we say that deflection is the sincerest form of flattery?
Specsavers....Chuckle, Chuckle
Jo Bloggs...
Nov 24th, 2016 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse -8You say...:
- “ I have to say I am surprised you have such an issue about the - and + votes Think.
You didn't really Think anyone was going to like your bullshit did you? ...and what happens when the votes plummet into the red, as they invariably do?
He does a Trump and cries rigged votes. How fucking pathetic have you become.”
I say...:
I Think you are confounding me with somebody else..., laddie.
I Think that must be Anglo Turnip ChrisR that indeed “does a Trump and cries rigged votes”
I Think it is evident (see example at the link below) that my reaction is quite the opposite... :-)))
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/11/19/texas-holds-the-largest-oil-and-gas-deposit-ever-discovered-in-united-states/comments#comment455060
You've done nothing but confirm your obsession with the voting system you silly old fool.
Nov 24th, 2016 - 01:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +5;-))))
The FIG has no veto for use against HMG...
Nov 24th, 2016 - 02:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -6It has opinions it has interests and it also has wishes, but they are all dependent on whichever party is in control of HMG...
This was highlighted when the question was put to Corbyn concerning a Falklands veto...No veto HMG ultimately decides the fate of the Falklands, he intimated...
Governments change and their views change, one always has to view the careful wording of their assurances...
Corbyn's view is not the view of the party he is tenuously the leader of. Just like your view, in my view ;-) is not the view of the majority of the UK people.
Nov 24th, 2016 - 02:46 pm - Link - Report abuse +6Keep up your efforts though, you're starting to grow on me and I appreciate your humour. Just try not to be so bitter and twisted you silly old fool.
Voice...if you are talking about the Jeremy Marr interview, I think you had better listen carefully to it again....He never said they didn't have a Veto, his actual words were when asked by Mr Marr if they had a Veto were...
Nov 24th, 2016 - 04:33 pm - Link - Report abuse +5'...Veto..They have a right to stay where they are, they have a right to decide on their own future, that will be part of it. Let's have that discussion and let's not set agendas in advance.'...he hesitated over the question but never confirmed when asked that they did not have a veto. He may well have wanted to say it, but he knew better than to commit political suicide. His hesitation was enough for many though.
'The FIG has no veto for use against HMG', that is your opinion of what may happen if JC lead the Labour Party to become HMG. Otherwise it is another of your fairy stories as it is not the opinion of the HM current Government or it appears the vast Majority of the opposition. Even their spokesman made it clear that the Labour Party is committed to Self Determination.
So unless and until JC becomes the dictator of the Labour Party as HMG, it appears that comment is his personal opinion. Not as you try and falsely portray, the opinion of HMG.
Still haven't been to Specsavers I see....
Nov 24th, 2016 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -6Read it again and try and understand what “he intimated” means...
If there was a specific piece of legislation that specifically gave the FIG a veto....I'm sure he would be aware of it...
I can guarantee if you trawl through all the available legislation...you won't find one...
you can claim a veto all you like, but you certainly can't provide any legislation mentioning one...
Also presenters do their homework...if one existed he wouldn't have posed the question...
...you are coming back at me with nothing...
...and no...nothing isn't a real cool hand....
Skirting around the issue as always Voicey. Stop trying to make it sound like there has to be an official instrument of veto. Quite simply, we know that the UK Government won't sign-off on anything unless we are happy. If we object on grounds that aren't genuine enough, of course they will disregard us but we wouldn't do that. We would only object for legitimate reasons and we are 100% confident that the UK would back us on them.
Nov 24th, 2016 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +7Honestly you funny “little” bugger, you must have found more red herrings in your time than John West.
:-;))))
Don't stop though; you are a laugh a minute.
Chuckle chuckle.
Jo...
Nov 24th, 2016 - 11:25 pm - Link - Report abuse -5Struggling to find fault with that appraisal of the situation...
I'm going to have to dwell on it...
I reckon I'd best give you an up tick in the meantime....
“This was now the crux of the dispute, a dilemma which would bedevil successive governments. For the islanders, the episode served as a catharsis. They had effectively been granted a veto; their wishes were paramount. After 1968, no minister ever forgot that.”
Nov 25th, 2016 - 12:06 am - Link - Report abuse +6[The British Government and the Falkland Islands, 1974-79 Aaron Donaghy 2014]
Lord Ton...
Nov 25th, 2016 - 12:51 am - Link - Report abuse -8You are struggling with the English Language...
“They had effectively been granted a veto”
Is not the same as being granted a veto to be used whenever something doesn't suit them..
It's an expression...you know that...I know that and everybody familiar with English knows that...
“He had effectively been given licence to do what he wants”
Doesn't mean he can actually do what he wants....
Ridley had effectively sold the Falklands down the Swanney...
Also doesn't mean he sold the Falklands down the Swanney...
Play with the words all you like Voice, the Islanders have the recognised right to say “no” - that is a veto.
Nov 25th, 2016 - 01:08 am - Link - Report abuse +8The Brexit referendum has effectively split the nation in two....but it hasn't really, has it....?
Nov 25th, 2016 - 01:43 am - Link - Report abuse -7The UN declaration on self determination for all peoples has effectively given all people a veto...but it hasn't has it...?
Can you imagine all the legislation you must have poured over...and the best you can do is come up with a quote from an opinion...
You could have simply thought laterally....
There is no way on earth that the great HMG would put into effect legislation that allowed the tail to wag the dog...
“We are fully aware that no British government will ever take a substantive decision on this issue without the approval of the islanders. The islanders have acquired a de facto veto. It's them we have to convince.” [Minister Di Tella in June, 1997]
Nov 25th, 2016 - 03:59 am - Link - Report abuse +8It doesn't have to be written into law Voice, indeed very few of our Constitutional arrangements are so written. They merely have to be acknowledged to make them real.
The first quote was from an Irish academic which I chose at random. I have a few others, including from Argentines, but they are all opinions. Much of Constitutional Law is about opinions - that is why the British Constitution is so flexible. Your quote was hardly better, as Corbyn was promptly slapped down by his own Shadow Foreign Secretary, and all Labour's MPs.
The Islanders have the right of veto simply because the Government of the UK acknowledges that they do. Perhaps one day that will change; perhaps it'll get enshrined in law - who knows. The reality is that the UK is accepting the United Nations attitude that the people of the NSGTs get to make the decisions on matters that affect them. That is right and proper.
We'll have to see whether the islanders feel the need to flex that power, and, if so, what the reaction from London is. Argentina's reaction will be no surprise, they are already moaning about it.
Errrrrrrrrrm... Mr. Lorton...
Nov 25th, 2016 - 04:53 am - Link - Report abuse -8You say...:
“We are fully aware that no British government will ever take a substantive decision on this issue without the approval of the islanders. The islanders have acquired a de facto veto. It's them we have to convince.” [Minister Di Tella in June, 1997]”
I say... :
Ya know that minister Guido di Tella (besides being a fellow of Oxford's St. Antony's College) was an Argie.... do Ya...???
Paraphrasing Mr. Voice, I must say...:
”Can you imagine all the legislation you must have poured over... and the best you can do is come up with a quote... from an opinion... from an Argie...!!!
(Incredulous chuckle...:-)
Of course I know Think, I know so much more than you. I have more :-)
Nov 25th, 2016 - 05:12 am - Link - Report abuse +8How about another Argie?
“(Whatever) the justification for the British decision, its consequences, as seen from Buenos Aires, were overtly negative. Argentina would have to fight fiercely – perhaps .. more fiercely than Spain itself – to prevent the UN from granting any measure of legitimacy to the referendum, since this would seriously weaken the case against using this instrument in the Falklands. As a result, Argentine diplomats would be even more reluctant to reach any settlement with Britain that sanctioned or appeared to legitimate the islanders' veto powers.”
[González M. A. The Genesis of the Falklands (Malvinas) Conflict 2014] (The references date back to 1966 and talk of a referendum for Gibraltar)
Your Government knows about the Islanders veto Think - they have known about it since 1968 in fact, and been denying and/or rejecting it ever since.
As for “pouring” Think, it's called research. It's what I do. Sadly, old Malvinistas like yourself do not do research, relying instead upon the regular brainwashing processes employed by your State, and - even more sadly- by yourselves. Self-inflicted brainwashing. How weird is that.
The proof is in the pudding Think/Voice, and time will tell all :-)
Wooooow..., Mr. Lorton...
Nov 25th, 2016 - 05:37 am - Link - Report abuse -9TWO opinions... from TWO Argies...
Your argument is getting pretty strong..., laddie...
Luckily... I have a THIRD opinion from a THIRD Argie...:
- “Well..., well..., well...
Ball's in the Foreign & Colonial Office court now...
Let's see if the dog wags the tail................. or vice versa...”
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/11/21/argentina-upset-with-falklands-for-insisting-darwin-cemetery-operation-should-be-trilateral/comments#comment455052
Chuckle..., chuckle...
I think that's a 3rd opinion from a 2nd Argie Think - but whatever.
Nov 25th, 2016 - 06:01 am - Link - Report abuse +9Tail's been wagging the dog on this issue since 1967. Do you want more opinions Think? Many of them Argentine? Do me a favour - download the pdf version of the Timeline and search on 'veto' - saves me having to repeat myself.
Argentina's upset? Wow - that's hardly new Think. It's Argentina's default state when it comes to the Falklands. Now why would that be? Oh yes, impotence Think .... Argentina's continued impotence.
I don't think we care if Argentina's upset Think ....... not for a second
You are still looking for red herrings that don't exist Think and you know it. Roger has provided you with real-life examples of the reality of our relationship with the UK; as conceded by various Argentine officials. ...and the best you can do is to try to use our mistrust of anything an Argentine Government official says against us.
Nov 25th, 2016 - 06:52 am - Link - Report abuse +8What you are also doing with pseudo-aplomb is implying that we would use this “non-existent” (because it's not in an instrument of law somewhere “laddie”) power of veto to sabotage the ICRC project. Sorry to disappoint you but that is simply not true.
I reckon your best bet on this thread now is to hone in on spelling and grammatical errors and try to take the argument off on a massive illogical tangent. Now that is something you do do well. Either that or, against all odds, keep hammering this idea that we have no power of veto, which is a red herring; a) because it's an effective power of veto; and b) because it's most unlikely we'll wish to use it anyhow.
Ya silly old fool! :-))
Voice,
Nov 25th, 2016 - 10:58 am - Link - Report abuse +8You gloss over things far to easily....
Andrew Marr interview, his question to Mr Corbyn regarding a veto was to a particular hypothetical and very fictional scenario:
if there was a power sharing/Sovereignty negotiation, should (not 'do') the islanders have a veto over any talks. Mr Corbyn stated in his fictional world, what his personal opinion is and what he thinks the UK should do and how the negotiations should proceed, his opinion, not his Party line or current Government legislation. You then came to the conclusion the 2+2=5.
Why would there be a need to legislate for something that at the present time is seen as a fictional scenario. Or to wider legislate for something that HMG has repeatedly stated exists already in the form of 'Self Determination', until the Islanders choose to use that mystical 'Veto', who knows what will happen.
You two seem to have a fixation with legislation. Westminster has more important things to do than legislate for fictional scenarios. I also came at it from the other direction, in the interests of fairness. I looked for legislation the stated the Islanders 'do not have a veto', couldn't find any either.
Maybe Voice/Think the legislation will be put in place if and when it is needed, until then the current involved parties seem grown up and trustworthy enough to work together, listen to each other and respect each others views. Probably an Alien concept for the both of you.
Mr. Roger Lorton & Mr. Jo Bloggs...
Nov 25th, 2016 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse -8I see you two have been Thinking hard to respond to humble Mr.Think...
Just one “tiny winy” but fundamental flaw in your argumentation......, laddies...
You seem to be responding to Mr. Voice' line of reasoning..., not auld, humble Mr. Think's...
My opinions about the usefulness of them British squatting Kelpers in Malvinas as a “By Proxy” tool and excuse to persue archaic Colonial dreams in the South Atlantic by a minor but influential “British Sector” of politics.. are well known in here...
When that “Sector” loses its grip.., itcan go the 1,500 Kelpers from Malvinas as it went for the 1,000,000 Sahibs & Memsahibs from the Raj...or the 400,000 B'wanas and B'wanettes from South Rhodesia...
Or, eventually, they could talk with Argentina and get an advantageous agreement à la Åland Islands...
Take the pills old man; they'll help you sleep...... perchance to dream
Nov 25th, 2016 - 12:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +8Think
Nov 25th, 2016 - 02:01 pm - Link - Report abuse +2My response to your last is in your language:
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
“Argentina's upset? Wow - that's hardly new Think. It's Argentina's default state when it comes to the Falklands. Now why would that be? Oh yes, impotence Think .... Argentina's continued impotence.”
Nov 27th, 2016 - 05:36 am - Link - Report abuse +2And that pretty sums up the Argentina's entire position on the Falklands. Anger over its impotence to get what it wants.
A classic example of a dummy spit on a national level.
Totally off topic... but I feel I must share it.
Nov 30th, 2016 - 01:42 am - Link - Report abuse +1A few months ago a friend, born and raised on the island of Jersey, had occasion to proceed from Pto Natales into RGland to renew his 90 day Chilean visitor's visa.
Duly stamped into RGland.
Several hours later... departing RGland.... massive hullabaloo.... bloke says that he should never have had a stamp in his passport when entering as Jersey was sovereign RG territory. Girl who stamped him in given all sorts a grief.. this took about an hour.
Friend then managed to show that Jersey was actually off the coast of France. More hullabaloo... bloke who started the fuss probably taken out and shot or somesuch.
Another hour passes before they all settle down and friend is allowed to pass back into Chile.
You really could not make this stuff up.... such a stupid stupid people...
Frank
Nov 30th, 2016 - 04:46 am - Link - Report abuse -3Your friend Pastor Ben Garrett , Puerto Williams:
You really could not make this stuff up...such a stupid people..
“The end times are very close and we believe it is God's will for a World Revival to start very soon. We are beleiving that in 2009 a spark will kindle the fire of the Holy Spirit here.
Be a part of this Latin American and World revival which is prophezied in our very town where the Cape Horn Missionary Church is located. We ask pastors everywhere to pray that this spark will keep burning”
Not a friend of mine.... merely someone I once met in passing... you really must try harder.....
Nov 30th, 2016 - 06:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0Frank, the Yank...
Nov 30th, 2016 - 10:06 am - Link - Report abuse -2Just for your kind info...
That friend of yours born and raised on the island of Jersey, DID NOT “proceed from Pto Natales into RGland TO RENEW his 90 day Chilean visitor's visa.”
That friend of yours born and raised on the island of Jersey, did proceed from Pto Natales into RGland TO CHEAT on his 90 day Chilean visitor's visa.”
Soooooo typical Anglo...
Always complaining about lawlessness... but breaking the law whenever they feel like it...
Tinkle: “.....proceed from Pto Natales into RGland TO CHEAT on his 90 day Chilean visitor's visa.”
Nov 30th, 2016 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The practice of what is known as the ”visa run” is not only well known and lawful but is widely practiced by foreign residents who spend the summer months around Puerto Natales and take the 30 minute trip up to the frontier complex at Cerro Dorotea and then down to the eternally depressing Argentine mining town of Río Turbio, there to spend a few hours with pastry and cortados while sucking up the wifi at the YPF station, before returning to Chile for another 89 days. We know some Canadians who summer in the Puerto Natales area and practice this every year. Again, it's completely legal, compliant, and sanctioned by both governments, though it is soooooo typically argento that there are some imaginary argies outside of the region who have characteristically little understanding or appreciation of the applicable law and its practices. So accustomed to their own highly evolved degree of native corruption that it has become unimaginable that others may do otherwise.
When Douglas Tompkins was alive he used to do the same visa run or paid the penalty-renewal fee at the Chilean Extranjería, since he wouldn't become a permanent legal resident of Chile and thus had to renew his tourist card every 90 days.
Anglo Turnip Marti Llazo...
Nov 30th, 2016 - 01:55 pm - Link - Report abuse -1The practice of what you call “Visa Runs” is indeed well known..., UNLAWFUL... and widely practiced by foreign ”prospective“ residents in many parts of the world...
The one I remember best is the ”Gaijin Visa Run” to Busan...
Anyhow... Such practices are ILLEGAL all over the World..., including Chile and Argentina...
That's the basic idea of a 90 days visitor's visa... Here..., there... and everywhere...
So..., go and tell your porkies to some gullible & brainwashed Anglo that wants to hear them...
Or give us a link that contradicts what I just wrote...
There may be some arcane notice that no one adheres to but thousands of “tourists” make the visa run every year between CL and AR and both governments allow the practice.
Nov 30th, 2016 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here is really all you need to know: CL and AR frontier control (migraciones/ PDI on the Chilean side) at most entry points have access to their respective data bases which indicate in real time when a particular carnet/DNI/passport holder enters and leaves. When the limit on a stay is 90 days, whether or not that limit has been exceeded is rather simple to determine. If there is no overstay, leaving the country within 90 days effectively closes the books on that tourist card/visa. Leaving, entering other country, leaving other country, coming back and starting a new tourist card starts the clock on a new account and a new 90 days. So long as the conclusion of one stay is documented, there is no observed time lapse required before beginning a new 90 days, although some tourists have been told to “come back the next day.” All that is required is evidence of having left the country and entering another. This is so fundamentally simple that even some argentines can be made to understand it.
The Chilean Extranjería/PDI makes this visa run process even simpler. Rather than actually making that one-day (or less) trip to the frontiers and back, for a fee they will give you another 90 days. Just ask for a prórroga de turismo. If you're a tourist in Argentina and don't wish to make the visa run then visit your local “Delegación Nacional de Migraciones” and process a 90 day extension.
For our next lesson we will explain to tinkle how to pour water out of a boot.
So... Thicko... how long exactly do you have to be out of Chile before you can return? 2 hours, 2 days, 2 months, 2 years?????
Nov 30th, 2016 - 07:35 pm - Link - Report abuse -1( I'm typically out for 1 to 2 months... does that meet with your approval?)
Good deflection BTW from the fact that the typical RG has had a truly miserable education.
Geeeeeee..., the Anglo turnips are backpedaling violently this afternoon...
Nov 30th, 2016 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Turnip Marti Llazo can't..., of course..., provide any link about the legality of something illegal...
But he certainly can... blah..., blah... blahhh...
Turnip Frank, the Yank knows how to break the law... but not the law!
He even asks me for clarification...!!!
:-)))
OK, tinkle, tell us how long you have to be in another country before returning to Chile as a tourist, for your next tourist card.
Nov 30th, 2016 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -2This may surprise you but Chile does not publish a list of those things which are permitted, but rather those that are proscribed.
If there is a law that proscribes what I described, then you should be able to present that law.
In the absence of any such proscription then the currently observed practice accepted by Extranjería and PDI appears to be unchallenged by any published statute in effect.
Here is the email for the nice fellow at Relaciones Exteriores who can take your question about the amount of time that one must be in another country before re-entering Chile as a tourist. Please quote the response in its entirety
José Luis Ilabaca O. jilabaca@minrel.gov.cl
Geeeeeeeeeee......
Nov 30th, 2016 - 10:23 pm - Link - Report abuse -2More blah..., blah..., blahhhh.... fom them Anglo Turnips...
The current basic rules for the Argentinean (and I strongly suspect also the Shilean and Uruguayan) 90 days Visitor's Permit... is to closely correspond with the basic rules of the European Union 90 days Visitor's Permit....
That is...: 90 days permission of stay in a period of 180 days...
BIIIIG difference though being.... that, whilst the Europeans are absolutely hysterical about their rules..., we in the Southern Cone take them in a somehow more “relaxed” way...
We luuuuuuv them Non-Mercosur Turists and Foreigners and we want them to enjoy themselves down here as much as they fancy...
But that dosn't mean that we don't have the legal instruments in place to, kindly but firmly, ask them to return to their homes if they should become a nuisance...
Capiscse...?
Answer the question Thicko... how long before you can legally return to Chile?
Nov 30th, 2016 - 10:33 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Oh... you 'suspect' 90 days.... I 'suspect' you are mistaken.
Tinkle, you are once again provably full of shite. To wit,
Nov 30th, 2016 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Just called one of our attorneys who deals with our connections in Chile.
His answer is this: the law that covers tourist cards and related entries is Decreto Ley 1094 with the latest revision date in April 2011. It lists the restrictions on tourist visas/card issuance.
Did you know that being an asshole argentine can be used as the prima facie basis for denying admission to Chile? I didn't know that, either. But it's found in Article 64 of that law.
If you read the law articles that list the restrictions on when you can return after a prior tourist visa the answer is that there are no such restrictions. Read the law.
This message won't do tinkle any good but it may be of use or interest to others planning to continue with fully compliant visa runs. PDF copies of the latest law revisions for these statutes are available for free download from the Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional (de Chile).
Geeeeeeeee......
Nov 30th, 2016 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse -2More word diarrhea from them Anglo Turnips...
But still not ONE SINGLE link to anywhere that suggest that it is legal for a Vistor to cheat on the 90 days Visitors Permit...
NOT ONE...
Turnips...!
I think it is up to you to prove that it is illegal to re-enter within 90 days..
Dec 01st, 2016 - 12:12 am - Link - Report abuse -1Quit while you are in front, Thicko!
Ooooops... too late
Tinkle, we all notice that you have changed the question. How very argentine of you.
Dec 01st, 2016 - 12:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0The issue you presented was: ”....did proceed from Pto Natales into RGland TO CHEAT on his 90 day Chilean visitor's visa.”
And for reasonable people we have established to your evident dismay that someone on a 90 day tourist card in Chile who does not overstay that 90 days, may leave lawfully leave Chile, lawfully enter Argentina, and then promptly return to Chile and qualify for and lawfully receive a new 90 day tourist card, cumpliendo en tiempo y forma con la ley que rige la otorgación de susodicho tarjeta, DL1094, there being no demonstrated proscription for that new issuance in either the cited law nor any other evidence presented.
Inasmuch as the characteristically mendacious argie condition is one to be laughed at, this thread is providing the fodder for exceptional hilarity.
Geeeeeeeee......
Dec 01st, 2016 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -3More, more and more word diarrhea from them Anglo Turnips...
One of them even gave me an email.............. An E-mail............. !!! Woooooooow....!!!
Shall we see what we find if we follow that E-Mail lead...???...:
- “José Luis Ilabaca O. jilabaca@minrel.gov.cl”... hmmmmm...
The guys functions are...:
-“*Elaborar anualmente el Cuadro de Visas y aranceles, documento por cual se informa sobre el valor y tiempo de estadía de los diferentes tipos de visas, conforme al principio de reciprocidad.”
*(To yearly prepare the Visas and Fees List..., which informs about the prices and periods of stay of the different types of Visas, FOLLOWING THE RECIPROCITY PRINCIPLE...)
http://www.minrel.gob.cl/inmigracion/minrel/2008-07-16/140738.html
Meaning that Shile treats tourists from a given Country as that given Country treats Shilean tourists...
Fair and simple...
By the way, Turnips.... Remember that a 90 days Visitor's Visa DOES NOT give the right to work....
That friend of yours “born and raised on the island of Jersey who did proceed from Pto. Natales into RGland TO CHEAT on his 90 day Chilean visitor's visa” .... wouldn't also be CHEATING by working in Chile without a Work Permit... would he...???
As I already said above...
Sooooooooooooooo typical Anglo...
Always complaining about lawlessness... but breaking every law and rule whenever they feel like it...!!!
Psssst...
Thicko, do not judge others by yourself.
Dec 02nd, 2016 - 02:37 am - Link - Report abuse -1He is simply a man of independent means just like myself who likes to hang out in southern Chile....
Reciprocity fees at Santiago Airport only concern Australian and Mexican passport holders these days... seems the Albanians came to an agreement.
Tinkle, the issue you have tried to avoid and change fools no one. Belatedly introducing the concept of “working” to the matter is only an attempt to conceal your failure to correctly characterise the matter of serial tourist card entries for Chile. You failed to even ask the spokesperson for the chief of Chile's department of immigration but instead cut-and-pasted one tiny bit of that office's responsibilities. You fool no one, tinkle.
Dec 02nd, 2016 - 01:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your “speculation” is of no value except to cloud the issue. Perhaps you'd like to introduce a Falklands claim to further obfuscate the matter.
I contacted our Canadians in Puerto Natales. They had some time ago asked the Extranjería office about the prórroga for an additional 90 days as tourists. The nice lady at Extranjería told them....you can spend US$100 on a prórroga or just go to Río Turbio [Argentina] for the day and then come back and get a new tourist card.
Seems as though the Chilean Extranjería understands what is permitted. A certain wannabe argie does not.
Tinkle has consistently failed to produce evidence of any statutory prohibition for serial tourist card issuance as was promoted by the Chilean authority in Puerto Natales. And no one is fooled.
Frank the Yank
Dec 02nd, 2016 - 03:15 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Your friend is a man of “Independent Means”...., huhhhhhh...?
Evidently not so “Independent” that he can afford the official visa fee instead of cheating, though...
A otro perro con ese hueso, yanki...
Tinkle still doesn't understand the tourist card process for Chile. As he is immune to so much understanding.
Dec 02nd, 2016 - 04:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is no “official visa fee” for Chile, tinkle, unless you are referring to something else, the legal extension, and that is a prórroga as described earlier.
Likewise, a foreign resident who owns a second home in Chile and does not create legal residency in the country, can lawfully use a tourist card (including multiple serial 90-day stays that include absences into another country) to occupy that second home. This is precisely what the infamous Tompkins did for many years, and the legality of this was upheld (much to the considerable annoyance of Aysen's senator Horvath).
Try to keep up, tinkle.
Sorry Thicko, you just haven't been paying attention.
Dec 02nd, 2016 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Where have I said that I have ever done a one day visa run, legal as it is?
I haven't - the shortest I have ever been out of the country would be seven days or so. Or is that also illegal in your view?
Frank the Yank..
Dec 02nd, 2016 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse -2You say...:
“Sorry Think, you just haven't been paying attention.
Where have I said that I have ever done a one day visa run...”
I say...:
Sorry Frank, you just haven't been paying attention...
Where have I said that YOU have ever done a one day visa run...?
Besides... i THINK we were talking about your “friend born and raised on the island of Jersey,...,” weren't we...?
Soooooo human of you...
Using the third-person singular to tell an embarrasing story about oneself...
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!