MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, June 27th 2022 - 05:32 UTC

 

 

Falklands: Argentina calls for sovereignty negotiations as it recalls 3 January 1833

Friday, January 4th 2019 - 06:02 UTC
Full article 49 comments

In an official release from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Argentina recalled that 186 years ago, on 3 January 1833, “UK military forces illegally occupied and usurped the Malvinas Islands and adjoining maritime spaces in the South Atlantic”. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Roger Lorton

    Usual nonsense. Alicia Castro, the ex-Ambassador to London is complaining that the current Ambassador has been a little tardy in sending this out as he is yet to do so. He was probably enjoying the fireworks.

    So, Happy New Year everyone, I have no doubt that this year will be much the same as last but perhaps CFK will get back to liven things up.

    Oh, and there's a new edition posted - https://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/

    TTFN ;-)

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 08:13 am - Link - Report abuse +9
  • Brit Bob

    Argentina has protested at what it still regards as an illegal occupation of the Islands by Britain, but, during lengthy periods including one of more than thirty years in the nineteenth century, no protests were lodged with the British government.'~ Arguably, therefore, any claim Argentina may have had was extinguished during this time. (Sovereignty and the Falklands Crisis, Greig D.W., Australian Yearbook of International Law, p44, 1983, quoting Cohen Jonathan. ”Les Iles Falkland (Malouines)”. (1972) 18 Ann Fr Dr Int 235.243-5.

    Falklands – Argentinian Sovereignty Protests (1 pg): https://www.academia.edu/10574523/Falklands_-_Argentinian_Sovereignty_Protests

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse +7
  • Wild Blue Yonder

    Really got a nerve and very thick skin, but old habits die hard. The people of the Falkland Islands have made it perfectly clear that they don't want a bar of this. Why can Argentina not understand? What can Argentina not understand? Time for another reality check, as if being thrashed, humiliated and internationally humbled 36 years ago wasn't enough? Resorting to violence to achieve their dodgy claims makes for a bad legacy, a horrible reputation and earned pariah status.
    Practicing the role of a good neighbour will deliver much more benefit long-term to Argentina than the continuation of being a regional bully.
    Argentina has fouled its nest, and burned it bridges for a long time to come.
    Live and let live. Blessed are the peacemakers.

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 10:50 am - Link - Report abuse +8
  • RedBaron

    There are many differing opinions about the events of 1833 but the fact is that the UK have controlled the Islands since that time. The population was never indigenous - but the British have been the main occupiers and rulemakers for almost 200 years and have managed the property correctly.
    If the Argentines cannot accept that the current occupiers are legitimate and if they feel they have strong international support why don't they take their claim to the ICJ? According to their rhetoric they would win in a minute.
    On the other hand, they blotted their copybook of territorial claims by launching their own illegal military invasion in 1982. Unlike the British in 1833, this landing in the Falklands failed and, along with that failure, the Argentines lost all claim to the Falklands forever more.
    It is impossible to see what claim they may have other than geographical proximity, as they have made precious little attempt to make their claims good in the last 186 years.
    The ICJ would probably recommend that Argentina simply scrap their constitutional claim and get on with more important things.

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse +8
  • Islander1

    Their Spanish inheritance claim is a bit dodgy as well- Spanish garrison withdrew to Montevideo(the then seat of Spanish S.America eastern side Empire I think pre 1810? -not Buenos Aires.
    In which case Uruguay has a better claim on that argument!

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse +8
  • JustinKuntz

    The Spanish Navy administered the former penal colony of Puerto Soledad from Montevideo, as such it was never under BA control. The Spanish Navy was controlled directly from Madrid.

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 01:05 pm - Link - Report abuse +6
  • golfcronie

    Pissed myself laughing Nuff said

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 01:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Don Alberto

    Wild Blue Yonder asks: “Why can Argentina not understand?”

    An inhabitant of Argentina is called un Argentino.

    Argentino ... if you rearrange the letters in the word A:6 r:5 g:2 e:9 n:3 t:8 i:1 n:7 o:4 = ignorante

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Islander1

    Thanks for the confirmation Justin. To misquote Think - there goes another nail OUT of the coffin!

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 03:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Chicureo

    Negotiate for what and with whom? Isn't the ridiculous unilateral Argentina call for sovereignty negotiations sort of pathetic solitary act of m*sterbation? Just asking...

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Patrick Edgar

    Oh so Macri is finally worried that his unpatriotic back stabbing prostituting heart is going to cost him his reelection. To bad it isn't sincere and the Argentine have finally figured that out.
    In any case, all your comments are irrelevant fascist clone droned disparaging bigoted delusions.
    1) Neither War nor military power, does not give merit of value to political sovereign right. I do realize that the British are stuck in not being able to admit that for what the noble alternative signifies, and says about all past invasive destructive hoarding interventions the world over.
    2) Wow! What a feat !! administrating wandering sheepherders supported kept and ordered from London for 187 years, doing nor accomplishing next to nothing for their own sake, but just standing watch and fulfilling their bogus role of political human shields for London's interests in the islands geopolitical logistic location. The only reason Britain has been there for 187 years, is because of its suggestion of military power and refusal to respect and honor diplomacy with Argentina regarding the dispute.
    3) Argentina has never had a military posture about the islands in all its history. The Junta invaded out of its own personal need behind the backs of the People and its Constitutional nation. Of course the British continue to need to look past that defining detail, as it too would obligate the alternative truthful reasoning that London rather avoid.
    4) People's right to self determination regarding a territory they live on, cannot exist in a vacuum that somehow has the power to shut up the rights of nations. We must all pass our requests through the governments that rule above us. London continues to cheat by switching the wiring on that logic, falsely championing democratic human values to seduce the world into miss-education. And this is one of its most serious offenses against the world. It uses the emotional propaganda of “people's rights to their land” to justify its occupations

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse -8
  • Think

    TWIMC...

    Just got a tweety-alarm about somebody grossly misquoting me on this thread...
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k-tzTsbWswY

    It was right..., it was right..., somebody grossly misquoted me earlier on this thread...
    For your kind info..., Mr. Timlander1..., them nails continue to go INTO the South Atlantic Engrish Pirate Oil Adventure Coffin on a very satisfactory rate...
    Just remember that “Final Engrish Decision” about the Pirate Oil Adventure due in the last quarter of 2018...
    Just look at today's oil price...
    Just look at the calendar...
    Chuckle..., chuckle...

    By the way... We Argies ain't going to dissapear..., Chay...
    This is our Continent...
    Not Engelands...

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse -9
  • mollymauk

    Red Baron said “It is impossible to see what claim they may have other than geographical proximity”

    In the all-important (to them) year of 1833, where was the southern border of Argentina?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_the_Desert#/media/File:Mapa_ARGENTINA_frontera.png

    For those who don't want to click on the link, the Southern border of Argentina in 1833 was about 1000 miles away from the Falklands - hardly geographically proximate.........
    (Oh, and how did Argentina extent to Tierra del Fuego.......... by military conquest, including deliberately killing the rightful occupants of the land. So if it was unacceptable for Britain to peacefully (no deaths) expel a few people in 1833, how was the Conquest of the desert acceptable and legal?)

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 07:36 pm - Link - Report abuse +7
  • Chicureo

    A great writer, that few even remember once said that “In 1453 before the fall of the city the intellectuals of Constantinople were discussing the gender of angels. There were heated debates on whether angels were male or female.”

    Here we are in 2019 debating about what apparently was forcefully and permanently resolved by a very intractable woman in 1982.

    But, let me give praise to those who still valiantly defend their beliefs. Patrick, bless him, especially reminds me that this disagreement, in the conscious of Argentines, will linger into oblivion.

    ¡Feliz año THINK!

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Think

    Yeahhhh..., yeahhhh.... all those niceties to you too..., hermanito Shileno...

    By the way... One thing has been nagging me though...
    - If I have you correctly placed..., and if you haven't had your mano deeper in the lata than most milicos there..., your apartment in Viña must have at least 5 neighour appartments that were grossly affected by the vindictive musical action taken by that petite local version of private Helga Geerhart that so lovingly mothered your daughters... ;-)

    Didn't you feel a teeny weeny twinge of embarrassment when the pacos knocked at your door...?

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 09:09 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • The Voice

    Patrick and Think… low rent Eric and Ernie! Pointless incoherent RG waffle from impotents.

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 09:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Chicureo

    Estimado THINK

    I'm back now suffering the heat in Chicureo...

    As I cowered in the corner, as my “Frau She Who Must Be Obeyed” read the riot act to the polite and respectful paco...

    ...and yes, mis vecinos were p*ssed, but she's always kept me frightened of her wrath...

    ¡Saludos!

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 09:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Islander1

    Think,
    No offense meant- just being a bit cheeky. Of course the south eastern bit of SouthsAmerica belongs to you folks -just as these Islands belong to us folks who live here and whose ancestors have built them, having pushed no indigenoius people off the lands in the first place either.

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    Claiming the whole continent now Think? Your neighbours will not be in the least surprised.

    How many years has Argentina been knocking these letters out to the UN now? With what success? You would have thought that 189 years of failure (first warning 1829) would have got through to them by now.

    Here's to the next 189 ;-)

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 11:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Think

    Sr. Shicureo...
    ***“Frightened of her wrath...”***..., huhhhhhhhhhh....
    I remember EXACTLIY what you mean...
    One of them many things I certainly don't miss from marital life with them beautiful Venusian foes...;-)

    Mr. Timlander1...
    No ofense taken..., we were being a bit cheeky ourself (me and Tweety...;-)

    Mr. Lorton...
    By perseverance..., the snail reached the Ark..., laddie...

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 11:35 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • Roger Lorton

    But it's still a snail Think...... underfoot

    Jan 04th, 2019 - 11:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Think

    Correct...., me dear above and beyond haughty Engrish lion...

    Jan 05th, 2019 - 12:09 am - Link - Report abuse -4
  • DemonTree

    Heh, just don't go visiting our neighbours, they're very fond of their snails.

    (You two make me glad I'm not married.)

    Jan 05th, 2019 - 01:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Enrique Massot

    Hey, nothing like a little noise from Argentina to push islanders to action.

    Say, over 20 comments in 20 hours!

    However, islanders have little to fear for as long as Mauricio Macri remains president of the Argentines. He will go through a few motions just pour la gallery, but at heart he remains a genuflect admirer of every single former colonial / neo-colonial power.

    As for the Malvinas claim, you'd be better off getting used to it. It has been going for a long time and it will continue to be until the islands are returned to Argentina (to the despair of some Chileans).

    Jan 05th, 2019 - 05:19 am - Link - Report abuse -5
  • imoyaro

    Nice to see Kamerad/Komrade Rique showing his true National Socialist colors. But with any luck his goddess, La Asesina will win the next election. And with any luck Trump will trigger a general exchange, in which the Chinese base in Neuquen will get obliterated. Too bad you won't be there, but the “Nuclear Winter,” which will surely hit Canada no matter what, will put paid to your continuous lies. See you there, you genocidal Fascist/ Communist piece of bipedal detritus... ;)

    Jan 05th, 2019 - 07:54 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Think

    TWIMC... (specially the haughty ones)

    ... Continuing with me thoughs about “Nails and Snails against Colonialism” from above...

    Many a haughty Colonial Engrish Lion has..., through history..., succumbed to them humble colonized snails nails...(schistosomes...)

    Let's hope that 2019 brings to all of us a better *AA... and a very adamantine **BB... so the imperative attrition campaign against that Archaic Imperial Colonial Engrish Enclave in the South Atlantic can resumed in full...

    (* AA = Argentinean Administration...)
    (**BB = British Brexit...)

    Jan 05th, 2019 - 09:01 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Roger Lorton

    Nothing can be 'returned' Enrique, simply because the Islands were never Argentine. There were a few trespassers there from Buenos Aires in the 1820's, although whether they qualified as 'Argentine' is moot. Indeed, whether BA was acting for the nation is unclear. The Chamber & Senate hearings of 1879 & 1882 would suggest not and that BA was acting ultra vires.

    As for Argentina's long running 'claim' - who cares? 189 years of failure should demonstrate that Argentina's claim is going nowhere. After 30 years of no UN GA Resolution, clearly even that political organisation no longer cares.

    In 1994 the then Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd said that“... the question of sovereignty is in effect settled. It may take years yet before Argentina recognises this fact. But the Argentine invasion in 1982 made it certain, I think, that the Islanders will not accept Argentine rule, and no one will in practice force it on them.” That remains the situation.

    Think (now when I saw the words “I think” in Hurd's words I had the strangest of thoughts .... it passed ;-) ) Macri's administration is certainly not perfect, but CFK again? You really believe that that would be better? Unbelievable.

    Jan 05th, 2019 - 10:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Think

    Errrrrrrrr...

    Could you please lead me to the part in my above comment where I advocate for the return to power of that brave woman in an impossible job named Cristina Elisabet Fernández Wilhelm de Kirchner..., copper...?

    Jan 06th, 2019 - 10:59 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Roger Lorton

    ”Let's hope that 2019 brings to all of us a better *AA... (* AA = Argentinean Administration...)”

    You already have Macri, beginning to look like CFK is the alternative ...... old man.

    Jan 06th, 2019 - 11:14 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • golfcronie

    Patrick,You know as the whole world knows that Argentina population ( ruled by the military at the time ) took to the streets and cheered your troops that “ invaded ” the Falklands. No good trying to brush it away. ARGENTINA ARMED FORCES INVADED THE FALKLANDS. Even the UN told you to get out.Your countrymen accepted the military in power at the time.

    Jan 06th, 2019 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Think

    You infer too much..., young one...
    Even for an ex Engrish copper...

    Jan 06th, 2019 - 12:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • The Voice

    Ole Turkeyneck coming back? The Whisky sodden ramblings of a Pata gonad Dino! Or possibly a Castro hatted hypocrite safely ensconsed in a safe Commonwealth haven. Nothing for peaceful Islanders to fear. Question is are there Clangers on the far side?

    Jan 06th, 2019 - 05:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Enrique Massot

    I do understand it's not an easy position to be a resident in a disputed territory.

    So, as I said before, islanders may take a break for as long as Mauricio Macri remains as the Argentine president. He will continue to make concession after concession without asking for anything in exchange--just to show how nice he is to the central countries. Macri is but a typical exponent of our beloved oligarchy, those who claim to be Argentines but hold large part of their assets in offshore accounts.

    The 1982 attempt to recover the islands by force was the result of the country being under a civic-military dictatorship, but Argentina's general consensus today is, the islands must be recovered through peaceful negotiations.

    Such negotiations will be carried out by a strong administration capable to rally the world's progressive countries behind this long overdue restitution.

    Jan 07th, 2019 - 04:44 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • DemonTree

    What concessions? He agreed to the second flight and did ask for something in exchange - it has to call at Cordoba twice a month to make it easier for Argentines to visit. Nothing else has changed.

    Jan 07th, 2019 - 11:35 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • mollymauk

    I posted the following comment earlier in this thread, and have posted something similar on other discussions here on Mercopress. But none of you supporters of the Argentine view on who are the rightful owners of the islands have an answer.
    If the British settling (peacefully, i.e without exchange of fire in a military engagement), was not acceptable or legal, then how was the Occupation of Patagonia by military force legal. If it was OK for the Argentine nation to extend its borders by 1000 miles by methods including shooting the original local inhabitants (“owners”), then surely the British didn't do anything too unacceptable in 1833..... (after all, there were only about 50 people asked to leave, and no-one killed......)



    ”Red Baron said “It is impossible to see what claim they may have other than geographical proximity”

    In the all-important (to them) year of 1833, where was the southern border of Argentina?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_the_Desert#/media/File:Mapa_ARGENTINA_frontera.png

    For those who don't want to click on the link, the Southern border of Argentina in 1833 was about 1000 miles away from the Falklands - hardly geographically proximate.........
    (Oh, and how did Argentina extend to Tierra del Fuego.......... by military conquest, including deliberately killing the rightful occupants of the land. So if it was unacceptable for Britain to peacefully (no deaths) expel a few people in 1833, how was the Conquest of the desert acceptable and legal?)”

    Jan 07th, 2019 - 12:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Chicureo

    mollymauk

    You are presenting logical thought to a forum where several of the contributors are illogical to reason with.

    Jan 07th, 2019 - 12:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Voice

    mollymauk

    Military conquest was a legally acceptable form of acquiring territory then...
    There was no conquest of the Falklands...just theft...and theft between two“friendly” nations was not an acceptable means of acquiring territory especially when one of them immediately protests...
    It's not difficult to explain or understand...

    Jan 08th, 2019 - 01:25 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • darragh

    I've not been on this site for some time and when I come back what do I find - the same old crap from 'think' (who doesn't), 'voice' (who can't), EM writing nonsense and PE with his usual incomprehensible garbage.

    I may be back - but probably not....

    Cue 'think (who doesn't) to make some disparaging comment about 'paddies' and 'voice' (who can't) to back him up.

    Jan 08th, 2019 - 10:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • dab14763

    #There was no conquest of the Falklands...just theft...and theft between two“friendly” nations was not an acceptable means of acquiring territory especially when one of them immediately protests...#

    Theft? From who? Argentina? Argentina in 186 years has been utterly incapable of proving it ever established sovereignty over the Falklands. Spain? Perhaps theft of Port Louis or stretching it, East Falkland. But Spain in 186 years has not made one single protest to the UK, thus losing any rights it may have had to the UK through acquisitive prescription.

    Jan 08th, 2019 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    “There was no conquest of the Falklands...just theft.”
    Still attempting ”Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction. Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam). In other cases, its repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority or appeal to belief fallacies.“
    https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
    ”Nevertheless, there occurs, according to international law, a territorial change, provided that the occupation, made with the intention of incorporating the occupied territory into the territory of the occupying State, assumes a permanent character, and that means that the legal order of the occupying State becomes efficacious for the territory in question. Usually one speaks of “occupation,” … annexation is not only possible in time of war, but also in time of peace. The decisive point is that annexation, that is, taking possession of another State's territory with the intention to acquire it, constitutes acquisition of this territory even without the consent of the State to which the territory previously belonged, if the possession is “firmly established.” It makes no difference whether the annexation takes place after an occupatio bellica or not.”
    https://books.google.com.br/books?id=4dAr24lK4BEC&pg=PA214&lpg=PA214&dq=annexation+is+not+only+possible+in+time+of+war,+but+also+in+time+of+peace.&source=bl&ots=tpJ0TU6vP4&sig=nUSmINe5OhdkuNnfujFxt09XO20&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BhEhVe7TOITfsAWp9IHADQ&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=annexation%20is%20not%20only%20possible%20in%20time%20of%20war%2C%20but%20also%20in%20time%20of%20peace.&f=true

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 02:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    Voice

    Terry Hill needs to investigate the FAKE news site that now is now reporting some disturbing news about Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg... also, Amy Coney Barrett...

    He also really needs to check out the interesting article for some helpful remedies in reinforcing his/her self esteem:
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/39980/website-sells-phallic-prosthetics-prepubescent-frank-camp

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo the flamer
    “He also really needs to check out...”
    Continuing your 'Freudian slips', Freud said 'Thought is a Roundabout Way of Wishing'. It's not difficult to surmise what your thoughts are, since you can't refrain from revealing them.
    He also said ”The Unconscious. Nothing Comes “Out of the Blue.”

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 06:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    Terry

    Forgive me for just trying to help you. I thought the above link would be helpful for someone like yourself in a challenging enviroment.

    ...By the way, Ruthie may pull through, atheist leftists all over the USA are praying for her, dispute the irony...

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/39980/website-sells-phallic-prosthetics-prepubescent-frank-camp

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo the flamer
    “I thought the above link would be helpful..” Why would your personal obsession be of any help to anyone else?

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 09:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    Terry

    New news headline from the imaginary universe you dwell:

    “Trump White House Urging Allies to Prepare For Possible Departure of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Who May Resign from Court to Train Full-Time for the 2020 Olympics”

    There you go, I was mistaken, you of course was completely correct...
    ...people and laws change as they should...

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo the flamer
    “I guess you're engaging in “an informal logical fallacy” is your own way of conceding that you've lost both the plot and the debate ... ”
    Informal Fallacies
    Straw Man Argument
    Pro-choice is absurd. How could anyone support killing an innocent human being?
    https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/Straw-Person.html

    Jan 10th, 2019 - 11:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Chicureo

    “How could anyone support killing an innocent human being?”

    Exactly! How do you Terry justify murdering an innocent human unborn child?

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/39980/website-sells-phallic-prosthetics-prepubescent-frank-camp

    Jan 11th, 2019 - 01:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo the flamer
    The straw man argument from one with a straw brain, who is trying to rely on a failed informal fallacy.
    Still attempting ”Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction. Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam). In other cases, its repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority or appeal to belief fallacies.“
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
    Careful you're revealing your perverted interest again.

    Jan 11th, 2019 - 01:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    It's okay Chicureo, it was going to grow up to be an evil communist anyway.

    Jan 12th, 2019 - 06:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!