Walking over the dead

[Johnmcd]

Dear all,
I have been predicting for at least a year that the island councillors would do their utmost to suspend the building (which they did) and the eventual inauguration (which they are doing) of the Argentine War Memorial at Darwin. I predicted right. Now make what you want of the Penguin Press release given below, see it your own way, both ways or be indifferent. The way I see it is just another disgusting attempt by the islands councillors to ever deepen the divide. By doing so they further insult every British and especially Argentine serviceman that died in such a pointless war. I’m absolutely positive that all veterans of the conflict will be shocked at how the councillors are controlling such an emotive issue for their own cheap political gain.

I also see a reflection of the mercenary attitude of the islanders before the conflict when the Falkland Island Company traded with Argentina. They knew then what Argentina was up to and what their ambitions were but still they traded and no doubt encouraged them. Mercenary attitudes! Well one other fact, well forgotten, that the shops and pubs in Stanley would not take British Serviceman's cheques after the conflict, but were known to willingly take Pesos from the occupying Argentine forces during the conflict.

My obvious bitterness aside.
I don’t deny that the islanders had to be liberated and I really felt that I had played a part in that effort of liberation along with so many good young guys that stayed - buried at sea or in the peat. So I look over my shoulder to see what the islanders are doing with that hard won freedom. Honestly, I see no honour, no compassion - just hard headedness that makes a putrid stink in all camps.

Best wishes,
John.

TEXT


Falklands Councillors regretted the “circumstances” that compelled the Argentine Families Commission to call off this Friday’s private visit to the Darwin cemetery Memorial in Falklands where 237 Argentine combatants of the 1982 South Atlantic conflict are buried.

A small group of Argentine next of kin was scheduled to make a private visit this Friday to the Argentine Memorial finished last April, --still pending an official inauguration—but a meeting at the Argentine Ministry of Foreign Affairs last week finally convinced the Families Commission to call off the visit, since it was considered convenient that “no officials should participate” given the humanitarian characterization of the homage, according to the Argentine press.
Tuesday evening a spokesperson for the Families Commission advanced to Mercopress that travelling to the Islands on this one off-private flight to conduct a brief ceremony to mark the completion of the Memorial “could be politically misconstrued”, and therefore their decision.

The Argentine press reports that a week ago members of the Families Commission met with Argentine Foreign Affairs Minister Rafael Bielsa plus the head of the Malvinas desk Santos Goñi and the official line was that “no Argentine or British officials” should travel to the Islands for the event and avoid “any contact with the Falklands Legislative Council”.

Apparently the Families Commission had invited Sir Robin Christopher, British Ambassador in Buenos Aires and one of the great sponsors of the Memorial project, to join them in the private visit to the Memorial.

Furthermore the Families Commission was planning to appeal directly to the Falklands Legislative Council and Governor Howard Pearce for authorization of a full inauguration of the Memorial next September.

However the Families Commission finally in an official release on the sensitive issue said they had no intention of “interfering with the international policy of the Argentine government”.

Islanders since the current Argentine President Kirchner administration policy of ignoring the local elected Council plus interfering with Falklands’ fisheries and banning charter flights from Chile have flatly refused to any mass inauguration of the Memorial that could be politically tainted.

Last July 15th it was announced that the Argentine Families Commission had sought the agreement of the Falkland Islands Government for a day visit by a small group from the Commission to the Argentine Memorial at Darwin on Friday 6 August, "to enable them to conduct a short ceremony to mark the completion of construction work".

At the time Falkland Island Councillors had given their agreement to the visit which would be of no more than twelve in number and would not include any Argentine politicians or officials.
The visitors were to travel to the Islands in a private aircraft under the terms of the Argentine-British understanding on private flights signed in February 2001.

In response to the situation the Legislative Council of the Falklands this Wednesday made a public release stating that, “We regret that circumstances have compelled the Families Commission to call off their visit. Falkland Islanders have always welcomed visits from the next of kin, and we are disappointed not to be able to meet the Families Commission on Friday”.

Falklands Councillor Richard thingywell interviewed on Wednesday by the local FIBS Broadcasting said the passenger list of the Friday private flight from Argentina had “not been received” adding that if British Ambassador Sir Robin Christopher had been invited and was in the list he obviously was not an Argentine official..

[Gabriel]

Hi John,

I read the article in Mercopress, and tried unsuccessfully to find more info. I assume there were political issues on both sides, because I read that Bielsa asked the families not to travel to the islands.

Regards,

Gabriel

[The MCO Bhoy]

Somebody on the FI upset you have they John?!

[Johnmcd]

Gabriel,
Yes I believe that you are correct - it could well have been top level Argentine government intervention that stopped the private visit to the Darwin War Memorial. That’s not in dispute. What is, however, is the saga that has led up to the visit being cancelled and perhaps future visits by Argentine families. This goes back a long way and I have commented upon this in a whole series of postings. The route cause, in my view, is the Falkland Island manifesto pledge of having nothing to do with Argentina.

I mentioned ages ago that the Darwin Memorial has got nothing what so ever to do with the Argentine sovereignty claim. The erection of the memorial was agreed as part of the July 1999 Joint Statement signed by the UK and Argentina. What followed was difficulties in erecting the memorial and FIG refusal in having Argentine government officials at the site for the inauguration, which, I can only assume, has been further delayed because of this. Inevitably, this also reflects on the islands refusal of allowing direct Aerolineas flights into Stanley and the consequent Argentine charter flight ban. We also remember the island ban on any Argentine flagged ship berthing on the islands - such was the case in delivering the memorial stones which had to transported by a non Argentine flagged ship.

Look at this way. If the UK was dealing directly with Argentina then none of this would have happened. I’m sure the Memorial would have been built without fuss and inaugurated with dignity and would have enhanced Anglo/Argentine post conflict reconciliation. Not the opposite.

Also, I do understand islanders feelings of having a high profile inauguration ceremony on their soil by a country that still claims their territory. But they must surely know that their self-determination would never be compromised. Indeed being fully open to Argentine families and Argentine government officials could only benefit the islands through strengthened co-operation in all areas of mutual interest.

Best wishes,
John.

[Sakura26]

They dont want the flights.....they dont want the cementery...... they dont want to talk to us... Then what on Earth do they want? Argentina only wants to recover its territories and live in peace just as they want to live in peace too. It just happened that the land they are on is part of a conflict. But the more they keep closing the doors, the more we want to enter.....

Sakura

[Sea Eagle]

Sakura,

I must say sincerely that John frequently writes total and utter uninformed rubbish. I have asked him to substantiate some of the things he writes as 'fact' (even privately) but he has always failed to do so, which is his right no doubt. However all that stance does for me is to lessen the credibilty of everything he says and question his motives for his attitude.

John appears to have some personal 'beef' with Falkland's Councillors.

The next of kin of the Argentine fallen are made most welcome and have a warm and friendly reception from the vast majority of Falkland Islanders including Councillors who had publically welcomed the visit. I am sure ther next of kin will agree with that. The cancellation is entirely an Argentine decision there has been no negative influence on it from the Falklands at all.

The objection to regular Argentine flights is against the exclusivity that would give to Argentina over access to the Falklands and the present charter ban, which is a commercial sanction against the Falklands by Argentina. A free skies policy is what is needed to solve the deadlock and it is Argentina that is preventing this progress at the moment. I hope they will reconsider.

It is the Argentine Government that refuses to talk to Falkland Islanders or even rercogniser their rights not vice versa and my information is that the Islanders are very happy with the cemetery and memorial.

In addittion Argentina never established its sovereignty over the Falkland as it pretends in a manner that is required by international law. It is merely a pretender to that position.

As a vet of the Falklands conflict I have no doubt that John has a personal axe to grind, but what it is is a mystery to me.

I find his posts unreasonably biased, unsubtantiated in factual information, lacking evenhandedness and insulting to the intelligence of people who actually take the trouble to establish the facts to avoid friction and misunderstanding between Falkland Islanders and Argentines.

By the way John the Victory bar was established in the Falklands when I was a child, a very long time ago!!

Best wishes,

Ernie

[Johnmcd]

Ernie,
Total uninformed rubbish as you put it is only you putting yer head in the sand or as far away from reality to be termed blindly ignorant of the circumstances where the islanders find themselves today and in the future.

Those who have followed my posts and my exchanges with you will gather exactly where I’m coming from and very able to check the veracity of my postings on their own steam without unfair influence from you.

Suffice to say I’m not a FIG syncopate.

Best wishes,
John.

[Gabriel]

Hi Ernie,

While I respect your point of view, I feel the need to remind you that you are also a moderator, and as such, you should lead by example and refrain from making personal attacks ("I must say sincerely that John frequently writes total and utter uninformed rubbish.")

Gabriel

[Sea Eagle]

Gabriel,

As both an individual and a moderator I also have a duty to myself to speak what I see as the truth. John will know that I am not making a personal attack on him and that I am at odds with his brand of politics which seems to be to mislead people as to the state of affairs in the Falklands, the role of Falkland's Councillors. For instance he clearly blames FI Councillors in the lead posting on this thread for cancelling the Families Commission visit to the Falklands, when I know and he also probably knows (If he is as well informed as he says he is) that the FI Councillors knew nothing about the cancellation which came about as a result of persuasion by the Argentine Government. In fact up until yesterday the Families Commission had not informed FIG that they were not making the visit.

In my opinion John is the only one who is 'Walking over the dead' in this instance by trying to give an impression that is not supported by the facts to bolster up his own point of view. To which he is perfectly entitled. But when he employs unsubstantiated wording and implies fact in fictional information and deploys it as truth then I call that unsubstantiated rubbish, which it is.

None of us here are impartial we, in most instances, truly believe in our own point of view and defend it vigorously. What I indicated by agreeing to be a moderator was a genuine willingness to work for an equitable settlement and foster friendship between Argentines and Falkland Islanders but I do not see why I should stand aside silently while someone deliberately tries to sabotage that aim.

If that position is not acceptable in a moderator then I will cease to be one if asked to withdraw. However I am not going to go of my own accord for saying what is true as that would only give satisfaction to people who deliberately undermine those aims.

Gabriel I understand what you say, and appreciate your sentiments, but what you have said has really served to remind me of my duty. Perhaps my words were a tad harsh and perhaps I should have said.

'John, you know this new posting of yours 'Walking on the dead' does not reflect the true situation yet you post it not checking the facts and knowing it will mislead and incense readers as you have done with many other postings in the past. Please try to leave your personal political agenda out of this Forum which has the purpose of trying to bring Argentines and Falkland Islanders closer together, not alienating them by disseminating unsubstatiated propaganda, thank you. And by the way there is nothing more laughable than a politician who quotes himself to support his point of view'

Best wishes,

Ernie

[Gabriel]

Ernie,

My comment was directed specifically to your choice of words. Please keep in mind that not only English is a second language for me, but I also live in a place that utilizes different words that the ones used by you and John, and therefore it is almost impossible for me to perceive the exact nuances of your redaction.
As you well know, I am not innocent either. No doubt I will need a cool bath from time to time and I will welcome your effort if you choose to do the job.
I certainly would not ask you to remove yourself from voicing opinions, or to change your point of view to anything other that what you believe, nor am I willing to do so myself. This is the OTHER forum! But we are not just participants, we are also moderators, and therefore we have the responsibility to set the tone.
If you believe it to be your duty to participate in this forum I am very grateful to you. I still have a lot to learn.

Saludos,

Gabriel

[Sea Eagle]

Gabriel,

Absolutely nothing wrong with your English it is excellent as is Noelia's but I understand what you say. English varies in subtle meaning and nuance throughout the Anglo Saxon diaspora and indeed where it has been adopted in former Colonial territories.

As Winston Churchill once said of the USA and the UK 'Two countries separated by a common language'.

When I first came to England I was surprised at the difference in word use and meaning even between the Falklands and England. A simple example would be the use of the word 'Sidewalk' in the Falklands (and USA) and its equivalent 'Pavement' in England.

Other examples would be Farming terms and names of objects, many of which are Falklandised Spanish (Most of which originated from the River Plate Gauchos employed by Lafone and then the FIC) for which I did not immediately know the English words.

Now there is more UK influence in the Falklands this may have changed of course.

Best wishes,

Ernie