|
Post by Maquilishuat on Feb 1, 2005 1:51:23 GMT -3
Hello John:
You wrote:
"However, at the moment the islands appear to hedging their whole future on a single company that has share holdings currently matching the islands whole GNP. "
Would be kind enough to ellaborate a little more on this issue?
Saludos, Otto
|
|
|
Post by Johnmcd on Feb 1, 2005 6:46:59 GMT -3
Otto, This follows an extended thread on the other forum. Essentially, the company in question: Falkland Island Holdings, formally the Falkland Islands Company has effectively cornered all critical aspects of the islands economy and is prospecting heavily on island minerals.
It is my contention that this company wishes to maintain the ‘status quo’ to enable them to gain maximum profit with minimum political interference. Many of the islanders are already share holders in their enterprises – hence their apparent freedom of commercial manoeuvre.
The Falkland islands Company has a long history on the islands and were at one time the ‘landowners’ I believe they have now recovered this position despite having their wings clipped by the British government back in 1985.
To find out more please tap in a search on the Falkland Islands Company and also Falklands Islands holdings – remembering that both companies are the same.
Best wishes, John.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel on Feb 1, 2005 11:23:40 GMT -3
Hi John,
The same thing is happening everywhere else; big business dictates the rules. Do you think Wal-Mart, Microsoft or General Motors would stay out of the island's politics? Unrestricted capitalism is a global cancer; I don't understand why you find this so appalling only when it happens in Malvinas.
Regards,
Gabriel
|
|
caton
Junior Member
Posts: 69
|
Post by caton on Feb 1, 2005 20:52:28 GMT -3
John,
Your quote:
"Are you actually stating that the British ‘blackmailed’ the fascist Junta by deploying ISBN’s in the South Atlantic? If so, I would dearly love to read your sources."
Have you ever heard of MP Tom Dalyell? Well, that't the source (non British sources would be labeled as "anti-british", you know...)
Javier
PS: oh, yes, it's real that nobody cares in Argentina nowadays about our islands. Shhh, keep dreaming...
|
|
caton
Junior Member
Posts: 69
|
Post by caton on Feb 1, 2005 20:55:32 GMT -3
John,
Argentina offitially announced it had developed her own enrichment process in 1983.
|
|
|
Post by Johnmcd on Feb 2, 2005 6:54:31 GMT -3
Hi Gabriel, Your are out of sinc here. I’m not talking about globalisation at all, which has its own merits and de-merits.
I am talking about the economic monopolisation of a very small island entity by a large company, whose influence affects the very fabric of island self-determination.
Best wishes, John.
|
|
|
Post by Johnmcd on Feb 2, 2005 9:03:42 GMT -3
Javier, Yes, I do know Tam Dalyell and his influence on the post conflict Frank Report particularly concerning the order to sink the Belgrano and nuclear submarines in the S. Atlantic.
Tam raised questions in the House of Commons (c1982) if ballistic missile carrying submarines were deployed to the SW Atlantic operational area in 1982. The answer was no, they were not, as I remember. The Polaris submarines were part of the NATO nuclear deterrence as are the replacement Trident subs of today. As such their highly secret patrol stations (permanently off the River Plate) are never announced.
When was the last Argentine ‘mass demo’ demanding the return of the Malvinas in that famous square in BA?
Best wishes, John.
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel on Feb 2, 2005 10:03:25 GMT -3
John,
I understand your concern, but big bussines is big bussiness anywhere. My point is that you and me are threatened by the exact same thing. I am not necessarily talking about globalization. Try to imagine the Falkland Island Holdings being replaced by Wall-Mart. How is that going to change the picture?
Gabriel
|
|
|
Post by Sea Eagle on Feb 2, 2005 10:12:55 GMT -3
Dear All,
Tam Dalyell is the 'Father of the House of Commons' - that is the longest serving member - so I guess from his constituents point of view he must do some things right, though I can't think what!
He wrote the eminently shallow and forgettable book 'One Mans War' after the Falklands conflict.
In Simon Carr's Parliamentary Sketch in today's Independent he says of Tam Dalyell 'Mr Dalyell's bite is only as good as his bark when he remembers to put his teeth in' he goes on to say that yesterday he received, among the adverts for Viagra, an email press release saying: "Members not standing at the next election: Tam Dalyell" - We shall miss him. He says. Wont we? Lets not argue about it now.
My view: Tam Dalyell is famous/notorious for jumping on any bandwagon he can get his foot on, however insecurely, if only to take the opposite view to the official line however bizarre his opposite view may be. His pseudo-intellectual far back monotone has long since ceased to be convincing as are the outlandish causes he tends to espouse.
By the way I agree with Gabriel on this one, overbearing commercial interest is unwelcome in any form. The Falklands is not a special case, any licensed exploration interests in oil or mining in the Falklands will of necessity have to be 'farmed out' if the prospecting fulfills its promise. Only the Global players have the ultimate 'clout' and finance to actually exploit the resources. No doubt the FIG and the islanders as a whole will be glad about that because the taxes they charge and the shares they may hold will considerably increase their wealth and prospects of national security. What may not benefit is the environment. (I am not a Falklands shareholder by the way.)
Desire Petroleum shares are at 54.2p today from a recent high of 68p and a low of only a few months ago of 10p.
Regards,
Ernie
|
|