The UK was not always sure about the titles of the Malvinas. There are some interesting words expressed by the British Prime Minister, the Duke of Wellington in 1829:
“It is not clear to me that we have ever possessed the sovereignty of all these Islands. The Convention [of 1771] certainly goes no further than to restore to us Port Egmont, which we abandoned nearly sixty years ago. […] I confess that I should doubt
the expediency of now taking possession of them. We have possession of nearly every valuable post and colony in the world, and I confess that I am anxious to avoid exciting the attention and jealousy of other Powers by extending our possessions and setting the example of the gratification of a desire to seize upon new territories. But in this case, in which our right to possess more than Port Egmont is disputed, and at least doubtful, it is
very desirable to avoid such acts.”
Source: Letter from the Duke of Wellington to Sir George Murray (Foreign Office), in WELLESLEY, Arthur Richard, 2nd Duke of Wellington (Ed.), Dispatches, correspondences and memoranda of fi eld marshal Arthur Duke of Wellington, vol. VI, New York, Kraus Reprint Co, 1973, pp. 48-49.
Malvinas Islands: Facts and Fictions 
7 October, 2015 at 10:42 pm
Please note the use of the word ‘ALL’ clearly indicating that Wellington recognised that some of the islands were British at least. You should also publish the rest of his letter, and the legal opinion provided to him by Jenner which clearly demonstrates British title.
These can be found here – https://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/5-1823-to-1832.pdf
LikeLike
8 October, 2015 at 11:23 pm
Spain appointed governor to an English Island? You are dreaming
LikeLike
11 October, 2015 at 12:51 pm
Spain had an enclave.
LikeLike
8 October, 2015 at 11:24 pm
that is the blog of the illegal goberment of the islands malvinas?
LikeLike
16 October, 2015 at 7:53 pm
Another comment from one of the followers of #Quito.
LikeLike
17 October, 2015 at 11:39 pm
Busted, Lorton. “Nobody knew about the existence of JTRIG until Snowden himself spoke about it in an interview he gave NBC in February, 2014. The documents revealed internal publications that made it clear that the group’s cyber offensive mission was to attack all sorts of enemies, from Iran all the way to hackers from Anonymous –or, in this case, Argentina-, “destroying, degrading, discrediting and misinforming” the adversary, through the infiltration of its communication networks.”
http://tn.com.ar/politica/snowden-s-documents-the-internal-manual-that-explains-how-to-manipulate-people-through-internet-oper_592092
LikeLiked by 1 person
8 October, 2015 at 1:39 am
What can the “other” islands be if UK had only set foot temporarily over Saunders, an islet around the main two of the archipelago? And that is where UK left a plaque in 1774 as a “proof” of its “sovereignty”. By way, Spain did not cease to appoint governor after governor in those years…
LikeLike
11 October, 2015 at 12:52 pm
There were only 2 Governors. The others were designated as Comandante- Gobernadors under the Gil y Lemos plan and were in fact the commanders of whichever of the 2 frigates whose turn it was to be at the enclave.
You need to learn more. https://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/4-1775-to-1822.pdf
LikeLike
17 October, 2015 at 11:40 pm
Busted, Lorton. “Nobody knew about the existence of JTRIG until Snowden himself spoke about it in an interview he gave NBC in February, 2014. The documents revealed internal publications that made it clear that the group’s cyber offensive mission was to attack all sorts of enemies, from Iran all the way to hackers from Anonymous –or, in this case, Argentina-, “destroying, degrading, discrediting and misinforming” the adversary, through the infiltration of its communication networks.”
http://tn.com.ar/politica/snowden-s-documents-the-internal-manual-that-explains-how-to-manipulate-people-through-internet-oper_592092
LikeLike
8 October, 2015 at 11:25 pm
Yes. Indeed and that is why the international organizations call countries to sit and negotiate. there is reason to believe argentina is right.
LikeLike
11 October, 2015 at 12:53 pm
None whatsoever. There has been no call by the UN to “sit & negotiate” since 1988. The other minor organisations are irrelevant as the UK is not a member of any of them.
LikeLike
11 October, 2015 at 6:38 pm
minor organizations? if the UN is the only valid entity to you, then read the ICJ rullings on self determination and then dare to invoke it for this case. https://twitter.com/tururod/status/641044219554086913
LikeLike
12 October, 2015 at 10:06 am
The ICJ has made it quite clear that the right of self-determination is applicable to ALL the NSGTs listed at the UN. Perhaps you should read this – https://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/falklands-what-the-icj-might-say-about-argentinas-claims.pdf
LikeLike
13 October, 2015 at 9:18 pm
Perhaps you should read this too: https://www.un.org/en/decolonization/pdf/falkland_islands.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
13 October, 2015 at 1:31 am
Except for the fact that the UN has expressly defined the Malvinas issue as a SPECIAL AND PARTICULAR case because self determination does not apply to British subjects on the islands under migratory control. Not a colonial people as in NSGT as not every NSGT has a people as such. And UN makes it clear when referring to Malvinas.
Look what an interesting analysis I found. A brief analysis of the demography of the islands clearly reveals the artificial nature of Britain’s claim that the settlers constitute a separate people and are thereby entitled to self-determination. In 1851, 18 years after the seizure of the islands, the total population was 287 –roughly the same number of inhabitants as there was at the height of the community’s development during the period of Argentine administration towards the end of the 1820s. For a century, the number of inhabitants remained between 2,272 in 1911 and 2,841, according to the latest census in 2012. There were peaks, as in 1931 (2,392 inhabitants), and after generally remaining stable, this figure began to decline in 1962 (2,172 inhabitants) reducing to 1,813 inhabitants by 1980. Following the war in 1982, the population grew by almost a third in just thirty years. The reason for this was the economic boom produced by the granting of fishing licenses. These figures demonstrate that the demographic growth of the population is not natural.
The number of inhabitants on the islands is essentially dependent upon the economic and administrative needs of the colonial power. The population primarily comprises civil servants of the Crown, landowners and business men and women. Today, the second major “village” on the islands is made up of the civilian staff at the Mount Pleasant military base. They represent 15% of the islands’ population. The less well paid jobs are done by immigrants from Chile and Santa Helena. And yet the British citizens alone have the right to vote. Added to this there is also discrimination towards the Argentine citizens. Immediately after the end of the 1982 war, the resident Argentine citizens working for the fuel and transport provision services were expelled. For 17 years Argentine passport holder were banned from the right to visit the islands, even as tourists. An unwritten law prohibits Argentines from owning real estate, to the extent that those inheriting such properties were forced to sell them.
The manipulation of the latest census is blatant. As the majority of the inhabitants were not even born on the islands, the British authorities did not provide this information initially. In place of this, they provided information on how individual islanders identified themselves in terms of their “national identity”. The “result” was that 59% responded “Falkland Islander” and 29% “British”. This clearly shows that many of those who define themselves as “Islanders” are in actual fact British citizens having arrived from the United Kingdom. Indeed, many of them are the supposed “spokespersons” for the inhabitants, either as governmental or legislative representatives or as opinion makers in the islands’ media.
LikeLiked by 1 person
13 October, 2015 at 8:30 pm
This is great. Thank you. I am happy we managed to have this internal exchange and I am thrilled with all the good plans Malvineros is having. I am thankful for your enlightening insights.
LikeLike
13 October, 2015 at 10:42 pm
Please provide the reference number of the UN GA resolution that says that the Falklands are – SPECIAL AND PARTICULAR
There is a full list here – http://www.un.org/documents/resga.htm
As for population. The size of the population is irrelevant. The NSGT of Pitcairn has 53 people – with the right of self-determination. If the falklands only had 53 people, they too would still have the right.
Res 2625 clearly states that the NSGT of the Falklands is separate to Britain.
How people identify themselves is also irrelevant.
Cannot see what you hope to achieve with this nonsense.
LikeLike
15 October, 2015 at 3:11 pm
Only the minor C24 committee has stated it is a ‘Special and Particular Case’ in its statements, none of which got past the 4th Committee. The C24 does not represent the whole of the UNGA, it is made up of states like Russia, China, Syria etc etc who are obviously the bastions of self determination and human rights.
Please stop portraying the C24 statements as UNGA resolutions, it shows a lack of intelligence and integrity. Just like your other opinions, they are just that, opinions. Please do not try and pass these off as facts.
LikeLike
15 October, 2015 at 6:37 pm
To be precise the C24 when it refers to the Falklands as a ‘Special and Particular Case’ is reiterating Argentine statements. Argentine then claims that this is a “UN statement”.
The fact is there has been a UN resolution that declared the Falklands to be a different case because of Argentine claims. Point of fact, when a motion sponsored by Argentina and Spain to limit the right of self-determination in cases of a sovereignty dispute was soundly defeated in the UNGA.
LikeLike
16 October, 2015 at 7:52 pm
Not minor: it’s a committee at the UN. the fact that you do not comply with the Resolutions at the UN, it’s really a shame, as a P5. Also, justifying your lack of commitment by sharing a cheap interview with employee Ban Ki Moon in his personal capacity, shows how little you know and how well you follow the manual aired by Snowden and The Intercept and Todo Noticias: http://tn.com.ar/politica/snowden-s-documents-the-internal-manual-that-explains-how-to-manipulate-people-through-internet-oper_592092
In case miraculous Lorton has not told you so, the matter of the self determination for Malvinas and Gibraltar was discussed at the UNGA only once, in 1985 and the UK amendment was not accepted. The information you are sharing its false.
LikeLiked by 1 person
16 October, 2015 at 9:24 pm
C24 is a UN committee.
LikeLike
16 October, 2015 at 2:25 am
Argentina does not claim it is a “statement” but a resolution. Actually C 24 adopts resolutions. And al 193 UN Member States are so fool that they are prey to Argentina’s super power! Wow. And UNGA has never considered self determination in Malvinas and Gibraltar together. It only considered self determination once, in 1985, and both UK amendments were defeated. There has not been any other time the UNGA or C24 had to consider self determination in Malvinas ever since. Dont be wrong and misleading.
LikeLike
10 November, 2015 at 3:42 am
amazing junius=lordtrash and Justin such INCREDIBLE LIARSS! And also very stupidThere is NO LOGIC in their documents…incredible stupid and BAD PEOPLE!They not even GOOD LIARS!JAJAJAJAJAJ with people like this.MALVINAS ARGNEITNAS is the FUTURE!
LikeLike
11 November, 2015 at 2:03 am
One brain cell Miguel appears again. And, as on most occasions, says nothing of note. LOL
LikeLike
11 November, 2015 at 7:12 pm
Alzehimer usually attacks people at your age, Junius. Do not mess with Miguel.
LikeLike
13 November, 2015 at 1:15 pm
C24 is a UNGA Committee presided by the UN Secretary General whose opinion on C24 matters is nothing less than C24 doctrine and resolutions. So much so that C24 requests the SG to use his good offices and mediation to help GB and Argentina find the peaceful and negotiated solution to the sovereignty dispute.
LikeLike