29th January 2024 – I’ve previously been banned from Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, the Guardian Online, and a few less prominent places that aren’t worth mentioning here.
But I’ve just noticed I’ve also been banned from the http://www.arrse.co.uk Army Forum website. This is a private site that’s set itself up as “The voice of the British Army”, but without any official backing. It’s just an extravagant claim by the unidentified people behind it. Anonymous voices. The only pedigree this site does possess is: it has spent over the last 20 years carrying on with this nonsense.
And what lets it down horribly is it’s become a law unto itself. If a thinking veteran with an open / sceptical mind – and who’s served their country – gets into the habit of saying the ‘wrong things’ (which are conveniently always unspecified by the alleged ‘moderators’) they will get summarily dumped.
Whereas any old Tom, Dick or Harry, who’s obedient, goes down on bended knee, and agrees with the ‘official, settled version of events’ regarding the UK Establishment’s armed forces’ hideous conduct over the world, over the decades … can be lauded and labelled a “War Hero”, and other incongruous titles, according to the number of posts they make to the site.
I’m well gotten rid of. I can only say “Thank you, guys”. You’ve done me a big favour, Arrse, and made a sound decision by shutting down my freedom to waffle away aimlessly in pursuit of er, not a great deal. It’s been enlightening. Thanks again.
Now, onto Navy Net …
www.navy-net.co.uk is an online forum dedicated to Royal Navy serving members, veterans and civilians which has been around for almost 20 years. It’s a wonderful idea, but it’s got a very obvious flaw that’s in need of fixing. This looks pretty ingrained to me, and if it isn’t addressed soon, a promising opportunity to contact and communicate with others of a like mind is likely to be lost, particularly should the circling vultures – in the shape of wacky government proposals around internet regulation – be implemented.
I’ve tried for well over a year to appeal to the moderators’ better nature – they’re human beings after all – but it ain’t working! I now need to give an ultimatum asking them to clean up their act and to abide by their own stated site guidance, which they haven’t been doing ever since I joined back in March 2022. If this isn’t addressed, I may have to make it official.
The problem quickly made itself known after I posted here for the first time. I’d written and published a factual book at the end of March 2022. It’s also available on Audible. This is called “Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception”. As part of my post, I’d explained that my book listed a number of important questions on the Falklands War which I thought had not been addressed / investigated / answered in the 40 years since the war ended. These are highlighted here in issue number 18 of The Light newspaper … see page 10.
My position has been to promote the following facts (not exhaustive), which sadly have been overlooked by those who continue to push the official, settled version of events at the expense of these facts. But why? Because 42 years later, my questions still create doubt, embarrassment and huge questions over Mrs. Margaret Thatcher’s motivations. Post invasion, she kept stating the following whenever a camera was shoved in her face:
“The Falkland Islanders’ interests are paramount”:
Bear with me, please, but prior to the invasion, the Falkland Islanders’ interests were not at all paramount …
1 Mrs Thatcher had branded Falkland Islanders as “foreigners” inside her 1981 British Nationality Act. As a result, they were no longer able to settle in the United Kingdom
2 At the same time, she was also forging comprehensive trade deals with the fascist Argentine junta hinting at future co-operation, all whilst selling them UK-made weapons, right up until 4 days before the April 2nd 1982 invasion
3 She was also using the Foreign Office to try to secure a 99-year leaseback deal which would have seen the Argentine flag sharing flag posts with the union flag at Government House on the Falkland Islands before ultimately, the islands and the occupants themselves would be handed across to Argentina
4 Defence cuts were also in vogue, impacting the Royal Navy chiefly. Thatcher proposed to remove the Falklands’ guardship HMS Endurance, which would have resulted in the islands being left largely unprotected and Galtieri presumably pondering the likelihood that any invasion would be left uncontested.
5 Finally, not once did she criticise General Galtieri for kidnapping, torturing, murdering and secretly disposing of the bodies of thousands of his own law-abiding citizens as part of Nixon and Kissinger’s Operation Condor-influenced Dirty War – even after the invasion – an invasion which appeared to have been facilitated
I imagine the Iron Lady – wherever her indomitable ‘spirit’ lies now – would not be too put out by having to call them the Islas Malvinas.
As we can see from the above, she did most of the groundwork herself, and actually referred to the islands as Islas Malvinas in the following SECRET United Kingdom document from 1980, which I’ve dubbed “Nicholas Ridley’s 9/11”.
Link to the above excerpt: https://paulcardin.substack.com/p/5-why-did-foreign-office-minister
All the above facts are covered in much greater detail within the published research contained in the above book.
STOP PRESS
At the time of publishing this post I won’t be able to ask Navy Net to clean up their act as the Navy Net rules violators have banned me (for rules violations) until July 2024.
Return to Bomb Alley 1982 – The Falklands Deception, by Paul Cardin
Amazon link
Wirral In It Together 