as the falklands island soverignty issue is in the limelight atm,i was watching russia today,and they were talking about the chagos islands on breaking the set. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagos_Archipelago

the indigenous people were forcibly removed by the british government (so america could set up a military base) and the people are still fighting to return to the islands today.

how come there isn’t much news about this?

would be interested in your views also.

Probably not deemed inportant cos they don’t have any oil or gas.

OR

They are keeping it quiet because they do have oil or gas.

Yes, government proclamations about islanders’ right to self-determination are laced with hypocrisy. We do what we consider to be in the national interest and that’s all there is to it.

It is a pretty shit situation for the now ex-chagossians. Good luck in trying to get the mericans to move a military base though. Very few parallels to the FI though.

how come there isn’t much news about this?

Because it’s an embarrassment.

And talking about it isn’t going to whip up patriotic feelings which an unpopular government can milk for maximum effect.

That’s why.

It does make it to the news, but yes much less so. And as yet the native islanders have yet to launch a war to reclaim the islands.

Besides, the USA like the status quo. So shhhh…..

The difference from the referendum Falklands residents is that there there are no residents of the Chagos islands.

regards ‘native islanders’ – there aren’t any, the islands had no indigenous population when it was colonised, with contract plantation workers, so nobody can claim to be a ‘native islander’.

there are no residents of the Chagos islands

There are residents of the Chagos islands. And they would probably choose to remain American if they were asked in a referendum.

Hmm, at least one similarity to the Hispanic Argentinians.

Article on Russia today today , and should be on http://www.rt.com

Anonymous user 13.03.2013 16:18
Come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough rent boys… Olive eating surrender monkeys

Probably should find it funny, but hey ho.

Because it’s not news.

Because it’s not news.

Because it never is ?

Not even when it’s, well, news ?

Last month :

http://www.crawleyobserver.co.uk/news/local/resettlement-talks-for-exiled-chagos-leader-1-4785290

rattrap – Member

The difference from the referendum Falklands residents is that there there are no residents of the Chagos islands.

And hey, if we took all the people off the Falklands there’d be no people there either.

Everyone’s favourite hand-wringing media outlet has covered the chagos islands quite a few times.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/28/britain-tribunal-chagos-islands-marine-area

The difference from the referendum Falklands residents is that there there are no residents of the Chagos islands.

regards ‘native islanders’ – there aren’t any, the islands had no indigenous population when it was colonised, with contract plantation workers, so nobody can claim to be a ‘native islander’.

Do you know much about the origins of the current population of the Falklands. I’m guessing not from this post…

The Chagossians were ejected from their home.
The FI has never been home to Argentinians, and these italian/spanish conquerors are certainly not indigenous.

The FI has never been home to Argentinians, and these italian/spanish conquerors are certainly not indigenous.

Do you think that the current population of the Falklands are indiginous indigeneous native?

Pilger has been writing about it for a while but he seems to be moving further from the mainstream all the time. There was that bloke who used to stand in parlaiment square with a Free Diego Garcia placard, which is how i found out about it. I tried to find out who Diego Garcia was. 😳

Edlong, No – but they are at least the current resident population.

A bit like the vast majority of current residents of Texas are not native – but you’d hardly suggest holding a binding referendum of Comanche and Wichita indians allowing them to reinhabit the entirety of their historical lands and throwing out everyone else would you?

Nor for that matter would I think you would support the USA handing Texas back to Mexico.

Do you think that the current population of the Falklands are indiginous indigeneous native?

Of course not. But then, neither are the Argetinians. Cue big fight etc etc.

Everyone’s favourite hand-wringing media outlet has covered the chagos islands quite a few times.

It was extensively covered by major media outlets a few years ago when the big court decision was handed down and it was news. Now it’s not news, it’s not in the news.

It was extensively covered by major media outlets a few years ago when the big court decision was handed down and it was news. Now it’s not news, it’s not in the news.

I suspect most people are clueless that Britain has territory called the Chagos Islands, in contrast, I doubt there are very many people who haven’t heard of the Falkland Islands.

The only way I can explain this obvious anomaly is that the two territories get very different coverage by “major media outlets”.

The Falkland Islands seem to hit the headlines regularly, despite the fact that nothing of any great significance has happened there for over 30 years now.

What do you think ?