Mediaboss Marketing

Monday, June 13th 2022 - 10:45 UTC General Jeremy Moore take the surrender of Brigadier General Mario Benjamin Menendez

On 02nd April 1982 Argentine Forces invaded the Falkland Islands. Patrick Watts, who was Head of Falklands Radio, broadcast a marathon 11 hours non-stop description of the events as they unfolded. He maintained a British presence in the Radio Station for most of the 74 days of Argentine occupation. In this article, he provides a personal account of his recollections of the day that British Forces liberated the Falklands.

At around 1100 on the morning of 14th June 1982 the Falklands War unofficially ended. Argentine guns which had been inflicting considerable casualties on British Troops on Mount Longdon ceased firing while British artillery which for the previous 3 days and nights had incessantly bombarded the outskirts of Stanley in their attempts to silence the Argentine weaponry suddenly closed down as well. It was as if someone somewhere had flicked a switch at a pre-appointed time!

Snowflakes were gently falling; the roads were icy and it was bitterly cold as thousands of young Argentine soldiers abandoned the mountains, ridges, hills and valleys which they had occupied for the preceding 73 days, and walked disconsolately and dispiritedly into Stanley, resigned to their defeat and looking for shelter, warmth and food. Still fully armed they proceeded to occupy public buildings such as the Town Hall, Post Office and Gymnasium and commercial warehouses in an effort to escape from the cold. They were all very hungry despite the fact that many food containers, brought to the Islands by Argentine freighters, were languishing fully laden on grass verges and in paddocks and gardens. For some inexplicable reason there appeared to have been no attempts made to distribute the food to the hungry troops.

I climbed onto the roof of my house at the Police Cottages and saw the blue and white Argentine flag still flying on the 3 primary flag poles at Government House, Secretariat and Falkland Islands Defence Force Head Quarters. There were no white flags anywhere, despite the announcement made by the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in Parliament later in the day that white flags were flying over Stanley. She had been misled by the inappropriate words of a British Military Officer Major Bill Dawson of the Gurkha Regiment who at the time was stationed some 10 miles west of Stanley on Two Sisters mountain. He was filmed emerging from a bivouac uttering the infamous words: bloody marvellous white flags are flying over Stanley. 25 years later in 2007 Major Dawson returned to the Falklands and openly admitted to me that he did not see 1 white flag anywhere but that he had been encouraged, by a television crew, to exaggerate a report by a soldier who was positioned further forward on Mount William, and who had radioed him to say that he thought that there could be a white flag flying as he saw something fluttering in the wind. It was most probably a piece of ladys white underwear on a clothes line suggested Major Dawson. He was later reprimanded by General Moore for his indiscretion. But the myth of white flags flying over Stanley lingers on to this day.

At 3:00 in the afternoon I walked to the Government Secretariat/Treasury building and spoke with Air Commodore Carlos Bloomer-Reeve who had been brought back from Bonn where he was Military Attach and installed as Chief of Civil Affairs. He had previously spent 2 years in the Islands in charge of the state airline L.A.D.E. which since 1971 had operated a weekly service between Comodoro Rivadavia and the Falklands. Bloomer-Reeve was respected by all who knew him and he was most attentive to the concerns of the civilian population despite the belligerent attitude of an Argentine Intelligence Officer the feared Major Patrico Dowling. Bloomer-Reeve conveniently told me that there was a cease fire and took me to a window from where I could see the dark outline of British Paratroopers standing next to the 1914 War Memorial and just 400 yards distant. I knew then, as the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had promised, that the British were back in my beloved Islands. It was an emotional moment for me.

At 8:00 in the evening I returned to the Secretariat building as I had been advised that Major General Jeremy Moore who commanded the British Land Forces would be arriving to take the surrender of Brigadier General Mario Benjamin Menendez who in early April had been sworn-in as Governor of the Islands. It was a short reign. In the passage way on the top floor stood Menendez looking resplendent and immaculate in his dress uniform complete with medals and decorations. His shoes shone so brightly that I could almost see my reflection in the polished toe-caps. Flanking him I recognized Commodore Bloomer-Reeve and Captain Melbourne Hussey, an Argentine Naval officer who was the official translator and had been appointed Head of Education during his short stay in the Falklands. The 4th person was Vice-Commodore Eugenio J. Miari of the Argentine Air Force who was their Senior Legal Advisor.

Major General Moore and his considerable entourage arrived a little later than expected. He was much shorter than I had imagined a slight figure compared to Menendez - wearing combat type green clothing and a peaked desert type hat while his face was covered with camouflage. He looked more the vanquished than the victor! After the surrender had been signed the Argentine delegation departed and as he walked past General Menendez looked directly at me and uttered one solitary word sorry. Perhaps he recognized my face from the official tour of Government Departments which he undertook in early April?

The document that he had signed ended: The surrender to be effective from 2359 GMT (2059 local time) on 14th June and include those Argentine Forces presently deployed in and around Port Stanley and those others on East Falklands, West Falklands and outlying Islands.

General Moore later sent a telegram to London which concluded with the words: The Falkland Islands are once more under the Government desired by their inhabitants. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN. The General asked: where are the locals? and as I looked around I proudly realized that I was the only civilian inhabitant of the Falklands actually present at this historic and memorable occasion.

I profusely thanked him, on behalf of the population of the Falklands, for the swift and decisive liberation from unwanted Argentine Military occupation. He wanted to know where the civilians were and I quickly replied that I was aware that more than 120 inhabitants were sheltering within the safety of the stone-walled West Store building. He demanded to visit them and seemed totally oblivious to the possible danger posed by the thousands of armed Argentines who still occupied the dark and snow-covered town. Shells had earlier knocked out a power generator and most of the town was without electricity or street lighting. They know its all over so lets go was his blithe response. In the dimly lit store-room, where people had laid out their mattresses between the cheeses and hams, he was cheered with much acclaim, lifted onto shoulders and paraded between the sleeping bags, photographed shaking hands with a young child and congratulated on the success of the land forces. The West Store Manager David Castle gallantly invited the incarcerated civilians to help themselves from the liquor shelves and bottles of alcohol were soon being consumed in the appropriate celebratory manner. Many toasts were proposed, firstly to the General himself, then to the Task Force and finally to Mrs. Thatcher.

Typical of an Englishman Major General Moore later asked me where could he get a good cup of tea so I took him to my home at the Police Cottages, along with his fellow senior Officers, his bodyguard, a few journalists and a photographer, and he ate cakes and scones that my mother had made. Coincidentally she was celebrating her 66th birthday on that very day. At that moment I struggled to comprehend the total significance of this momentous occasion. The leader of the British Land Forces was sitting in my small kitchen drinking tea and we had been liberated. Was it just a dream or was it reality I asked myself. As he departed for Government House he profusely thanked my mother and added the immortal words: Best damned cuppa Ive had since we sat out.

Later that night the defeated Argentines sought revenge and we became aware that private dwellings, public buildings and a sports hall which had all been previously occupied by Argentine soldiers and contained considerable amounts of ammunition had been set on fire. The local Fire Brigade assisted by many volunteers and some Argentine Military Police provided by Captain Romero prevented the fires from spreading and destroying the town. Romero, a decent man, was a reservist who had been sent across by the Junta to supervise the Military Police during the 74 days of occupation. He took appropriate action against conscripts caught stealing from unoccupied dwellings and tried to help the civilian community as far as his rank would allow. Thankfully the fires were eventually contained and the small town survived. The disarming of Argentine soldiers and their repatriation back to Argentina on British Merchant ships began on the following day. DEMOCRACY had returned to the Falklands.

By Patrick Watts - Stanley

Read the original:
Timeline: 14th June 1982 Democracy restored to the Falkland Islands - MercoPress

The next morning the penny dropped. When Dutt Saab said he would allow the bulldozers only over his dead body, he really meant it. He lay down in its path and soon there was high drama in progress. Naturally, the municipal authorities were frazzled by that action, word went up to the municipal commissioner, then the collector, eventually the chief minister and perhaps even the prime minister. Soon there was a crowd of officials, big and small, begging Sunil Dutt to vacate the bulldozer's path but he did hot relent. He continued to lie on the road through the beating sun, sitting up only to sip water, eating nothing until the authorities called off the bulldozing for the day.

You try this again tomorrow, I will be here again," he warned them. I will not allow the poor to be bulldozed out of their homes.

The action earned Dutt Saab much criticism that he was standing in way of much needed development, that he was benefitting only a few to the detriment of the larger population of commuters, even that he was merely safeguarding his vote bank. But Dutt Saab was unfazed. He took all the criticism in his stride, insisted that people whose houses were being demolished had to be rehabilitated first and only then the railway terminus could come up.

It did - after the government had taken the measures demanded by Sunil Dutt. It may be noted that much of the houses in the slums were illegal constructions, if not the entire slums and the government was well within its rights to demolish them.

But Dutt Saab's argument was that it was government's failure to begin with the failure to provide the poor with adequate housing - that had compelled them to encroach upon the railway land, so now the government could not wash its hands off and simply abdicate its responsibility to the poor.

Now Sunil Dutt was no politician. He was a film star, a friend of the Nehru-Gandhi family and member of parliament only because of that friendship with Rajiv Gandhi. But his instincts towards the poor were the right ones and he reacted against his own government, in the manner that opposition politicians of the 1960s and 1970s would - something those in the current century have failed to live up to.

Even when the Delhi municipal authorities were bulldozing the homes of poor Muslims and Hindus in Jahangirpuri some weeks ago, only one politician showed the courage to stand before those monstrous machines and stop the razing. I am greatly disappointed that in Uttar Pradesh, the newly elected legislators were conspicuous by their absence when the home of a Muslim activist was being razed on extra-Constitutional grounds.

If that home was illegal, there should have been resort to the courts but the silence of the judiciary in matters of human rights in this country these days has been greatly disappointing. Bulldozers cannot be allowed to crush our democracy in the arbitrary manner being resorted to by the BJP-ruled states and if politicians and judges will not speak up for the people, the people themselves must.

It is a frightening prospect but when the state pushes people to the wall, we could be soon faced with a revolution in the manner of the French and Russian revolutions which were, after all, reactions to the complete disregard by the respective rulers of the poor and the deprived.

After all, the Khodynka tragedy of Russia during the last Tsar's coronation wherein people were crushed in a stampede - after which he attended a ball - and the Paris street tragedy wherein children were crushed under the carriage wheels of a French aristocrat with no remorse expressed by the king, were the triggers for those revolutions.

Those tragedies were accidents that enraged the people in the face of indifferent rulers. We are faced with deliberate crushing by those ruling in the name of democracy in a manner worse than the French or Russian kings. They were self-absorbed but not deliberately cruel as here today. There is always a price to pay for people's anguish can never be bottled up for too long. Unless another Sunil Dutt can lie down on the ground and stop the bulldozers from razing people to the ground, the tragic outcome of such deliberate cruelty is inevitable.

The only question is when.

( The writer is Consulting Editor, National Herald, Mumbai. Views are personal)

Link:
Bulldozer justice does no good to a democracy or rule of the law and Sunil Dutt knew it - National Herald

Holidaying on the island of Arran, off the west coast of Scotland, we came upon a geological site known as Huttons Unconformity. James Hutton, an 18th-century geologist, became curious about junctions between different types of rock formation, created at different times and by different processes, as if manifestations of a collision between mighty opposing forces.

At the time, people thought that rocks were either created by volcanic activity or they were laid down by oceans. Hutton realised that both processes had shaped what he was seeing neither of the simple explanations could resolve what was going on. His unconformity struck me as a good metaphor for collisions, contradictions, and disconnections which I have been thinking about.

The first collision is between peoples expressed values and the actions they take. According to statistics presented in a recent paper, racial inequality cost the United States economy $16 trillion in lost gross domestic product over the last two decades. Meanwhile, the gender pay gap holds back the global economy by about $160 trillion. Yet people in positions of privilege continue to tolerate inequality and fail to support policies which would lead to greater equality despite generally claiming to have egalitarian values.

The gender pay gap holds back the global economy by about $160 trillion.

The authors of the paper, American social psychologists, argue that this contradiction arises because the privileged and those in positions of power believe that policies which increase equality will necessarily harm them and undermine their status. In a series of experiments, they showed that members of advantaged groups consistently believed that policies which would actually benefit everyone would harm them, while policies that increased inequalities between groups would always be good for them. The researchers conclude that these misperceptions may explain why inequality prevails even as it incurs societal costs that harm everyone.

But the participants in the experiments may not have been misperceiving anything at all. The equality-enhancing scenarios they were presented with all focused on increasing material assets. For example, they were asked to consider increases in the amount of mortgage loans to disadvantaged groups with no changes for the advantaged group, or increases in pay for women with no changes in pay for men. Clearly the respondents did not like these proposals, even though the scenarios they were presented with would not decrease their own material assets and would reduce absolute differences between groups.

Perhaps they were instinctively or should I say unconsciously recognising another, second, collision, between material and relative status, and understanding the importance of relative status. What one has matters less than how much one has relative to others.

Karl Marx understood this, pointing out: A house may be large or small; as long as the neighbouring houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut the occupant of the relatively little house will always find himself more uncomfortable, more dissatisfied, more cramped within his four walls.

And indeed this is backed by modern research. A study found that people were satisfied with the size of their house only until someone came along and built a bigger house on the same block.

So it is not really a misperception to think that others obtaining more material assets does not hurt as long as ones own assets remain unchanged; if they now have relatively more, ones relative status has actually declined. And relative status matters enormously: research suggests it is more important for health and wellbeing than absolute income or wealth.

Capitalism its neoliberal variant in particular has trained us to desire ever bigger incomes and ever more stuff, despite this being a zero-sum game. If we all receive the same increments in absolute terms, none of us gains relatively, one against another. And having more things does not buy happiness, or at least it does so only transiently.

Advertising plays on everyones desire to have more, implying that having more will fulfil us. But that is another collision, this time with the truth: we are being offered false promises. True wellbeing emanates from things which do not have a price tag a sense of purpose, agency, social connection.

Of course the pursuit of more income and possessions would not matter that much if it only gave rise to broken dreams and lack of fulfilment. But consumerism and over-consumption are not just pointless they are harmful.

We live on a finite planet with finite resources and here lies the final and most important disconnect. There is a fundamental collision between what we need to do to address climate change and other environmental problems and the neoliberal ideology of economic growth. We cannot have both, and our politics and policies have not yet grappled with that contradiction.

But just as Hutton was forced to come up with new ideas about geological processes by pondering his unconformity, taking a clear look at the clashes between neoliberalisms pursuit of economic growth and sustainable wellbeing can lead us to focus on solutions.

Greater equality is an essential and powerful enabler of a transformation to a sustainable economy.

Tackling inequality, happily, offers a pathway out of all of these conflicts, collisions and clashes of social forces. Greater equality helps resolve the paradox between people saying they prefer equality yet acting in favour of maintaining inequality, because in more equal societies people trust one another more and act more collectively, for the common good.

Equality also helps reduce the conflict between wanting more and that not bringing us happiness. In a more equal society the hierarchy is flatter, our relative status is more similar and greater social capital enhances our flourishing and wellbeing.

Finally, greater equality is an essential and powerful enabler of a transformation to a sustainable economy. It can help create the shared spirit of collectivism needed if we are to tackle this great challenge, simultaneously reducing our competitive desires to consume ever more while enhancing public health and happiness.

Greater equality is thus a triple win: good policies, greater wellbeing and a society flourishing within planetary boundaries.

This is a joint publication by Social EuropeandIPS-Journal.

Continue reading here:
The most privileged value relative wealth over absolute wealth Democracy and society - IPS Journal

As Free and Fair Elections Face Unprecedented Threats, Business Leaders Recognize A Strong Economy Requires a Strong Democracy

In New Polling by Morning Consult, Business Leaders Say Companies Should Protect American Democracy And Customers Say They Will Support Them

WASHINGTON, May 23, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, a coalition of business leaders and organizations announced the Business & Democracy Initiative, a new partnership dedicated to protecting the integrity of our elections and rebuilding trust in democratic institutions, becausea strong economy requires a strong democracy.

The Business & Democracy Initiative's founding partners are top business leaders and advocates: the Black Economic Alliance, the Leadership Now Project, and Public Private Strategies. Leaders in America's business community view democracy and voting rights as an economic issue. Fully 45 of the top 50 global companies operate in a democracy, according to research by Freedom House. The Business & Democracy Initiative will engage business leaders to shift the conversation around our democracy, drive corporate change, and secure the next generation of American prosperity.

New research by Morning Consult on behalf of the Business & Democracy Initiative shows the business community wants to be active in protecting American democracy, and their customers will support them. The results show:

"With our nation's democratic system under more stress than ever, the business community is a critical voice in the fight to preserve our free, open, and democratic system," said Rhett Buttle, founder of Public Private Strategies. "We believe that a strong democracy is the cornerstone of a dynamic and inclusive American economy, and we will be engaging with stakeholders across all levels of business to advocate for reforms that strengthen our democracy."

"Business leaders across the country are concerned about the health of our democracy. They understand that our economic dynamism depends on a capable and accountable government," said Daniella Ballou-Aares, CEO of the Leadership Now Project. "The Business & Democracy Initiative will provide business leaders with the knowledge and platform to lead on the issues from preventing election crisesto expanding civic engagement and secure a strong economy for the next generation."

"As businesses continue to expand their influence on the American public, they have an increasing responsibility to proactively preserve and protect American democracy," said David Clunie, Executive Director of the Black Economic Alliance. "Through the Business & Democracy Initiative, the Black Economic Alliance and our partners will help the business community utilize its increasingly expansive reach to help fortify the integrity of our democracy, which is necessary to achieve an inclusive and sustainable economy for all Americans."

Read the full survey report and learn more about the Business & Democracy Initiative at businessanddemocracy.org

About Public Private StrategiesPublic Private Strategies (PPS) creates opportunities where the public and private sectors meet. We bring together diverse allies including foundations, associations, corporations, small businesses, and entrepreneurs to solve pressing societal challenges. By harnessing the power of the private sector, we build coalitions, activate campaigns, and create strategic partnerships to drive desired policy and market outcomes. Learn more at http://www.publicprivatestrategies.com.

About the Leadership Now ProjectThe Leadership Now Project is a membership organization of business and thought leaders who are committed to long-term solutions to renew American democracy. Leadership Now has four guiding principles that transcend political parties: to protect democracy while renewing it; to promote fact and evidence-based policymaking; to create an economy that works for all, and to embrace diversity as an asset. In 2019-2021, the organization is focused on the threats to the fundamentals of democracy, including low voter participation, gerrymandering, and the influence of money in politics. You can follow LNP on LinkedIn and on Twitter at @LeadershipNP. Learn more at http://www.leadershipnowproject.org.

About the Black Economic Alliance The Black Economic Alliance is a coalition of Black business leaders and allies committed to driving economic progress for the Black community through public policy, advocacy, and engagement with government and business leaders. Led by a board that includes executives from a range of industries including media, finance, pharmaceutical, nonprofit, and tech, BEA uses its collective power and business acumen to advance policies that will improve work, wages, and wealth for Black Americans. Learn more at blackeconomicalliance.org.

SOURCE The Business & Democracy Initiative

Read more:
Announcing the Business & Democracy Initiative: New Coalition Will Empower Business Leaders to Stand Up for American Democracy - PR Newswire

DATE: Wednesday, May 25

TIME: 11 a.m.

WHO: Experts from Beyond Conflict, a nonprofit organization that uses conflict experience and brain and behavioral science to work for peace; the American Immigration Council; and UMass Amhersts Linda Tropp, professor of social psychology.

WHAT: Media telebriefing on Beyond Conflicts new report, Renewing American Democracy: Navigating a Changing Nation, which identifies psychological drivers that are being exploited to deepen social division and hasten democratic decline in the U.S.

WHERE: Virtual event. RSVP at the Zoom link here.

CONTACT: Patty Shillington, pshillington@umass.edu, 305-606-9909 Embargoed copy of the report is available.

The nonprofit organization Beyond Conflict will discuss the findings of Renewing American Democracy: Navigating A Changing Nation. The new report analyzes Americas social divides through the lens of social science to understand how demographic, social and cultural changes in the U.S. can affect perceptions of threats to our identities, feelings of belonging and perceptions of status and power. The report illuminates how these psychological dynamics can lead to greater support for populist authoritarianism, ultimately threatening the health of our democracy.

The report authors will discuss the human instinct to align with groups of people who look and think alike and to defend those groups against perceived threats, and how that instinct has been exploited and leveraged by political actors, decision makers, media conglomerates and other influencers.

Oriented toward practical interventions, the report focuses on how four identity-related dynamics in modern American life factionalism and partisan sorting, residential segregation and declining social trust, information echo chambers, and divergent racial attitudes and beliefs about racial equity are exacerbating the divides.

In addition to Tropp, the other panelists are Tim Phillips, founder and CEO of Beyond Conflict; Michelle Barsa, Beyond Conflicts director of democracy and social identity; and Wendy Feliz, founding director of the Center for Inclusion and Belonging at the American Immigration Council.

Read more:
Experts Analyze Link between Human Psychology and Threats to American Democracy - UMass News and Media Relations