Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

  1. #1
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    The UK has imposed direct rule on the Turks and Caicos Islands after an inquiry found evidence of government corruption and incompetence.

    The administration of the UK territory in the Caribbean has been suspended for up to two years and power transferred to the UK-appointed governor.

    Politicians are accused of selling crown land for personal gain.
    BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    We can do this?
    Wow, learn new things everyday.


  2. #2
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    UK suspends Turks and Caicos govt

    Britain has ordered the suspension of local government in its Caribbean territory of Turks and Caicos following a long-running wrangle over alleged corruption, the Foreign Office says.
    Modern day colonialism or the correct response to a region under our protection and its citizens seen as British?
    Last edited by Laila; 08-15-09 at 01:51 PM.


  3. #3
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    We can do this?
    Wow, learn new things everyday.
    Of course you can. Most countries have "colonies" of some sort. Denmark has Greenland, the US has Puerto Rico, Britain has a number of Islands across the world, as does France. Some are self administrating others are not. In the end though it is the colonial country that calls the shots if it wants too.. always been like that.
    PeteEU

  4. #4
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,048

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Of course you can. Most countries have "colonies" of some sort. Denmark has Greenland, the US has Puerto Rico, Britain has a number of Islands across the world, as does France. Some are self administrating others are not. In the end though it is the colonial country that calls the shots if it wants too.. always been like that.
    Puerto Rico isn't a colony or even close. It's an unincorporated territory. We didn't enslave Puerto Ricans or force them in any way to become part of our country. They did that out of their own free will and can leave if they so wish. We didn't show up in Puerto Rico, plant a flag and told them we were calling shots and we DON'T call shots in Puerto Rico. At all.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  5. #5
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Puerto Rico isn't a colony or even close. It's an unincorporated territory. We didn't enslave Puerto Ricans or force them in any way to become part of our country. They did that out of their own free will and can leave if they so wish. We didn't show up in Puerto Rico, plant a flag and told them we were calling shots and we DON'T call shots in Puerto Rico. At all.
    Sure.... it is an non-self governing territory and commonwealth of the USA.... it is a freaking colony in everything but name lol. Yes they are US citizens.. but so are people from American Samoa I believe and the US Virgin Islands and they are also colonies.

    Are they independent .. no. Do they have full control of their own territory? no. Do they have representation in the US Congress.. no. Heck even your own SC states it is "a territory appurtenant and belonging to the United States, but not a part of the United States."

    And how was this "territory" gotten.. through war. And did the US promise the people of Puerto Rico independence when the territory went from colonial Spanish rule over to US occupation and rule? yes.. that was over 100 years ago. And it took 60 years or so before the first referendum on independence was allowed.. how nice of you..

    In every way you look at it, Puerto Rico is a colony, just as the Philippines was and Cuba (for a brief time). They might have wide ranging self rule but the fact is they are not part of the US (aka a State) nor are they independent.. hence they must be a colony.

    Also according to your own constitution, ultimate governance of the island is retained by both the U.S. Congress and President. That means that the people of Puerto Rico can vote as much as they want but if the US Congress and President do not agree and sign off on it.. then it dont count.. That is the classic rule of any colony. The "owner" nation has ultimate authority of everything that goes on in the territory regardless of what the locals think or do.

    So yes Puerto Rico is a colony along with the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Guam. They just happen to have more self rule than most.
    PeteEU

  6. #6
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,048

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Sure.... it is an non-self governing territory and commonwealth of the USA.... it is a freaking colony in everything but name lol. Yes they are US citizens.. but so are people from American Samoa I believe and the US Virgin Islands and they are also colonies.
    What you have stated above is blatantly false :

    BBC NEWS | Americas | Country profiles | Regions and territories: Puerto Rico


    * Territory: Puerto Rico
    * Status: Self-governing part of USA
    * Full name: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
    * Population: 3.9 million (via UN, 2006)
    * Capital: San Juan
    * Area: 8,959 sq km (3,459 sq miles)
    * Major languages: Spanish, English (both official)
    * Major religion: Christianity
    * Life expectancy: 71 years (men) 80 years (women)
    * Monetary unit: US dollar
    * Main exports: Chemicals, foodstuffs, machinery
    * GNI per capita: $10,950 (World Bank, 2001)
    * Internet domain: .pr
    * International dialling code: +1787
    Are they independent .. no. Do they have full control of their own territory? no. Do they have representation in the US Congress.. no. Heck even your own SC states it is "a territory appurtenant and belonging to the United States, but not a part of the United States."
    And once again in the context of what a Colony is they fall short. Why? History. Compare the history of Puerto Rico to that of ANY British/Spanish/French and Portuguese colony and you'll find it obvious that they our A and your B are not the same. Stop it. This is silly now.

    And again the difference between a COLONY and a PUERTO RICO is that a COLONY never had a choice in the matter. Thus their status as a COLONY. Puerto Ricans can at any point decide whether or not they wish to remain a Commonwealth or become a state. So far they've chosen to remain a Commonwealth. So you calling it a colony is a bit disingenuous. When did we show up in Puerto Rico and claim it as our own? What war did we have with Puerto Ricans over sovereignty? Any? At all? The 13 Colonies had a war of independence. Cuba had a war of independence. Mexico had a war of independence. Why? Because we were all colonies. Show me what makes Puerto Rico a colony?

    And how was this "territory" gotten.. through war. And did the US promise the people of Puerto Rico independence when the territory went from colonial Spanish rule over to US occupation and rule? yes.. that was over 100 years ago. And it took 60 years or so before the first referendum on independence was allowed.. how nice of you..
    War with whom? The Puerto Ricans? Or Spain? Again you're being disingenuous. At what point in history did we force Puerto Rico to be a commonwealth or a colony of any sort? The military occupation lasted a total of 2 years. Almost right after both of the democratic parties created in P.R. by Puerto Ricans supported annexation by the United States. Now how this amounts to what a colony is. You know what the British/Spanish/French/Portuguese did is beyond me.

    In every way you look at it, Puerto Rico is a colony, just as the Philippines was and Cuba (for a brief time). They might have wide ranging self rule but the fact is they are not part of the US (aka a State) nor are they independent.. hence they must be a colony.

    Also according to your own constitution, ultimate governance of the island is retained by both the U.S. Congress and President. That means that the people of Puerto Rico can vote as much as they want but if the US Congress and President do not agree and sign off on it.. then it dont count.. That is the classic rule of any colony. The "owner" nation has ultimate authority of everything that goes on in the territory regardless of what the locals think or do.

    So yes Puerto Rico is a colony along with the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Guam. They just happen to have more self rule than most.
    You keep saying it but it doesn't make it so. Obviously if you want to compare us to what Europeans did with their colonies then look for what you think is a colony then you'll find one.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #7
    Student LowRevs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Downeast in NC
    Last Seen
    07-12-12 @ 04:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    272

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    I lived in PR for a couple years. Beautiful island and wonderful friendly people. Well except for the socialists (actually Cubans) who were shooting up the Navy and blowing up the customs house while I was there. It was said to be the Vieques fisherman trying to get the Navy to stop practice shelling the fishing grounds. Sounds more like Cuban insurgents doesn't it...did to me. Fisherman with automatics and grenades. A little odd. BTW, the Navy Base at Roosevelt Roads was closed after continued peaceful demonstration by the Puerto Ricans. Not a colony.

    They don't consider themselves a colony. They continue to choose commonwealth status because they like the protection of the US and the (non-voting) representation and basically free movement into the US. In most ways the ties are closer than those of a simple ally such as Grenada or Costa Rica.

    The difference between a colony and a commonwealth is that the commonwealth can vote itself to full independent statehood and we would simply negotiate new treaties or leave as they wished/voted. The Philipinos had no problem with us being there when the Japs were torturing their people. They liked our protection. After a time they reconsidered and figured we were "influencing" them too much and asked us to leave. We left. Not a colony.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

  8. #8
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    Quote Originally Posted by LowRevs View Post
    I lived in PR for a couple years. Beautiful island and wonderful friendly people. Well except for the socialists (actually Cubans) who were shooting up the Navy and blowing up the customs house while I was there. It was said to be the Vieques fisherman trying to get the Navy to stop practice shelling the fishing grounds. Sounds more like Cuban insurgents doesn't it...did to me. Fisherman with automatics and grenades. A little odd. BTW, the Navy Base at Roosevelt Roads was closed after continued peaceful demonstration by the Puerto Ricans. Not a colony.

    They don't consider themselves a colony. They continue to choose commonwealth status because they like the protection of the US and the (non-voting) representation and basically free movement into the US. In most ways the ties are closer than those of a simple ally such as Grenada or Costa Rica.

    The difference between a colony and a commonwealth is that the commonwealth can vote itself to full independent statehood and we would simply negotiate new treaties or leave as they wished/voted. The Philipinos had no problem with us being there when the Japs were torturing their people. They liked our protection. After a time they reconsidered and figured we were "influencing" them too much and asked us to leave. We left. Not a colony.
    And you sound like a true colonial power.... /clap.
    PeteEU

  9. #9
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    And what exactly is wrong with colonialism again? It seems like all of the places where law and order have gone to Hell in a handbasket in the last century or so have been former colonies... and the misery and destruction have only started upon the withdrawal of the former colonial power.

    Perhaps if they had remained colonies, under the rule of the people who conquered them, there would still be order and some small measure of prosperity there.

  10. #10
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: UK imposes Turks and Caicos rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    No it aint.

    And once again in the context of what a Colony is they fall short. Why? History. Compare the history of Puerto Rico to that of ANY British/Spanish/French and Portuguese colony and you'll find it obvious that they our A and your B are not the same. Stop it. This is silly now.
    Yes lets look at history. The UK, France and just about eveybody else went to the America's and Africa and Asia, some places they bought land and established colonies, in other places the "defeated" the natives and seized territory. Over time the colonial powers traded territory across the globe in various wars and deals, but the areas remained colonies under the full control ultimately by the holding country.

    Now lets look at Puerto Rico. How did the US get that area? In a war against the Spanish. Hence the area was transferred from colonial Spain to the US.. was it set free? no.

    Now fast forward to today, 100 years after the conquest of the colonial Spanish colony of Puerto Rico. Is the colony independent? no. Does it have full control over its own territory? no. Is it a state of the US? no. Is it a full member of the US? no.

    And again the difference between a COLONY and a PUERTO RICO is that a COLONY never had a choice in the matter. Thus their status as a COLONY. Puerto Ricans can at any point decide whether or not they wish to remain a Commonwealth or become a state. So far they've chosen to remain a Commonwealth. So you calling it a colony is a bit disingenuous. When did we show up in Puerto Rico and claim it as our own? What war did we have with Puerto Ricans over sovereignty? Any? At all? The 13 Colonies had a war of independence. Cuba had a war of independence. Mexico had a war of independence. Why? Because we were all colonies. Show me what makes Puerto Rico a colony?
    Give me a break. Peurto Rico was seized in war! The people were never given a choice before the 1950s, 60 years after being taken! even though you promised even before the war I believe to "free the peoples of Spanish colonial rule".. yea right.

    War with whom? The Puerto Ricans? Or Spain? Again you're being disingenuous. At what point in history did we force Puerto Rico to be a commonwealth or a colony of any sort? The military occupation lasted a total of 2 years. Almost right after both of the democratic parties created in P.R. by Puerto Ricans supported annexation by the United States. Now how this amounts to what a colony is. You know what the British/Spanish/French/Portuguese did is beyond me.
    LOL where did you read that? The fact that the colonial power gave the people limited popular governance does not change the fact that it is a colony. The Brits gave the locals in India "popular" governance of the day, but I doubt you will claim that India was not a colony.

    Seriously it is a classic colonial attitude of " the people asked us to be here" crap. Sure they might say so now, but that dont change the fact that the first many decades of US rule they did not have any choice. The only area that did have a choice was Cuba and they left. Both the Philippines and Puerto Rico was run like a colony for decades before war forced the US to change attitude.

    It also does not change the rulings of SC of the USA about areas like Puerto Rico that gives ultimate power to the US Congress and President. Also it categorises it as "a territory appurtenant and belonging to the United States, but not a part of the United States ".. that is a freaking colony lol.

    And lets look at the political structure of the island. For one they can elect the governor. Congrats! Can he chose his own government? Yes but only with the consent of the US. Okay can that government legislate on things like citizenship, currency, postal service, foreign affairs, military defense, communications, labor relations, the environment, commerce, finance, health and welfare, and many others? No.. that is the prerogative of the US congress.

    And you are saying they are not a colony?

    You keep saying it but it doesn't make it so. Obviously if you want to compare us to what Europeans did with their colonies then look for what you think is a colony then you'll find one.
    Listen I never said there was not differences.. one of them is that you started your colonies in the late 1800s where Europeans started them 400 years earlier. Times were different.
    PeteEU

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •