It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


'Pirates' Strike a U.S. Ship Owned by a Pentagon Contractor, But Is the Media Telling the Whole St

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof

Protection is a move done by a government, not by rogue individuals calling themselves militants, terrorists, and pirates. Resource exploitation is but ONE cause/reason for unlawful piracy; there are numerous others reasons for its existence, one being that militant, insurgent, and terrorist groups are using them as an instrument of financing operations, equipments, etc. via their cut of the ransom they possibly gain.

Warlords are the government in Somalia so in their own backward way, the piracy is government sanctioned.

Obviously they shouldn't be allowed do it but Im sure all these people are living hand to mouth and doing this out of desperation to survive. They all probably have a chip on their shoulder from being raped by richer nations.. also the fact that there is no real law to completely stop them...

Its a hard one to call.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 01:43 PM
reply to post by budski

So I guess the US government is failing to protect the borders for illegal aliens from mexico. I guess from your point of view I should be able to kidnap coyotes,drug smugglers and hold them for ransom until the drug lords pay me. Sieze all drugs and money crossing the border and I get to keep it all.
Would you defend me at my trial if I try it the same way your defending these guys or would I just be a evil American gun ho crazy to you.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 01:48 PM
Government or no government, agree with them or disagree with them, HOW is 350 miles out to sea protecting territorial waters? The distance out to sea that these pirates are taking ships is WELL outside ANY territorial claim by ANY nation. If all these trawlers are in their waters taking their fish, and dumping things in their waters, they they could easily get to their boats, if they can get as far out to sea as they have.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 01:50 PM
reply to post by JBA2848

What on earth are you talking about?

I am presenting a news story for discussion, from an angle not seen in the MSM.

If you don'y like it, don't read it - or if you think I've been offensive in some way, use the alert button.

Other than that, stick to the topic

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 01:52 PM
reply to post by Zaphod58

My take on this is that they see the ransoms as some kind of reparation - it's not right, but it may be understandable if they are using the money to help the people affected by the actions of others.

Of course some are just out and out pirates, but that should not detract from how Somalians MAY have suffered because of people (corporations etc) taking advantage of the lack of central government.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 01:58 PM
reply to post by budski

There is no evidence at all that they're using the money for anything but themselves. Women are racing to the ports to try to marry them because they're now rich from getting ransoms. This money goes into their pockets, and stays there.

Holmes: Let’s start with the military solution. Why not send a message?

Larsen: Certainly there would be some deterrent effect. I think in this case, the incentives are so large. The money that they’re making is so extraordinary, especially by Somalia standards, that it would be difficult. However, in this particular situation, the goal is to solve it as quickly and as safely as possible without putting the hostage in jeopardy.

Holmes: There are hopeless, deplorable conditions in Somalia. A life of piracy looks pretty good for some of these young men compared to the conditions in Somalia.

Larsen: You couldn’t have said it better, T.J. I’ve been on the ground in Somalia. One of the interesting demographic things that’s happening right now is that single Somali women are flocking to the port town Bosaso where these pirates come out of in the hopes of marrying a pirate. So you can see that it really is — the root conditions of poverty, lawlessness and civil war on the ground in Somalia are really what are breeding this problem.

It doesn't sound like anything but trying to get out of poverty, nothing to do with protecting resources or anything else.

[edit on 4/9/2009 by Zaphod58]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 02:05 PM
reply to post by Zaphod58

As I said, SOME of them are undoubtdedly just doing this for personal gain - in other words, real pirates.

There is also little reported about anything but these people.

I don't think we are going to find the truth of the matter from the MSM - but from the report in the OP there is little doubt that some are doing this as a protectionist measure.

Not all ships have been 350 miles out...

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 02:18 PM
reply to post by budski

No, they've expanded out to 350 miles. But most of the ships that were taken weren't anywhere NEAR Somali waters. They were 100+ miles out. I'm trying to download a map that shows where they all took place in 2008, but my connection is slow right now. Once I get it downloaded I'll link it in here.

Look at how many attacks took place in Somali waters. A large number of events were almost in Yemeni waters they were so far out.

[edit on 4/9/2009 by Zaphod58]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 02:30 PM
[edit on 9-4-2009 by Skyfloating]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 03:16 PM
I do have a question in regards to this situation.
As I was watching CNN yesterday, they reported that the crew had one of the pirates held hostage, and that three others "tried to escape".

Now the news is reporting that the captain of the ship is being held hostage?
Fox news determined as well that chances are within 2-3 days the pirates will fall sea sick and give up, how could you even present this as a truth? It'd be interesting to see if that does indeed happen and if it does....I call shenanigans.

What is the real story behind this?

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 03:25 PM
Hmm, really tried to see your point Author. Ahem, but I do not feel sorry for the Pirates, they are patrolling international waters Hijacking CARGO, SHIPS that are sailing National flags representing their creeds. Then after they successfully hijack the ship the plunder the cargo and demand ransoms for the crews. Yes I am American, and I am quite sure we will make an example out of this one. No I don't feel sorry for them, maybe pity for their ignorance. Also the story is pretty clear, the media can't screw this story up.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 03:27 PM
reply to post by ThirdJohnAdams

What shenanigans? The crew captured one pirate, the other three were holding the captain of the ship. The crew traded their prisoner for the captain, but the pirates reneged and they all got into a 28 foot lifeboat from the ship.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 03:38 PM
reply to post by Zaphod58

Ahh see I had not heard all that. My call of shenanigans was based on the many different bits of information that were being presented as fact on the news.

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 04:51 PM
reply to post by Adrifter

The only people I feel sorry for are the people living on the coast of somalia whose health has been ruined by the dumping of toxic waste.

IMO the MSM have already screwed up this story by nont reporting on some of the issues surrounding somalian coastal waters, apart from the piracy, but as they are corporate in nature that's to be expected.

The reason for posting this story was to open up the pirate discussion to other factors, such as those in the OP article.

It makes for interesting reading...

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:00 PM
reply to post by budski

I hear ya bro.. not hatin on you. Its interesting, just I don't feel the romanticism in the story, I see your side as well and respect it, I just don't agree.. Somalia, has been a bad place to be for sometime but pirating is not the answer to the problem..

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:21 PM
Removed by poster.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by Seekerof]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:37 PM
My participation in this thread ends here.
My apologies to everyone for my bumptiousness.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by Seekerof]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:49 PM
I watched an interesting interview with these "pirates" a while back.

It appears they are also very upset about the involvement of US oil interests in Somalia. Somalia is one of the richest nations on the planet, in resources... But the ABSOLUTE POOREST when it applies to the citizens there. These people are modern day Robin Hoods.

Note the line "IF US Interests can succeed in establishing peace in the region".... yadda yadda yadda... They stand to make a buttload of cash.

It should be apparent to most by now how the US establishes peace.

In this case they villianize the people who are trying to fight for the Somalian PEOPLE.

Flame if you must. I won't bother reading it. There are too many people completely corrupted by the MSM at this point. People will believe whatever load of bullsnap that they are taught to believe.

Notice that they aren't talking about what they are doing to protect the resources INSIDE of Somalia. Just exploiting what they are doing off its coasts.
But it is all the same objective. To stop western hegemony from gaining MORE interest in Somalian affairs.
We've seen this time and time again. Nicaragua rings a bell.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:57 PM
reply to post by Seekerof

here's what you said:

Protection is a move done by a government, not by rogue individuals calling themselves militants, terrorists, and pirates.

Which suggests that there is a government in Somalia.

Which makes the statement wrong.

Which suggests you need to read up a bit about the situation in Somalia.


Perhaps your semantic error is more at fault here.

I also have NOT stated that those reasons are solely responsible for anything - merely something which merits discussion as having possible implications.

[edit on 9/4/2009 by budski]

posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 06:03 PM
reply to post by Seekerof

Interesting Document, until we get to the end:

The information and opinions expressed in this Report are the views of Aegis Defence Services Limited (“Aegis”) and constitute a judgement as at the date of the Report
and are subject to change without notice. The information and opinions expressed in this Report have been formed in good faith on the basis of the best information and
intelligence available at time of writing from sources believed to be reliable, but no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to its accuracy,
completeness or correctness. Subject to clause 9 of Aegis’s standard Terms and Conditions (a copy of which is available on request), Aegis accepts no liability arising out
of or in connection with the comments made or the information set out in this Report and the Client is advised that all actions are taken at the Client’s own risk. In
particular, the comments in this Report should not be construed as advice, or a solicitation, invitation or inducement to purchase or sell securities, commodities or any
other form of financial instrument in any company or undertaking, and this Report should not be construed in any way as a Financial Promotion under Section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

I find it a little convenient that a private firm with ties to the government and financial interests in the area has written this.

Of course it couldn't possibly be that they have something to gain...

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in