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.


The Somalia Conspiracy is Real!!!

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:19 AM

Originally posted by Pervius

Originally posted by niceguybob

COMPANIES that own those big ships also FORBID their employees from having firearms to protect their lives. So if you want the risk dying. MAYBE the COMPANY who owns the ship is PAYING the pirates to take the write off losses and make money....and also make money from the guys selling off the goods in Somalia...that's how the world goes round.

My experience of my family's being for many generations Merchant Sea-Man Captains is that no Captain ever leaves port without a personal weapon - pistol, shotgun, rifle etc.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:39 AM
Some shipping companies hire security personnel ( usually a 4 man team ) to travel onboard and escort the ships through the GOA. Those teams are still bound by Rules of Engagement, they can't open fire on a skiff just like that. Normally if you fire warning shots at them they turn off from their close approach. They are only looking for unarmed vessels, spray the Bridge with automatic fire, maybe an RPG if they don't stop. They won't try to board escorted vessels.

The Stargate thing is a crock. It's a good strategic decision to have ships in the GOA/Indian Ocean rather than to have to go all the way around Africa if things get hotter in the region. The Suez would be a no go for ships if it were ever taken.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:40 AM
reply to post by 13star

So you agree that the pirates are used as a cover up for something else, we don't know yet which is why I said sniff around?

That's is my whole point. Maybe re-reading the thread would help you understand that.
edit on 28-6-2011 by confreak because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:22 AM
reply to post by confreak

2 man mercenary team from a first world country usually costs a liner about $10k per month, 4 man team obviously double, this is a low price in reality, but would get you british soldiers.

So that's $20k per month across X number of liners, it gets expensive. That's not to say certain companies do not put these men on board. Not all but alot.

Thing is the reason the pirates use small boats is because they are hard to detect by radar and can move in at nightfall when there is very little visibility, meaning 20 men can get aboard your boat and take on your 4 guys very easily.

Usually it's a cost thing, do you lose more by arming all your vessels or by paying ransoms? Also it is sometimes better to not be armed and confront these people, like it is advised if a store or bank is held up to just comply with demands.

Besides this, Somalians make millions by stealing a single ship, with a few million you have access to good training and good weapons, not to mention the influx of foreign african mercenaries who want to get in on a big business.

It's not such a simple fix as saying let's get us some guns. Large well equipped, well trained forces attacking using the element of surprise. Not simple to beat that out.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:24 AM
reply to post by confreak

I have completed several armed transits in the GOA and the ship's company are scared stiff when a pirate skiff is approaching. I guess you think the answer would be to shove a gun in their civilian hands ? I didn't say the Navy weren't doing Anti-Piracy Patrols/Search and Boards while they are there. It's not something new, they've been there for years. In the event of a pirate attack the distress signal is sent and closest Naval vessel will assist. That could be anywhere in a 1000 km radius. That could be an awfully long wait when you are being peppered with AK-47's and running full ahead.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:30 AM
reply to post by ShadowScholar

The cost is not that much, as I said, either armed guards, or arm your crew, the training won't cost much.

That being said, Pirates don't attack at night, there is only one incident where they have and that is because bright moonlight gave them visibility.

"They attacked at night, which was very unusual. They were using the moonlight as it's still quite bright."

The above being said, it still doesn't explain the assembly of the largest Navy force. I still suspect it has been used as a cover for something else. That is where the speculations come in, some claim it is because the area is a hot spot, some claim because they want to allow toxins to be dumped there, others claim extra dimensional activities, and I laid my own ones hence underground UFO base etc

The possibility is there, I'm sniffing through to see what I find. It will be an interesting search.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by confreak

Somali pirates attack commercial vessels, not military. Commercial vessels are unarmed (some have the sound devices though). Since the crews are unarmed its easy for pirates, who are armed, to board and seize control.

When they demand a ransom, and that ransom is paid, its air droppped to the pirates.

There are several documented cases of military vessels engaing the pirates, and the pirates pretty much lose.

The smaller crafts they use are less powerful in terms of engine, but faster in terms of weight. Think Lord Nelson and crossing the T.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:06 PM
reply to post by Xcathdra

Sorry didnt get to finsh my oriognal post. What I was going to say is the reason for the armada so to speak is because of Somalias location. The suez transit corridor is essential, and the amount of resources passing back and forth is massive.

I dont think there is anything else going on. Unless thehy finally got around to exploring the cavity under the Sphynx.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:51 PM
This is just ridiculous.

They are not allowed to have weapons on board, or to defend themselves, for the most part. So you have unarmed ships with millions worth of goods, it's easy pickings, of course people with no lives or futures are going to attempt to hijack these ships.

Your whole premise for there being a conspiracy is "why don't they just defend themselves" Well the answer is obvious, they aren't legally allowed to, and this law has been around FAR longer than anything else related to your little conspiracy theory has been.

There is no reason to believe there is any sort of conspiracy going on here, unless you willfully refuse to look at the facts, the facts being, for the most part they are legally not allowed to carry weapons and defend themselves. It can't get more simple than this.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:52 PM
Good thread op.. S&F... You are correct, something very odd is going on in that region.
A friend who had sailed from Australia to Europe last year, sailed through the gulf of Aden and they had to stop and wait with a bunch of other boats for a couple of days..
When a certain amount had gathered they were escorted through by warships, they had to stay on a certain course which my friend said didn't make any sense.
He was told it was because of pirates.. Now I must add he is not into conspiracies at all, and generally doesn't believe them... but even he had some doubts about the pirate story and he says people on other boats had some suspicions too.

edit on 28/6/11 by Misterlondon because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 06:47 PM
Dig deeper into the past and you may find some more leads...

Look into the events of their wars and US involvement going back a few decades. I know there was a civil war and a decent amount of US enticement and involvement (ever see black hawk down?). Many people denied the US government enticed a war saying "Why would they, there is no real motive to create war in Somalia.". Maybe the answer to that question is the same as the OP's...

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by ShadowScholar

I agree, a friend of mine just got a contract to do security for a large shipper who moves through that area. If the economy gets any worse I may just join him. I would love to shoot an RPG out of a Somalis hands.

Most countries have they're naval ships there to protect their own assets moving through the area. Just for giggles, you don't think it would be a huge embarrassment for a Russian flagged ship to be taken. Say the U.S. Navy recovers it and finds out it was headed to Iran with say new S-300 Missile systems onboard. That is exactly what other nations beside Russia don't want. The U.S. or anyone else knowing their business.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:12 PM
reply to post by confreak

You can add Norwegian army to the list as well.. They sent some brigade to "protect" Norwegian ships.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:13 PM
reply to post by Misterlondon

Now that is a story that would lead me to believe that there is something going on the the Gulf of Aden that someone doesn't want seen. And if commercial liners stray to close "they" send pirates out to distract crew instead of a military vessel because, well, why would a military vessel intervene with a commercial vessel that is on its normal course. Pretty interesting OP....has definitely got me thinking!

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:15 PM
Look, As far as the U.S. Navy looking the other way when they KNOW what's on certain craft,that's gimmee.

It's like ATM machine vendors. They don't have a sign on the side of their trucks that say "I have Money for ATM's." You try and be inconspicuous.

ALL of our delivery's of good's AND weapons don't have a sign on them. Planes for that matter.

The U.S. Warships do not deliever weapons off of our warships or cargo ships that say some cases.

It's called covert activity and low profile.. That's not really a conspiracy. That's just how we do things.

And don't think for a minute the Navy ships aren't too far behind a "commercial" looking vessel.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:20 PM

That's what I was thinking.

I believe it was Aaron Mccollum (dont quote me on the spelling) who said there is a hyperdimensional portal or stargate located in the Gulf of Adan. I don't know if I buy that though.

Interesting nontheless.

he also said he was some sort of dolphin/human hybrid.. among other wild tales..

i wouldnt take this guys claims too seriously..
edit on 28/6/11 by Misterlondon because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:27 PM
This might shed light on why ships are not armed. They should be heavily armed. Blow a few of them out of the water, and they will stop.

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:54 PM
reply to post by confreak

Thats a big conclusion to jump to, an easier explanation would be a massive case of insurance fraud where companies and pirates work together, telling them when and where to attack a ship and collecting the insurance payout (whihc can be 100's of millions of $.

Tourism is such a huge industry there as well thats why we have our navys there, my parents just went on a cruise around here and the ship was in the national papers for having razor wire fencing to stop pirates getting in as well as other measures.

Btw they dont wan the ship armed as payous for dead crew are VERY high indeed rather than compensation for just psycological trauma that they experience. The issue is pirates can board a ship undetected they could never sink these ships with their weapons. If they can get on a ship a close quarters fight that leads to deaths is very costly to the companies involved so they dont wan that. Also cqb fighting means that sheer numbers of pirates could overwhelm the smaller but better trained force, especially when they know that if they kill a pirate then the civillian crew members may be killed for this.

whats everyone think?

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:13 AM
reply to post by clintdelicious

ATS is an open minded community of people, we keep our minds open to possibility. Even if it is insurance fraud it still doesn't explain the massive build of Navy force in the area.

That is why I called it speculation, the speculations doesn't have to go a long with the official story, most of us don't believe our governments for rightful reasons, and the official story obviously doesn't make sense as outlined in my first post.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:20 AM
reply to post by MamaJ

You think like Americans, many people from other countries don't want to use weapons, don't want to take the responsability it implies even if they are in dangerous places, and even if it can save their lives.

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in