Somali pirates vow revenge.

[Grace Seeker]

When I saw the headline "Somali pirates vow revenge." my first thought was: Are you kidding? What's to avenge. The pirates started this. Other people were just defending themselves and now the pirates are the ones who seek revenge.


However, as the saying goes, there are two sides to everything. The pirates' view is, I guess, that since they hadn't killed anyone, then they had no expectation that anyone had any right to kill them in defending themselves from the pirates.

But is that a reasoned argument? Afterall, the pirates did use force in taking their captives. They fired bullets and rocket propelled grenades at the boats. Perhaps they were just lucky that no one had been killed yet. When Capt. Philipps had briefly escaped from them and was swimming away, they didn't just let him go. They made him get back in the boat. What would they have done if he had kept swimming? Would they have let him go or have shot and killed him? It was only the threat of arms that enabled them to accomplish what they did accomplish. It seems to me that it was the pirates who raised the stakes to the lethal level the moment they introduced firearms into the picture. With that introduction, it was inevitable that someone, on one side or the other, was going to be hurt or killed eventually. Now it has happened, and the pirates are the ones who feel the need to seek revenge. Incredible!!

[Cabdullahi]

These pirates were ex-fishermen after they've seen the fish decline around the Somali coast they took matters unto their own hands.....what forced them to make this stupid decision....its none other than toxic removal companies that are paid to remove nuclear wastes for the nuclear producing countries ...because Somali hasn't yet got a functioning government these companies have taken advantage using vessels to trespass into our waters.....

every country has a coast guard and if any other country comes in...their ships,boats and vessels will be seized...ask the British what happened to them when they went into Iranian waters

so if you like these rascal fishermen are the untrained coast guards of somalia..ok thats one thing but what about the goods they steal and the ransom money they demand....well what about their fish? that was not only destroyed but stolen off their shores and beyond.......lets all understand why piracy began in the first place rather than to just accept whatever the media says

[YusufNoor]

These pirates were ex-fishermen after they've seen the fish decline around the Somali coast they took matters unto their own hands.....what forced them to make this stupid decision....its none other than toxic removal companies that are paid to remove nuclear wastes for the nuclear producing countries ...because Somali hasn't yet got a functioning government these companies have taken advantage using vessels to trespass into our waters.....

every country has a coast guard and if any other country comes in...their ships,boats and vessels will be seized...ask the British what happened to them when they went into Iranian waters

so if you like these rascal fishermen are the untrained coast guards of somalia..ok thats one thing but what about the goods they steal and the ransom money they demand....well what about their fish? that was not only destroyed but stolen off their shores and beyond.......lets all understand why piracy began in the first place rather than to just accept whatever the media says

:sl:

erm, that actually makes some sense! MashaAllah!

:w:

[Cabdullahi]

thank you sir.....i just watched the news abit ago and saw the freed captain 'philips' speak.......he repeatedly said the military are the heroes!...the military who sniped teenagers

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Whatsthepoint]

pirate teenagers

[Cabdullahi]

''WASHINGTON, April 13 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Monday that three Somali pirates who were killed by the Navy's Seals to end a hostage crisis were "untrained" teenagers.

Addressing an audience at the Marine Corps War College in Quantico, Virginia, Gates said that the slain pirates, aged at between 17 to 19, were heavily armed but inexperienced. ''

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...t_11181063.htm


There you go

[Whatsthepoint]

They were pirates all right! Don't matter how old or untrained.
Of course I don't support shooting anyone.

[Strzelecki]

Oh dear.
...And here we were all complacent thinking the world's pirate issue was over a few hundred years ago...

[KAding]

They were pirates all right! Don't matter how old or untrained.
Of course I don't support shooting anyone.

I do support it in this case.

Of course there are social and political reasons why piracy is on the rise in the area, but that does not mean it isn't a crime and it shouldn't be dealt with.

These people were armed, attacked a vessel, took its crew hostage, kidnapped the captain. It was completely right to take out these pirates.

You cannot commit such acts of piracy and expect authorities to not respond with force. IMHO they even have an obligation to act and prudently use force if necessary.

Of course, in the end this problem can only fundamentally be dealt with by stabilizing Somalia, but that does not mean these thugs need not be dealt with by navies worldwide.

[KAding]

thank you sir.....i just watched the news abit ago and saw the freed captain 'philips' speak.......he repeatedly said the military are the heroes!...the military who sniped teenagers

They were armed pirates.

What is the punishment for piracy in Islamic Law?

[Trumble]

These pirates were ex-fishermen after they've seen the fish decline around the Somali coast they took matters unto their own hands.....what forced them to make this stupid decision....its none other than toxic removal companies that are paid to remove nuclear wastes for the nuclear producing countries ...because Somali hasn't yet got a functioning government these companies have taken advantage using vessels to trespass into our waters.....

every country has a coast guard and if any other country comes in...their ships,boats and vessels will be seized...ask the British what happened to them when they went into Iranian waters

so if you like these rascal fishermen are the untrained coast guards of somalia..ok thats one thing but what about the goods they steal and the ransom money they demand....well what about their fish? that was not only destroyed but stolen off their shores and beyond.......lets all understand why piracy began in the first place rather than to just accept whatever the media says

What a load of complete and utter deluded rubbish. 'Untrained coast guards? Since when have Somali waters extended 350 miles offshore? Since when have coast-guards held hostages for ransom? What do food aid ships have to do with 'toxic removal'? These 'rascal fishermen' are guilty of piracy on the high seas, are criminals, and should be treated accordingly. They drag the name of Somalia into the dirt.

[Cabdullahi]

What a load of complete and utter deluded rubbish. 'Untrained coast guards? Since when have Somali waters extended 350 miles offshore? Since when have coast-guards held hostages for ransom? What do food aid ships have to do with 'toxic removal'? These 'rascal fishermen' are guilty of piracy on the high seas, are criminals, and should be treated accordingly. They drag the name of Somalia into the dirt.

keep your hair on mate.........im might be deluded but here....i can help you enlighten yourself abit and maybe you could do the same for me another time :)


Johann Hari: You are being lied to about pirates

Some are clearly just gangsters. But others are trying to stop illegal dumping and trawling

Monday, 5 January 2009


Who imagined that in 2009, the world's governments would be declaring a new War on Pirates? As you read this, the British Royal Navy – backed by the ships of more than two dozen nations, from the US to China – is sailing into Somalian waters to take on men we still picture as parrot-on-the-shoulder pantomime villains. They will soon be fighting Somalian ships and even chasing the pirates onto land, into one of the most broken countries on earth. But behind the arrr-me-hearties oddness of this tale, there is an untold scandal. The people our governments are labelling as "one of the great menaces of our times" have an extraordinary story to tell – and some justice on their side.

Pirates have never been quite who we think they are. In the "golden age of piracy" – from 1650 to 1730 – the idea of the pirate as the senseless, savage Bluebeard that lingers today was created by the British government in a great propaganda heave. Many ordinary people believed it was false: pirates were often saved from the gallows by supportive crowds. Why? What did they see that we can't? In his book Villains Of All Nations, the historian Marcus Rediker pores through the evidence.

If you became a merchant or navy sailor then – plucked from the docks of London's East End, young and hungry – you ended up in a floating wooden Hell. You worked all hours on a cramped, half-starved ship, and if you slacked off, the all-powerful captain would whip you with the Cat O' Nine Tails. If you slacked often, you could be thrown overboard. And at the end of months or years of this, you were often cheated of your wages.

Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. They mutinied – and created a different way of working on the seas. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively, without torture. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls "one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century".

They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals. The pirates showed "quite clearly – and subversively – that ships did not have to be run in the brutal and oppressive ways of the merchant service and the Royal Navy." This is why they were romantic heroes, despite being unproductive thieves.

The words of one pirate from that lost age, a young British man called William Scott, should echo into this new age of piracy. Just before he was hanged in Charleston, South Carolina, he said: "What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirateing to live." In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died.

Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it." Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Mr Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."

At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia's seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish stocks by overexploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m-worth of tuna, shrimp, and lobster are being stolen every year by illegal trawlers. The local fishermen are now starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: "If nothing is done, there soon won't be much fish left in our coastal waters."

This is the context in which the "pirates" have emerged. Somalian fishermen took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least levy a "tax" on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia – and ordinary Somalis agree. The independent Somalian news site WardheerNews found 70 per cent "strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence".

No, this doesn't make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters – especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies. But in a telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali: "We don't consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas." William Scott would understand.

Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our toxic waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We won't act on those crimes – the only sane solution to this problem – but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 per cent of the world's oil supply, we swiftly send in the gunboats.

The story of the 2009 war on piracy was best summarised by another pirate, who lived and died in the fourth century BC. He was captured and brought to Alexander the Great, who demanded to know "what he meant by keeping possession of the sea." The pirate smiled, and responded: "What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you, who do it with a great fleet, are called emperor." Once again, our great imperial fleets sail – but who is the robber?

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...s-1225817.html

[Trumble]

Can't say that changes my opinion much, but I was a bit harsh, for which I apologise. Thanks for the informative response.

[Grace Seeker]

What is the punishment for piracy in Islamic Law?

Good question. Is there a response?

And does Allah make allowance for piracy if one does it for a "good" reason? I know there are difference punishments for thieves who steal bread to feed their family and thieves who steal gold to line their purses, so maybe there are different punishments for different kinds of piracy, too. But which is it that these Somali pirates are really doing?

I understand that they aren't exactly playing Robin Hood and stealing from the rich to give to the poor, but are spending the money on new homes and cars and other luxuries for themselves, not so much for their neighbors. Also, they aren't targeting those who have actually taken their fish nor polluted their waters with dumping. They are going after those with the most money to pay ransoms. And now they have even begun to attack the vessels that are loaded with relief supplies for their neighbors while out on the high seas hundreds of miles from Somalian waters.

They may be 16/17 years of age, but the people they are attacking are in just as much jeopardy as if they were 36 or 47. If they didn't mean anyone harm, they wouldn't need guns and RPGs to do what they do would they? I just think it is crazy that it is the criminals who now claim that they are the ones justified in seeking revenge.

[burdenofbeing]

I'm saying this one on the top of my head, but I know that new muslims that left mecca, after the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, attacked and looted the caravans from mecca. The people of mecca confiscated the muslims goods and did harm to them as well. Prophet Mohammed didn't have these attacks stopped until mecca tribes asked for another agreement.

Based on that, I could say, if you are being plundered, you are permitted to plunder back. Without going overboard.

[Grace Seeker]

I'm saying this one on the top of my head, but I know that new muslims that left mecca, after the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, attacked and looted the caravans from mecca. The people of mecca confiscated the muslims goods and did harm to them as well. Prophet Mohammed didn't have these attacks stopped until mecca tribes asked for another agreement.

Based on that, I could say, if you are being plundered, you are permitted to plunder back. Without going overboard.

And in what ways did a ship bringing supplies to Kenyan and Somalian refugees represent those who the fisherman of Somali had a grievance against?

[burdenofbeing]

It's irrelevant. I'm just answering the question about piracy in Islam.
Don't act like I'm the somalian pirates.

[islamlover_girl]

They were armed pirates.

What is the punishment for piracy in Islamic Law?

(The only recompense of those who make war against Allâh and His Messenger and who strive hard to create disordr in the land, is (according to the nature of the crime) that they be executed or crucified to death, or that their hands and feet be cut off on account of their opposition, or their (free) movement in the land be banned (by exile or imprisonment). This would mean ignominy for them in this world and there awaits them in the Hereafter a severe punishment). (translation of surat alma`eda aya 33).
The punishment of piracy is one of the mentioned punishments,the a authorities have to choose one of them according to the nature of the crime.

[Grace Seeker]

It's irrelevant. I'm just answering the question about piracy in Islam.
Don't act like I'm the somalian pirates.

I don't think you, or anyone else here, is a Somalian pirate. I'm just trying to figure out how what you said about piracy in Islam would be applied to the piracy taking place in Somalia? I don't see them as being similar situations, do you?

[burdenofbeing]

I don't know the situation over there enough to have an educated opinion.

[Maryan0]

Deaths caused by illegal dumping of toxic wastes on somalia's coast=300+

Deaths caused by pirates, taken in action to rid themselves of foreign nations dumping on their coast and stealing their resources=0

so which is the worser crime, i do not justify the actions of pirates, but condemning and not taking into account the reasons why piracy even began is ignorant

salaam

[Cabdullahi]

^ you must be somali?

[Maryan0]

^ you must be somali?

maybe, why do you ask?
salaam

[Grace Seeker]

Deaths caused by illegal dumping of toxic wastes on somalia's coast=300+

Deaths caused by pirates, taken in action to rid themselves of foreign nations dumping on their coast and stealing their resources=0

so which is the worser crime, i do not justify the actions of pirates, but condemning and not taking into account the reasons why piracy even began is ignorant

salaam

Does one determine the morality of an action by the number of people some other group may or may not have brought harm to?

The Somali pirates have vowed to take revenge not on the toxic waste dumpers, but on others who have simply sought to defend themselves from their criminal acts. Should American Indians attack Spain, France, and Great Britian because of what those European powers did in their history? Would those horrendous acts justify crimes against people simply trying to make a peaceful and legal living in those countries today? You say you don't justify the actions of the pirates, but it sure does sound like you are trying to excuse them, and I can't tell a whole lot of difference between those two points from what you have written.

[Maryan0]

Grace Seeker-Does one determine the morality of an action by the number of people some other group may or may not have brought harm to?

The Somali pirates have vowed to take revenge not on the toxic waste dumpers, but on others who have simply sought to defend themselves from their criminal acts.
the very reason piracy even began in the horn was because of certain nations illegally fishing and illegally dumping on somalia's coast and these men in the beginning were fisherman who were forced to take up arms to defend themselves and their waters. did they become greedy later on? yes, but like i said before condemning them without taking into account the reason pirating even began in the first place is ignorant. piracy is a crime but so is illegal dumping and fishing, why should they be expected to be moral?
especially when they they have been complaining to the rest of the world for the past 20 yrs and the rest of the world chose to ignore them until piracy became such a big issue.
Should American Indians attack Spain, France, and Great Britian because of what those European powers did in their history?
if the american indians were still being massacred and purposely being infected with diseases they were not immune to etc. than they would have every right to attack and defend themselves, should they do it today? no because although the native people don't have it that great the main crimes they were subjected to happened almost 100 years ago and taking action against those countries generations after those atrocities took place would not make sense.

Would those horrendous acts justify crimes against people simply trying to make a peaceful and legal living in those countries today?
read above, illegal dumping and fishing isn't history, it still goes on to this very day.
You say you don't justify the actions of the pirates, but it sure does sound like you are trying to excuse them, and I can't tell a whole lot of difference between those two points from what you have written.

i do not justify their actions but i won't condemn them until the international community chooses to condemn their own actions, and stop illegal dumping and illegal fishing that has caused irreparable damage to somalia's coast and the deaths of 100's of somali people.

[Cabdullahi]

Grace Seeker-Does one determine the morality of an action by the number of people some other group may or may not have brought harm to?

The Somali pirates have vowed to take revenge not on the toxic waste dumpers, but on others who have simply sought to defend themselves from their criminal acts.
the very reason piracy even began in the horn was because of certain nations illegally fishing and illegally dumping on somalia's coast and these men in the beginning were fisherman who were forced to take up arms to defend themselves and their waters. did they become greedy later on? yes, but like i said before condemning them without taking into account the reason pirating even began in the first place is ignorant. piracy is a crime but so is illegal dumping and fishing, why should they be expected to be moral?
especially when they they have been complaining to the rest of the world for the past 20 yrs and the rest of the world chose to ignore them until piracy became such a big issue.
Should American Indians attack Spain, France, and Great Britian because of what those European powers did in their history?
if the american indians were still being massacred and purposely being infected with diseases they were not immune to etc. than they would have every right to attack and defend themselves, should they do it today? no because although the native people don't have it that great the main crimes they were subjected to happened almost 100 years ago and taking action against those countries generations after those atrocities took place would not make sense.

Would those horrendous acts justify crimes against people simply trying to make a peaceful and legal living in those countries today?
read above, illegal dumping and fishing isn't history, it still goes on to this very day.
You say you don't justify the actions of the pirates, but it sure does sound like you are trying to excuse them, and I can't tell a whole lot of difference between those two points from what you have written.

i do not justify their actions but i won't condemn them until the international community chooses to condemn their own actions, and stop illegal dumping and illegal fishing that has caused irreparable damage to somalia's coast and the deaths of 100's of somali people.

^Certified somali..........and this post confirms it

[Grace Seeker]

i do not justify their actions but i won't condemn them until the international community chooses to condemn their own actions, and stop illegal dumping and illegal fishing that has caused irreparable damage to somalia's coast and the deaths of 100's of somali people.

I have no problem condemning both sets of actions -- illegal dumping and piracy. In fact it isn't even piracy, for the most part it is just plain kidnapping, and that at gunpoint.

[YusufNoor]

I have no problem condemning both sets of actions -- illegal dumping and piracy. In fact it isn't even piracy, for the most part it is just plain kidnapping, and that at gunpoint.

so what do you call the invader US forces in Iraq?

and do you condemn them?

[Grace Seeker]

so what do you call the invader US forces in Iraq?

Uncalled for and a gross mistake.

and do you condemn them?

The troops personally? No, I don't condemn them personally.

The decision to send them? Yes. I was out in front condemning the idea as unwarranted even as Colin Powell made his unconvincing pitch to the UN.

[Paragon]

Does one determine the morality of an action by the number of people some other group may or may not have brought harm to?

The Somali pirates have vowed to take revenge not on the toxic waste dumpers, but on others who have simply sought to defend themselves from their criminal acts. Should American Indians attack Spain, France, and Great Britian because of what those European powers did in their history? Would those horrendous acts justify crimes against people simply trying to make a peaceful and legal living in those countries today? You say you don't justify the actions of the pirates, but it sure does sound like you are trying to excuse them, and I can't tell a whole lot of difference between those two points from what you have written.

The gist of it all is that dual morality on International Relations applies here. There is one set of morals for domestic consumption, but there is another for the anarchic world out there. Be as it may, morality - under Islamic which is less condemning in this instance and the bogged-down western one - are irrelevant. Anyone with rudimentary understanding of this scandalous saga would appreciate these words, retold in st. St. Augustine's Pirate story:

’For the same reason you infest the earth; but because I do it with a little ship, I’m called pirate; because you do it with a big fleet you’re called emperor’”.

If you can't get the basis of these words then perhaps there's a need for revision.

[burdenofbeing]

of course by no means should this be understood as somalian pirates are just in what they are doing. it merely means, the events are multi faceted.

[nocturnal]

And in what ways did a ship bringing supplies to Kenyan and Somalian refugees represent those who the fisherman of Somali had a grievance against?

The US has played a fundamental role in destabilising Somalia and entrusting it to the callous warlords whose years of ruinous feuding have rendered Somalia perhaps the most anarchic state on the planet. Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown by an alliance of warlords with fervent American support. The planners in the US knew what the result of that would be and when one of the warlords, Mohamed Farah Aideed, was deemed a "deviant" by the US, it sparked their 1993 intervention.

The people who have been coerced into piracy today, are doing so out of desperation. They are living in abject misery and poverty, the result of a failed state with no effective central government for 18 years, which means no education, health, social systems and policies thereby deprieving people of opportunities that every human being should be entitled to.

Today, international opinion works perfectly in sync with the intentions of US planners and propagandists who will obviously ascribe the chaotic situation that they engineered many years ago, to Al Qa'ida.

[nocturnal]

Does one determine the morality of an action by the number of people some other group may or may not have brought harm to?

The Somali pirates have vowed to take revenge not on the toxic waste dumpers, but on others who have simply sought to defend themselves from their criminal acts. Should American Indians attack Spain, France, and Great Britian because of what those European powers did in their history? Would those horrendous acts justify crimes against people simply trying to make a peaceful and legal living in those countries today? You say you don't justify the actions of the pirates, but it sure does sound like you are trying to excuse them, and I can't tell a whole lot of difference between those two points from what you have written.

Classic specious response your post is; clever but misleading. These innocent people trying to earn a living are a vivid manifestation of US hegemony. That should be understood carefully and objectively. While it is wrong to attack the crew of these ships, it is important to note that they are plying waters in a region that the West has systematically undermined, subverted and flung into mayhem.

If the US in particular is keen to avert further acts of piracy, then they should perhaps begin by paying reparations for the chaos and bloodshed that they prompted by supporting servile and repressive warlords who killed their own people. They should recognise facts, key among them that the Islamic Courts and Al Shabaab are the de facto government today, although there is scant hope of that happening.

If they couldn't bring themselves to recognise Hamas as the democratically elected government of the Palestinians, they won't even remotely contemplate recognising Al Shabaab and the Islamic Courts, the very same organisation that in 6 months managed to stabilise a nation that was characterized by anarchic mayhem for 18 years.

Piracy cannot be solved by deploying warships, you have to come up with a political solution, not a military one, and until the neo-imperialists cease their bellicose posturing, this cannot be achieved.

[YusufNoor]

:sl:

while i'm not crazy about the source, this is a very interesting piece:

You Are Being Lied to About Pirates

Who imagined that in 2009, the world's governments would be declaring a new War on Pirates? As you read this, the British Royal Navy - backed by the ships of more than two dozen nations, from the US to China - is sailing into Somalian waters to take on men we still picture as parrot-on-the-shoulder pantomime villains. They will soon be fighting Somalian ships and even chasing the pirates onto land, into one of the most broken countries on earth. But behind the arrr-me-hearties oddness of this tale, there is an untold scandal. The people our governments are labeling as "one of the great menace of our times" have an extraordinary story to tell -- and some justice on their side.

Pirates have never been quite who we think they are. In the "golden age of piracy" - from 1650 to 1730 - the idea of the pirate as the senseless, savage thief that lingers today was created by the British government in a great propaganda-heave. Many ordinary people believed it was false: pirates were often rescued from the gallows by supportive crowds. Why? What did they see that we can't? In his book Villains of All nations, the historian Marcus Rediker pores through the evidence to find out. If you became a merchant or navy sailor then - plucked from the docks of London's East End, young and hungry - you ended up in a floating wooden Hell. You worked all hours on a cramped, half-starved ship, and if you slacked off for a second, the all-powerful captain would whip you with the Cat O' Nine Tails. If you slacked consistently, you could be thrown overboard. And at the end of months or years of this, you were often cheated of your wages.

Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. They mutinied against their tyrannical captains - and created a different way of working on the seas. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls "one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century." They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals. The pirates showed "quite clearly - and subversively - that ships did not have to be run in the brutal and oppressive ways of the merchant service and the Royal navy." This is why they were popular, despite being unproductive thieves.

The words of one pirate from that lost age - a young British man called William Scott - should echo into this new age of piracy. Just before he was hanged in Charleston, South Carolina, he said: "What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirating to live." In 1991, the government of Somalia - in the Horn of Africa - collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since - and many of the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died. Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury - you name it." Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."

At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia's seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish-stocks by over-exploitation - and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m worth of tuna, shrimp, lobster and other sea-life is being stolen every year by vast trawlers illegally sailing into Somalia's unprotected seas. The local fishermen have suddenly lost their livelihoods, and they are starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: "If nothing is done, there soon won't be much fish left in our coastal waters."

This is the context in which the men we are calling "pirates" have emerged. Everyone agrees they were ordinary Somalian fishermen who at first took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least wage a 'tax' on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia - and it's not hard to see why. In a surreal telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali, said their motive was "to stop illegal fishing and dumping in our waters... We don't consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas and dump waste in our seas and carry weapons in our seas." William Scott would understand those words.

No, this doesn't make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters - especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies. But the "pirates" have the overwhelming support of the local population for a reason. The independent Somalian news-site WardherNews conducted the best research we have into what ordinary Somalis are thinking - and it found 70 percent "strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence of the country's territorial waters." During the revolutionary war in America, George Washington and America's founding fathers paid pirates to protect America's territorial waters, because they had no navy or coastguard of their own. Most Americans supported them. Is this so different?

Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our nuclear waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We didn't act on those crimes - but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 percent of the world's oil supply, we begin to shriek about "evil." If we really want to deal with piracy, we need to stop its root cause - our crimes - before we send in the gun-boats to root out Somalia's criminals.

The story of the 2009 war on piracy was best summarised by another pirate, who lived and died in the fourth century BC. He was captured and brought to Alexander the Great, who demanded to know "what he meant by keeping possession of the sea." The pirate smiled, and responded: "What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you, who do it with a great fleet, are called emperor." Once again, our great imperial fleets sail in today - but who is the robber?


Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent newspaper. To read more of his articles, click here. or here.

POSTSCRIPT: Some commenters seem bemused by the fact that both toxic dumping and the theft of fish are happening in the same place - wouldn't this make the fish contaminated? In fact, Somalia's coastline is vast, stretching to 3300km. Imagine how easy it would be - without any coastguard or army - to steal fish from Florida and dump nuclear waste on California, and you get the idea. These events are happening in different places - but with the same horrible effect: death for the locals, and stirred-up piracy. There's no contradiction.

source: can't get link to work, Huffington Post

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:
No, this doesn't make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters - especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies.

There you go. Buried within all the smoke and mirrors is the truth. Hostage taking is not justifialbe. Those that do it are just gangsters.

I think Somalli has a case on all of the rest, but that doesn't change the nature of the actions of those who took hostages and where shot while actively engaged in that crime. For those people to claim that they are going to seek revenge is preposterous.

For the Somalii people to seek reparations against the companies that are involved in the other, also illegal, activity I fully understand and support. And if they get no response, then I could even understand while Somalia might declare war on those nations that sanction this. But these individuals who are themselves criminals have no standing on which to claim that they are seeking revenge simply because they played a dangerous game and lost -- it was inevitable and they brought it on themselves.

[YusufNoor]

There you go. Buried within all the smoke and mirrors is the truth. Hostage taking is not justifialbe. Those that do it are just gangsters.

I think Somalli has a case on all of the rest, but that doesn't change the nature of the actions of those who took hostages and where shot while actively engaged in that crime. For those people to claim that they are going to seek revenge is preposterous.

For the Somalii people to seek reparations against the companies that are involved in the other, also illegal, activity I fully understand and support. And if they get no response, then I could even understand while Somalia might declare war on those nations that sanction this. But these individuals who are themselves criminals have no standing on which to claim that they are seeking revenge simply because they played a dangerous game and lost -- it was inevitable and they brought it on themselves.

In 1991, the government of Somalia - in the Horn of Africa - collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since - and many of the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died. Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury - you name it." Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."

you read all that and the most important thing to you and your "Christian" values is that some some people are inconvenienced or perhaps relieved of some currency?

is that what 3 gods does to you? are you REALLY your brothers keeper? do you think that Jesus "loves everybody" except those that Caucasian/Western Imperialists are currently raping/pillaging/plundering/murdering/taking advantage of?

must be the "Christian" "Crusader" in you, eh?

[Grace Seeker]

you read all that and the most important thing to you and your "Christian" values is that some some people are inconvenienced or perhaps relieved of some currency?

First people were not just inconvenienced. They were threatened. They were shot at. They were robbed. They were kidnapped. Their very lives were endangered. You're trying to live in a world where one criminal act gives license to another criminal act, and I don't buy into it.


Second, I didn't say it was the most important thing. But it is the only thing in what you wrote that is actually relevant to this particular thread.


Third, you want to start a thread on the criminality of those who dumped nuclear wasts in Somali waters, please, go right ahead. I've already made comment that I agree that such actions are also wrong, even criminal in behavior, and worthy of Somalia trying to defend itself. But the way they have done so is not in keeping with people who wish to be heard as defending themselves, for they are not attacking those who have harmed them, they are attacking the most convenient target. It is like a person who has been wronged by one set of neighbors, and in response lashes out at every other neighbor. Having been wronged by one person does not make it right to themselves wrong another, and no amount of saying how poorly they have been treated changes the wrongs themselves are doing to somehow be seen as right.

[Keltoi]

The actions of these pirates have nothing to do with nuclear waste. They gain reputation in their communities by sacking and pillaging ships. It is like the Wild West in the U.S. To pose the theory that the piracy that goes on off Somali waters is due to waste dumpage is laughable at best. They represent nothing and noone except themselves and their particular criminal element.

[Maryan0]

First people were not just inconvenienced. They were threatened. They were shot at. They were robbed. They were kidnapped. Their very lives were endangered. You're trying to live in a world where one criminal act gives license to another criminal act, and I don't buy into it.


Second, I didn't say it was the most important thing. But it is the only thing in what you wrote that is actually relevant to this particular thread.


Third, you want to start a thread on the criminality of those who dumped nuclear wasts in Somali waters, please, go right ahead. I've already made comment that I agree that such actions are also wrong, even criminal in behavior, and worthy of Somalia trying to defend itself. But the way they have done so is not in keeping with people who wish to be heard as defending themselves, for they are not attacking those who have harmed them, they are attacking the most convenient target. It is like a person who has been wronged by one set of neighbors, and in response lashes out at every other neighbor. Having been wronged by one person does not make it right to themselves wrong another, and no amount of saying how poorly they have been treated changes the wrongs themselves are doing to somehow be seen as right.

How do you propose they go about it? in a legal manner

[Grace Seeker]

How do you propose they go about it? in a legal manner

Well, it sounds like it is common ordinary business that have violate Somalian waters and could be tried, either in Somalia, in the country where they do business, or in the World Court. But it would be the action of the Somalian government to do this, not some thugs who have proclaimed themselves sheriff of the high seas.

Now, maybe, that is not doable. Maybe the lack of a functioning government in Somalia prevents them from seeking redress. If that is so, then it seems to me that these people who are so willing to go on the high seas in the name of seeking justice have their violence pointed in the wrong direction. If they were really concerned about the Somalian people, they would be opposing the war lords of their own country who effectively prevent the government from functioning. The Somalian government would be in a much better position than some rogue pirates to demand action be taken by the international community. The pirates will be seen for just what they are, pirates and nothing more. They are not coast guard by any stretch of the imagination, thus far the only thing they have shown a propensity to protect is the lining of their own pockets, and they don't seem to care who they attack to line it. A real coast guard goes after only those who are violating their coast; I hardly think that these aid ships fit that description. That the pirates don't seem to care tells me all I need to know about their true character.

[Maryan0]

Well, it sounds like it is common ordinary business that have violate Somalian waters and could be tried, either in Somalia, in the country where they do business, or in the World Court. But it would be the action of the Somalian government to do this, not some thugs who have proclaimed themselves sheriff of the high seas.

Now, maybe, that is not doable. Maybe the lack of a functioning government in Somalia prevents them from seeking redress. If that is so, then it seems to me that these people who are so willing to go on the high seas in the name of seeking justice have their violence pointed in the wrong direction. If they were really concerned about the Somalian people, they would be opposing the war lords of their own country who effectively prevent the government from functioning. The Somalian government would be in a much better position than some rogue pirates to demand action be taken by the international community. The pirates will be seen for just what they are, pirates and nothing more. They are not coast guard by any stretch of the imagination, thus far the only thing they have shown a propensity to protect is the lining of their own pockets, and they don't seem to care who they attack to line it. A real coast guard goes after only those who are violating their coast; I hardly think that these aid ships fit that description. That the pirates don't seem to care tells me all I need to know about their true character.

i think we all at this point understand that piracy is a crime along with illegal dumping and fishing but that isn't the issue in totality.
Somalia at this point in time is known as failed nation, the people of somalia have been complaining for a long time and nobody chose to listen to them until certain nations started losing millions to somali pirates.
is anything being done at this point to eradicate illegal dumping in fishing which caused pirating? no, instead these nations ordered patrols to escort ships and to take out these pirates in somali waters.
the funny thing is that i as a somali will probably be the most objective somali you meet on this issue. the majority of somalis see these men as heroes and they don't call them pirates they call them coast guards.

if you can find a way for illegal dumping and fishing (which caused piracy) and piracy to be eradicated do tell me, i'll be sure to pass it on. until than it's a free for all, wrong and right doesn't govern reality.

peace

[joedawun]

i think we all at this point understand that piracy is a crime along with illegal dumping and fishing but that isn't the issue in totality.
Somalia at this point in time is known as failed nation, the people of somalia have been complaining for a long time and nobody chose to listen to them until certain nations started losing millions to somali pirates.
is anything being done at this point to eradicate illegal dumping in fishing which caused pirating? no, instead these nations ordered patrols to escort ships and to take out these pirates in somali waters.
the funny thing is that i as a somali will probably be the most objective somali you meet on this issue. the majority of somalis see these men as heroes and they don't call them pirates they call them coast guards.

if you can find a way for illegal dumping and fishing (which caused piracy) and piracy to be eradicated do tell me, i'll be sure to pass it on. until than it's a free for all, wrong and right doesn't govern reality.

peace

Being a Somali national hero is all very nice. As these people are regarded as heroes and Coast Guards by the Somali people, then they should be doing their duty and going after the illegal fishermen or the illegal dumpers that are laying waste to the Somali nation. Pursuing ships that are not involved with illegal fishing or dumping, then holding their crews for ransom is nothing but piracy.

Once the heroic Somali Coast Guard begins actually guarding the Somali coast from the illegal fishermen and dumpers, then the rest of the world will awaken from it's confusion and agree that they are heroes, not pirates. Meanwhile, it should come as no surprise that they will be the targets of other nation's naval forces as they protect international shipping on the high seas from the piracy of the would be Heroic Somali Coast Guard.

[Maryan0]

Being a Somali national hero is all very nice. As these people are regarded as heroes and Coast Guards by the Somali people, then they should be doing their duty and going after the illegal fishermen or the illegal dumpers that are laying waste to the Somali nation. Pursuing ships that are not involved with illegal fishing or dumping, then holding their crews for ransom is nothing but piracy.

Once the heroic Somali Coast Guard begins actually guarding the Somali coast from the illegal fishermen and dumpers, then the rest of the world will awaken from it's confusion and agree that they are heroes, not pirates. Meanwhile, it should come as no surprise that they will be the targets of other nation's naval forces as they protect international shipping on the high seas from the piracy of the would be Heroic Somali Coast Guard.

truly ignorance is bliss, i'll repeat this for like the third time since you probably don't have access to google.
again right After the collapse of the somali government foreign boats illegally fishing and dumping in Somali waters were spotted regularly, the somali fisherman and coastal people's livelihoods were threatened they complained and they complained but than again like most impoverished african nations that have nothing to offer they were ignored and so they chose to take up arms to defend themselves. this in turn turned to piracy and yes later on greed played a part in it because why fish when you can make millions stealing.
it's funny how only when the worlds supply of oil was threatened, did people start to take notice of what was going on. now everyone is wondering how this piracy came to be such a big issue ignoring the fact that it was going for almost 2 decades.
now the very perpretators of illegal dumping and fishing are ordering patrols of the somali coast and refusing to take into account their part in the piracy even starting, but than a again such is the nature of imperialists.
every action has as a reaction, illegal dumping and fishing by the international community caused pirating.
so once the the heroic western world and the heroic navy take into account that they actions caused by their heroic citizens were what caused piracy than piracy will be here to stay.

[joedawun]

truly ignorance is bliss, i'll repeat this for like the third time since you probably don't have access to google.
again right After the collapse of the somali government foreign boats illegally fishing and dumping in Somali waters were spotted regularly, the somali fisherman and coastal people's livelihoods were threatened they complained and they complained but than again like most impoverished african nations that have nothing to offer they were ignored and so they chose to take up arms to defend themselves. this in turn turned to piracy and yes later on greed played a part in it because why fish when you can make millions stealing.
it's funny how only when the worlds supply of oil was threatened, did people start to take notice of what was going on. now everyone is wondering how this piracy came to be such a big issue ignoring the fact that it was going for almost 2 decades.
now the very perpretators of illegal dumping and fishing are ordering patrols of the somali coast and refusing to take into account their part in the piracy even starting, but than a again such is the nature of imperialists.
every action has as a reaction, illegal dumping and fishing by the international community caused pirating.
so once the the heroic western world and the heroic navy take into account that they actions caused by their heroic citizens were what caused piracy than piracy will be here to stay.

Lisa, in my ignorance I nevertheless appreciate the plight of the people of Somalia. My point, which you need not Google, is that there is a disconnect when you describe the people who are attacking and hijacking ships on the high seas as anything but pirates, regardless of the reasons that they resorted to their actions.

If they are to be regarded as heroic, or as a Somali Coast Guard, then they would need to be guarding the Somali coast and stopping the illegal fishing or dumping that you claim that they are reacting to. The fact remains that they attack ships and hold crews hostage that are neither fishing or dumping waste in Somali waters.

As you reminded us, every action indeed does have a reaction. Just as you claim these Somalis were moved to react to their plight by attacking ships and crews on the high seas, the nations whose ships are being attacked are reacting by having their navies escort these ships to protect them from attack.

My final point, then, is that you should not be surprised when the Somalis, whom you regard as heroes but who are in fact engaged in acts of piracy, are blown out of the water. The problems that drove them to react are not addressed or solved, and the tragedy that is Somalia continues.

[Maryan0]

Lisa, in my ignorance I nevertheless appreciate the plight of the people of Somalia. My point, which you need not Google, is that there is a disconnect when you describe the people who are attacking and hijacking ships on the high seas as anything but pirates, regardless of the reasons that they resorted to their actions.
joedawun my point is that piracy is a crime but there were actions that lead up to piracy, in my previous posts i acknowledged that what they pirates were doing was wrong and that's why i call them pirates. my point is this situation is not one sided and condemnation against piracy without taking into account the reasons why it even began is wrong and very biased.

If they are to be regarded as heroic, or as a Somali Coast Guard, then they would need to be guarding the Somali coast and stopping the illegal fishing or dumping that you claim that they are reacting to. The fact remains that they attack ships and hold crews hostage that are neither fishing or dumping waste in Somali waters.

Their actions in the beginning started off as heroic, it later evolved into something different with local warlords getting involved. the pirates attack the ships of countries they believe are perpretrators of illegal dumping and fishing whether those specific ships are actually carrying out the illegal dumping and fishing at that point in time does not matter to them. that's wrong but than again so are the actions by those specific nations that have caused the deaths of 100's of somali and the damage to the somali coast. they've opened a pandora's box. piracy didn't just pop up out of nowhere something caused it.and the world didn't choose to be moral about their actions so why should they?

As you reminded us, every action indeed does have a reaction. Just as you claim these Somalis were moved to react to their plight by attacking ships and crews on the high seas, the nations whose ships are being attacked are reacting by having their navies escort these ships to protect them from attack.
and i guess the pirates will continues to attack their ships because in their own words "they have nothing to lose".

My final point, then, is that you should not be surprised when the Somalis, whom you regard as heroes but who are in fact engaged in acts of piracy, are blown out of the water.
this point confirms your ignorance, first and foremost Somalia is a nation of millions. piracy neither defines somalis neither is piracy commited by all somalis. and do point out to me were i said they were heroes, my words were that the majority of somalis see these men as heroes and they do.

lol at the "blown out of the water". blow them out of the water after you steal their fish and poison their waters.amazing.but than again such is the nature of imperialists so i wasn't expecting anything else. you can shoot at them all you want it wont change a thing somalis have been shot for the past 20 years.

The problems that drove them to react are not addressed or solved, and the tragedy that is Somalia continues.
the problems that drove somalis to piracy were not being addressed to begin with. Piracy is criminal and should be condemned. But the International community must also address illegal fishing, and dumping of toxic wastes in Somalia’s waters. For piracy to be eradicated the root causes of pirating need to be taken into account and then and only then will the piracy end.
if the international community continues to commit their crimes than the somali pirates can continue on with theirs too and more power to them

[Grace Seeker]

truly ignorance is bliss, i'll repeat this for like the third time since you probably don't have access to google.
again right After the collapse of the somali government foreign boats illegally fishing and dumping in Somali waters were spotted regularly, the somali fisherman and coastal people's livelihoods were threatened they complained and they complained but than again like most impoverished african nations that have nothing to offer they were ignored and so they chose to take up arms to defend themselves. this in turn turned to piracy and yes later on greed played a part in it because why fish when you can make millions stealing.

"Ignorance is bliss." You are right. And you are right that much of the rest of the world was living in bliss ignoring the issues that were being experienced by people in Somalia. That was wrong. I can see how that led to people acting as they did. And again, if it had just been against the illegal dumpers then two things are true I would have probably stayed ignorant, and if I had been aware of it, I probably would have sided with those who were protecting their homeland.

You are also right that Somalia has little to offer most other countries, and this has worked both for and against Somalia in a variety of ways. For the USA, it would probably just rather forget about Somalia. Until recently, my most vivid memory of Somalia was of the attacks by Somali warlords on Americans in Mogadishu. Our interactions with Somailia have not left a good taste in our collective mouths. We argue amongst ourselves whether we had any business being there in the first place, and that it was a sign that even if there are places needing help we can't be everywhere and aren't always welcomed when we are. So, it is hard to hear now that we were wrong for not responding to these other issues about dumping and fishing in the past when it was exactly in that past that we were told we were wrong for being in Somalia in the first place. It seems that whatever course the USA takes it is ****ed if we do and ****ed if we don't. In that sort of environment, we are going to define our interests more along our own selfish lines. Off the coast of Somalia, that means protecting ships flying our flag and vigorously fighting of anyone who threatens them.

As far as the valid issues you bring up, somehow all sides are going to have to move on beyond the issues that clutter up our past and decide what we want and can do in the future. I don't think lifting up a "Coast Guard" that openly attacks ships operating peacefully and legally in international waters is going to be Somalia's best strategy. But since it did bring you some attention again, you are probably wise to make use of it to once again push on these other legitimate issues that you do have. Just don't link them too closely with the pirates or you will quickly lose the hearing that you presently enjoy.

[nocturnal]

The actions of these pirates have nothing to do with nuclear waste. They gain reputation in their communities by sacking and pillaging ships. It is like the Wild West in the U.S. To pose the theory that the piracy that goes on off Somali waters is due to waste dumpage is laughable at best. They represent nothing and noone except themselves and their particular criminal element.

If you're going to strip this down to its most elemental aspects, then you'd do well to consider that the reason these people resort to piracy is because of the complete lack of opportunity in Somalia.

The new president just recently ratified a decree that would charge the Justice Ministry with the implementation of Sharia. That, supplemented by the departure of foreign peace-keeping troops will enable the new administration to tackle this problem decisively.

Constant foreign subversion and American denunciations of an extraordinarily inchoate administration will only undermine its efforts.

[salafy_masry]

keep your hair on mate.........im might be deluded but here....i can help you enlighten yourself abit and maybe you could do the same for me another time :)


Johann Hari: You are being lied to about pirates

Some are clearly just gangsters. But others are trying to stop illegal dumping and trawling

Monday, 5 January 2009


Who imagined that in 2009, the world's governments would be declaring a new War on Pirates? As you read this, the British Royal Navy – backed by the ships of more than two dozen nations, from the US to China – is sailing into Somalian waters to take on men we still picture as parrot-on-the-shoulder pantomime villains. They will soon be fighting Somalian ships and even chasing the pirates onto land, into one of the most broken countries on earth. But behind the arrr-me-hearties oddness of this tale, there is an untold scandal. The people our governments are labelling as "one of the great menaces of our times" have an extraordinary story to tell – and some justice on their side.

Pirates have never been quite who we think they are. In the "golden age of piracy" – from 1650 to 1730 – the idea of the pirate as the senseless, savage Bluebeard that lingers today was created by the British government in a great propaganda heave. Many ordinary people believed it was false: pirates were often saved from the gallows by supportive crowds. Why? What did they see that we can't? In his book Villains Of All Nations, the historian Marcus Rediker pores through the evidence.

If you became a merchant or navy sailor then – plucked from the docks of London's East End, young and hungry – you ended up in a floating wooden Hell. You worked all hours on a cramped, half-starved ship, and if you slacked off, the all-powerful captain would whip you with the Cat O' Nine Tails. If you slacked often, you could be thrown overboard. And at the end of months or years of this, you were often cheated of your wages.

Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. They mutinied – and created a different way of working on the seas. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively, without torture. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls "one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century".

They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals. The pirates showed "quite clearly – and subversively – that ships did not have to be run in the brutal and oppressive ways of the merchant service and the Royal Navy." This is why they were romantic heroes, despite being unproductive thieves.

The words of one pirate from that lost age, a young British man called William Scott, should echo into this new age of piracy. Just before he was hanged in Charleston, South Carolina, he said: "What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirateing to live." In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died.

Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it." Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Mr Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."

At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia's seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish stocks by overexploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m-worth of tuna, shrimp, and lobster are being stolen every year by illegal trawlers. The local fishermen are now starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: "If nothing is done, there soon won't be much fish left in our coastal waters."

This is the context in which the "pirates" have emerged. Somalian fishermen took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least levy a "tax" on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia – and ordinary Somalis agree. The independent Somalian news site WardheerNews found 70 per cent "strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence".

No, this doesn't make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters – especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies. But in a telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali: "We don't consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas." William Scott would understand.

Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our toxic waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We won't act on those crimes – the only sane solution to this problem – but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 per cent of the world's oil supply, we swiftly send in the gunboats.

The story of the 2009 war on piracy was best summarised by another pirate, who lived and died in the fourth century BC. He was captured and brought to Alexander the Great, who demanded to know "what he meant by keeping possession of the sea." The pirate smiled, and responded: "What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you, who do it with a great fleet, are called emperor." Once again, our great imperial fleets sail – but who is the robber?

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...s-1225817.html

The somalian fishermen have all the right to defend their living ..

[memories]

When I saw the headline "Somali pirates vow revenge." my first thought was: Are you kidding? What's to avenge. The pirates started this. Other people were just defending themselves and now the pirates are the ones who seek revenge.


However, as the saying goes, there are two sides to everything. The pirates' view is, I guess, that since they hadn't killed anyone, then they had no expectation that anyone had any right to kill them in defending themselves from the pirates.

But is that a reasoned argument? Afterall, the pirates did use force in taking their captives. They fired bullets and rocket propelled grenades at the boats. Perhaps they were just lucky that no one had been killed yet. When Capt. Philipps had briefly escaped from them and was swimming away, they didn't just let him go. They made him get back in the boat. What would they have done if he had kept swimming? Would they have let him go or have shot and killed him? It was only the threat of arms that enabled them to accomplish what they did accomplish. It seems to me that it was the pirates who raised the stakes to the lethal level the moment they introduced firearms into the picture. With that introduction, it was inevitable that someone, on one side or the other, was going to be hurt or killed eventually. Now it has happened, and the pirates are the ones who feel the need to seek revenge. Incredible!!

Lol!!!:D Id like to see them try and take revenge against the french navy!! with their lil fishing boats! No revenge to be had here, cut and run is what theyl do.

[nocturnal]

This whole apparently moralistic anti-piracy stance being adopted by the west is just blatant duplicity. These shipping vessels that are attacked are the only feasible means these people have to resistance of the pollution of their coastal waters and pillaging of their fishing areas. They cannot reasonably be expected to take on the countries on whose behalf these vessels ply that stretch of ocean.

The Americans send in a whole host of warships to neutralise this piracy threat to their commercial activities, yet the world ignores how they armed the Ethiopians and were the prime instigators behind the recent Ethiopian occupation also themselves bombing regularly Somali territory in the past year.