Pirates
Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 3:57 pm
Ryan Dawson
Modern Pirates or Privateers?
In recent events, pirates have been raiding ships and last week captured an oil tanker carrying 100 million dollars worth of goods. The crew is currently being held hostage for ransom. Upon breaking this story, a lot of feed back returned actually rooting for the pirates. Sarcastic or not, this form of thievery is quite romanticized and well "cool." On land or in the air, robbing, taking hostages, and making ransom demands by rouge groups is called terrorism. But at sea its pirates. Once the word Pirate is attached, people try to see the reasons and motives for the underdog something that could actually be appyied to many terrorists as well although it is socially unexceptional.
History often takes on the spin of social context surrounding the people reporting it. Pirates for example have gone back and forth from heroes to villains to just cool and everything in between in a relatively short time. And it always depending on who was telling the story. A privateer from England like Françoise Drake who is upheld as a hero and explorer was nothing but a state sponsored terrorist and a bigot. He routinely attacked the Spanish with no discernment for civilian or soldier, innocent or criminal. He had no problem killing and enslaving Africans (an act of terrorism) and then selling them (often by forced purchases, like getting “protection” money) in the Caribbean, or murdering Catholics, attacking the Spanish towns/ships or killing Native Americans. If any man did that today, assuming he wasn’t an American or an Israeli, he would be put to jail or sentenced to death.
The structure of privateers was not unlike intelligence agencies or the mafia today. If a nation attacks another nation it is an act of war. However if a nation covertly sponsors and splits the wealth with criminals who are pirates, drug smugglers, contraband, or hired mercenaries through private multinational companies, then there is some distance. If a group of pirates only happen to attack Spanish Ships and never the English who secretly financed them, then upon capture the pirates would be killed or sentenced trough a trial for individual acts of crime. But England would be free of responsibility. A true pirate attacks indiscriminately for profit. A privateer has state backing. Both are just bandits at sea.
The Spanish, or rather factions within the economic system, encouraged the pirates and privateers. Tremendous amounts of money were spent on senseless fortifications and means of defense, always banking on the excuse of the highly over inflated threat of pirates, (which could have been dealt with in a much more efficient manner) which ultimately bankrupted the Spanish yet allowed the Old School Military Industrial complex and the Old School Central Banks better known as Churches, to consolidate the wealth of the populous to their own demise and profiteer handsomely with the ruling elites in all nations. Loyalties were to money not to nations or any acceptable code of ethics.
Today it’s a lot worse and complicated but it is based roughly on the same model of creating a problem, scaring the public, and driving them into debt to supposedly solve what the nation created to begin with and making the problem worse and blaming nearly powerless patsies. I can remember when the US beta tested its first Iraq war by invading the much smaller country of Panama. They cited getting rid of Noriega as the main rational for the war. Noriega had been on the CIA’s own pay roll since 1966 and reached a six figure salary by 1980. In 1989 when I was in Elementary school, the US invaded Panama killing 2-4 thousand civilians and left tens of thousands of others homeless, so the US could put a guy in jail and replace him with a puppet government where all the same drug trafficking etc continues.
People might be interested in learning about “Operation PBSuccess”, the “Phoenix Program,” “Operation Gladio,” “Operation TP-Ajax,” “Operation Paper Clip,” “Project FUBELT,” the entire Iran Contra affair, and the proposed plan of “Operation Northwoods.” Other notable CIA clients have been Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Each was replaced after serving their purposes.
Pirates or terrorists, for the winners writing the history books have their stories’ and motives flip-flopped according to whatever is a useful context. For example the long held cut throat pirates got a new identity in the time of women’s rights, the Marxist ideas of class struggle, the civil rights era, and so on because some pirates in the Americas at least, were or employed women, freed or were former slaves, offered a life away from indentured servitude and class immobility, and fought the evil genocidal colonial powers like hopelessly out-gunned vigilantes. They can be glorified or demonized depending on the perspective. But what they did cannot be denied, and that would consist mainly or stealing from and murdering innocent people for profit. I would see it more as the little crooks antagonizing the big crooks. But maybe it was said best in the words of a pirate captured by Alexander the Great, who when asked how he dared molest the sea, replied “How dare you molest the whole world? Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an Emperor."
What will the results be of the current pirate news? Well the Somalians will undoubtedly use the money to buy black market weapons, furthering the ongoing violence. Insurance will go out the roof, and inhumane mercenaries (pirate hunters) such as Black Water will offer their naval services to escort ships or hunt down pirate mother ships for the right price of course.
But what of the causes? What possible condition could exist in Somalia to warrant such extreme behavior? What was the CIA doing in their timely trip to Somalia?
We have to strive the root and that's the social economic conditions on the ground in Somalia. It's a strategic pawn wedged between far bigger players in the age old game of MIC build up.
Is this the work of Privateers? One jailed pirate, Farah Ismail Eid, said recently that up to 30 per cent of most hijackers' profits went to government officials. "Believe me, a lot of our money has gone straight into their pockets," he added."
And Somali politicians fuel piracy, says African Union. They look the other way because they get a cut. Just call it what it is not pirates but privateers. Is it any stretch then when countries secretly pay criminal terrorists at sea that they would not also secretly pay terrorist on the land and air? We know for a fact that Israel has set up fake Al Qaeda cells.
What lead to this breakdown in Somalia?
The pirate character or the 1700s might invoke a "cool" image but remember that theft and murder are what they are no matter how you dress or say RRRRR. Profiteering only allows indirect violence by the states, increased military spending, platforms for false flags, and a lot of stealing. It's not cool. OK it's cool but it's not right.
Modern Pirates or Privateers?
In recent events, pirates have been raiding ships and last week captured an oil tanker carrying 100 million dollars worth of goods. The crew is currently being held hostage for ransom. Upon breaking this story, a lot of feed back returned actually rooting for the pirates. Sarcastic or not, this form of thievery is quite romanticized and well "cool." On land or in the air, robbing, taking hostages, and making ransom demands by rouge groups is called terrorism. But at sea its pirates. Once the word Pirate is attached, people try to see the reasons and motives for the underdog something that could actually be appyied to many terrorists as well although it is socially unexceptional.
History often takes on the spin of social context surrounding the people reporting it. Pirates for example have gone back and forth from heroes to villains to just cool and everything in between in a relatively short time. And it always depending on who was telling the story. A privateer from England like Françoise Drake who is upheld as a hero and explorer was nothing but a state sponsored terrorist and a bigot. He routinely attacked the Spanish with no discernment for civilian or soldier, innocent or criminal. He had no problem killing and enslaving Africans (an act of terrorism) and then selling them (often by forced purchases, like getting “protection” money) in the Caribbean, or murdering Catholics, attacking the Spanish towns/ships or killing Native Americans. If any man did that today, assuming he wasn’t an American or an Israeli, he would be put to jail or sentenced to death.
The structure of privateers was not unlike intelligence agencies or the mafia today. If a nation attacks another nation it is an act of war. However if a nation covertly sponsors and splits the wealth with criminals who are pirates, drug smugglers, contraband, or hired mercenaries through private multinational companies, then there is some distance. If a group of pirates only happen to attack Spanish Ships and never the English who secretly financed them, then upon capture the pirates would be killed or sentenced trough a trial for individual acts of crime. But England would be free of responsibility. A true pirate attacks indiscriminately for profit. A privateer has state backing. Both are just bandits at sea.
The Spanish, or rather factions within the economic system, encouraged the pirates and privateers. Tremendous amounts of money were spent on senseless fortifications and means of defense, always banking on the excuse of the highly over inflated threat of pirates, (which could have been dealt with in a much more efficient manner) which ultimately bankrupted the Spanish yet allowed the Old School Military Industrial complex and the Old School Central Banks better known as Churches, to consolidate the wealth of the populous to their own demise and profiteer handsomely with the ruling elites in all nations. Loyalties were to money not to nations or any acceptable code of ethics.
Today it’s a lot worse and complicated but it is based roughly on the same model of creating a problem, scaring the public, and driving them into debt to supposedly solve what the nation created to begin with and making the problem worse and blaming nearly powerless patsies. I can remember when the US beta tested its first Iraq war by invading the much smaller country of Panama. They cited getting rid of Noriega as the main rational for the war. Noriega had been on the CIA’s own pay roll since 1966 and reached a six figure salary by 1980. In 1989 when I was in Elementary school, the US invaded Panama killing 2-4 thousand civilians and left tens of thousands of others homeless, so the US could put a guy in jail and replace him with a puppet government where all the same drug trafficking etc continues.
People might be interested in learning about “Operation PBSuccess”, the “Phoenix Program,” “Operation Gladio,” “Operation TP-Ajax,” “Operation Paper Clip,” “Project FUBELT,” the entire Iran Contra affair, and the proposed plan of “Operation Northwoods.” Other notable CIA clients have been Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Each was replaced after serving their purposes.
Pirates or terrorists, for the winners writing the history books have their stories’ and motives flip-flopped according to whatever is a useful context. For example the long held cut throat pirates got a new identity in the time of women’s rights, the Marxist ideas of class struggle, the civil rights era, and so on because some pirates in the Americas at least, were or employed women, freed or were former slaves, offered a life away from indentured servitude and class immobility, and fought the evil genocidal colonial powers like hopelessly out-gunned vigilantes. They can be glorified or demonized depending on the perspective. But what they did cannot be denied, and that would consist mainly or stealing from and murdering innocent people for profit. I would see it more as the little crooks antagonizing the big crooks. But maybe it was said best in the words of a pirate captured by Alexander the Great, who when asked how he dared molest the sea, replied “How dare you molest the whole world? Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an Emperor."
What will the results be of the current pirate news? Well the Somalians will undoubtedly use the money to buy black market weapons, furthering the ongoing violence. Insurance will go out the roof, and inhumane mercenaries (pirate hunters) such as Black Water will offer their naval services to escort ships or hunt down pirate mother ships for the right price of course.
But what of the causes? What possible condition could exist in Somalia to warrant such extreme behavior? What was the CIA doing in their timely trip to Somalia?
We have to strive the root and that's the social economic conditions on the ground in Somalia. It's a strategic pawn wedged between far bigger players in the age old game of MIC build up.
Is this the work of Privateers? One jailed pirate, Farah Ismail Eid, said recently that up to 30 per cent of most hijackers' profits went to government officials. "Believe me, a lot of our money has gone straight into their pockets," he added."
And Somali politicians fuel piracy, says African Union. They look the other way because they get a cut. Just call it what it is not pirates but privateers. Is it any stretch then when countries secretly pay criminal terrorists at sea that they would not also secretly pay terrorist on the land and air? We know for a fact that Israel has set up fake Al Qaeda cells.
What lead to this breakdown in Somalia?
The demise of the government like it just happened... The US threw Somalia into war with Ethiopia. It's the forgotten war rarely ever mentioned."As recently as 2006, the strict rule of the Islamic Courts Union made most people too scared to join pirate gangs. The demise of that government left a vacuum in which the pirates can do more or less as they please, and easily get hold of the guns and rocket-propelled grenades they need to board cargo ships. As poor Somalis have seen, those willing to take to the high seas rake in massive profits from ransoms at little apparent risk. The temptation to join them and escape lives of poverty has increased. What government remains in Somalia is unwilling or unable to take any kind of stand. Indeed, it may even be profiting from the buccaneering enterprise of its citizens."
The pirate character or the 1700s might invoke a "cool" image but remember that theft and murder are what they are no matter how you dress or say RRRRR. Profiteering only allows indirect violence by the states, increased military spending, platforms for false flags, and a lot of stealing. It's not cool. OK it's cool but it's not right.