Somali pirates 2 sides to a story

[spookytooth]

http://viewzone.com/pirates.html

[rebel]

White guilt anyone?

Best wishes to the 16 y/o white girl who just set sail, solo around the world. Geez you know what these filthy bastards will be thinking.

[Dave Lobster]

There's always some excuse, isn't there?

[jackie]

That viewzone site looks pretty credible.

I loved the "Body, Mind & Spirit" section, it really revealed my hidden personality.

[spookytooth]

I've spent hours reading shit on viewzone over the years.Some real interesting stuff there
http://www.mondovista.com/mysticise/
and some good pics

[Street Gerbil]

It didn't take long. I had a brief look at their front page. My bullshitometer has gone kaboom and I am badly injured in the explosion. Please, somebody call an ambulance!

[Forest]

White guilt anyone?

Best wishes to the 16 y/o white girl who just set sail, solo around the world. Geez you know what these filthy bastards will be thinking.

Given that there's almost 5,000km between Cape Town and Mogadishu, I suspect they'll be thinking "How the hell will we get back to Somala?"

[peasea]

http://viewzone.com/pirates.html

But does this explain why Maoris act the way they do?
http://www.onenzfoundation.co.nz/

[paddy]

http://viewzone.com/pirates.html

All that was missing was the line at the bottom saying "forward this to everyone in your contact list"...

[spookytooth]

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/261147
http://somaliswiss.wordpress.com/200...ng-off-somalia
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=16517

[Jantar]

Somalia.....

Too poor to buy food for its people.
Too poor to buy materials for infrastructure.
Too poor to form even a basis of democracy.

But can have weapons and equipment that costs heaps.

[Swoop]

Somalia.....

But can have weapons and equipment that costs heaps.

Plus they don't want any stinkin' peacekeepers there, unless they need some targets to shoot at...

[Skyryder]

Not too sure if this link will work but essentially the Somali's have had their fishing grounds plunded.

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache...df+Somali+fish

I saw a documentary of this some time ago. The Japanese even sent armed ships to protect their vessels.

Most of the so called pirates from Somalia are in fact impoverished fishermen forced by necessity into acts of piracy by the most powerful of motives - starvation! And the reason they are starving is because for years, European, Chinese and Japanese pirates have been illegally plundering the waters off the coast of Somalia. Hundreds of millions of dollars of fish have been looted from Somali water and the world did and does nothing to prevent it.

from

http://www.democraticunderground.com...ess=115x184854

Skyryder

[Street Gerbil]

from

http://www.democraticunderground.com...ess=115x184854
[/I]
Skyryder

That's some source, dude. A paragon of accuracy and reliability. Not.

[Timber020]

Not off somalia but another case of what happens off the coast of Africa by western companies. BTW look up super injuctions, makes some interesting and alarming reading.

In August 2006, Trafigura dumped a shipload of toxic waste on Africa's Ivory Coast. Some 100,000 Ivorians sought medical help for breathing problems, vomiting and skin eruptions; according to a UN report, 15 people died. Trafigura maintained repeatedly that the material discharged was harmless. A few months later a British lawyer started legal proceedings on behalf of the victims; the oil company paid £100 million to the Ivorian government to pay for removing the waste but continued to deny liability. The legal case dragged on.

Fast forward to 2009, when reporters from the BBC and the Guardian newspaper assembled evidence pointing to a company cover-up. Carter-Ruck launched a libel suit against the BBC, and obtained a super-injunction preventing the Guardian from mentioning an expert report commissioned by Trafigura in September 2006. Now here's the part that was "secret" until yesterday: The report confirmed the "likely" presence of compounds "capable of causing severe health effects," including "headaches, breathing difficulties...unconsciousness and death," in the caustic tank washings dumped around Abidjan. In other words, Trafigura's own scientific consultants had clearly suggested that the "slops" were potentially dangerous--but the company continued to insist that they were not. The document, known as the Minton report, has been available for some time on the internet from the open government and anti-corruption group Wikileaks and on the website of Greenpeace in the Netherlands, which is pursuing legal action against Trafigura for manslaughter and grievous bodily harm. But until yesterday no description of its contents could be published in Britain.

Fortunately the Guardian had another set of documents up its sleeve: a set of internal emails between Trafigura executives written before the dumping, in which they consider how to dispose of the toxic "shit," banned in Europe, left in the ship's hold by a cheap consignment of petrol. On September 16 the paper publicized the emails in a front-page story; the next day Trafigura offered compensation to 31,000 victims, while still denying any liability.

This week, the farce reached a new pitch of absurdity when Carter-Ruck told the Guardian that it could not report a Member of Parliament's question in the House of Commons referring to the super-injunction. Even in Britain, where we have no First Amendment and no constitution, the proceedings of parliament are public and protected both by the Bill of Rights of 1689 and by centuries of hard-won legal precedent. A front-page story duly appeared in the paper announcing the censorship without mentioning its content, as well as the editor's intention to seek an urgent hearing. Since parliamentary questions are publicly listed in advance it was the work of a moment for bloggers to put two and Trafigura together; the twittersphere went wild. Carter-Ruck hastily agreed to vary its injunction to allow the coverage of parliament--and, in one last desperate attempt to keep the information under wraps, went on to warn the Speaker of the House of Commons that MPs could not debate the Minton report or the law firm's behavior because the matter was sub judice.