A whole new low for Somalian piracy.

19-06-2011 07:30AM #1

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13826050

Somalia: Six jailed for 'pirate ransom' cash

Somalia has jailed three Britons, two Kenyans and an American for bringing more than $3m (£2m) in cash illegally into the country, allegedly to pay ransoms to pirates for ships they hold.

The two men accused of carrying the cash received 15-year sentences; the others got 10 years.

The men were arrested on 24 May shortly after they landed at the airport in the capital, Mogadishu.

The UN says more than $110m in ransoms were paid to Somali pirates last year.

The Somali government officially opposes the payment of ransoms, but the practice has become routine.

The Foreign Office in London has said it is aware of the verdicts and has told the authorities in Mogadishu to ensure the safety and security of the group while legal options are considered.

This is the first time Westerners have been sentenced for involvement in delivering ransoms. It is not clear why this group of men fell foul of the authorities.

Asked about possible pardons or parole, information ministry spokesman Abdifitah Abdinur said: "Everything is possible and I can't comment on the future."

15 years :eek: Such a pathetic shlthole. Since the country cant control it's own problem, they should be helping people take ransom money into the country, not jailing them. Wonder what happened the hostages the money was for..

James T Kirk · 19-06-2011 07:35AM

Arr...

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Some12 · 19-06-2011 07:36AM

The govt is probably just as bent as the pirates.

Wonder what happened to the $3 million they were carrying?

19-06-2011 08:38AM

I think it is to desuade people from paying the ransom, this would starve the pirates of funds and hopefully stop their operations.

xxtattyberxx · 19-06-2011 08:44AM

I understand wanting to stop the payments being given to the pirates and to try put a hault to random payments but 15 years is absolutly ridiculous, the courts are no doubt as corrupt as the pirates and id say that 3million got a 50/50 split but id be very suprised if the UN stand back and let 2 westerns face 15 years in prison over it.

later12 · 19-06-2011 08:46AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Since the country cant control it's own problem, they should be helping people take ransom money into the country.

No, they shouldn't.

That is the logical equivalent of feeding a begging dog, or of co-operating with tiger kidnappers. The more you co-operate, not only do you increase the other parties resources, but the stronger the positive re-enforcement loop that says ''hey, this works, do it again''.

The last thing the Somali authorities need, from their point of view, are foreigners paying once-off ransoms to these pirates, then shagging off home to let the Somalis deal with rich pirates and a positive re-enforcement loop of pirate activity which they already find challenging.

I can understand the relatives' distress in this case, but the Somalis are right to take this sort of behaviour seriously.

EggsAckley · 19-06-2011 09:24AM

Some12 wrote: »

The govt is probably just as bent as the pirates.

Wonder what happened to the $3 million they were carrying?

$500,000 entering Mogadishu tax

Show Time · 19-06-2011 09:25AM

The OP is a good reason why i would never give money to any of the third world countries.

Biggins · 19-06-2011 11:29AM

later10 wrote: »

No, they shouldn't.

That is the logical equivalent of feeding a begging dog, or of co-operating with tiger kidnappers. The more you co-operate, not only do you increase the other parties resources, but the stronger the positive re-enforcement loop that says ''hey, this works, do it again''.

The last thing the Somali authorities need, from their point of view, are foreigners paying once-off ransoms to these pirates, then shagging off home to let the Somalis deal with rich pirates and a positive re-enforcement loop of pirate activity which they already find challenging.

I can understand the relatives' distress in this case, but the Somalis are right to take this sort of behaviour seriously.

Couldn't agree more.

Cianos · 19-06-2011 11:48AM

later10 wrote: »

No, they shouldn't.

That is the logical equivalent of feeding a begging dog, or of co-operating with tiger kidnappers. The more you co-operate, not only do you increase the other parties resources, but the stronger the positive re-enforcement loop that says ''hey, this works, do it again''.

The last thing the Somali authorities need, from their point of view, are foreigners paying once-off ransoms to these pirates, then shagging off home to let the Somalis deal with rich pirates and a positive re-enforcement loop of pirate activity which they already find challenging.

I can understand the relatives' distress in this case, but the Somalis are right to take this sort of behaviour seriously.

In a country that corrupt and lawless I really doubt they're doing it purely as a preventative measure.

They probably just didn't bribe the right people, something went wrong, and now the funds have been 'confiscated'.

Even the ministry spokesman making a statement saying that "everything is possible" sounds like they're only now just trying to figure out how to deal with the situation.

mikemac · 19-06-2011 12:09PM

Remember when they attacked a Russian ship last year and lost.

The Russians were to take them to Moscow for a trial but it seems there was no gurantee they'd be convicted.

There were two stories going around.

One was they executed the pirates.
The other story and probably crueler was they left the pirates hundreds of kilometres offshore with no engine in the Indian ocean to die of either dehydration or the the sharks.

You don't mess with the Russians it seems

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8675978.stm

As for the OP's story, probably the correct people didn't get their bribe. The government are as crooked as the pirates and the money is now in some politicans Swiss band account

19-06-2011 12:11PM

later10 wrote: »

No, they shouldn't.

That is the logical equivalent of feeding a begging dog, or of co-operating with tiger kidnappers. The more you co-operate, not only do you increase the other parties resources, but the stronger the positive re-enforcement loop that says ''hey, this works, do it again''.

The last thing the Somali authorities need, from their point of view, are foreigners paying once-off ransoms to these pirates, then shagging off home to let the Somalis deal with rich pirates and a positive re-enforcement loop of pirate activity which they already find challenging.

I can understand the relatives' distress in this case, but the Somalis are right to take this sort of behaviour seriously.

Yes, they should.

I knew someone would post exactly what you did without actually thinking about the reality of the situation.. A dog is a lot different to a coastline of pirates.
Some guys getting arrested taking in ransom money will not stop piracy.. Or dent it. Or have any bit of difference at all to the situation. Like absolute zero difference. They're making millions and there's effectively no law and order to stop them.

Your point is fine in a perfect world but it's an absolute indisputable fact that in this case, it doesn't matter at all. We have people serving massive jail sentences for committing no crime, we have a hostage situation with lost money and we have a corrupt police force getting 3 million dollars.

Don't try and argue a very valid ideology in situations where it doesn't apply.

Sand · 19-06-2011 12:12PM

Seems odd they could organise a convoy system back and forth across the Atlantic 70 years ago to protect shipping against an organised threat. But today, they cant run a simple convoy system to get shipping through a much smaller area of water where the threat is a bunch of yokels in barely seaworthy fishing boats.

squod · 19-06-2011 12:12PM

There's probably a lucrative market for mercenaries in that part of the world. Wonder if there's a FAS course going in mercenaring ?

Cianos · 19-06-2011 12:19PM

Sand wrote: »

Seems odd they could organise a convoy system back and forth across the Atlantic 70 years ago to protect shipping against an organised threat. But today, they cant run a simple convoy system to get shipping through a much smaller area of water where the threat is a bunch of yokels in barely seaworthy fishing boats.

From what I remember reading about it, it's still more economical for shipping companies to send ships through the Somalian waters, the money they would spend rerouting the ships or hiring security convoys is more than what they lose through ransoms etc.

mikemac · 19-06-2011 12:24PM

I've heard a bit about Blackwater, a private contractor with men with military experience.

Hire a platoon to stay on your oil tanker?
The captain can lock away their weapons until needed, the captain is always in charge.
In fact you could nearly ask the insurance company to pay for this

Makes sense to me

Eric Cartman · 19-06-2011 12:30PM

the somalian goverment has issued a statement saying they would accept a ransom to release the men

19-06-2011 12:30PM

mikemac wrote: »

I've heard a bit about Blackwater, a private contractor with men with military experience.

Hire a platoon to stay on your oil tanker?
The captain can lock away their weapons until needed, the captain is always in charge.
In fact you could nearly ask the insurance company to pay for this

Makes sense to me

Is the possibility of a firefight on an oil tanker a good idea?

mikemac · 19-06-2011 12:32PM

They are double hulled or at least some are. A bullet isn't going to penetrate that.

Biggins · 19-06-2011 12:43PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Is the possibility of a firefight on an oil tanker a good idea?

Its crude oil, so the likelihood of it igniting is very low (not impossible, just very, very low).

Blackwater are known by another name (XE Services) by the way now.
(This is becuase they have been very bold boys, been caught out and changed their name in a PR exercise.)
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Worldwide

Back on topic, as long as these pirates are been feed money by one way or another, there will always be an incentive to carry on doing what they are doing.

Sending the money transporters to jail is not going to solve anything (other ways of getting the money in, will be found) BUT it sends out a message - the government is taking an official stance, that they don't want their countries pirates being further rewarded - and there is sense in their thinking.

19-06-2011 12:50PM

Biggins wrote: »

BUT it sends out a message - the government is taking an official stance, that they don't want their countries pirates being further rewarded - and there is sense in their thinking.

I think they just wanted the money to be honest.. And I highly doubt that any of the 3 million will go towards stopping piracy. If it were spent on patrols, I'd be less skeptical.

Biggins · 19-06-2011 12:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I think they just wanted the money to be honest.. And I highly doubt that any of the 3 million will go towards stopping piracy. If it were spent on patrols, I'd be less skeptical.

Well if the money 'disappears' the government will be exposed as just as openly bad.

I think the present measures all are applying, are a joke.
Somalia government is ineffective, the other nations are pissing about (capturing the pirates and having to let them go - WTF!).

19-06-2011 01:33PM

Cianos wrote: »

From what I remember reading about it, it's still more economical for shipping companies to send ships through the Somalian waters, the money they would spend rerouting the ships or hiring security convoys is more than what they lose through ransoms etc.

It's the old "time is money" story, the shipping companies won't co-operate enough to create a convoy as the first ones in line would have to wait a day or so for the last! I'm sure the navies patrolling the region would prefer them all to be in the one place.

No pirate is going to take on such a risk.

Augmerson · 19-06-2011 01:58PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes, they should.

I knew someone would post exactly what you did without actually thinking about the reality of the situation.. A dog is a lot different to a coastline of pirates.
Some guys getting arrested taking in ransom money will not stop piracy.. Or dent it. Or have any bit of difference at all to the situation. Like absolute zero difference. They're making millions and there's effectively no law and order to stop them.

Your point is fine in a perfect world but it's an absolute indisputable fact that in this case, it doesn't matter at all. We have people serving massive jail sentences for committing no crime, we have a hostage situation with lost money and we have a corrupt police force getting 3 million dollars.

Don't try and argue a very valid ideology in situations where it doesn't apply.

This.

What is going to happen now to the people being held by the Pirates? "Oh looks like nobody is coming for you, they were sent to jail, where is my knife?" 10-15 years in a Somali jail, I'd rather be shot there and then. I cannot imagine what kind of hellhole they will be in.

Biggins · 19-06-2011 02:01PM

Augmerson wrote: »

...I cannot imagine what kind of hellhole they will be in.

Probably something similar to those captured by the pirates that are still getting money incentives to carry on!

tommyhaas · 19-06-2011 03:01PM

Sand wrote: »

Seems odd they could organise a convoy system back and forth across the Atlantic 70 years ago to protect shipping against an organised threat. But today, they cant run a simple convoy system to get shipping through a much smaller area of water where the threat is a bunch of yokels in barely seaworthy fishing boats.

There is convoys through the Gulf of Aden. The issue is both that the Pirates are going to deeper water now and that certain shipping companies aren't prepared to wait around for the convoys. Obviously ships trading in and around the East coast of Africa are particularly susceptible

Deleted User wrote: »

Is the possibility of a firefight on an oil tanker a good idea?

No. No it isn't. Its difficult enough to even get the relevant paperwork to use a camera on the deck of a tanker, firearms simply aren't going to happen

mikemac wrote: »

They are double hulled or at least some are. A bullet isn't going to penetrate that.

That's irrelevant. The issue is the possibility of a firefight in a potentially explosive atmosphere

tommyhaas · 19-06-2011 03:07PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It's the old "time is money" story, the shipping companies won't co-operate enough to create a convoy as the first ones in line would have to wait a day or so for the last! I'm sure the navies patrolling the region would prefer them all to be in the one place.

No pirate is going to take on such a risk.

Again there are conveys through the Gulf of Aden. Iv been part of one. Any decent company will insist on sailing in convey. If people are prepared to work for companies that don't insist on it, well piracy is probably the least of the problems they'll face onboard

Cianos wrote: »

From what I remember reading about it, it's still more economical for shipping companies to send ships through the Somalian waters, the money they would spend rerouting the ships or hiring security convoys is more than what they lose through ransoms etc.

I'm not being smart here, but look at a map. There's not a hope a ship sailing from the Med to SE Asis is going to round the Cape of Good Hope as oppose to transiting the Gulf of Aden

crackcrack30 · 19-06-2011 03:17PM

Havent some ships been taken from convoys, once the pirates land on deck there is nothing the navy can do.............ross kemp documentory

kowloon · 19-06-2011 05:26PM

Somalia has a government?!

Biggins · 19-06-2011 05:31PM

kowloon wrote: »

Somalia has a government?!

Officially!

Chuck Stone · 19-06-2011 05:34PM

Interesting story for those who might be interested in interesting stories.

You Are Being Lied to About Pirates

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/13-6

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."

A whole new low for Somalian piracy.

Comments