This hijacked supertanker is not as large as the first one, but a few more of these could start to have a noticeable impact on oil and gas processes.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article6937787.ece
"Somali pirates seized an oil tanker on its way from Saudi Arabia to the US in the latest in a series of attacks hundreds of miles off the coast of Africa.
A gang of nine pirates hijacked the Greek-flagged 300,000 tonne supertanker on Sunday 800 miles (1,287km) close to the Seychelles.
It is one of the largest vessels seized by Somali pirates, who regularly mount attacks on some of the 20,000 ships that pass through the Suez Canal between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean each year.
...
The company said that the tanker was carrying about 275,000 metric tonnes of crude. At an average price of about $75 (£46) a barrel, the cargo is worth more than $20 million."
Showing posts with label Pirate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pirate. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
US-Flagged Maersk Alabama Attacked Again, Repel Pirates
About seven months ago the US-flagged Maersk Alabama was captured by pirates before being set free by US forces with the captured pirates taken to a Manhattan court. They were attack again, but this time they were able to fend off the pirates. Using small arms and an LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device) they repelled the four pirates attacking in a skiff who had and were using automatic weapons.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/18/maersk-alabama-pirates-somalia-guards (via)
"Somali pirates attacked the container ship Maersk Alabama today for the second time in seven months. Private guards on board the US-flagged ship repelled the attack with gunfire and a high-decibel noise device.
A US surveillance plane was monitoring the ship as it continued to its destination, Mombasa in Kenya ...
Four pirates in a skiff attacked the ship again today at about 6.30am local time, opening fire with automatic weapons from about 300 yards away, a statement from the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain said. A security team repelled the attack by using evasive manoeuvres, small-arms fire and a Long Range Acoustic Device, which can beam earsplitting alarm tones."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/18/maersk-alabama-pirates-somalia-guards (via)
"Somali pirates attacked the container ship Maersk Alabama today for the second time in seven months. Private guards on board the US-flagged ship repelled the attack with gunfire and a high-decibel noise device.
A US surveillance plane was monitoring the ship as it continued to its destination, Mombasa in Kenya ...
Four pirates in a skiff attacked the ship again today at about 6.30am local time, opening fire with automatic weapons from about 300 yards away, a statement from the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain said. A security team repelled the attack by using evasive manoeuvres, small-arms fire and a Long Range Acoustic Device, which can beam earsplitting alarm tones."
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
The United Nations Support Collective Punishment? Believes it Affective?
All the quotes are from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/opinion/19long-1.html?_r=3&ref=opinion.
The article is about how to deal with a hostage situation centered around the recent difficulties with pirates. It starts by saying that there are generally two options, negotiate or a physical rescue.
"But there might be another way — an approach that could be run through the United Nations and that would be available both to governmental and nongovernmental authorities acting for the interned seamen."
A different way. A way that both governmental and nongovernmental authorities could use.
In the first situation the UN was asked to intervene by Nairobi who had citizens being held hostage in Somalia.
"Eventually, after long and heated internal discussion, the United Nations security team persuaded the United Nations country team that the most effective approach would be to use humanitarian aid and assistance as a lever to gain release of hostages."
How exactly would they use humanitarian aid as a lever?
"United Nations assistance was withheld from the Somali clan or region by which or in which hostages were being held until those hostages were released."
Translation, they used collective punishment. More on the how soon.
"In every case there was a release, and in no case were hostages harmed or ransom paid."
Not much to explain here. The collective punishment was 100% successful at saving the hostages while not paying the hostage takers.
What exactly did they do?
"In 1995, for example, the water supply for Mogadishu, the capital, was shut off by the United Nations humanitarian agencies until a hostage who worked for another aid organization was released. On the first day of the shutoff, the women who collected water from public distribution points yelled at the kidnappers; on the second day they stoned them; on the third day they shot at them; on the fourth day, the hostage was released."
Translation, they cut off the water supply to the capital city and refused to turn it back on until the hostage was released. It took four days of a United Nations caused drought of sorts until the innocent bystanders could not take it any more. The women needed water so badly that they took hostile and violate action against the kidnappers.
This was not an isolated occurrence of collective punishment by the United Nations. The next example involves French hostages.
"After demonstrating that the hostages were alive, the pirates demanded $1 million in ransom. I responded that the United Nations would suspend all civic improvement in the region — education, animal husbandry, vaccination, water projects. The aid would resume when the hostages were released."
This actually goes a step beyond collective punishment. Collective punishment involves punishing innocents along with the perpetrators. What the United Nations did here was punish the family and friends of the perpetrators, not the perpetrators themselves.
"This drove a wedge between the pirates and their home clan, the Darod. Clan elders put pressure on the pirates. After several weeks, the Frenchmen were released to me in return for resumption of all United Nations humanitarian aid."
The plan worked as they expected it would. Punishing the clan led to the clan pressuring the pirates to release the hostages.
As is put so nicely over at http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/33418_United_Nations_Hypocrisy_Writ_Large, imagine how the United Nations would react if Israel used these tactics to free Gilad Shalit. Hypocrisy?
The article is about how to deal with a hostage situation centered around the recent difficulties with pirates. It starts by saying that there are generally two options, negotiate or a physical rescue.
"But there might be another way — an approach that could be run through the United Nations and that would be available both to governmental and nongovernmental authorities acting for the interned seamen."
A different way. A way that both governmental and nongovernmental authorities could use.
In the first situation the UN was asked to intervene by Nairobi who had citizens being held hostage in Somalia.
"Eventually, after long and heated internal discussion, the United Nations security team persuaded the United Nations country team that the most effective approach would be to use humanitarian aid and assistance as a lever to gain release of hostages."
How exactly would they use humanitarian aid as a lever?
"United Nations assistance was withheld from the Somali clan or region by which or in which hostages were being held until those hostages were released."
Translation, they used collective punishment. More on the how soon.
"In every case there was a release, and in no case were hostages harmed or ransom paid."
Not much to explain here. The collective punishment was 100% successful at saving the hostages while not paying the hostage takers.
What exactly did they do?
"In 1995, for example, the water supply for Mogadishu, the capital, was shut off by the United Nations humanitarian agencies until a hostage who worked for another aid organization was released. On the first day of the shutoff, the women who collected water from public distribution points yelled at the kidnappers; on the second day they stoned them; on the third day they shot at them; on the fourth day, the hostage was released."
Translation, they cut off the water supply to the capital city and refused to turn it back on until the hostage was released. It took four days of a United Nations caused drought of sorts until the innocent bystanders could not take it any more. The women needed water so badly that they took hostile and violate action against the kidnappers.
This was not an isolated occurrence of collective punishment by the United Nations. The next example involves French hostages.
"After demonstrating that the hostages were alive, the pirates demanded $1 million in ransom. I responded that the United Nations would suspend all civic improvement in the region — education, animal husbandry, vaccination, water projects. The aid would resume when the hostages were released."
This actually goes a step beyond collective punishment. Collective punishment involves punishing innocents along with the perpetrators. What the United Nations did here was punish the family and friends of the perpetrators, not the perpetrators themselves.
"This drove a wedge between the pirates and their home clan, the Darod. Clan elders put pressure on the pirates. After several weeks, the Frenchmen were released to me in return for resumption of all United Nations humanitarian aid."
The plan worked as they expected it would. Punishing the clan led to the clan pressuring the pirates to release the hostages.
As is put so nicely over at http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/33418_United_Nations_Hypocrisy_Writ_Large, imagine how the United Nations would react if Israel used these tactics to free Gilad Shalit. Hypocrisy?
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Captured Pirate in Manhattan Court
The captured pirate from the US-flagged Maersk Alabama stand off (Berman Post: Americans Captured by Pirates, Freed by SEALs/Marines: "US-flagged Maersk Alabama") is not in a Manhattan court. It is the first piracy case in US courts in over 100 years. The judge ruled that the pirate will be tried as an adult. The five charges could result in Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse (the pirate) spending the rest of his life in prison.
More at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/04/21/2009-04-21_is_somali_pirate_that_helped_hijack_maersk_alabama_an_adult_or_just_a_kid_hearin.html.
More at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/04/21/2009-04-21_is_somali_pirate_that_helped_hijack_maersk_alabama_an_adult_or_just_a_kid_hearin.html.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Clinton's Piracy Solution - Track And Freeze Pirate Assets
Secretary of State Clinton's plan to combat piracy include "track and freeze pirate assets" and "to stop boat-building companies from doing business with the pirates". These are her so called 21st century solutions. Unlike 'traditional' terrorist groups, pirates do not deal with institutions or at least institutions that can be accessed in order to freeze their assets. The boat company ban seems more ridiculous. One of my favorite comments (from the source); "I heard over 90% of these boats used by pirates are from America. We need a pirate boat ban". It is a reference to the now debunked notion that Mexican cartels get 90% of their weapons from the USA. Another one of her 21st century solutions which sounds to me more like a 19th century solution may have more promise. That is organizing a counter piracy task force.
More at http://www.qando.net/?p=2088.
More at http://www.qando.net/?p=2088.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Sharpton - Pirates Are Actually a "Voluntary Coast Guard"
The subject/title really says it all. I wish I could say he was just kidding, but it does not sound like in in the clip.
Video embedded below. (from http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/04/023336.php)
Video embedded below. (from http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/04/023336.php)
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Pirates Attack Another American Ship
Not content with the four new boats they captured (Berman Post: Somali Pirates on a Hijacking Spree), the pirates tried to take an American cargo ship. While automatic weapons fire and RPGs were fired at the ship, non of the crew were injured or killed. After radioing for help, the crew barricaded themselves in the engine room. The Navy responded and is now escorting the ship. There is some damage to the ship, but ultimately the pirates were not able to get on board.
More at http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/us_world/NATLUS-Cargo-Ship-Hijacked-Near-Somalia-Coast-Officials.html?.
More at http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/us_world/NATLUS-Cargo-Ship-Hijacked-Near-Somalia-Coast-Officials.html?.
Somali Pirates on a Hijacking Spree
In the wake of the successful rescue of the American hostages (Berman Post: Americans Captured by Pirates, Freed by SEALs/Marines), pirates have been on a spree of sorts. They have captured four boats and more than 60 people, none of them American (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090414/ap_on_re_af/piracy). At least one more was attempted, but in a bizarre twist a massive school of dolphins saved the ship (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/14/content_11184581.htm)
This problem is going to get worse until something is done to stop then. I threw in my '2 cents' in the last related post (linked to above). More thoughts on stopping piracy can be found at http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/04/pirate-latest.html.
In a semi related point, there is an interesting article over at http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/04/super-snipers.html regarding the sniper scopes of the future. Bullets that change course in flight, scopes that compensate for air turbulence, and scopes that can compensate for heat haze may be around the corner.
Then again, who needs more advanced scopes and ammo if as Matthews seemed to suggest, the snipers just "got lucky".
Video embedded below.
This problem is going to get worse until something is done to stop then. I threw in my '2 cents' in the last related post (linked to above). More thoughts on stopping piracy can be found at http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/04/pirate-latest.html.
In a semi related point, there is an interesting article over at http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/04/super-snipers.html regarding the sniper scopes of the future. Bullets that change course in flight, scopes that compensate for air turbulence, and scopes that can compensate for heat haze may be around the corner.
Then again, who needs more advanced scopes and ammo if as Matthews seemed to suggest, the snipers just "got lucky".
Video embedded below.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Americans Captured by Pirates, Freed by SEALs/Marines
Over the last five days or so, Americans were taken prisoner by pirates, then freed by American military personnel.
The US-flagged Maersk Alabama was attacked by pirates off the cost of Somalia. It is one of many ships taken recently in that region and not even one of the more spectacular ones (Berman Post: Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 33 Russian Designed T-72 Tanks and Berman Post: Pirates Hijacked Saudi Supertanker (Oil)). What does make it special is that it is thought to be the first US-flagged vessel taken by pirates in a non war zone in roughly two centuries.
The Marine hymn "From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli"; the "shores of Tripoli" is a reference to fighting Muslim pirates in North Africa (present day Libya) around 1800.
The American crew fought back and was able to retake control of the ship. In the process they through three pirates overboard and captured one. The captain of the Maersk Alabama was taken hostage on a life boat.
The life boat quickly ran out of food, fuel, and water. Still, the pirates refused to give up the captain. In what can only be described as an incredible feet of marksmanship and timing, three snipers simultaneously killed three pirates holding the captain hostage. Imagine the difficulty from three snipers on one bobbing ship hitting three moving targets on another bobbing ship all at the same time. If anyone misses the captain will almost certainly be killed. With that the captain was rescued. His ship had already reached its destination in Kenya to deliver relief supplies.
After the dust settled, there was some question as to what role Obama had played. While he did not order the attack he had apparently authorized the use of force twice. Some say that all Obama did was confirm/affirm what was already the rule, to use force if the life of the captain was in imminent danger. In that context, Obama did not actually authorize anything nor restrict anything, just solidify what was already in place.
Focus is now shifting on how to prevent future attacks. Most promising in my opinion are attacking the pirate's land bases, arming the crews, and a strict no negotiation policy. History seems to show that the only real way to stop pirates is to destroy their land bases. Arming the crew provides for a significant deterrent effect. A policy of no negotiation takes away the main financial incentive the pirates have.
Clinton had an inappropriate moment where she appeared to chuckle at the situation.
Video embedded below. (From http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/04/piracy-is-funny-hillary-chuckles-over.html)
More at (prepare for a link storm) http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/08/somali-pirates-seize-american-ship-crew, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090412/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_piracy_obama, http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/04/how-the-rescue-happened.html, http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97HQFGO1&show_article=1, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article6082713.ece, http://www.necn.com/Boston/World/2009/04/11/Maersk-Alabama-reaches-port-in/1239478784.html, http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/04/pirate-episode-hurts-obamas-negotiating.html, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aYhvgOfyTmYA, and http://www.nypost.com/seven/04102009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/anti_piracy_101_163759.htm?page=0.
The US-flagged Maersk Alabama was attacked by pirates off the cost of Somalia. It is one of many ships taken recently in that region and not even one of the more spectacular ones (Berman Post: Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 33 Russian Designed T-72 Tanks and Berman Post: Pirates Hijacked Saudi Supertanker (Oil)). What does make it special is that it is thought to be the first US-flagged vessel taken by pirates in a non war zone in roughly two centuries.
The Marine hymn "From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli"; the "shores of Tripoli" is a reference to fighting Muslim pirates in North Africa (present day Libya) around 1800.
The American crew fought back and was able to retake control of the ship. In the process they through three pirates overboard and captured one. The captain of the Maersk Alabama was taken hostage on a life boat.
The life boat quickly ran out of food, fuel, and water. Still, the pirates refused to give up the captain. In what can only be described as an incredible feet of marksmanship and timing, three snipers simultaneously killed three pirates holding the captain hostage. Imagine the difficulty from three snipers on one bobbing ship hitting three moving targets on another bobbing ship all at the same time. If anyone misses the captain will almost certainly be killed. With that the captain was rescued. His ship had already reached its destination in Kenya to deliver relief supplies.
After the dust settled, there was some question as to what role Obama had played. While he did not order the attack he had apparently authorized the use of force twice. Some say that all Obama did was confirm/affirm what was already the rule, to use force if the life of the captain was in imminent danger. In that context, Obama did not actually authorize anything nor restrict anything, just solidify what was already in place.
Focus is now shifting on how to prevent future attacks. Most promising in my opinion are attacking the pirate's land bases, arming the crews, and a strict no negotiation policy. History seems to show that the only real way to stop pirates is to destroy their land bases. Arming the crew provides for a significant deterrent effect. A policy of no negotiation takes away the main financial incentive the pirates have.
Clinton had an inappropriate moment where she appeared to chuckle at the situation.
Video embedded below. (From http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/04/piracy-is-funny-hillary-chuckles-over.html)
More at (prepare for a link storm) http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/08/somali-pirates-seize-american-ship-crew, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090412/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_piracy_obama, http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/04/how-the-rescue-happened.html, http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97HQFGO1&show_article=1, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article6082713.ece, http://www.necn.com/Boston/World/2009/04/11/Maersk-Alabama-reaches-port-in/1239478784.html, http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/04/pirate-episode-hurts-obamas-negotiating.html, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aYhvgOfyTmYA, and http://www.nypost.com/seven/04102009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/anti_piracy_101_163759.htm?page=0.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Pirates Hijacked Saudi Supertanker (Oil)
Pirates have hijacked a Saudi Supertanker with two million gallons of oil on board. This type of hijacking is near the top of my list of fears. Oil prices have been sliding for a while, but can you imagine the effect this would have had back when oil prices were near their peak. My fear is not just the effect this could have on prices, but physical damage. Oil supertankers are among the largest ships on the seas and contain a huge amount of a very volatile cargo. Imagine the effect of a terrorist ramming a tanker like this into a major port.
First, there would be almost no way to stop it. A ship of this size and mass builds up so much inertia that it takes some time to stop it without it fighting you. Traveling at full speed with the engines maxed out would likely overcome any attempt to physical pull it back if you could manage to hook on to it in the first place (assuming you do not catch up to it until it gets close to shore). Shooting at it is not optimal either because of the massive oil spill you could cause and the possibility of the oil catching fire and exploding. Even if you do not shoot at it, once it hits something in port it will have the same effect. One word; nightmare. It does not appear that the pirates have this in mind, but if pirates can hijack a ship in once thought "safe" waters, so can terrorists.
http://www.ft.com
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e10892ba-b4a8-11dd-b780-0000779fd18c.html
"Pirates operating off the coast of east Africa have hijacked a Saudi supertanker fully laden with an estimated 2m barrels of oil in an attack that marks a significant escalation in the scope of banditry in the region.
The pirates, believed to be from lawless Somalia, seized control of the Sirius Star, which is owned by Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, on Saturday, 450 nautical miles south-east of the Kenyan Indian Ocean port of Mombasa.
It is estimated that the tanker was holding more than a quarter of the daily exports from Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter. The oil would have been worth about $100m (€79m, £66.5m) at Monday’s market price..."
First, there would be almost no way to stop it. A ship of this size and mass builds up so much inertia that it takes some time to stop it without it fighting you. Traveling at full speed with the engines maxed out would likely overcome any attempt to physical pull it back if you could manage to hook on to it in the first place (assuming you do not catch up to it until it gets close to shore). Shooting at it is not optimal either because of the massive oil spill you could cause and the possibility of the oil catching fire and exploding. Even if you do not shoot at it, once it hits something in port it will have the same effect. One word; nightmare. It does not appear that the pirates have this in mind, but if pirates can hijack a ship in once thought "safe" waters, so can terrorists.
http://www.ft.com
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e10892ba-b4a8-11dd-b780-0000779fd18c.html
"Pirates operating off the coast of east Africa have hijacked a Saudi supertanker fully laden with an estimated 2m barrels of oil in an attack that marks a significant escalation in the scope of banditry in the region.
The pirates, believed to be from lawless Somalia, seized control of the Sirius Star, which is owned by Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, on Saturday, 450 nautical miles south-east of the Kenyan Indian Ocean port of Mombasa.
It is estimated that the tanker was holding more than a quarter of the daily exports from Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter. The oil would have been worth about $100m (€79m, £66.5m) at Monday’s market price..."
Friday, September 26, 2008
Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 33 Russian Designed T-72 Tanks
Somali Pirates seize a ship off the Horn of Africa carrying 33 Russian designed T-72 tanks with spare parts and ammunition. United States ships in the area are reportedly "monitoring the situation" and the Russians have dispatched the missile frigate "Neustrashimy" to the region presumably to hunt down the ship. The seized ship "Faina" was headed to Kenya in a reportedly legal sale from Ukrainia. It is unclear if Ukrainia has dispatched any ships in a recovery attempt as of yet.
It is unknown if the Pirates knew of the cargo on the ship before they attacked, but some doubt it reasoning both that Pirates generally just attack targets of opportunity, and that it would be extremely difficult to sell these tanks.
This attack seems a new high watermark for modern piracy. One that may well be surpassed if countries do not act decisively to curtail these activities.
http://www.foxnews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,428582,00.html
"A Russian warship on Friday rushed to intercept a Ukrainian vessel carrying 33 battle tanks and ammunition that was seized by pirates off the Horn of Africa — a bold hijacking that heightened fears about the surging piracy and high-seas terrorism."
It is unknown if the Pirates knew of the cargo on the ship before they attacked, but some doubt it reasoning both that Pirates generally just attack targets of opportunity, and that it would be extremely difficult to sell these tanks.
This attack seems a new high watermark for modern piracy. One that may well be surpassed if countries do not act decisively to curtail these activities.
http://www.foxnews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,428582,00.html
"A Russian warship on Friday rushed to intercept a Ukrainian vessel carrying 33 battle tanks and ammunition that was seized by pirates off the Horn of Africa — a bold hijacking that heightened fears about the surging piracy and high-seas terrorism."
Friday, September 19, 2008
New Google Search Language - Pirate?!?
In order to make all the worlds information searchable and available to everyone, you must be able to search in many different languages. To this end, Google is constantly working on adding new languages. Google's latest language addition ... Pirate. That is right, Pirate.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/google-in-one-more-language.html
"As we've written before, one of our goals is to enable everyone using Google to find the information they want easily, no matter what language they speak.
It recently came to our attention that Google was not accessible to a large, influential, and notoriously quick-tempered community: Pirates. As of today we are proud and rather relieved to announce that Google Search is available in Pirate."
http://googleblog.blogspot.com
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/google-in-one-more-language.html
"As we've written before, one of our goals is to enable everyone using Google to find the information they want easily, no matter what language they speak.
It recently came to our attention that Google was not accessible to a large, influential, and notoriously quick-tempered community: Pirates. As of today we are proud and rather relieved to announce that Google Search is available in Pirate."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Like what you read; Subscribe/Fan/Follow
