Pirates take another Brit Yacht......

Edwin

Edwin

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 Nov 2009
Messages
98
Location
Saujon France
www.michaelbriant.com
ANOTHER SAILING YACHT MISSING AND FEARED ABDUCTED BY SOMALI PIRATES
Officially not yet fully confirmed reports speak of another case in which a sailing yacht with possibly 2 British couples on board was captured by sea-shifta off the Seychelles within the last 24h. While official records show the report of a missing yacht, local reports say the yacht is being commandeered towards Somalia, possibly Hardheere and even more likely Hobyo.

Source:
SMCM
Somali Marine & Coastal Monitor

ECOTERRA INTERNATIONAL - UPDATES & STATEMENTS, REVIEW & CLEARING-HOUSE
2009-12-07 * MON * 23h42:56 UTC
Issue No. 299
 
Viking said:
If true? Where's the Navy? - Forget about singing 'Rule Britannia' at next years Proms! Start singing 'Somali pirates rule the waves!'
Click to expand...
I think you underestimate the size of the problem and the huge sea area involved... The following is todays report:-

start Quote:
£100,000 deal to free British pair from Somali pirates 'blocked by ministers' (sailworld)
British Ministers refused to allow the Royal Marines to rescue a British couple from Somali pirates, then blocked a £100,000 deal that would have released them, it has been claimed.
Defence Secretary Ainsworth stopped a crack team of fighters from launching an assault on the Kota Wajar, the pirate vessel which seized Paul Chandler, 59, and wife Rachel, 55, on their yacht in the Indian Ocean.
Armed with machine guns, the elite unit was twice seconds from attacking the pirates, the Daily Mail can reveal.
But they were ordered to stand down, allowing the ship to rendezvous with the kidnappers on the Chandlers' yacht and take the terrified hostages to Somalia.
A senior defence source said: 'The Navy has been in the firing line for not taking on the pirates, but the final decision not to use the Marines is out of our hands. It was taken at ministerial level.'
Asked if Mr Ainsworth was involved, the source said: 'Yes.'
An MoD spokesman said: 'The decision not to intervene was unquestionably the right one in the circumstances and we should not second-guess that.'
A hostage negotiator involved in the Chandlers' case has claimed the Foreign Office blocked a ransom payment.
Nick Davis said that although the kidnappers had originally demanded £4.3million, they had been willing to accept £100,000.
Mr Davis said: 'We could have had the Chandlers out weeks ago.'

'Ransom deal blocked' for Somali hostages Paul and Rachel Chandler by Mark Townsend and Rajeev Syal (Observer)
£100,000 deal with Somali pirates falls through as UK government says it will not allow payments to hostage-takers
A British couple kidnapped by Somali pirates six weeks ago were on the verge of being freed for a £100,000 ransom when the government blocked the deal, the Observer can reveal.
The money to release Paul and Rachel Chandler, taken hostage from their yacht on 23 October, had been agreed by a British negotiator two weeks ago. Foreign Office officials rejected the breakthrough, saying that they would not allow payments to hostage-takers.
The disclosure will increase the anguish for relatives of the Chandlers, from Tunbridge Wells, Kent, after concern that Britain's policy of not talking to kidnappers will endanger their lives.
Nick Davis, who negotiated the deal, yesterday accused the Foreign Office of playing "stupid games" after revealing how the Chandlers' captors had agreed to an offer that would have released the couple at a fraction of the £4.3m ransom previously demanded.
Davis, chairman of the industry anti-piracy organisation, the Merchant Maritime Warfare Centre (MMWC), accused the government of pursuing a flawed diplomatic strategy that could imperil the couple. The centre was set up last year to educate the shipping trade in anti-piracy measures and is funded by industry groups and insurers.
Davis said: "We could have had the Chandlers out weeks ago. The money was available, the pirates were keen to let them go, it was just a case of pushing the button. It was all ready to go. The pirates don't want to keep the Chandlers any longer. It's not good for them either.
"A figure of £100,000 had been agreed and put in place. It's still ready the second that I get given the nod. Then I can get them out and we can release the funds and get it to [the pirates]."
The Chandlers have been held captive for 45 days in Somalia. They were sailing from the Seychelles to Tanzania as part of a round-the-world tour when their 38ft yacht, Lynn Rival, was boarded by gunmen while they slept.
Davis said he had decided to go public because of his frustration at the negotiations and because of contacts from Somalia suggesting that Rachel Chandler, who is 55 and a retired economist, was becoming extremely frail. Her health was under pressure, he said, from constant shuttling between safe houses around the Somalian port town of Haradheere, to prevent the pair being caught by armed Islamist cells. "She can't cope with this. She's very weak and deteriorating; she's in a bad way and we need to get her home," he said.
The deal was agreed on 21-22 November but, according to Davis, fell through because the Foreign Office would not deviate from its policy of not paying hijackers nor would it communicate the breakthrough to relatives of the Chandlers in the UK. "The fact that professionals can affect their release should be clearly articulated to the family of the Chandlers so they can decide whether to support it," he said.
Davis, who has visited pirate contacts in Haradheere four times in the past two years, said concern was mounting over the government's policy of negotiating the Chandlers' release through middlemen, and that the "third-party" individuals involved seemed incapable of delivering a settlement.
A Foreign Office source said it had had little contact with the couple since they appeared on a video link two weeks ago.
Davis said: "We're in a situation where the people that can effect a release are being effectively blocked by diplomatic efforts because they [the British government] are just playing another game, that's the problem. There are secret games, just stupid games going on with the government diplomatically that does not work in the families' favour."
His exasperation corroborates the frustration of experienced Scotland Yard hostage negotiators from SCD7 command, who are also involved in the Chandler negotiations. Met sources have indicated frustration at lack of progress, with one source saying that an opportunity to secure release was "missed early on".
The revelations will intensify scrutiny of the government's "hands-off" policy of refusing to talk directly with kidnappers or terrorists. The approach was criticised during attempts to five Britons kidnapped in Baghdad two years ago, a strategy that left UK officials reliant on mediators and has not prevented four of the five hostages being killed.
Last night Mrs Chandler's brother, Stephen Collett, and Mr Chandler's sister, Jill Marshment, refused to comment on the revelations.
A Foreign Office spokesman said: "We do not discuss operational details in cases like this. We are using our contacts in the region to gain information and bring influence to bear on the hostage-takers. We will talk to anyone who may be able to help secure their release, but we do not make substantive concessions to hostage-takers."
Davis said: "There is a political agenda that's far removed from what the public think is the right and respectful thing to do as regards the Chandlers. Let's get it resolved and make sure the government looks like it's won at the end of the day. They need to let us speak to the right people and get the Chandlers out of there, or do they want to keep it a secret squirrel society?"
The £100,000 deal was struck shortly after the Chandlers appeared in a video broadcast on 20 November and appealed directly to the British government to open talks for their release. The footage shows the couple looking thin and fatigued, with Mr Chandler, a 59-year-old retired quantity surveyor, pleading for the government to start negotiating over a ransom and saying they might otherwise be killed within a week.
Davis said the pirates were extremely keen to strike a deal, but increasingly "fed up" over the lack of a settlement. He said the ransom fee was ready to be released instantly and had been raised through the advance sale of media rights, such as book deals and interview rights.
News of the deal coincides with fresh concerns over the protection of shipping routes off the coast of Somalia. Britain's private security industry is debating having officials routinely employed on all shipping routes off Somalia. Davis's organisation even has a contract with Yemen's navy to provide armed escorts for vessels crossing the Gulf of Aden.
At least six UK private security firms are operating off Somalia, employing former personnel of the Special Boat Service, the Royal Marines landing craft squadron and the Royal Navy. So profound is the threat of piracy that deployment to the Gulf of Aden has become the industry's new growth area.
A source at the British Association of Private Security Companies said: "Demand in Iraq has gone down, Afghanistan never took off to the extent people expected – but Somalia is booming."
More than 168 incidents of piracy were reported off Somalia in the first nine months of 2009 compared with 111 in all of 2008, according to Lord Jopling, a Nato special adviser on piracy. More than 500 hostages have been taken in 2009 so far, of whom 150 are still held by the pirates.

end quote

It is a huge problem - a huge international problem with no solution in site.

Michael
 
Viking said:
If true? Where's the Navy? - Forget about singing 'Rule Britannia' at next years Proms! Start singing 'Somali pirates rule the waves!'
Click to expand...

One has to wonder that not only can a few desperadoes living in the highlands of Afghanistan can run training schools and terrorise the world from horseback while a few more out of work fishermen run circles around the combined efforts of the worlds navies in the Indian Ocean picking of everything from private yachts to VLCC ships and passenger ships. Says a lot for modern technology that we can t find them. I wonder if they are not playing fair by not equiping ther Dhows with AIS and using Iridium phones :D:D
 
Bilgediver said:
One has to wonder that not only can a few desperadoes living in the highlands of Afghanistan can run training schools and terrorise the world from horseback while a few more out of work fishermen run circles around the combined efforts of the worlds navies in the Indian Ocean picking of everything from private yachts to VLCC ships and passenger ships. Says a lot for modern technology that we can t find them. I wonder if they are not playing fair by not equiping ther Dhows with AIS and using Iridium phones :D:D
Click to expand...

Not true they could put a stop to this easily, but there is no political will to do so.

The whole problem is crime pays, it is a very simly risk reward calculateion risk is low and rewards are so very high.

Deal withthe problem sink every pirate ship and shoot every pirate. Make it absolutly clear that there will be no survivors of anyone found undertaking piracy and it will stop.

Finally prosecute the directors of every shiping and insurance company who pay a ransom.
 
PawPaw said:
News of the deal coincides with fresh concerns over the protection of shipping routes off the coast of Somalia. Britain's private security industry is debating having officials routinely employed on all shipping routes off Somalia. Davis's organisation even has a contract with Yemen's navy to provide armed escorts for vessels crossing the Gulf of Aden.
At least six UK private security firms are operating off Somalia, employing former personnel of the Special Boat Service, the Royal Marines landing craft squadron and the Royal Navy. So profound is the threat of piracy that deployment to the Gulf of Aden has become the industry's new growth area.
A source at the British Association of Private Security Companies said: "Demand in Iraq has gone down, Afghanistan never took off to the extent people expected – but Somalia is booming."
More than 168 incidents of piracy were reported off Somalia in the first nine months of 2009 compared with 111 in all of 2008, according to Lord Jopling, a Nato special adviser on piracy. More than 500 hostages have been taken in 2009 so far, of whom 150 are still held by the pirates.
end quote

It is a huge problem - a huge international problem with no solution in site.
Michael
Click to expand...

Follow the money. There are two businesses involved here.

Early big payments of ransoms validated the pirate's business model, which rapidly expanded.

This created a demand for protection services against pirates, another business model, which is also profitable, but only exists if the first model is valid.

Stop paying ransoms, and both business models fail. If you've got the nerve. I understand the sympathy motive, which suggests that 'just this one time' a payment should be made. That's personal, understandable, but goes against the general good, and will cause both businesses to thrive.

But these are mutually dependent businesses . . . so you have to question the motives of third parties, especially those involved in one of the businesses, who suggest that ransoms should be paid.

JimB
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"The days pass happily with me wherever my ship sails...
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxTo young men contemplating a voyage I would say go."

Sage words from Joshua Slocom, the first retiree to restore an old wooden boat and circumnavigate the globe on his own from 1895 to 1898. He penned a hugely influential account of this journey, Sailing Alone Around the World, fuelling countless fantasies of life on the high seas.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8388222.stm
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
I do appologise if I am liable to offend anyone by my following statement (so don't read it id you are at all sensitive).


.
.
.
.
.

We are in tis state of affairs because people are so afraid of offending anyone or "not respecting others rights".
F * * K them. Start blowing them out of the water, off their sand dunes or whatever, the moment they even attempt to interfere with international trade, legitimate business or the affairs of the UK !
Britain needs to grow some bollox again. Far too much pussy footing around everyone these days.
As I have said before, in these days of equality, we must also be prepared to shoot and kill white pirates, terrorists etc.......
 
puddock said:
I do appologise if I am liable to offend anyone by my following statement (so don't read it id you are at all sensitive).


.
.
.
.
.

We are in tis state of affairs because people are so afraid of offending anyone or "not respecting others rights".
F * * K them. Start blowing them out of the water, off their sand dunes or whatever, the moment they even attempt to interfere with international trade, legitimate business or the affairs of the UK !
Britain needs to grow some bollox again. Far too much pussy footing around everyone these days.
As I have said before, in these days of equality, we must also be prepared to shoot and kill white pirates, terrorists etc.......
Click to expand...

Spot on
 
No offence taken Puddock, but you have a difficult choice.

Do you shoot people before you know they are pirates - when they may be innocent fishermen - or do you wait until after they have taken hostages, when the chance of the hotages surviving your recommended blitz on pirates would be rather small?

The gap between these two states can be a matter of seconds.
 
puddock said:
I do appologise if I am liable to offend anyone by my following statement (so don't read it id you are at all sensitive).


.
.
.
.
.

We are in tis state of affairs because people are so afraid of offending anyone or "not respecting others rights".
F * * K them. Start blowing them out of the water, off their sand dunes or whatever, the moment they even attempt to interfere with international trade, legitimate business or the affairs of the UK !
Britain needs to grow some bollox again. Far too much pussy footing around everyone these days.
As I have said before, in these days of equality, we must also be prepared to shoot and kill white pirates, terrorists etc.......
Click to expand...

bang on !
 
rallyveteran said:
No offence taken Puddock, but you have a difficult choice.

Do you shoot people before you know they are pirates - when they may be innocent fishermen - or do you wait until after they have taken hostages, when the chance of the hotages surviving your recommended blitz on pirates would be rather small?

The gap between these two states can be a matter of seconds.
Click to expand...

I think you will find that "having a presence" and a little observation do the trick.
Why were the RM turned back in the case of the Chandlers? Do you think it was because "they weren't sure" if they were pirates or fisherman? Or perhaps it could just have been some limp wristed official back in the UK that didn't have the bottle for the job he'd wormed his way into.

EDIT: One thing is for sure - the RM would have had the bottle, the skills and the satisfaction of rescuing 2 of their OWN citizens.
 
I've sailed up the Gulf of Aden, and been approached by small boats. I wasn't armed, but if I had been I know I would have shot some innocent people if I wanted to stay completely safe. I think you are saying this is a price worth paying for my safety. I don't agree.
 
puddock said:
I do appologise if I am liable to offend anyone by my following statement (so don't read it id you are at all sensitive).


.
.
.
.
.

We are in tis state of affairs because people are so afraid of offending anyone or "not respecting others rights".
F * * K them. Start blowing them out of the water, off their sand dunes or whatever, the moment they even attempt to interfere with international trade, legitimate business or the affairs of the UK !
Britain needs to grow some bollox again. Far too much pussy footing around everyone these days.
As I have said before, in these days of equality, we must also be prepared to shoot and kill white pirates, terrorists etc.......
Click to expand...

You reall are a bloodthirsty little bugger ,aren't you?

However I think you're dead right!
 
rallyveteran said:
I've sailed up the Gulf of Aden, and been approached by small boats. I wasn't armed, but if I had been I know I would have shot some innocent people if I wanted to stay completely safe. I think you are saying this is a price worth paying for my safety. I don't agree.
Click to expand...

But you weren't a paid professional soldier at the time, were you? I don't think I mentioned Yachtsmen or Merchant Seamen being armed ..... my point was the protection of International Waters, by military force in a JUSTIFIED manner.

Anyway, this looks to be turning into a thread for "The Lounge" ........ sorry if I jumped in.
 
Couple of points here. We're mostly sailors and boaty folk. We probably have a very biased view of how the government should protect us wherever we go in the world.

http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?op...&controller=visualization.googlemap&Itemid=89

That's a map of reported piracy areas worldwide. how do you feel the population of the UK as a whole would feel if the RN started placing ships all over to protect the odd mad yachtie who was probably warned not to go there anyway? And how many millions can be spent before people start accusing Mr Brown of 'wasting our money' again?

I went diving to Sudan in 2000. I would not go now. If I did, it would be my own risk, and I really would not expect the government to come get me, or my family to pay the ransom. It's my choice to go to a known danger area.

This really is a huge and very costly issue, and I don't think it's as simple as just sending the Navy out to sort it every time. We are the ones that go to these places, it's our risk.

No disrespect to those currently being held, I genuinely do feel really sorry for them
 
rallyveteran said:
No offence taken Puddock, but you have a difficult choice.

Do you shoot people before you know they are pirates - when they may be innocent fishermen - or do you wait until after they have taken hostages, when the chance of the hotages surviving your recommended blitz on pirates would be rather small?



Hi

If they are in these waters 200 miles offshore shoot them and blow their boats out of the water.
Let them be the ones worried about seeing another ship ,not us as we are Innocent sailers in international waters

cheers bobt
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top