The Chandlers book

[VO5]

It was a warning given by a guy who worked behind the bar at a yacht club ffs. The Chandlers had already been delayed for a long time and decided to go. You cannot possibly know what you would have done in the same circumstances.


- W

Yes I do know.
I would have checked it out thoroughly, that is what I would have done.
But you think different.
I don't think like you.
The world is a very dangerous place.
It is quite safe if you just potter about in the Engish Channel.
Other parts of the world can be deadly.
And for this reason information given ought to be thoroughly verified before proceeding.
And Maby has a point, and in my view it is a very valid point indeed.

 

[VO5]

And before you answer back Webby, I will tell you more.
As I look out of my window I can see the coast of Africa 16 miles away across the Strait of Gibraltar.
It is called the Barbary Coast.
A century ago piracy was rife on that side of the Strait.
It is in the history books and we all know about it here as well.
It was squashed by the Royal Navy on the seaward side and on the land side by the French, who ruled Morocco, Algeria and right up to Tunisia.
The French have given these territories independence long ago.
The Royal Navy today has 22 ships and 24 admirals.
A repetition of piracy breakling out in the Mediterranean is not as far fetched as you might consider, at the western end or anywhere else for that matter.
We already have hoardes of Africans trying to get across to Europe by whatever means possible in these very waters and recklessly and desperately using anything that floats, from rafts to canoes.

 

[30boat]

It was a warning given by a guy who worked behind the bar at a yacht club ffs. The Chandlers had already been delayed for a long time and decided to go. You cannot possibly know what you would have done in the same circumstances.


- W

I think I would treat the advice as local knowledge ie seriously.

 

[VO5]

I think I would treat the advice as local knowledge ie seriously.

Exactly, precisely.

Here is another example, not related but nevertheless illustrates the point.

Several weeks ago, a newly married young couple went on honeymoon to the Sechelles. He was very keen on snorkelling an diving.

No one in the complex in which they stayed ventured to give them any advice. No one. Not the tourist office. Not the operators of the complex. No one.

But a chambermaid when told by the wife of his plans revealed three people had been killed on the beach where he propsed to dive this year.

She told him.

He disregarded the advice passed on.

He went snorkelling.

Less than 80 feet from the shore he was suddenly attacked by a shark.

First of all the shark took his arm off. His wife on the beach heard his screams and saw his face contorted with pain and fear.

The shark took a second bite. This time his leg....

They managed to get him out.

The poor chap died on the way to hospital, leaving a frantic and distraught widow.

Now that is why local knowledge is invaluable, and very often it is not passed on top downwards but bottom upwards, for whatever reason.

Therefore it cannot be ignored or disregarded, ever.

 

[philiphurst]

Exactly, precisely.

Here is another example, not related but nevertheless illustrates the point.

Several weeks ago, a newly married young couple went on honeymoon to the Sechelles. He was very keen on snorkelling an diving.

No one in the complex in which they stayed ventured to give them any advice. No one. Not the tourist office. Not the operators of the complex. No one.

But a chambermaid when told by the wife of his plans revealed three people had been killed on the beach where he propsed to dive this year.

She told him.

He disregarded the advice passed on.

He went snorkelling.

Less than 80 feet from the shore he was suddenly attacked by a shark.

First of all the shark took his arm off. His wife on the beach heard his screams and saw his face contorted with pain and fear.

The shark took a second bite. This time his leg....

They managed to get him out.

The poor chap died on the way to hospital, leaving a frantic and distraught widow.

Now that is why local knowledge is invaluable, and very often it is not passed on top downwards but bottom upwards, for whatever reason.

Therefore it cannot be ignored or disregarded, ever.

Excellent point, well made.

 

[Poignard]

I think I would treat the advice as local knowledge ie seriously.

+ 1

 

[Ludd]

By and large , I agree with Maby.

One thing I noticed in pics of the yacht at the time was the "Sea-Me" active radar reflector at the masthead. Since reports at the time inferred they were both below when boarded,is it reasonable to assume they had it switched on? Do they refer to this in their book? If they don't, I would think it fair to assume that it was on ,and the pirates would have expected a much bigger target.

 

[fishermantwo]

By and large , I agree with Maby.

One thing I noticed in pics of the yacht at the time was the "Sea-Me" active radar reflector at the masthead. Since reports at the time inferred they were both below when boarded,is it reasonable to assume they had it switched on? Do they refer to this in their book? If they don't, I would think it fair to assume that it was on ,and the pirates would have expected a much bigger target.

That's also a good point. Once the pirates approached the yacht it was probably a case of "while we are here". The trouble with this sort of book is the author can leave out lots!

The initial reports when it happened seem vastly different to what has been mentioned so far from the book, I have not read it.

 

[Hostage]

I don't think like you.
The world is a very dangerous place.
It is quite safe if you just potter about in the Engish Channel.
Other parts of the world can be deadly.
And for this reason information given ought to be thoroughly verified before proceeding.
And Maby has a point, and in my view it is a very valid point indeed.[/QUOTE]

The Chandlers went to sea. They made many decisions which were right. They made one which went badly wrong whatever the details. I'm sure they have agonised long over their folly. I think it is important that we should be defending their right to make their own decisions otherwise we could end up knee deep in legislation restricting our freedom on the water where we go to escape the nanny culture on land. Turn the TV off and get real.

 

[VO5]

I don't think like you.
The world is a very dangerous place.
It is quite safe if you just potter about in the Engish Channel.
Other parts of the world can be deadly.
And for this reason information given ought to be thoroughly verified before proceeding.
And Maby has a point, and in my view it is a very valid point indeed.

The Chandlers went to sea. They made many decisions which were right. They made one which went badly wrong whatever the details. I'm sure they have agonised long over their folly. I think it is important that we should be defending their right to make their own decisions otherwise we could end up knee deep in legislation restricting our freedom on the water where we go to escape the nanny culture on land. Turn the TV off and get real.[/QUOTE]


Hoo r u to tell anybody to turn off the TV and get real ? Hoo exactly ?
We have not been discussing the Nanny State or anybody's rights.
We have been discussing a recently published book about the horrific experiences of two unfortunate sailors, a husband and wife taken by pirates and held hostage and the very real dangers of deliberatley disregarding local knowledge.
The Nanny State is a direct consequence of people not acting responsibly and the "State" deciding and taking it upon themselves to treat them as if they were children, in case you haven't noticed.

 

[webcraft]

The Chandlers went to sea. They made many decisions which were right. They made one which went badly wrong whatever the details. I'm sure they have agonised long over their folly. I think it is important that we should be defending their right to make their own decisions otherwise we could end up knee deep in legislation restricting our freedom on the water where we go to escape the nanny culture on land. Turn the TV off and get real.

Hear hear. Too many self-righteous people who have never made a mistake on here, always have been.

- W

 

[grumpygit]

I speak for the vast, silent majority on here who look on with amazement at 'fellow sailors' vilifying the Chandlers, belittling their suffering, sneering, pontificating and commanding their armchair warships - and can't believe what they are reading.

The people I speak for wouldn't dream of posting on this thread. Which is of course quite handy for me, as there is no way you can prove me wrong


- W

Just a mo, hold your tongue and screw your neck back in.........I speak for myself and I don't need to be in or out of your majority, silent or not.......

Peeps opinions are theirs and theirs alone and not to be chastised so fervently by any bigoted view of others.

Let's say wrong place wrong time for the Chandlers, so CHILL...............

_______________________________________________________________

 

[webcraft]

Just a mo, hold your tongue and screw your neck back in.........I speak for myself and I don't need to be in or out of your majority, silent or not.......

Peeps opinions are theirs and theirs alone and not to be chastised so fervently by any bigoted view of others.

Well, you've posted on this thread so you by definition aren't in the group I was speaking about are you? I will continue to feel free to criticise those who I regard as self-rightous and utterly lacking in empathy. I believe it is know as free speech, so please don't tell me to 'hold my tongue' . . .

- W

 

[Beadle]

Utter rubbish.

+1

The pirates had been taking huge ransoms from shipping companies for yearsbefore the Chandlers.

Blame the "civilised" world for doing nothing to stop it earlier, or indeed since.

 

[grumpygit]

Well, you've posted on this thread so you by definition aren't in the group I was speaking about are you? I will continue to feel free to criticise those who I regard as self-rightous and utterly lacking in empathy. I believe it is know as free speech, so please don't tell me to 'hold my tongue' . . .

- W

Yes, there is nothing wrong with free speech, if fact it's our right (just) but please speak for yourself and not others, this includes me.It does not matter what group or side you are on or not, just lets not get embittered with fellow peeps. Again chill........

____________________________________________________________________

 

[Koeketiene]

 

[Ludd]

Despite my obvious lack of qualifications to comment on this thread(i.e. I don't hold the same viewpoint as Webcraft) I STILL would like to know if the "Sea- Me" was switched on. It is something that to my mind is very relevant.

 

[ctva]

I speak for the vast, silent majority on here who look on with amazement at 'fellow sailors' vilifying the Chandlers, belittling their suffering, sneering, pontificating and commanding their armchair warships - and can't believe what they are reading.

The people I speak for wouldn't dream of posting on this thread. Which is of course quite handy for me, as there is no way you can prove me wrong


- W

Not me.

Not read the book, not listened to too much news reporting and not listened to too much 3rd party speculation. ALL three will be heavily skewed to the authors view / money making requirements.

Would I sail anywhere in the Indian Ocean... no.
Would I take local knowledge / advice ... yes, basic first rule of seamanship when going somewhere new.

What sticks in my throat is the money making side of it with the book. What about the cost of the search operation, the cost of the negotiations, the risk that others were put to? Will they get any money from the book?

They made a mistake, probable stupidity, but do like most others do, say sorry and thanks to all that helped and shut up.

 

[webcraft]

What sticks in my throat is the money making side of it with the book.

I bet.

The Chandlers are giving several talks for which there is an admission charge (CA on the 5th) - I expect that burns you up as well.

It was the Chandlers' family that paid the eventuial ransom of $440,000, although the couple say that they have not been told who exactly paid what. They raised around £100,000 themselves towards the bill with a post-release interview, but their relatives say they are not expected to repay any further debts, insisting that such a burden would 'hamper their return to normal life'.

What's it to do with you?

- W

 

[gardenshed]

The Chandlers were victims of a crime committed in international waters.

Reading many of the above posts, you could be led to believe that they were the ones who were in the wrong. They didn't start piracy in the Indian Ocean and haven't changed the level of danger for anyone else in that Ocean or elsewhere.

It has cost them dearly: What value do you put on being illegally incarcerated for a year and being continually threatened with losing your life or being beaten, starved and subjected to other atrocities?
In addition, they lost their yacht and they and their family apparently contributed significant sums of money towards the ransom and towards the cost of their rescue.

I also understand that before heading off on a round the world cruise, they held respectable jobs, paid their taxes and were a normal respectable couple. That they had a sense of adventure and did something about it, is commendable.

Do they deserve the support of the UK government when sailing in international waters?
I believe yes

Did they deserve the FCO efforts to help with their release?
I believe yes

Did they get preferrential treatment?
I don't believe so. The Govt and its representatives did what they would do to help any UK citizen in trouble aboroad, no more and no less. There was no SAS mission to release them, no government ranson paid, the FCO worked within its normal rules and did what it could. Others tried to help too.

Do they deserve to try and make something of their ordeal by selling their story and publishing a book: Yes they do. There is nothing distasteful about this. There are people who are interested in hearing their version of the story and who may be curious enough about it to buy the book, and not rely on tabloid reporting or other speculative sources of information.

They are as entitled to this as the ex-soldiers who capitalise on their (paid) experiences in war who then publish their memoirs, or our politicians who get far greater sums for publishing their memoirs.

What I find extremely distastful about the "i wouldn't have done that" brigade in this thread, is that they haven't once offered an alternative course of action that the Chandlers could reaslitically have taken and make derogaratory comments about their decisions based on speculation and ignorance of the full facts.