Somali pirates hit oil tanker in long-range attack
Dennis
-------------------------------------
Somali pirates hit oil tanker in long-range attack
By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer Jason Straziuso, Associated
Press Writer 1 hr 12 mins ago
NAIROBI, Kenya - Somali pirates attacked on oil tanker Monday farther out
at sea than any previous assault, suggesting that pirate capabilities are
growing as they increase activity off East Africa.
Pirates in two skiffs fired automatic weapons and rocket-propelled
grenades at the Hong Kong-flagged BW Lion about 1,000 miles (1,600
kilometers) east of the Somali coast, the European Union Naval Force
said.
The tanker's captain increased speed and took evasive maneuvers, avoiding
the attack, the force said. No casualties were reported. The naval force
sent a plane from the Seychelles islands to investigate.
Pirates have launched increasingly bold attacks against vessels in the
Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden in hopes of capturing a ship and crew and
collecting ransom. They currently hold more than 190 hostages, including
a British couple seized from their personal yacht late last month.
The high-seas hijackings have increased despite an international armada
of warships deployed by the United States, the European Union, NATO,
Japan, South Korea and China to patrol the region. U.S. drones launched
from nearby Seychelles are also patrolling for pirates.
Cmdr. John Harbour, a spokesman for the EU's anti-piracy force, said it
wasn't immediately known whether the two skiffs Monday had launched
attacks from a larger mothership. He said the work by international
navies had pushed pirates out to sea.
"The international transit corridor near the coast is becoming safer, but
the pirates are taking fairly drastic action, carrying out attacks so far
off the coast," Harbour said. "Certainly our success to date has pushed
the pirates out from their normal hunting grounds."
Spain on Monday raised the possibility of sending two captured Somali
pirates back home after trying them in Madrid � as a way to win the
release of a Spanish trawler held by fellow brigands off the Horn of
Africa.
Pirates seized the ship Alakrana and its 36-member crew in the Indian
Ocean Oct. 2, and besides a ransom they are demanding the release of two
colleagues who were caught the next day by Spanish naval forces. Among
the 36 hostages are 16 Spaniards, eight Indonesians, and 12 crew from
five African countries.
Justice Minister Francisco Caamano told reporters that Spain would have
to try the two in Madrid on kidnapping and other charges "and then see if
there is some kind of international agreement" allowing them to serve
their sentence in Somalia.
Judge Baltasar Garzon, who ordered the two pirates brought to Madrid,
said: "I think there are legal avenues to resolve this conflict. I
sincerely think it can be done."
Garzon declined to go into detail. Such a decision would not be up to
him, but rather his superiors at the National Court. He insisted,
however, that Spain cannot yield to the hijackers and simply free the two
men held in Madrid.
Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, speaking during a visit to
Poland, declined to confirm or deny that Spain is considering trying the
two and then sending them home to serve their sentence.
Zapatero said the situation is too delicate for him to comment on in
detail, saying anything he says publicly will eventually reach the
hijackers. But he did say, "the situation may be on the right track."
At a meeting Sunday in Nairobi between Spain's ambassador to Kenya and
Somalia's prime minister, Spain committed to initiating legal procedures
to transfer the two pirates to Somalia, according to a statement from the
Somali government.
Prime Minister Omar Abdurashid Sharmarke "is convinced that this course
of action will lead to a quick resolution of this issue," the statement
said. None of the Spanish officials who spoke Monday went so far as to
say Spain had made such a pledge.
The Alakrana's skipper, Ricardo Blach, said in comments carried Monday in
the newspaper El Pais that conditions on the ship after 40 days of
captivity are hellish.
Blach said the heavily armed pirates number around 30 and are constantly
high on qat, a mild stimulant plant, and open fire in the air to scare
the sailors and keep them from sleeping.
"They spit in our faces. They kick us," Blach told the newspaper.
The pirates took three sailors ashore Thursday to increase pressure for a
settlement, but the Spanish Foreign Ministry insisted Monday they have
been taken back aboard the Alakrana, despite reports from the region that
they were still ashore.
Meanwhile, the EU Naval Force said that seven pirates its forces arrested
after an attack late last month on a French fishing vessel had been
transferred to Kenyan authority for prosecution "in accordance with the
agreement between the EU and Kenya."
___
Associated Press reporter Daniel Woolls in Madrid contributed to this
report.
Copyright � 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091109/ap_on_re_us/piracy/print
David E. Powell
Time to mount antitank missiles and lmgs on tankers, or at least have
a couple good rifles.
mike
>
> Time to mount antitank missiles and lmgs on tankers, or at least have
> a couple good rifles.
Fighting pirates at sea, while satisfying, is a waste.
History shows you have to clean out the local ports they call home.
Now adding defence isn't a bad idea, but not new.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tN4DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA505#
For a small Pop. Mechanics article from 1934, on keeping Chinese
pirates from boarding
If you go there, look at pg 566. unrelated to piracy, but floating
airports are interesting
**
mike
**
a425couple
"mike" <mara...@yahoo.com> wrote in message ...
-"David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com> wrote:
-> Time to mount antitank missiles and lmgs on tankers, or at least have
-> a couple good rifles.
-Now adding defence isn't a bad idea, but not new.
Seems to me, it would be worthwhile just to take
some selected ships, temp. put aboard a machine gun
team (Cpl. & 3) weld on one spindel mount (or 2 near
rear), even an old M-60 properly mounted should have
the range and stability for decent enough accuracy
to definitely discorage ----
While odds of a bite on the one you so equip
might be rather thin, , ?
-Fighting pirates at sea, while satisfying, is a waste.
Mostly agreed. But sometimes you really want some
satisfaction. We will always have some new "bad news"
being shown, so it's nice to hear of something "satisfying".
-History shows you have to clean out the local ports they call home.
Yes, but I have trouble thinking that anyone really has
any good idea on how to "clean out" Somali ports.
The last tries there and similar have gone rather badly!
dott.Piergiorgio
>
> Time to mount antitank missiles and lmgs on tankers, or at least have
> a couple good rifles.
As pointed in another thread, ATM and MG on commerce ships should be
shoulder or biped-fired, being legally (with some law-mandering) crew's
weapons instead of ship's weapons...
... but what about Q ships ? will be really effective, I suspect (and,
as the frequent incidents involving aux warship shown, perhaps there's
even no need of requisitioning and giving AMC status, a really informal
repainting of some AO or similiar warships should suffice)
Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.
dott.Piergiorgio
> Seems to me, it would be worthwhile just to take some selected ships,
> temp. put aboard a machine gun team (Cpl. & 3) weld on one spindel mount
> (or 2 near rear), even an old M-60 properly mounted should have the
> range and stability for decent enough accuracy to definitely discorage
As I pointed in past, the (int'l Law) issue is about welding, because of
that XIXth century convention, whose forbid the arming (Naval sense) of
commerce ships. If you weld a mount on deck, this is crossing the line
between crew's weapons and ship's weapons, and every Navy whose disagree
can legally take over the ship and tried the crew as pirates (!!!)
Richard Casady
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Yes, but I have trouble thinking that anyone really has
>any good idea on how to "clean out" Somali ports.
>The last tries there and similar have gone rather badly!
I think the USAF could handle the chore easily.
Casady
Jim Yanik
news:uo1jf5lpv2qnllrgj...@4ax.com:
MOABs ought to suffice.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
William Black
And you can bet your life that if Blackwater (or whatever they're called
this week) do it half a dozen navies would be only too delighted to
arrange a short court date for them...
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
William Black
How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill to no very good purpose?
Alan Lothian
<fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> :
> :How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill to no very good purpose?
> :
>
> Terrorists, pirates, how many other kinds of vermin do you want to
> sympathize with?
How cruel, Fred. Many of these people are quite kind to children and
animals. Just like Adolf Hitler.
Myself, I take a 19th-century RN attitude to the buggers. It does, I
must admit, involve a broadside and a boarding in the smoke. If there's
anything left to board. These days, with that wonderful Mk 110 57mm
job... only a six-pounder, but by God at 220 rpm it gives you bang for
the buck. I'm saving up for one, in readiness for my next duel. I am
almost embarrassed to confess it, Sir, but I cannot but share your
attitude to "fair fights". Which you have never hidden out of the sight
of day, let it be said.
--
"The past resembles the future as water resembles water" -- Ibn Khaldun
If you wish to email me, try putting a dot between alan and lothian.
Blueyonder is a thing of the past.
William Black
> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> :
> :How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill to no very good purpose?
> :
>
> Terrorists, pirates, how many other kinds of vermin do you want to
> sympathize with?
>
Oh dear, poor old Fred.
Look, killing innocents while shooting at pirates is almost acceptable.
Bombing the shit out of a town because you think there might just be the
odd pirate within the county line isn't.
Peter Skelton
<alanl...@mac.com> wrote:
>In article <gd8kf55v34bk2ha6o...@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
><fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> :
>> :How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill to no very good purpose?
>> :
>>
>> Terrorists, pirates, how many other kinds of vermin do you want to
>> sympathize with?
>
>How cruel, Fred. Many of these people are quite kind to children and
>animals. Just like Adolf Hitler.
>
>Myself, I take a 19th-century RN attitude to the buggers. It does, I
>must admit, involve a broadside and a boarding in the smoke. If there's
>anything left to board. These days, with that wonderful Mk 110 57mm
>job... only a six-pounder, but by God at 220 rpm it gives you bang for
>the buck. I'm saving up for one, in readiness for my next duel. I am
>almost embarrassed to confess it, Sir, but I cannot but share your
>attitude to "fair fights". Which you have never hidden out of the sight
>of day, let it be said.
You might consider an automatic 3", there are a lot of them
around, many in natty twin mounts. Admittedly, they seem to fail
after a minute's firing, but that's about 90 shots/barrel which
should be adequate for duelling. If you can get one, the Canadian
70 cal is the way to go.
Peter Skelton
William Black
> :> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> :>
> :> :
> :> :How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill to no very good purpose?
> :> :
> :>
> :> Terrorists, pirates, how many other kinds of vermin do you want to
> :> sympathize with?
> :>
> :
> :Oh dear, poor old Fred.
> :
> :Look, killing innocents while shooting at pirates is almost acceptable.
> :
> :Bombing the shit out of a town because you think there might just be the
> :odd pirate within the county line isn't.
>
> Oh dear, poor old Willie.
>
> Look, you qvetch about how this or that is so difficult it is
> impossible any time anyone suggests doing ANYTHING about any of the
> various lots of vermin you seem to sympathize with. Were it left to
> you, we'd all just paint targets on our chests and hope for the best.
>
> It's one thing to note real issues. It's quite another to make up
> 'hypothetical' idiocy and then act as if it is the course suggested,
> as you do above.
>
Lack of content noted...
Look, Blackbeard was a pirate, Captain Kidd was a pirate, Henry
Morgan was a pirate, all were dealt with in different ways.
For myself I think the 'Henry Morgan solution' was probably the best.
You find the biggest baddest pirate you can, then you set him up as the
local boss and you tell him that if the piracy doesn't stop he's going
to get his neck stretched...
Then you sit back and await messages that the piracy has stopped and
your nominee is busy drinking himself to death on his profits made by
selling the pirate swag he has seized...
The 'Blackbeard solution; sending naval ships to engage in pitched
battles with them; is expensive, time consuming and far too many
people get killed.
The 'Captain Kidd solution' (hire privateers to hunt pirates) is an
obvious none starter. All you have to do is read about Kidd, at which
point you realise that the privateers just can't be trusted not to turn
pirate themselves.
Bombing ports is not a solution to piracy.
It never was and it never will be.
Jim Yanik
news:111120090557334549%alanl...@mac.com:
> In article <gd8kf55v34bk2ha6o...@4ax.com>, Fred J.
> McCall
><fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> :
>> :How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill to no very good
>> :purpose?
>> :
>>
>> Terrorists, pirates, how many other kinds of vermin do you want to
>> sympathize with?
>
> How cruel, Fred. Many of these people are quite kind to children and
> animals. Just like Adolf Hitler.
>
> Myself, I take a 19th-century RN attitude to the buggers. It does, I
> must admit, involve a broadside and a boarding in the smoke. If
> there's anything left to board. These days, with that wonderful Mk 110
> 57mm job... only a six-pounder, but by God at 220 rpm it gives you
> bang for the buck. I'm saving up for one, in readiness for my next
> duel. I am almost embarrassed to confess it, Sir, but I cannot but
> share your attitude to "fair fights". Which you have never hidden out
> of the sight of day, let it be said.
>
those who knowingly tolerate criminals in their midst deserve whatever they
get.
drop MOABs on them in their hideaways and Pirate bases.
William Black
There are NO 'hideaways' or 'pirate bases'.
There are coastal villages and towns.
Some, there is no doubt, have pirates in them.
But you can't just go bombing or shooting up a place at random because
criminals live there.
If you could then most big cities would be free fire zones...
Jack Linthicum
> >news:111120090557334549%alanl...@mac.com:
>
> >> In article <gd8kf55v34bk2ha6o9inhssfa1cevsc...@4ax.com>, Fred J.
> >> McCall
> >> <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Those MOABs go at $27,000 a clip, uses a C-130 to deliver
dott.Piergiorgio
> Myself, I take a 19th-century RN attitude to the buggers. It does, I
> must admit, involve a broadside and a boarding in the smoke. If there's
> anything left to board. These days, with that wonderful Mk 110 57mm
> job... only a six-pounder, but by God at 220 rpm it gives you bang for
> the buck.
well, I think that is better the 3" OTO, 130 rpm 12-pounder, with
terminal guidance as option.....
a425couple
>>>> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> :How many more innocent Muslims do you want to kill
>>>> :to no very good purpose?
>>>> Terrorists, pirates, how many other kinds of vermin do you want to
>>>> sympathize with?
>>> How cruel, Fred. Many of these people are quite kind to children and
>>> animals. Just like Adolf Hitler.
>>> Myself, I take a 19th-century RN attitude to the buggers. It does, I
>>> must admit, involve a broadside and a boarding in the smoke. If
>>> I am almost embarrassed to confess it, Sir, but I cannot but
>>> share your attitude to "fair fights". Which you have never hidden out
>>> of the sight of day, let it be said.
>> those who knowingly tolerate criminals in their midst deserve
>> whatever they get.
>> drop MOABs on them in their hideaways and Pirate bases.
>
> There are NO 'hideaways' or 'pirate bases'.
> There are coastal villages and towns.
> Some, there is no doubt, have pirates in them.
> But you can't just go bombing or shooting up a place at random
> because criminals live there.
> If you could then most big cities would be free fire zones...
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with what Mr. Black wrote.
IMHO, He does a quite reasonable job of expressing fairly
common modern sentiment (perhaps "humanitarian" ?).
It has certainly seemed to have changed in the last
65 years or so.
It used to be we had wars. Actual wars that were fought,
and seemed to often come to some resolution, and thus
then created a situation where there was often peace
for the next couple of decades.
Yes, the total numbers of dead (& injured & damaged)
were high. Over riding morality was more based on a
fairly simple concept, the civilians (and all military) were
responsible (or at least liable) for the government they had
and it's policies.
(also, the reciprocal, government responsible for it's
citizens, and their actions.
--nutcase kills a crown prince-- declare a war! )
I do not ever recall, Mr. Black condemning WWII
RAF conducting it's bombing campaign against
German manufacturing, with a definite goal to
"dehouse" (kill, injure, disperse) the factory workers.
(Just to be clear, I certainly do not "condemn" that campaign.)
Where, when, & why, have we changed?
Who really now are "innocents" ?
Seems like now in a "war", the only individuals that we
can properly target is the poor smuck in uniform
(and he's often never done anything wrong in his
life except give his service to his country's ((or community's))
authorities.
"Poor dumb smuck, - Fire for effect!" ).
William Black
> I do not ever recall, Mr. Black condemning WWII RAF conducting it's
> bombing campaign against German manufacturing, with a definite goal to
> "dehouse" (kill, injure, disperse) the factory workers. (Just to be
> clear, I certainly do not "condemn" that campaign.)
>
> Where, when, & why, have we changed?
We haven't.
We usually know the difference between war and crime.
Criminals are a police matter.
Even at the height of the nastiness on the North West Frontier between
the wars the work was mainly done by paramilitary police rather than the
army.
H. Wilker
Peter Skelton <skel...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:57:33 +0100, Alan Lothian
> <alanl...@mac.com> wrote:
((snip))
> >Myself, I take a 19th-century RN attitude to the buggers. It does, I
> >must admit, involve a broadside and a boarding in the smoke. If there's
> >anything left to board. These days, with that wonderful Mk 110 57mm
> >job... only a six-pounder, but by God at 220 rpm it gives you bang for
> >the buck. I'm saving up for one, in readiness for my next duel. I am
> >almost embarrassed to confess it, Sir, but I cannot but share your
> >attitude to "fair fights". Which you have never hidden out of the sight
> >of day, let it be said.
>
> You might consider an automatic 3", there are a lot of them
> around, many in natty twin mounts. Admittedly, they seem to fail
> after a minute's firing, but that's about 90 shots/barrel which
> should be adequate for duelling. If you can get one, the Canadian
> 70 cal is the way to go.
There is a detailed and interesting description of a personal duel
fought with naval guns somewhere in Neal Stephenson's "Baroque Cycle" -
if I remember correctly, it is in the third volume, "The System of the
World". The location is Tower Hill, London. Saying more would spoil the
fun...
See http://nealstephenson.com/ - the "Cycle" comprises "Quicksilver",
"The Confusion", and "The System of the World". It contains several
story threads with naval content, so might make interesting reading for
some readers of this group. Be warned, however, of a mass of extraneous
exposition, if it is only the naval stuff you're after.
Regards
Helge Wilker
a425couple
"William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote ...
> a425couple wrote:
>> I do not ever recall, Mr. Black condemning WWII RAF conducting it's
>> bombing campaign against German manufacturing, with a definite goal to
>> "dehouse" (kill, injure, disperse) the factory workers. (Just to be
>> clear, I certainly do not "condemn" that campaign.)
>>
>> Where, when, & why, have we changed?
>
> We haven't.
Who hasn't changed?
Certainly seems we have all changed a lot in our concern
with what is now termed "collateral damage".
And recalling an earlier resolution of piracy,
sure seems the British response has also changed:
"On the August 27 1816, following a round of failed negotiations, the fleet
delivered a punishing nine-hour bombardment of Algiers. The attack
immobilized many of the Dey's corsairs & shore batteries, coercing him into
accepting a peace offer of the same terms as he had presented the day
before. He warned that if they were not accepted that he would continue the
action. The Dey accepted the terms, not realising that they were a bluff as
the fleet had already fired off all of its ammunition."
> We usually know the difference between war and crime. Criminals are a
> police matter. Even at the height of the nastiness on the North West
> Frontier between the wars the work was mainly done by paramilitary police
> rather than the army.
OK, please tell us what police should deal with this problem?
And what judicial / court system should handle the cases?
Seems to me, plenty of cases, where if a country can not,
or will not, deal with it's citizens doing "crimes" against
another country or it's citizens, then military force by
the offended country has been approved of.
William Black
>
> "William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote ...
>> a425couple wrote:
>>> I do not ever recall, Mr. Black condemning WWII RAF conducting it's
>>> bombing campaign against German manufacturing, with a definite goal
>>> to "dehouse" (kill, injure, disperse) the factory workers. (Just to
>>> be clear, I certainly do not "condemn" that campaign.)
>>>
>>> Where, when, & why, have we changed?
>>
>> We haven't.
>
> Who hasn't changed?
> Certainly seems we have all changed a lot in our concern
> with what is now termed "collateral damage".
That's just in the press.
Everyone involved in the process accepts that some innocents will die.
> And recalling an earlier resolution of piracy,
> sure seems the British response has also changed:
> "On the August 27 1816, following a round of failed negotiations, the
> fleet delivered a punishing nine-hour bombardment of Algiers. The attack
> immobilized many of the Dey's corsairs & shore batteries, coercing him
> into accepting a peace offer of the same terms as he had presented the
> day before. He warned that if they were not accepted that he would
> continue the action. The Dey accepted the terms, not realising that they
> were a bluff as the fleet had already fired off all of its ammunition."
You fail to understand the difference between pirates and a nation state.
>> We usually know the difference between war and crime. Criminals are a
>> police matter. Even at the height of the nastiness on the North West
>> Frontier between the wars the work was mainly done by paramilitary
>> police rather than the army.
>
> OK, please tell us what police should deal with this problem?
> And what judicial / court system should handle the cases?
There are plenty of precedents for establishing 'Admiralty Courts'.
In this case you do need to employ the various navies 'In support of the
civil power'.
But all they're supposed to do is arrest the miscreants...
> Seems to me, plenty of cases, where if a country can not,
> or will not, deal with it's citizens doing "crimes" against
> another country or it's citizens, then military force by
> the offended country has been approved of.
Well no.
That's not actually the case.
Alan Lothian
dott.Piergiorgio <dott.Pierg...@KAIGUN.fastwebnet.it> wrote:
I will reflect upon your advice, Egregio Dottore. You may be right. And
really, all things considered, 130rpm ought to do the business. But I
could just about have mounted the Mk110 on top of my Citroen CX
ambulance.... hmmmm. Thought required. Consider it terminal guidance.
Alan Lothian
<willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
<snippaggio>
Much as I have enjoyed watching you and Fred slagging each other...
>
> Bombing ports is not a solution to piracy.
Oh yes it bloody well is. It's not what you'd call an *elegant*
solution, and I appreciate elegance as much as the next man. But
consider foot-and-mouth disease. By and large, I'd go along with your
idea of bribing out the top pirate, but it does no harm for him to know
his home and kiddies could, ah, go pear-shaped. Sliced and diced.
>
> It never was and it never will be.
It's been done before, back in the days when "collateral damage" was an
incomprehensible footnote in Latin textbooks. See Roman Navy, Adriatic
coast, etc. No sick cattle, no foot and mouth disease.
Of course, you could just change the rules of engagement for the many
expensive warships supposedly protecting trade in the region. Shoot
enough of the poor sad sorry fuckers and trade is protected; simple as
that. Not nice, I grant you. But what runs out first? Sad sorry fuckers
or Mk110 57mm rounds? (I'll settle for the Egregio Dottore's 130rpm
3-inch, I'm not a snob and he may have a point. Although 57mm is
certainly cheaper and I could never mount that 3-inch on my Citroen CX
ambulance)
William Black
By and large, I'd go along with your
> idea of bribing out the top pirate, but it does no harm for him to know
> his home and kiddies could, ah, go pear-shaped. Sliced and diced.
I don't think anyone was in any doubt at all about what the English
government of the day would have done to Morgan had he failed or
returned to piracy...
It is interesting to note that he seems to have run the pirates off the
seas in less than five years, was promptly eased out of his position of
authority and spent the rest of his life drinking himself to death, at
the age of 54, with those of his comrades who'd had the sense to walk
away with him.
What impresses me is his age.
This is a man who commanded a pirate fleet at 30, sacked Panama at 32,
destroyed Maracaibo at 33 and got out early enough and with enough spare
cash to spend his last ten years doing nothing but drinking with his
mates...
> Of course, you could just change the rules of engagement for the many
> expensive warships supposedly protecting trade in the region. Shoot
> enough of the poor sad sorry fuckers and trade is protected; simple as
> that. Not nice, I grant you. But what runs out first? Sad sorry fuckers
> or Mk110 57mm rounds? (I'll settle for the Egregio Dottore's 130rpm
> 3-inch, I'm not a snob and he may have a point. Although 57mm is
> certainly cheaper and I could never mount that 3-inch on my Citroen CX
> ambulance)
The problem is that all you'd do is radicalise the innocents.
Shoot 'Selim the Pirate' and nobody minds. Getting your head shot off
by the US navy is part of the modern pirate's job description and
everyone will shake their heads and mutter "It was inevitable you know,
he always did push his luck"
Blast poor old 'Abdul the Fisherman' and you've upset his wife, kids,
aunts, uncles and everyone else who knows the guy.
Blast a couple of thousand Abduls and you'd have enough starving
teenagers and upset wives and brothers to start a reasonable sized
terrorist movement.
You don't think all those Pakistanis on the NWF are rising up for
religious reasons do you? The US Predator drones have managed to
radicalise a generation!
We live in a world where powerful weapons are available to anyone with
little to lose and a target to shoot at and we have to learn that if you
upset people they all now have the capacity to, to an extent, shoot back.
Richard
> a425couple wrote:
>
> > "William Black" <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote ...
> >> a425couple wrote:
> >>> I do not ever recall, Mr. Black condemning WWII RAF conducting it's
> >>> bombing campaign against German manufacturing, with a definite goal
> >>> to "dehouse" (kill, injure, disperse) the factory workers. (Just to
> >>> be clear, I certainly do not "condemn" that campaign.)
>
> >>> Where, when, & why, have we changed?
>
> >> We haven't.
>
> > Who hasn't changed?
> > Certainly seems we have all changed a lot in our concern
> > with what is now termed "collateral damage".
>
> That's just in the press.
>
> Everyone involved in the process accepts that some innocents will die.
>
> > And recalling an earlier resolution of piracy,
> > sure seems the British response has also changed:
> > "On the August 27 1816, following a round of failed negotiations, the
> > fleet delivered a punishing nine-hour bombardment of Algiers. The attack
> > immobilized many of the Dey's corsairs & shore batteries, coercing him
> > into accepting a peace offer of the same terms as he had presented the
> > day before. He warned that if they were not accepted that he would
> > continue the action. The Dey accepted the terms, not realising that they
> > were a bluff as the fleet had already fired off all of its ammunition."
>
> You fail to understand the difference between pirates and a nation state.
>
If a "nation state" cannot adequately police its citizens so as to
prevent acts of piracy (Somalia) or smuggling (Mexico) or terrorism
(Afghanistan)...when do we call it a day and admit that despite our
wishful thinking and the protestations of the "government" (such as it
is), this is in fact a FAILED state.
Instead of the lenient term "criminal", perhaps we should view them as
rogue unsanctioned soldiers and deal with such scum (and their support
networks) accordingly. IOW, bomb them off the map.
The trouble with paying danegeld is you never get rid of the dane.
Must be all the estrogen in the world's drinking water courtesy of the
"sexual revolution". Men used to have balls.
William Black
> On Nov 11, 6:41 pm, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> "On the August 27 1816, following a round of failed negotiations, the
>>> fleet delivered a punishing nine-hour bombardment of Algiers. The attack
>>> immobilized many of the Dey's corsairs & shore batteries, coercing him
>>> into accepting a peace offer of the same terms as he had presented the
>>> day before. He warned that if they were not accepted that he would
>>> continue the action. The Dey accepted the terms, not realising that they
>>> were a bluff as the fleet had already fired off all of its ammunition."
>> You fail to understand the difference between pirates and a nation state.
>>
>
> If a "nation state" cannot adequately police its citizens so as to
> prevent acts of piracy (Somalia) or smuggling (Mexico) or terrorism
> (Afghanistan)...when do we call it a day and admit that despite our
> wishful thinking and the protestations of the "government" (such as it
> is), this is in fact a FAILED state.
The idea of a 'failed state' is false.
Some states have firmer control of their citizens than others.
That some states do not control criminal activity to the extent the USA
would like them to do is no reason to start shooting at them.
I notice that the US government is not considering bombing Mexico
because of the smuggling and that the Central American basket cases
aren't being either described as 'failed states' (although if anyone is
they are) or being considered for a swift and explosive visit from the
USAF either...
> Instead of the lenient term "criminal", perhaps we should view them as
> rogue unsanctioned soldiers and deal with such scum (and their support
> networks) accordingly. IOW, bomb them off the map.
'Rogue unsanctioned soldiers' are more properly called 'bandits'.
Now look up something called 'social banditry' and find out that what
you do by attacking the innocents where the bandits live is to open a
can of worms.
> The trouble with paying danegeld is you never get rid of the dane.
Trotting out clich�s doesn't help much either.
> Must be all the estrogen in the world's drinking water courtesy of the
> "sexual revolution". Men used to have balls.
And this comment can be safely ignored as well.
Jack Linthicum
> If Wee Willie had his way we'd all still be paying tribute to the
> Pashas on the Barbary Coast...
>
> William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Shades of Hines, a top posting. Keep it up, Fred, that way we can tell
what is you and what is the minutes of the last meeting.
La N
Heheheheh ..... So, what *are* the chances of the United States of Men With
Balls bombing Somalia back to (or forward to) the Middle Ages? And I
wonder what the fallout (if any) would be?
- nilita
William Black
The place is the size of Afghanistan with a quarter the population and
the longest coastline in Africa.
Pirates, by their very nature, spend most of their time out at sea
looking for victims, while trying to look like fishermen...
The bad guys use telephones of various types for their communications
and reasonably freely available military stores for their weapons.
Where will they bomb?
La N
I guess it's nigh impossible to positively ID them and take them out
systematically when they are at sea, eh?
BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
- nilita
Andrew Robert Breen
La N <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
>Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
Oh, more so. Much more so. The pirates of the heyday period (1600-1700,
say) were not nice people at all.
As to why they have the aura of romance - those /deleteds/ are safely dead
for centuries, and thus are available for romanticising. It's a bit like
Scott writing his romances about my throughly ghastly ancestors along the
Anglo-Scots borders. Great heroes all, if you count the regular
stock-in-trade of a hero as raiding a widow's house, beating her up and
stealing her clothes, furniture and food. And then burning the house,
possibly with a relative or two inside it[1].
There are also more complex factors at play with pirates: there's the
patriotic puffing up of brutes like Drake and his successors, and the
general sense in England for much of the 16th/very early 17th century that
piracy was patriotic, as it was something Englishmen did to other people
(see also: privateering in other nation's mythos). Piracy became markedly
less popular in the later 17th century, after the Commonwealth ejected
them from the West Country, Pembrokeshire, the south coast of Ireland and
such places and they set up anew in North Africa, where their ships were
found to be eminently transferrable technology. Somehow pirates were less
romantic when they were burning and slave-raiding your village than they'd
seemed when they were bring the products of such antics abroad back home
(NAM Rodger's "Safeguard of the Sea" and "Command of the Ocean" are really
good on this stuff). So over the years the 'ammer came down, pretty much
with popular backing. And then, in the 19th century, when all the (white)
pirates were safely dead (apart from the ones running opium to China or
slave-raiding islanders in the Pacific, which was what that uncle you
didn't talk about did...) the stage was free for the rediscovery of those
glamourous Elizabethans and, by extension, the later pirates.
But pretty well all of 'em make the Somalian guys look downright amiable.
[1] Of course, this /was/ the standard modus operandii of heroes for most
of time. Homer refers, as do the sagas.
--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
La N
> In article <UgWKm.51609$Db2.51053@edtnps83>,
> La N <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and
>> fantasy. Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
>
> Oh, more so. Much more so. The pirates of the heyday period
> (1600-1700, say) were not nice people at all.
>
> As to why they have the aura of romance - those /deleteds/ are safely
> dead for centuries, and thus are available for romanticising. It's a
> bit like Scott writing his romances about my throughly ghastly
> ancestors along the Anglo-Scots borders. Great heroes all, if you
> count the regular stock-in-trade of a hero as raiding a widow's
> house, beating her up and stealing her clothes, furniture and food.
> And then burning the house, possibly with a relative or two inside
> it[1].
>
>
Heheh ... I've been getting a kick out of Mel Gibson doing the rounds of
interviews over the past few weeks admitting that maybe "Braveheart" Wallace
wasn't really such a nice guy after all ... Darned.
- nilita
Dennis
> BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and
> fantasy. Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
In many cases, yes.
I read a book about classic pirates a while back - can't think of the
name. Some of the appeal was that people oppressed by society back then -
such as most ordinary seamen, also slaves, other lower classes - became
pirates and in many cases pirates had an egalitarian society. Captains
were elected, crews agreed on rules as a whole, and other things like that.
So that was some of the appeal - an egalitarian group in a world that
was anything but, and some Robin Hood added in.
Dennis
La N
"Andrew Robert Breen" <a...@aber.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:67sts6x...@news.aber.ac.uk...
> --
> Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales,
> Aberystwyth
> Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
> money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
Mindful that you live in Wales, as does my brother, Andy, I am reminded of
an article that I found in several UK papers a couple of months ago. I am a
fan of news of the weird and absurd, but I want to know from you if this is
true: :)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211960/Council-turns-offensive-Spotted-Dick-Spotted-Richard-spare-blushes-diners.html
Council turns 'offensive' Spotted Dick into Spotted Richard to spare blushes
of diners
By James Tozer
Last updated at 8:04 AM on 09th September 2009
Offensive? Spotted Dick has been renamed Spotted Richard by canteen staff at
Flintshire County Council
For generations it has risen above all the schoolboy sniggers.
But it appears the smirking has to stop as modern sensitivities struggle to
cope with the jokes prompted by one of our most loved puddings - Spotted
Dick.
Now those sensitivities have seen a prudish council changing the name to
Spotted Richard after canteen staff tired of the giggling.
The latest attempt to censor classic Victorian suet and raisin pudding has
angered traditionalists, who have fought several battles in recent years
over the name.
The defenders of the old ways have been joined by Klaus Armstrong-Braun, a
councillor who was taken aback when he saw the name change in the canteen at
the headquarters of Flintshire council in North Wales.
'I couldn't believe it, it seemed ludicrous,' he said.
'Spotted Dick is part of our heritage.
'It just seemed political correctness gone mad.
'There was a sign in the dining room for things like rice pudding and then
this Spotted Richard - I had to ask what it was.
'Whoever has changed it needs to be told they are being silly.'
Yesterday a Flintshire spokesman explained that Spotted Richard was now on
its menus at Mold county hall because of 'childish comments' from diners.
He said: 'The correct title for this dish is Spotted Dick.
'However, because of several immature comments from a few customers,
catering staff renamed the dish Spotted Richard or Sultana Sponge.
'This was not a policy decision - staff simply acted as they thought best
to put an end to unwelcome and childish comments, albeit from a very small
number of customers.'
It is by no means the first time the name Spotted Dick has come under threat
from the PC brigade.
In 2001, Tesco also opted for the name Spotted Richard, claiming women
shoppers were offended by having to ask for Spotted Dick.
Others followed suit, with Gloucestershire NHS Trust among those who tried
to popularise the 21st century version.
Both eventually admitted defeat, and yesterday the Pudding Club - which
seeks to preserve traditional British desserts - predicted that Flintshire
would go the same way.
'This is totally bonkers,' said chairman Peter Henderson.
'Spotted Dick is part of our heritage, and I can't believe people are really
offended by it.
'If they were changing the name in a tongue-in- cheek way, that would be
fair enough - I've seen it sold as Blemished Richard.
'But for a council to ban the name is a waste of time and money.'
Jeffrey Hamilton
> If Wee Willie had his way we'd all still be paying tribute to the
> Pashas on the Barbary Coast...
No you wouldn't, Fred. We knew who the 'Pashas on the Barbary Coast' were.
Fair game....
What William said was correct.
We turned far too many Muslim weddings into mass Muslim funerals.
There is going to be a price to pay for that oft repeated error.......
cheers.....Jeff
Jack Linthicum
Probably right up to the moment the drummers began to beat and the guy
with hood over his head started playing with his rope.
Dennis
>> � � � � So that was some of the appeal - an egalitarian group in
> a world that
>> was anything but, and some Robin Hood added in.
>
> Probably right up to the moment the drummers began to beat and the guy
> with hood over his head started playing with his rope.
Well, everyone had to sign on to the rules of the ship. If you wound
up at the end of a rope, it was your fault. That was the idea, anyway.
Dennis
Andrew Robert Breen
La N <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"Andrew Robert Breen" <a...@aber.ac.uk> wrote in message
>news:67sts6x...@news.aber.ac.uk...
> > --
>> Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales,
>> Aberystwyth
>> Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
>> money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
>
>Mindful that you live in Wales, as does my brother, Andy, I am reminded of
>an article that I found in several UK papers a couple of months ago. I am a
>fan of news of the weird and absurd, but I want to know from you if this is
>true: :)
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211960/Council-turns-offensive-Spotted-Dick-Spotted-Richard-spare-blushes-diners.html
>Council turns 'offensive' Spotted Dick into Spotted Richard to spare blushes
>of diners
>By James Tozer
>Last updated at 8:04 AM on 09th September 2009
>
Well, that's the fair-and-balanced Daily Wail for you.
IIRC (this is all a bit back, now) the decision wasn'r made by the council
(by the school, IIRC..), and it was very promptly reversed once the
council got to know. But that wasn't the desired story.
Personal tale: got interviwed by the Daily Wail once, a bit back. They
wanted to know about the effects of the current spell of low solar
activity. Once I made it clar that (a) global warming wasn not in any way
related to solar activity any more (might have been once, but the solar
effects are way swamped by those from addtitional greenhouse gases and (b)
it would not cause house price collapse, single parenthood or lesbians (I
exagerate for efect here.. ;) they visibly lost interest. The story never
appeared. Funny, that...
--
Andy Breen ~ Speaking for myself, not the University of Wales
"your suggestion rates at four monkeys for six weeks"
(Peter D. Rieden)
Eugene Griessel
Breen) wrote:
>Personal tale: got interviwed by the Daily Wail once, a bit back. They
>wanted to know about the effects of the current spell of low solar
>activity. Once I made it clar that (a) global warming wasn not in any way
>related to solar activity any more (might have been once, but the solar
>effects are way swamped by those from addtitional greenhouse gases and (b)
>it would not cause house price collapse, single parenthood or lesbians (I
>exagerate for efect here.. ;) they visibly lost interest. The story never
>appeared. Funny, that...
They exist to sell sensation to the sensation hungry public - far more
important to report on a top model who had an affair with a champagne
bottle than utter crap like stupid scientific facts! If you had really
wanted to appear in the rag you would have worn your Plaid Cymru
T-shirt to the interview and threatened everyone who did not enjoy
cawl to instant extinction.
Eugene L Griessel
I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory.
- I post only from Sci.Military.Naval -
Andrew Robert Breen
Eugene Griessel <eug...@dynagen.co.za> wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:13:37 +0000, a...@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Robert
>Breen) wrote:
>
>>Personal tale: got interviwed by the Daily Wail once, a bit back. They
>>wanted to know about the effects of the current spell of low solar
>>activity. Once I made it clar that (a) global warming wasn not in any way
>>related to solar activity any more (might have been once, but the solar
>>effects are way swamped by those from addtitional greenhouse gases and (b)
>>it would not cause house price collapse, single parenthood or lesbians (I
>>exagerate for efect here.. ;) they visibly lost interest. The story never
>>appeared. Funny, that...
>
>They exist to sell sensation to the sensation hungry public - far more
>important to report on a top model who had an affair with a champagne
>bottle than utter crap like stupid scientific facts! If you had really
>wanted to appear in the rag you would have worn your Plaid Cymru
>T-shirt to the interview and threatened everyone who did not enjoy
Bugger... another chance missed.
>cawl to instant extinction.
Hmm. Might be a bijou problemette there. Don't like Cawl that much. Would
talking about the urgent need to annex the strategically-vital Hereford
cider orchards have workwd, do you think?
Eugene Griessel
Breen) wrote:
>In article <9loof51r850su5ri4...@4ax.com>,
>Eugene Griessel <eug...@dynagen.co.za> wrote:
>>On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:13:37 +0000, a...@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Robert
>>Breen) wrote:
>>
>>>Personal tale: got interviwed by the Daily Wail once, a bit back. They
>>>wanted to know about the effects of the current spell of low solar
>>>activity. Once I made it clar that (a) global warming wasn not in any way
>>>related to solar activity any more (might have been once, but the solar
>>>effects are way swamped by those from addtitional greenhouse gases and (b)
>>>it would not cause house price collapse, single parenthood or lesbians (I
>>>exagerate for efect here.. ;) they visibly lost interest. The story never
>>>appeared. Funny, that...
>>
>>They exist to sell sensation to the sensation hungry public - far more
>>important to report on a top model who had an affair with a champagne
>>bottle than utter crap like stupid scientific facts! If you had really
>>wanted to appear in the rag you would have worn your Plaid Cymru
>>T-shirt to the interview and threatened everyone who did not enjoy
>
>Bugger... another chance missed.
>
>>cawl to instant extinction.
>
>Hmm. Might be a bijou problemette there. Don't like Cawl that much. Would
Love the stuff. Leeks and mutton - can't go wrong!
>talking about the urgent need to annex the strategically-vital Hereford
>cider orchards have workwd, do you think?
Indubitably - anything controversial. Threaten to chop them down and
replace with marijuana and you are almost sure to make the front page!
Eugene L Griessel
The only thing that hurts more than paying income tax,
is not having to pay income tax.
William Black
> BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
Gilbert and Sulivan started it, then there are all those movies...
> Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
Far more so.
Blackbeard and Kidd both seem to have murdered any witnesses.
William Black
> Mindful that you live in Wales, as does my brother, Andy, I am reminded of
> an article that I found in several UK papers a couple of months ago. I am a
> fan of news of the weird and absurd, but I want to know from you if this is
> true: :)
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211960/Council-turns-offensive-Spotted-Dick-Spotted-Richard-spare-blushes-diners.html
> Council turns 'offensive' Spotted Dick into Spotted Richard to spare blushes
> of diners
It's in the Daily Mail and so almost certainly a pack of lies.
> For generations it has risen above all the schoolboy sniggers.
Well no.
It was a Royal Naval favourite called 'a dead baby'.
They changed the name to protect the sensibilities of Victorian ladies
when they brought it ashore...
William Black
The most successful pirate of them all, Sir Francis Drake, never got
elected to anything.
Neither did Captain Kidd.
Nobody ever suggested Sir Henry Morgan should stand for election either...
Blackbeard was elected, but I don't think the election was contested.
Paul J. Adam
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> writes
>I guess it's nigh impossible to positively ID them and take them out
>systematically when they are at sea, eh?
Catch them in the act, and the ROE allow quite enthusiastic action. (See
HMS Cumberland last year, for only one example).
Otherwise, a fishing dhow with half-a-dozen men aboard is just a fishing
dhow. The towed skiffs? Routine. A few rifles and an RPG? They need to
defend themselves, there are pirates around. Mobile phones? To talk, of
course... but with that equipment, you've got all you need for a pirate
expedition if a target presents, while still being able to fish legally
if nothing good appears or if large grey war-canoes keep pestering you.
>BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
>Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
And then some.
--
He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.
Paul J. Adam
Andrew Robert Breen
William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>La N wrote:
>
>> Mindful that you live in Wales, as does my brother, Andy, I am reminded of
>> an article that I found in several UK papers a couple of months ago. I am a
>> fan of news of the weird and absurd, but I want to know from you if this is
>> true: :)
>>
>>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211960/Council-turns-offensive-Spotted-Dick-Spotted-Richard-spare-blushes-diners.html
>> Council turns 'offensive' Spotted Dick into Spotted Richard to spare blushes
>> of diners
>
>It's in the Daily Mail and so almost certainly a pack of lies.
>
>> For generations it has risen above all the schoolboy sniggers.
>
>Well no.
>
>It was a Royal Naval favourite called 'a dead baby'.
>
>They changed the name to protect the sensibilities of Victorian ladies
>when they brought it ashore...
I'd thought it was originally "drowned baby", or was that but an
alternative name?
Andrew Robert Breen
William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>Dennis wrote:
>>
>> So that was some of the appeal - an egalitarian group in a world that
>> was anything but, and some Robin Hood added in.
>
>The most successful pirate of them all, Sir Francis Drake, never got
>elected to anything.
>
>Neither did Captain Kidd.
>
>Nobody ever suggested Sir Henry Morgan should stand for election either...
>
>Blackbeard was elected, but I don't think the election was contested.
All diligent apostles of the principle of "one man, one vote". In a very
literal sense.
William Black
> In article <hdhtrp$j9v$2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> La N wrote:
>>
>>> Mindful that you live in Wales, as does my brother, Andy, I am reminded of
>>> an article that I found in several UK papers a couple of months ago. I am a
>>> fan of news of the weird and absurd, but I want to know from you if this is
>>> true: :)
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211960/Council-turns-offensive-Spotted-Dick-Spotted-Richard-spare-blushes-diners.html
>>> Council turns 'offensive' Spotted Dick into Spotted Richard to spare blushes
>>> of diners
>> It's in the Daily Mail and so almost certainly a pack of lies.
>>
>>> For generations it has risen above all the schoolboy sniggers.
>> Well no.
>>
>> It was a Royal Naval favourite called 'a dead baby'.
>>
>> They changed the name to protect the sensibilities of Victorian ladies
>> when they brought it ashore...
>
> I'd thought it was originally "drowned baby", or was that but an
> alternative name?
>
I think they were probably interchangeable.
I've seen 'dead baby' in a recipe book and 'drowned baby' is in the
Patrick O'Brian books, and his research was usually meticulous.
Or they could be two different steamed suet puddings.
La N
> Andrew Robert Breen wrote:
>> In article <hdhtrp$j9v$2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> La N wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mindful that you live in Wales, as does my brother, Andy, I am
>>>> reminded of an article that I found in several UK papers a couple
>>>> of months ago. I am a fan of news of the weird and absurd, but I
>>>> want to know from you if this is true: :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211960/Council-turns-offensive-Spotted-Dick-Spotted-Richard-spare-blushes-diners.html
>>>> Council turns 'offensive' Spotted Dick into Spotted Richard to
>>>> spare blushes of diners
>>> It's in the Daily Mail and so almost certainly a pack of lies.
>>>
>>>> For generations it has risen above all the schoolboy sniggers.
>>> Well no.
>>>
>>> It was a Royal Naval favourite called 'a dead baby'.
>>>
>>> They changed the name to protect the sensibilities of Victorian
>>> ladies when they brought it ashore...
>>
>> I'd thought it was originally "drowned baby", or was that but an
>> alternative name?
>>
>
> I think they were probably interchangeable.
>
> I've seen 'dead baby' in a recipe book and 'drowned baby' is in the
> Patrick O'Brian books, and his research was usually meticulous.
>
> Or they could be two different steamed suet puddings.
Have any of you guys ever had spotted dicks?
- nilita <winky>
William Black
Paul J. Adam
<willia...@hotmail.co.uk> writes
>It was a Royal Naval favourite called 'a dead baby'.
Related to "babies' heads" (steak and kidney pudding)?
Paul J. Adam
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> writes
>Have any of you guys ever had spotted dicks?
I would say "I practice safe sex" but I'm so good at it these days I
don't need to practice any more, I just get on with it };)
La N
> La N wrote:
>>
>> Have any of you guys ever had spotted dicks?
>>
>> - nilita <winky>
>
>
> http://eatbma.blogspot.com/2009/03/anyone-want-some-spotted-dick.html
You know? I'm sure we had that as kids, being that my dad's family was
*nglish.
- nilita
Andrew Robert Breen
Oh yes, as a child - both at home and at school. The spots were the fairly
effete currants favoured in modern times, as opposed to the traditional
mix of dried-unknowns and ratshit favoured in the traditional treatments,
of course.
Oh, and it's "spotted dick". Singular and plural are the same for puddings
of that sort ;)
Alan Lothian
<bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
> Fred J. McCall wrote:
> > If Wee Willie had his way we'd all still be paying tribute to the
> > Pashas on the Barbary Coast...
>
> No you wouldn't, Fred. We knew who the 'Pashas on the Barbary Coast' were.
> Fair game....
>
> What William said was correct.
> We turned far too many Muslim weddings into mass Muslim funerals.
> There is going to be a price to pay for that oft repeated error.......
Not if you repeat it often enough.
It could really get as brutal as that, you know. The fuckwits tried to
kill my wife: I take that sort of personal. 7/7/ 2005. VERY PERSONAL.
Even after our divorce. And telescopic stuff is quite helpful in cases
of age and failing eyesight. Also due to a good Scots scientific
education, I know far more than they do about IED. Eat death, Johnny
Muslim. Go and abuse your women in hell. I am more than happy to help
you on your way there. Jeff, these lunatic bastards tried, and almost
succeeded, to kill the woman I loved above all others. I want them all
dead, as soon and as decently as possible. In Scots: nae messin'.
I write, as always, as the most liberal and tolerant of men
--
"The past resembles the future as water resembles water" -- Ibn Khaldun
If you wish to email me, try putting a dot between alan and lothian.
Blueyonder is a thing of the past.
La N
> In article <QiYKm.8228$ky1....@newsfe14.iad>, Jeffrey Hamilton
> <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>
>> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> If Wee Willie had his way we'd all still be paying tribute to the
>>> Pashas on the Barbary Coast...
>>
>> No you wouldn't, Fred. We knew who the 'Pashas on the Barbary Coast'
>> were. Fair game....
>>
>> What William said was correct.
>> We turned far too many Muslim weddings into mass Muslim funerals.
>> There is going to be a price to pay for that oft repeated
>> error.......
>
> Not if you repeat it often enough.
>
> It could really get as brutal as that, you know. The fuckwits tried to
> kill my wife: I take that sort of personal. 7/7/ 2005. VERY
> PERSONAL. Even after our divorce. And telescopic stuff is quite
> helpful in cases of age and failing eyesight. Also due to a good
> Scots scientific education, I know far more than they do about IED.
> Eat death, Johnny Muslim. Go and abuse your women in hell. I am more
> than happy to help you on your way there. Jeff, these lunatic
> bastards tried, and almost succeeded, to kill the woman I loved above
> all others. I want them all dead, as soon and as decently as
> possible. In Scots: nae messin'.
>
Why, Mr. Lothian! I do believe you learned all this nasty talk on the Mean
Streets of Glasga'! Were you one of the Feral Boys perchance? Hmmm?
- nil
Alex Potter
> Indubitably - anything controversial. Threaten to chop them down and
> replace with marijuana and you are almost sure to make the front page!
Hmm. 'Twould be hard to vote on that issue :)
--
Regards
Alex
William Black
> In article <QiYKm.8228$ky1....@newsfe14.iad>, Jeffrey Hamilton
> <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>
>> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> If Wee Willie had his way we'd all still be paying tribute to the
>>> Pashas on the Barbary Coast...
>> No you wouldn't, Fred. We knew who the 'Pashas on the Barbary Coast' were.
>> Fair game....
>>
>> What William said was correct.
>> We turned far too many Muslim weddings into mass Muslim funerals.
>> There is going to be a price to pay for that oft repeated error.......
>
> Not if you repeat it often enough.
>
> It could really get as brutal as that, you know. The fuckwits tried to
> kill my wife: I take that sort of personal. 7/7/ 2005. VERY PERSONAL.
> Even after our divorce. And telescopic stuff is quite helpful in cases
> of age and failing eyesight. Also due to a good Scots scientific
> education, I know far more than they do about IED. Eat death, Johnny
> Muslim. Go and abuse your women in hell. I am more than happy to help
> you on your way there. Jeff, these lunatic bastards tried, and almost
> succeeded, to kill the woman I loved above all others. I want them all
> dead, as soon and as decently as possible. In Scots: nae messin'.
Well the 7/7 bombers were as British as...
Gerry Adams...
Actually probably more so, the 7/7 bombers aren't entitled to a second
nationality...
Keith Willshaw
> In article <hdhudf$r76$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>Dennis wrote:
>>>
>>> So that was some of the appeal - an egalitarian group in a world
>>> that
>>> was anything but, and some Robin Hood added in.
>>
>>The most successful pirate of them all, Sir Francis Drake, never got
>>elected to anything.
>>
>>Neither did Captain Kidd.
>>
>>Nobody ever suggested Sir Henry Morgan should stand for election either...
>>
>>Blackbeard was elected, but I don't think the election was contested.
>
> All diligent apostles of the principle of "one man, one vote". In a very
> literal sense.
>
Yep the captain was the man with the vote :)
Keith
Andrew Swallow
> La N wrote:
>>> Richard wrote:
>>>> On Nov 11, 6:41 pm, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> "On the August 27 1816, following a round of failed negotiations,
>>>>>> the fleet delivered a punishing nine-hour bombardment of Algiers.
>>>>>> The attack immobilized many of the Dey's corsairs & shore
>>>>>> batteries, coercing him into accepting a peace offer of the same
>>>>>> terms as he had presented the day before. He warned that if they
>>>>>> were not accepted that he would continue the action. The Dey
>>>>>> accepted the terms, not realising that they were a bluff as the
>>>>>> fleet had already fired off all of its ammunition."
>>>>> You fail to understand the difference between pirates and a nation
>>>>> state.
>>>> If a "nation state" cannot adequately police its citizens so as to
>>>> prevent acts of piracy (Somalia) or smuggling (Mexico) or terrorism
>>>> (Afghanistan)...when do we call it a day and admit that despite our
>>>> wishful thinking and the protestations of the "government" (such as
>>>> it is), this is in fact a FAILED state.
>>> The idea of a 'failed state' is false.
>>>
>>> Some states have firmer control of their citizens than others.
>>>
>>> That some states do not control criminal activity to the extent the
>>> USA would like them to do is no reason to start shooting at them.
>>>
>>> I notice that the US government is not considering bombing Mexico
>>> because of the smuggling and that the Central American basket cases
>>> aren't being either described as 'failed states' (although if anyone
>>> is they are) or being considered for a swift and explosive visit from
>>> the USAF either...
>>>
>>>> Instead of the lenient term "criminal", perhaps we should view them
>>>> as rogue unsanctioned soldiers and deal with such scum (and their
>>>> support networks) accordingly. IOW, bomb them off the map.
>>> 'Rogue unsanctioned soldiers' are more properly called 'bandits'.
>>>
>>> Now look up something called 'social banditry' and find out that what
>>> you do by attacking the innocents where the bandits live is to open a
>>> can of worms.
>>>
>>>> The trouble with paying danegeld is you never get rid of the dane.
>>> Trotting out clich�s doesn't help much either.
>>>
>>>> Must be all the estrogen in the world's drinking water courtesy of
>>>> the "sexual revolution". Men used to have balls.
>>> And this comment can be safely ignored as well.
>>
>>
>> Heheheheh ..... So, what *are* the chances of the United States of Men
>> With Balls bombing Somalia back to (or forward to) the Middle Ages?
>> And I wonder what the fallout (if any) would be?
>
> The place is the size of Afghanistan with a quarter the population and
> the longest coastline in Africa.
>
> Pirates, by their very nature, spend most of their time out at sea
> looking for victims, while trying to look like fishermen...
>
> The bad guys use telephones of various types for their communications
> and reasonably freely available military stores for their weapons.
>
> Where will they bomb?
>
>
bomb the homes of the their wives, mothers and Mullahs - these are the
people in charge of telling the men to behave.
Andrew Swallow
William Black
Well no.
Most of them seem to be fishermen driven out of the fishing business
when the big boats fished out Somalian waters after the Somali
government disintegrated.
Don't you just love the idea of the men of a strictly Muslim society
being told to do stuff by their women...
Andrew Swallow
{snip}
>
> Personal tale: got interviwed by the Daily Wail once, a bit back. They
> wanted to know about the effects of the current spell of low solar
> activity. Once I made it clar that (a) global warming wasn not in any way
> related to solar activity any more (might have been once, but the solar
> effects are way swamped by those from addtitional greenhouse gases and (b)
> it would not cause house price collapse, single parenthood or lesbians (I
> exagerate for efect here.. ;) they visibly lost interest. The story never
> appeared. Funny, that...
>
The Daily Mail has a lower middle class readership that does not mind
getting its hands dirty. It is currently giving away DVDs of WW2 RAF
stories.
The solar cycle may not cause global warming but it does mess up
short wave radio communications. The stories that spin off from
this:
a. For men - pictures and how does this work descriptions of military
hardware. Ships, air force bases and army Signal Corps trucks
modify to carry radios.
b. For women - hero picture of men in uniform using short wave radio
for long range communication. The territorial army may even be
using it is Afghanistan.
c. Follow up for women - war time labour shortage resulting in girls
doing men's jobs (acting as signalmen).
Andrew Swallow
Alan Lothian
<ne...@jrwlynchANDNOTTHIS.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <_D%Km.51657$Db2.13989@edtnps83>, La N
> <nilita20...@yahoo.com> writes
> >Have any of you guys ever had spotted dicks?
>
> I would say "I practice safe sex" but I'm so good at it these days I
> don't need to practice any more, I just get on with it };)
It's the spots, Paul. OK if they are neatly petits, but.....
Alan Lothian
<willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I think they were probably interchangeable.
>
> I've seen 'dead baby' in a recipe book and 'drowned baby' is in the
> Patrick O'Brian books, and his research was usually meticulous.
>
> Or they could be two different steamed suet puddings.
No two steamed sweet suet puddings can be very different, Sir. A little
more or a little less galley slush....
That said, the horrible great slobberingly gelatinous pudding
impeccably visualized in the film Master & Commander is probably fairly
close to the original, at least in appearance. Much scoffed by
undernourished midshipmites if ever they got their hands on it.
Calories, calories.
Myself, these days I am restricted to un petit sorbet, pas de slush
s'il vous plait, and the merest trifle of good Armagnac. For which an
honest Calvados is an acceptable subsitute. To be consumed after the
sorbet, not with it.
You wouldn't *believe* what they charge for malt whisky here in the
depths of the Eurozone.
guy
> In article <hdhudf$r7...@news.eternal-september.org>,
To quote Vetinarii, 'I am the man, and I have the vote' (the only
vote!)
Guy
dott.Piergiorgio
> "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> :
> :Have any of you guys ever had spotted dicks?
> :
> :- nilita <winky>
> :
>
> No, I avoid women like you...
I hope for yourself (and Mrs. Nilita) that no relative of her has
propension for application of Code Duello.....
(side note, saying this about an Italian woman, is a sure way to find
brothers, sons, cousins, parents etc. hunting you with everything from
clubs to rifles....)
Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.
William Black
>
> You wouldn't *believe* what they charge for malt whisky here in the
> depths of the Eurozone.
>
Aldi do a cheapish one that's drinkable.
La N
"dott.Piergiorgio" <dott.Pierg...@KAIGUN.fastwebnet.it> wrote in
message news:7CcLm.34381$813....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
There is nobody I know, least of all any woman, who would waste time,
energy, and ammo on a loser like Fred. If have a feeling he is the killfile
of life of all women. And that's what makes him so miserable.
So no worry, eh?
Capice?
- nilita
dott.Piergiorgio
> So no worry, eh?
> Capice?
capito ;)
Jeffrey Hamilton
> "Jeffrey Hamilton" <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>
>> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> If Wee Willie had his way we'd all still be paying tribute to the
>>> Pashas on the Barbary Coast...
>>
>> No you wouldn't, Fred. We knew who the 'Pashas on the Barbary Coast'
>> were. Fair game....
>>
>
> Skippy here is now once again responding to EVERY post I make in order
> merely to disagree and make stupid remarks?
More importantly *Twink*, is anyone keeping track of how many posts *you*
respond to, merely to make stupid disparaging remarks ?
>
> What is this? Round 4? Round 5? It's so easy to lose track...
It's never ceased on your part *Twink*, quyite simply, you see a post you go
on the attack, it's no more difficult to count than to merely see how many
you posts you makein any given day.
cheers.....Jeff
Richard Casady
wrote:
>BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
>Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
Someone wrote some fiction. Treasure Island by RL Stevenson and the
like.
I think pirates should be sown into a hammock for the traditional
burial at sea. No reason to kill them first, just drop them over the
side.
Casady
William Black
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:58:44 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
>> Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
>
> Someone wrote some fiction. Treasure Island by RL Stevenson and the
> like.
Stephenson's pirates are not nice people...
Jack Linthicum
> > wrote:
>
> >> BTW, how did pirates (of yore) ever become the subjects of fun and fantasy.
> >> Weren't they as brutal then as they are now?
>
> > Someone wrote some fiction. Treasure Island by RL Stevenson and the
> > like.
>
> Stephenson's pirates are not nice people...
>
> --
> William Black
>
> "Any number under six"
>
> The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
> Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
> single handed with a quarterstaff.
Errol Flynn, Gene Kelly, Douglas Fairbanks and Junior, etc. See
below: