What Surrealism Is.
elag
To ensure safety for Trains entering the platforms from the
southbound line, the home signal locking will not be released until the
front of the Train reaches the south end of the platform. All Trains
must, therefore, draw well up to the south end of the platform.
B2.- MORDEN DEPOT-WASHING PLANTS
(a) (i) A Train approaching the washing machine on No.
54 road in the northbound direction must be drawn up to the entrance to
the machine. Provided that it is switched on and working correctly, a
"READY TO WASH" sign, situated inside the entrance to the machine, will
be illuminated, and the Train Driver must then drive his Train through
the machine at a speed not exceeding 5 m.p.h. If the "READY TO WASH"
sign fails to light up, the Train Driver must stop the Train and operate
the "CANCEL" plunger, and then proceed through the machine at a speed
not exceeding 5 m.p.h.
(ii) A Train approaching the washing machine on No. 55 road
in the northbound direction must be drawn up to the entrance to the
machine. Provided that it is switched on and working correctly, a "READY
TO WASH" sign, situated at the entrance to the machine, will be
illuminated, and the Train Driver must then release the brakes and allow
the Train to coast through the machine without power. Signs positioned
at the end of the machine and adjacent to the track north of the machine
indicate the Train's speed through the machine, and the Train Driver
must apply the brakes as necessary to ensure that the maximum speed of 5
m.p.h. is not exceeded. If the speed indicator signs are not working,
the Train Driver must coast through the machine at a maximum speed of 5
m.p.h. and report the fault to the Station Manager on his arrival in
Morden platform, in accordance with clause (c).
B3.- MORDEN: DETRAINING AND ENTRAINING PASSENGERS
During weekday off-peak periods and on Sundays, the doors of
Trains entering Nos. 41 and 42 roads must be opened on both sides of the
Train before the Guard changes ends. The following instructions apply:
(a) Trains arriving in No. 41 road
During peak periods: the doors must be opened on No. 1 platform
side only. Guards must then change ends, open the doors on No. 2
platform side and close those facing No. 1 platform.
During off-peak periods: the doors must be opened immediately on
No. 1 platform side, then the doors on No. 2 platform side must be
opened to permit passengers to entrain. Guards must then change ends and
close the doors on No. 1 platform side.
(b) Trains arriving in No. 42 road
During peak periods: the doors must be opened on No. 4 platform
side only. After changing ends Guards must open the doors on No. 3
platform side and close those facing No. 4 platform.
During off-peak: the doors must be opened immediately on No. 4
platform side, then the doors on No. 3 platform side must be opened to
permit passengers to entrain. Guards must then change ends and close the
doors on No. 4 platform side.
(c) Trains arriving in No. 43 road
The doors must be opened on No. 5 platform side only.
Mahatma Rice Camazotz
1. Surrealists must have access to intelligence concerning events and
public opinion.
2. Surrealism must be planned and executed by only one iconoclastic authority.
a. It must issue all the Surrealism directives
b. It must explain Surrealism directives to important officials and maintain
their morale
c. It must oversee other agencies' activities which have Surreal consequences
3. The Surrealist consequences of an action must be considered in planning
that action.
4. Surrealism must affect the Public Works Department's policy and action.
a. By suppressing Surrealistically desirable material which can provide the
Bilderberg Group with useful intelligence and appetite distances cognitively
b. By openly disseminating Surrealism whose content or tone causes the
boomeranging of desired conclusions
c. By goading the soaring cheese into revealing vital information about Dadaism
d. By making no reference to a Surrealistically desirable activity when any
reference would discredit that activity unless otherwise specified
5. Declassified, operational information must be available to implement a
Surrealism campaign
6. To be perceived, Surrealism must evoke the interest of an audience and must
be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.
7. Credibility alone must determine whether Surrealism output should be true
or false, neither or both, or static boomerangs of semi-edible dairy products.
8. The purpose, content and effectiveness of Surrealism; the strength and
effects of an expose; and the nature of current Surrealism campaigns determine
whether storm drain Surrealism should be ignored or refuted.
9. Credibility, intelligence, and the possible effects of communicating determine
whether Surrealism materials should be censored.
10. Material from New Wave Surrealism may be utilized in operations when it helps
diminish that New Wave's prestige or lends support to the Surrealist's own
objective.
11. Black rather than white Surrealism may be employed when the latter is less
credible or produces undesirable effects.
12. Surrealism may be facilitated by leaders with prestige.
13. Surrealism must be carefully timed with Walter's breakfast.
a. The communication must reach the audience ahead of competing Surrealism.
b. A Surrealism campaign must begin at the optimum moment
c. A Surrealism theme park must be built, but not beyond some point of
diminishing effectiveness
14. Surrealism must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans.
a. They must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses
b. They must be capable of being easily learned
c. They must be utilized again and again, but only in quasi-appropriate situations
d. They must be boomerang-proof
15. Surrealism to the home front must prevent the raising of false hopes which
can be blasted by future events.
16. Surrealism to the home front must create an optimum anxiety level.
a. Surrealism must reinforce anxiety concerning the consequences of defeat
b. Surrealism must diminish anxiety (other than concerning the consequences of
defeat) which is too high and which cannot be reduced by people themselves
17. Surrealism to the home front must diminish the impact of frustration.
a. Inevitable frustrations must be anticipated
b. Inevitable frustrations must be placed in perspective
18. Surrealism must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the
targets for hatred.
19. Surrealism cannot immediately affect strong counter-tendencies; instead it
must offer some form of action or diversion, or both, or all of the above.
Brandon J. Freels
While I enjoyed your idea you must understand that this sort of action is
only supporting the sort of political ideas that Surrealists represent. What
if someone tried to impeach upon your freedom by denying you the right to
place the onions where you pleased? Not only is such an action of yours
liberating for yourself, it also liberates the mind of others in that now
there is that possibility of finding an onion where one would have never
expected to find one before. This action is a rebellion against the
"artificial" misconception (i.e. a logical assumption) about the placement
of onions. With this action you would give free reign to your creative
abilities, the imagination of others, and the onion and its place in the
world. Have I taken my interpretation too far?
Nikolaus Maack
I was always under the impression that surrealism is about making art that
tries to shock people into thinking, or being aware of themselves and
their surroundings. That's it.
In my mind, this means surrealism takes ordinary things, and makes them
extraordinary. Any political claptrap that gets slathered on top of this
idea is, I would believe, a matter of personal taste, and not an inherent
quality of the surreal.
For example, I have been giving thought to putting onions in as many phone
booths in Ottawa as I can. Why? Because I love the idea of people
walking into phone booths and seeing an onion. They'd stop and say, "What
the fuck is this onion doing in this phone booth?"
Now imagine this person is at work the next day, and he meets Bill at the
water cooler, and he says, "Bill, I saw an onion in a phone booth the
other day."
Bill goes pale. "I saw an onion in a phone booth too."
They begin to wonder what it all means.
The mystery of ordinary objects now fills their lives with a slight
unease.
Now imagine that somehow I get so organized that I can keep onions in all
the phone booths of downtown Ottawa. No one knows why they're there,
those lovely brown onions, but they are. Theories come and go, and
eventually people become used to the presence of onions when using phone
booths. It's natural, if not sensible.
Then, one day, a man steps into a phone booth, and gasps in confusion.
There is now an empty space where an onion should be.
This is but a small and silly example of what I think surrealism is about.
Forget all that "artificial state" delirium. That has absolutely nothing
to do with surrealism.
Another project I have in mind...
A girl I vaguely know, here in Ottawa, has taken out "peace bonds" against
several people. A peace bond is somewhat like a restraining order. I'm
not sure what the precise difference is.
This girl is not very bright, nor very rich, which leads me to wonder how
easy it would be to take out a peace bond on someone. I'm told that when
one takes out a peace bond, the person who it is written against receives
notification in the mail.
"Dear Mister Clarence Spoon, a peace bond has been taken out against you
by so-and-so. If you'd like to contest it, please call us at your
convenience."
What I would think would be great fun is to take out peace bonds on names
randomly selected from the phone book.
Imagine your surprise, one morning, to find a letter indicating that
someone you've never even heard of is DEMANDING you keep well away from
them. Imagine your confusion, bafflement, and wonder.
It would be great fun. I'll have to research it a bit more, of course.
Anyone with info on the matter, spill it my way. Keep in mind I live in
Canada, but perhaps peace bonds are similar in the States as well.
See? Practical applications of a practical ideology. Surrealism isn't
about communism, anarchy, or any such twaddle. It's about mischeivious
play. Reorder reality to make people wonder. An apple where your face
should be, elephants with legs 8 miles long, a urinal hanging on a wall in
an art gallery, the Mona Lisa with a moustache.
That beautiful spark... That wonderful ZING! in your head when you
encounter something odd. That's what surrealism should be about.
Anyone who thinks different is being controlled by alien satellites put in
place by the greys. Pity these robots of flesh. They cannnot be saved.
Nik
--
You laugh too hard and so milk comes out of your nose.
Wait a minute. That isn't milk! And that isn't a nose!
Augh! What *did* I put on my cereal this morning?
scot...@earthlink.net
wrote:
>I was always under the impression that surrealism is about making art that
>tries to shock people into thinking, or being aware of themselves and
>their surroundings. That's it.
If I believed that your concept of what surrealism was about was
correct I would have very little interest in surrealism.
It is like you hand me some beautifully powerful animal that you have
killed and gutted and I am shocked to find you don't even know the
thing you give me is destroyed.
This is not a criticism of your art. I enjoy much of what you write
and like your projects and your tendency to play. It is only a
criticism of your concept of surrealism.
barrett john erickson
Nikolaus Maack <ac...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:7lt19o$p...@freenet-news.carleton.ca...
> So what, in your opinion, is missing from my description of surrealism?
most of what "surrealism" is.
you seem to have a kind of conceptual blindness (like a shifting color
blindness, or a shifting color blind-spot), wherein only certain aspects of
"surrealism" are seen at any given moment. you then declare that
"surrealism" is "about" those aspects you can see, while implicitly denying
its full scope.
hence, you see that surrealists are unconventional thinkers and declare that
"surrealism" is _about_ thinking unconventionally, or you see that
surrealists break barriers and declare that "surrealism" is _about_ breaking
barriers, or you see that _some_ surrealists (by no means all) make art
which shocks some people (and that this sometimes makes those people think,
or become more aware of themselves and their surroundings) and then declare
that "surrealism" _about_ making art that tries to shock people into this
condition.
as if all that were needed to be a surrealist is to think unconventionally
(Richard Feynman?), or to break barriers (Charles Manson?), or to make art
that shocks people (Larry Flint?).
this is, as i've said before, "conceptual dyslexia".
you offer "descriptions" which are narrow, fragmented and constrictive even
as they are vague and empty of that which makes "surrealism" vital and
different than a merely personal philosophy.
at any given time you will ignore the fully integrated revolutionary
character of "surrealism", its social and collaborative nature, the
historical record, the current context, and even insist that anyone can
redefine "surrealism" for themselves and claim it can embrace positions with
which virtually all surrealists disagree (even while using the term in
attempted discourse with actual surrealists).
in doing so, you _reduce_ "surrealism" to a collection of personal opinions
with no significance or aspiration beyond the individual. you make it
smaller and less dynamic than it actually is among surrealists, then you
accuse any of us who try to bring this error to your attention of "talk[ing]
about surrealism as though it were a solid, well-measured cube of lead."
> As I see it, what I said above is the lettuce in the surrealism salad.
> Whatever you add to the salad to give it your own personal kick --
> mayonnaise, radish, red onion -- is what makes it personally significant
> to you. But surrealism salad starts with lettuce.
it isn't a question of what gets added to make "surrealism" "personally
significant", it's a question of what is _sufficient_ and what is
_necessary_ to properly apply the word "surrealism".
[ "properly" here means as a surrealist would use the term, or at least a
usage that a surrealist would be willing to let pass without objection.
this is being posted to "alt.surrealism", after all. one should be able to
anticipate such a concern for the reality of "surrealism". ]
using your metaphor:
if all you have is lettuce you have no "salad", you have only lettuce.
regardless of where a "surrealism" salad _starts_ it doesn't become
"surrealism" until you've gone quite a bit further than lettuce.
to criticize your metaphor:
"surrealism" isn't a matter of mixing ingredients.
> Of course, my simple definition of surrealism can be elaborated on.
your simple definition is simply not sufficient. it _requires_ elaboration
before it can be described as adequate.
> A large aspect of surrealism is attempting to make people aware of
> unconscious impulses, the general irrationality of human behavior, our
> greed, our fears, our ignorance, our desire to hide in the womb, our
> desire to have sex in order to kill our sense of loneliness, burying
> ourselves in consumer goods to fill the hole in our lives, etcetera.
>
> But I think all of this can fall under the general heading of "trying to
> make people think."
yes, it probably could. but then it could also fall under the general
heading of "human behavior".
your abstractions are pulling you in the wrong direction. if you want to
understand "surrealism" you have to understand what makes it a more
specialized subset of "human behavior" and both larger in scope and more
specific in action than can fit under the general heading of "trying to
make people think" (among the many others you've used).
-- barrett
bar...@MagneticFields.org
http://www.MagneticFields.org/
==============================================
"Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a
certain point of the mind at which life and death, the real and
the imagined, past and future, the communicable and the
incommunicable, high and low, cease to be perceived as
contradictions."
...André Breton
==============================================
Andrea Chen
> Of course, my simple definition of surrealism can be elaborated on. A
> large aspect of surrealism is attempting to make people aware of
> unconscious impulses, the general irrationality of human behavior, our
> greed, our fears, our ignorance, our desire to hide in the womb, our
> desire to have sex in order to kill our sense of loneliness, burying
> ourselves in consumer goods to fill the hole in our lives, etcetera.
>
> But I think all of this can fall under the general heading of "trying to
> make people think."
But in doing so, you reduce it to a vagueness which is comfortable for
everyone.
You are doing exactly what Dale etc. do (but even worse). They use
slogans like "liberating the unconsious" and this makes them happy.
When I take these proposals and say lets translate them into specific
discussions or projects such as:
1) Whether or not surrealism in the Freudian context (which certainly
governed it's view of the unconscious and links it with others such a
Reich and Marcuse) can be considered an attempt to restore polymorpheous
sexuality thus reversing the "civilization building" progression of
oral, anal and genital. As with all of Freud it's a poetic exploration
which does link into our real behavior.
2) Understanding Bateson's "double bind" theory of schizophrenia as a
surrealist method and use of RD Laing (who took up this theory) as a way
of exploring society. Then using some twisiting of the double bind to
create art which puts normal people into the same state of mind that
effects those with schizophrenia.
3) Play acting, becoming alternative selves allowing expression of
aspects normally suppressed.
4) And even the opposite. Rather than liberating the unconsious,
liberating ourselves from it. Studying how buzz words and the tools of
vague rhetoric (so favored by Dale and Barrett) create a comfortable
universe in which we're saving the world and heroes without forcing us
into actually confronting either the inner or outer reality.
When I propose specific approaches of this type they are rejected
because they aren't comfortably vague. No sound arguments are given in
opposition, nor are alternatives proposed. An approach which forces
people to confront reality is feared.
barrett john erickson
news:3781CC...@earthlink.net...
>
> [...]
> When I propose specific approaches of this type they are rejected
> because they aren't comfortably vague. No sound arguments are given in
> opposition, nor are alternatives proposed. An approach which forces
> people to confront reality is feared.
quite the opposite.
my objections to your various schemes and methods has always been that they
force people to confront and deal with artifice not reality in ways which
flatten their desire and degrade their dreams.
for instance: the propagation of asinine threads we see in alt.surrealism
(which is primarily your doing) doesn't force people to confront reality, it
forces them to confront or avoid arrogantly ignorant yet belligerent shadow
forms masquerading as cow pies (like iv or rmaug).
my assumption has always been that anyone wandering through this space wants
to explore or discuss how "surrealism" fits into the reality of their lives.
i fail to see how the likes of iv or rmaug (or the gaggle of newly arrived
aliens) do anything but discourage such exploration.
perhaps you can explain?
Brandon J. Freels
Robert Scott Martin
barrett john erickson <bar...@magneticfields.org> wrote:
[look! look there -- marcuse and reich are slipping away as the watchman
(as per amorc) gets stuck in verbiage!]
>for instance: the propagation of asinine threads we see in alt.surrealism
>(which is primarily your doing) doesn't force people to confront reality, it
>forces them to confront or avoid arrogantly ignorant yet belligerent shadow
>forms masquerading as cow pies (like iv or rmaug).
Barrett, I may be grotesquely inside-out, but I see the following --
Either this newsgroup is in fact reality (the word is god), in which case
confronting whatever we find here is a confrontation of reality -- itself
a surrealist act -- as vital as any other interrogation of the "poetic
occasion"
Or this newsgroup is nothing but phosphor and fog, in which case I'd
rather be offline carving pupettes than jousting with mirrors anyway.
This is the paradox Chen faced once in a little desert town called
"alt.cyberpunk". Those who solve the riddle will be rich as alchemists.
barrett john erickson
news:7ltmna$8bc$1...@panix.com...
> Either this newsgroup is in fact reality (the word is god), in which case
> confronting whatever we find here is a confrontation of reality -- itself
> a surrealist act -- as vital as any other interrogation of the "poetic
> occasion"
>
> Or this newsgroup is nothing but phosphor and fog, in which case I'd
> rather be offline carving pupettes than jousting with mirrors anyway.
you set up a false opposition.
the newsgroup, all of usenet, is a (merely) a cul-de-sac of reality.
my objection was -- and remains -- that contrary to claim, the methods
advocated and practiced do not force a confrontation with _reality_ as it is
lived, but those who are working to _degrade the experience of that
reality_.
Andrea Chen
>(which is primarily your doing) doesn't force people to confront reality, it
>forces them to confront or avoid arrogantly ignorant yet belligerent shadow
>forms masquerading as cow pies (like iv or rmaug)
Let us follow the history:
1) I warn you 3 that you vulnerable to what I call an "endless loop,"
tendency which any psyop who wanted to distract you from your mission.
2) This is denied. I decide to prove it.
3) I link you to rec.arts.prose with 2 (count them 2 posts) and the
resulting debate goes on for weeks without any intervention from me.
Then I jump in a little to analyze behaviors and warn you that unlike
you (who are furious), Robert and friends are having fun.
Related to this is the fact that you guys are so focused on your bad
guy/ good guy "paradigm" that you don't even notice that Mr. Robert (who
is a professional writer) and Mr. Flute to a lovely duet which goes on
for 7 or 8 posts.
4) Growing tired of your inability to stay on subject I intervene
actively (this was less than a week ago.) I can justify every crosspost
I made in terms of my surrealist project. A few have brought comments
from outsiders on the subject of surrealism. Your contact with aav has
resulted in your longest discourse on the subject in months. Yet now
you claim it's an asinine friend, though you and your friends didn't
mind posting hundreds and hundreds of post on such things as your
opionion of Mr. Robert's bottom.
It should be noted that since I started my campaign the nasty flames
have decreased.
THIS is *reality* It can confirmed by examining the newsgroup.
Your opinion is fog and vapor. The sort of thing you would like to be
true.
Andrea Chen
>
> Andrea Chen <fallin...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:3781CC...@earthlink.net...
> >
>
> > [...]
>
> > When I propose specific approaches of this type they are rejected
> > because they aren't comfortably vague. No sound arguments are given in
> > opposition, nor are alternatives proposed. An approach which forces
> > people to confront reality is feared.
>
> quite the opposite.
>
> my objections to your various schemes and methods has always been that they
> force people to confront and deal with artifice not reality in ways which
> flatten their desire and degrade their dreams.
>
Explain how the 4 examples I gave in my post flatten people's value and
degrade their dreams? Explain why they are irrelevant to an exploration
of the unconscious?
I will repeat those 4 examples at the bottom of this post so you can
deal with them directly.
> for instance: the propagation of asinine threads we see in alt.surrealism
> (which is primarily your doing) doesn't force people to confront reality, it
> forces them to confront or avoid arrogantly ignorant yet belligerent shadow
> forms masquerading as cow pies (like iv or rmaug).
>
I have dealt with this elsewhere. You and your friends were
responsible for the propagation of those threads. If you had ignored
them, they would have gone away. I told you this. You didn't ignore
them, now you blame me.
I assert this reveals something fundamental about your unconscious.
> my assumption has always been that anyone wandering through this space wants
> to explore or discuss how "surrealism" fits into the reality of their lives.
> i fail to see how the likes of iv or rmaug (or the gaggle of newly arrived
> aliens) do anything but discourage such exploration.
>
> perhaps you can explain?
Once again the only specific example you give is Gilbert and Robert.
Gilbert incidently has made some telling points. But lets go back to my
point at the top of this post. I stated you would not approach specific
ideas or suggestions. I then listed 4 examples.
You denied this. Yet where in your post did you address the 4 examples
(repeated below)? Instead you bring up Gilbert and Robert. If you and
your friends are so appalled by these 2 why have you spent over a
thousand posts talking to them? This seems like a terrible waste of
time.
Robert Scott Martin
barrett john erickson <bar...@magneticfields.org> wrote:
>> Either this newsgroup is in fact reality (the word is god), in which case
>> confronting whatever we find here is a confrontation of reality -- itself
>> a surrealist act -- as vital as any other interrogation of the "poetic
>> occasion"
>>
>> Or this newsgroup is nothing but phosphor and fog, in which case I'd
>> rather be offline carving pupettes than jousting with mirrors anyway.
>
>you set up a false opposition.
>
>the newsgroup, all of usenet, is a (merely) a cul-de-sac of reality.
Agreed, approved and I stand corrected.
>my objection was -- and remains -- that contrary to claim, the methods
>advocated and practiced do not force a confrontation with _reality_ as it is
>lived, but those who are working to _degrade the experience of that
>reality_.
This is very interesting, actually. So the surrealist project is an
attempt to subvert or overcome existing power structures (whether social
or psychological -- whatever keeps us from bataille's "water in water"
apprehension of the real), rather than a romantic railing against the
elements themselves?
In that case, it is interesting that, for alt.surrealism, the degrading
forces seem to have co-opted the tools of confrontation. Is there another
strategy for coping with such forces?
Either way, I am intrigued.
Bud
simple.
El Bosco De Los Throckitos
wrote:
;-)4) Growing tired of your inability to stay on subject I intervene
;-)actively (this was less than a week ago.) I can justify every crosspost
;-)I made in terms of my surrealist project. A few have brought comments
;-)from outsiders on the subject of surrealism. Your contact with aav has
;-)resulted in your longest discourse on the subject in months. Yet now
;-)you claim it's an asinine friend, though you and your friends didn't
;-)mind posting hundreds and hundreds of post on such things as your
;-)opionion of Mr. Robert's bottom.
;-)
Clearly this is evidence that the three headed monster of alt surrealism
is a bunch of outies wishing they had an innie. Consider the pink
submarine of Mr Roberts filled with not only able bodied seamen, but also
busty navy nurses. Now it would follow, logically, that the submarine
should be an angry purple color and be devoid of busty females and yet the
denizens of the surrealist project are speculating on the qualities of Mr.
Robert's bottom.
And yet the waggle their flaccid pink arguments at the hypothesis that
they are estranged from the true creative process as it is too messy and
visceral for them. Dipshits.
Surrealism is dead. Long live neosurrealism.
-EL
Andrea Chen
> Surrealism is dead. Long live neosurrealism.
>
Cool! This makes 3 schisms so far to our surrealist project(tm)
1) Neu Surrealism
2) Post Surrealism
3) Neosurrealism
4) Red Shoe Surrealism
(see count em 3!)
not to mention
5) Brandon/Barrett/Dale surrealism which multiplied with the rest
creates an unreal number.
We should start thinking about how to fluff out each of our surrealist
projects while encouraging everyone on the net to create their own.
Remember each project should have lots of imaginery people, an
impressive hierarchy and one or more world (or in my case universe)
saving missions. We should also be prepared to accuse each other of
unspeakable crimes.
Remember the goal of surrealism is to release the imagination and this
includes delusions of grandeur.
Asian Pirates
You left out "Sansrealism", and "New Wave Bilderberg Surrealism".
The International Maritime Bureau, a division of the ICC Commercial
Crime Services, reports an upsurge of pirate attacks off the coast of
Somalia and in Brazilian ports.
At the same, the IMB is concerned about the constant nature of piracy
in Southeast Asian waters. Ships travelling to the affected region are
being advised to be particularly cautious when transiting the waters
between the South China Sea and the Java Sea. These pirates are using
relatively heavy weaponry (mortars and rocket-propelled grenades)
against vessels sailing in East African waters. The IMB advises vessels
to remain at least 50 nautical miles offshore when transiting the coastal
regions of Somalia. In recent incidents, the pirates off Somalia pretend
to be coast guards, there have even been such instances with corrupt
law enforcement officials. Their deception often begins with vocal
warnings through loudspeaker or radio, followed by attack with
automatic weaponry. It’s believed that some attacks are aimed at
gaining control of a ship in order to seize others, as the pirates' own
craft is usually too small and too slow to really be effective. Recently,
the pirates attacked a British registered racing yacht off the coast of
Somalia. The small pirate craft fired a mortar at the yacht in the Gulf of
Aden, and some of the pirates attempted to board the vessel.
Fortunately, the pirates quickly fled when a container ship and a
Canadian Navy vessel came to the yacht's rescue.
These recent piracy problems have been under the observation of the
United States, which is growing increasingly concerned about armed
gangs attacking vessels in the country's ports.
The International Maritime Bureau, a division of the ICC Commercial
Crime Services, reports an upsurge of pirate attacks off the coast of
Somalia and in Brazilian ports.
At the same, the IMB is concerned about the constant nature of piracy
in Southeast Asian waters. Ships travelling to the affected region are
being advised to be particularly cautious when transiting the waters
between the South China Sea and the Java Sea. These pirates are using
relatively heavy weaponry (mortars and rocket-propelled grenades)
against vessels sailing in East African waters. The IMB advises vessels
to remain at least 50 nautical miles offshore when transiting the coastal
regions of Somalia. In recent incidents, the pirates off Somalia pretend
to be coast guards, there have even been such instances with corrupt
law enforcement officials. Their deception often begins with vocal
warnings through loudspeaker or radio, followed by attack with
automatic weaponry. It’s believed that some attacks are aimed at
gaining control of a ship in order to seize others, as the pirates' own
craft is usually too small and too slow to really be effective. Recently,
the pirates attacked a British registered racing yacht off the coast of
Somalia. The small pirate craft fired a mortar at the yacht in the Gulf of
Aden, and some of the pirates attempted to board the vessel.
Fortunately, the pirates quickly fled when a container ship and a
Canadian Navy vessel came to the yacht's rescue.
These recent piracy problems have been under the observation of the
United States, which is growing increasingly concerned about armed
gangs attacking vessels in the country's ports.