General Debate 19/02/11

Yahoo News. OSLO, Norway – A Norwegian shipping magnate was strongly criticized Wednesday for suggesting that pirates captured off the Horn of Africa should be sunk with their skiffs or executed on the spot. In a newspaper op-ed, the 79-year-old founder of the Stolt-Nielsen shipping group, Jacob Stolt-Nielsen, said history shows that fighting piracy requires a gloves-off approach.

“When (piracy) implies a great risk of being caught and hanged, and the cost of losing ships and weapons becomes too big, it will decrease and eventually disappear,” Stolt-Nielsen wrote Tuesday in Norwegian financial newspaper Dagens Naeringsliv. “Pirates captured in international waters have always been punished by death, often on the spot,” he wrote, arguing that modern navies should deal with the problem like Roman pirate hunter Pompey did more than 2,000 years ago. “Not arrest them and say, ‘naughty, naughty, shame on you,’ and release them again, but sink their boats with all hands,” Stolt-Nielsen wrote. “The pirates won’t be frightened by being placed before a civilian court.”

The article drew sharp criticism in Norway, a seafaring nation known as a peace broker in many of the world’s armed conflicts and as the home of the Nobel Peace Prize. Jacqueline Smith, president of the Norwegian Seafarers Union, described Stolt-Nielsen’s views as “barbaric” and said killing pirates could endanger the 700 seafarers now held as hostages in Somalia.

Piracy in the busy shipping lanes off the African nation has flourished since its government collapsed in 1991. Erik Lahnstein, state secretary at Norway’s Foreign Ministry, said basic human rights must apply also to pirates, and noted that “even for the most gruesome crimes, we do not have death penalty in Norway.” Stolt-Nielsen acknowledged that killing pirates could trigger a backlash against crews held hostage. “But you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs. This is war and warfare costs lives,” he wrote.

Source.

10 thoughts on “General Debate 19/02/11

  1. There is only one language that pirates respond to.Force of arms. We don’t havt to go as far back as the ancient Romans. Pirates have always been dealt with firmly ,until now that is.
    Human rights is one of the most dangerous scams the west faces. Human rights legislation is crippling the west. The only people to benefit are criminals and lawyers.
    What of the human rights of ships crews and passengers?

    This is a great article from The Telegraph. Note Russian ships are no longer attacked and why. That’s how you deal with pirates.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/8298095/Spirit-of-Adventure-Behind-the-rise-of-the-Somali-pirates.html

    Like

  2. Damn straight… Why is it whenever a successful person talks about actions, consequences and solutions (or as I like to call it: reality) people act like they want to put kittens in blenders..?

    Like

  3. What happenned to the statement, “We don’t negotiate with terrorists”?!
    These pirates are simply terrorists by any other name. The fact that most of them are also Muslim is just another reason why we should not negotiate with them.

    Islam/terrorists/pirates only understand ONE message: greater force. These guys are prepared to live by the sword, we should make sure they die by the sword. No court cases, no lawyers, no juries – instant justice at the end of a gun!

    We need more individuals like Jacob Stolt-Nielsen! These pandering liberal soft-cocks make me want to puke!

    Like

  4. Interesting comments from a “senior National Party source” in an article on Stuff.co.nz (with a tip of the hat in the Whale’s direction):

    “members are particularly conserned (sic) about the party being hijacked by the Christian-right”

    “…conservatives are viewed as not in touch with middle New Zealand and not in line with John Key’s broader image.”

    “…the politics of the Christian-right does not fit in with the party’s broader appeal.”

    Just to remind those playing along at home, here are what the National Party claim are their values:
    * Loyalty to our country, its democratic principles and our Sovereign as Head of State
    * National and personal security
    * Equal citizenship and equal opportunity
    * Individual freedom and choice
    * Personal responsibility
    * Limited government
    * Strong families and caring communities
    (irrelevant or embarrassing ones left out for obvious reasons)

    All of these values are exactly, and I mean exactly, what those of us who claim to be Christian Conservatives hold dear. The only different between we CCs and the current National government is that to us, those values are not tradeable for the baubles of power, or any other price. The current National government has not just traded them away, but given them away in a desperate effort to appear the leftist equal of Labour.

    Well team, we always knew we were the enemy, and that the party to which we gave support in 2008 has betrayed us. Now I guess the only thing that’s changed is that we have proof of the betrayal. It is official; we are the enemy.

    Thanks for nothing Mr. Key. You and you communist bedfellows are assured of one thing this November: you will not have my vote. The National Party will not now, and never again, have my vote until they repent of their socialist sins and return to their own stated values.

    I have one final message for you Mr. Key: you are a disgrace. You and your entire cabinet.

    Like

  5. I always take Cameron Slater with a pinch of salt to be honest. He’s a bored, born to rule National Party hack hanging out on a sickness benefit hoping one day to get a regular gig as a radio or TV political commentator.

    Like

  6. Not so sure Angus. If Slater goes “mainstream” the hotline he has to National’s inner circle will immediately be cut. He seems to really enjoy being the black sheep that tells the family’s tales. Going mainstream will kill that.

    I also fully support his campaign against name suppression, although I wonder about his campaign against Goodfellow and (now) Pienaar et. al. Not that I know anything about either Goodfellow or Pienaar.

    Incidentally: here’s a statement of clarification. I don’t know Pienaar or Robinson. I have never heard of their Church. I have no idea their beliefs. What I can say is that branch stacking and candidate intimidation are tools of the left, not any Christian Conservative I have ever met. If Pienaar et. al. have done what the article claims, they are scum who have no place in the New Zealand political system.

    Like

  7. “I don’t know Pienaar or Robinson. I have never heard of their Church. I have no idea their beliefs. What I can say is that branch stacking and candidate intimidation are tools of the left, not any Christian Conservative I have ever met. If Pienaar et. al. have done what the article claims, they are scum who have no place in the New Zealand political system.”

    Gantt, I was going to write an article on this, but I’m unclear on this allegation of “branch stacking”. I can’t see why what has happened at Rodney should cause moral outrage. So Peinaar went out and signed up some new members (is that right?) that gave him a democratic edge in the voting. What is stopping his opponents from doing the same thing?

    It seems to me that Pienaar has merely managed to garner numerical support within the electorate that the others cannot. In my ignorance, I cannot see anything wrong with this. Could Gantt or anyone else reading this give me more information?

    Like

Comments are closed.