Video: Royal Marines capture and sink pirate vessel

[SPKmes]

<S> Diehard

[Die Hard]

<S>

[mechanic]

They sure do. That's why Britain is what it is these days.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Surveillance state. Police state.

The three young men who killed 16-year-old Ben Kinsella were today given life sentences at the Old Bailey in London.

Juress Kika, 19, Jade Braithwaite, 18, and Michael Alleyne, 20, from London, were told they would serve minimum terms of 19 years for killing Ben, the brother of the EastEnders actor Brooke Kinsella.

All three of the killers had criminal records and were described by police as "depressingly familiar characters".

After the verdicts were read out, it emerged that Kika had been on the run from police for 10 days after a robbery in which a man was stabbed.

Ben and his friends had been to a bar to celebrate the end of their GCSE exams when a row broke out in Islington, north London, on 29 June last year. Although the confrontation had nothing to do with him, Ben was chased along the street with other youngsters and stabbed to death when he stopped running.He was stabbed 11 times in five seconds by the three youths in revenge for the "disrespect" shown to Braithwaite.

"I am overjoyed," Brooke Kinsella, 25, said after the verdict. "It's awful, awful, but we got all we needed – it's justice. There is never going to be enough justice, but we have got it now."

Her mother, Deborah, 46, told the judge: "We had brought Ben up to always walk away from trouble. This sadly cost him his life ... He walked away to get safely home and they took advantage of that – he was one boy on his own.

"We, as his family, have been left devastated and in total despair. Our whole world has been totally turned upside down."

Video report: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090612/video/vuk-schoolboy-s-killers-facing-life-sent-49bfa63.html


16 year old kids being stabbed to death for 'disrepect'. This is why Britain is how it is. The killers were convicted thanks to CCTV footage. 'Gangster' lifestyles are not a British made problem. Our criminals had some class 50 years ago.

[Angus]

So, what the RN did was both legal and morally right?
WTG RN 

[Apeotomy]

Within the bound of the law (That is the established code between states) yes.

Morality is relative.

[Babalonian]

For the last time: It was legal.

Almost everyone who has posted in this thread has stated their personal opinion that what the RN did was Legal and "the right thing to do".

I think the lingering question here in this thread, is what on gods earth made you, Diehard, originaly think that what the RN did to those suspected pirates was in any way illegal or not "the right thing to do"?  Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK-47s?  If so, why?

[Die Hard]

Almost everyone who has posted in this thread has stated their personal opinion that what the RN did was Legal and "the right thing to do".

I think the lingering question here in this thread, is what on gods earth made you, Diehard, originaly think that what the RN did to those suspected pirates was in any way illegal or not "the right thing to do"?  Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK-47s?  If so, why?

You cannot possibly have read the whole thread if you don't know the answer. I'm not going to repeat myself, lest this thread will go on in never ending circles.

[Babalonian]

You cannot possibly have read the whole thread if you don't know the answer. I'm not going to repeat myself, lest this thread will go on in never ending circles.

I have been following and reading this post, but I have no intention of rereading it from the very beggining tonight.

Your attitude and argument in this thread before this post:

Diehard, it the Royal Navy was within it's right to seize the weapons and boat because there were reasonable grounds to suspect it's use was for piracy.  The RN is not required to prove intent was for use of piracy, only to have reasonable grounds to suspect that is the case.  Where are you getting this info that somli militia are equiped with motherboats & skiffs, machine guns, rpg's, extra fuel and grappling hooks. That is what has bene released by the media, we don't know what other evidence was to suggest they were pirates.  The pirates weren't arrested because the RN could not link them to a specific incident.

You even quoted an british official stating - "As a British official put it: “We can only arrest suspected pirates if we catch them in the act or on the point of launching an attack on a vessel. Clearly, with all the weaponry in the skiffs, there was an intent to commit piracy, but we hadn’t actually caught them in the middle of an attack so we had to release them.”
 

Un security council resolution 1851 states-

“2.   Calls upon States, regional and international organizations that have the capacity to do so, to take part actively in the fight against piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia, in particular, consistent with this resolution, resolution 1846 (2008), and international law, by deploying naval vessels and military aircraft and through seizure and disposition of boats, vessels, arms and other related equipment used in the commission of piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia, or for which there are reasonable grounds for suspecting such use;

Solid, irrefutable proof is not required.

was pretty damning of the RN and the actions it took against the alleged pirates.

My question still stands as it relates to the time and state that your mind was in when you originaly created this thread, not what has transpired and been revealed durign the cource of this thread.

[Apeotomy]

Almost everyone who has posted in this thread has stated their personal opinion that what the RN did was Legal and "the right thing to do".

I think the lingering question here in this thread, is what on gods earth made you, Diehard, originaly think that what the RN did to those suspected pirates was in any way illegal or not "the right thing to do"?  Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK-47s?  If so, why?

Its is legal.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with battleships and L85's?

I do.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK47's?

I do.

Do I support the activity of boarding a sovereign vessel who is committing no crimes, destroying their boat, holding them captive, and then releasing them?

I don't.

[Die Hard]

Its is legal.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with battleships and L85's?

I do.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK47's?

I do.

Do I support the activity of boarding a sovereign vessel who is committing no crimes, destroying their boat, holding them captive, and then releasing them?

I don't.

[eddiek]

Its is legal.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with battleships and L85's?

I do.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK47's?

I do.

Do I support the activity of boarding a sovereign vessel who is committing no crimes, destroying their boat, holding them captive, and then releasing them?

I don't.

Okay, now I know you're trolling.
Only "battleships" (and there are none patrolling the waters in question) belong to sovereign nations' navies.  BIG difference, actually, no comparison. 
The warships of the various nations are out there to protect the commercial shipping lanes from your heroes.  Their goal is the prevention of the hijacking of commercial shipping and the apprehension of said criminals if possible. 
If you support the 2nd, may I suggest you find a way to get yourself out to the area, get in a little boat, go out and say HI to these poor beleaguered, misunderstood pirates and see how warm your welcome is.  Odds are, it'll be the last anyone hears from you again, unless of course, you go armed or with an escort.
The last one is where you trap yourself with a paradox:  "Do I support the activity of boarding a sovereign vessel who is committing no crimes, destroying their boat, holding them captive, and then releasing them?

I don't."   
You don't support the pirates' activities, cause they are doing just that.  Boarding forcibly, holding the ship and crew captive and for ransom, then (maybe) releasing them.  Of course, the pirates have to show their resolve by making noises about killing crew members if the ransom isn't paid.
But you also don't support anyone stopping these folks before they can attack a defenseless cargo or cruise ship?  Even tho they fit the by now well known profile of the pirates, had all the reported weaponry and tools of the trade.....the RN shoulda just left em alone?
It never ceases to amaze me, trolling or not, how some people try to spin these things....................... .......

[Swoop]

LOL

[Masherbrum]

Its is legal.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with battleships and L85's?

I do.

Do you support the liberty of people floating around busy commercial shipping lanes with RPGs and AK47's?

I do.

Do I support the activity of boarding a sovereign vessel who is committing no crimes, destroying their boat, holding them captive, and then releasing them?

I don't.

I wonder who's shades account/troll account this is.   Laying low for 10 months.   

I will not apologize for my comments.    to the Royal Navy.   Do it again if the situation presents itself.

[Die Hard]

Eddiek, Apeotomy answered questions. You on the other hand are the one making a number of fallacious arguments, including Ad Hominem, Straw Man, Argument From Adverse Consequences, Psychogenetic Fallacy, Extended Analogy, Complex Question, Argument By Repetition, Argument By Selective Observation, Non Sequitur, Hypothesis Contrary To Fact, Argument By Scenario, and Two Wrongs Make A Right.

I'm afraid you're the one trolling Eddiek.

[eddiek]

I'm with Masherbrum, I hope/wish the RN bags more of them and other navies follow suit. 


This thread is losing it's entertainment value.  DH made his point on page 6:
"
Yep, there it is:

"The Council affirmed that the authorization provided in the resolution applied only to the situation in Somalia and did not affect the rights or obligations or responsibilities of Member States under international law, including under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, with respect to any other situation.  It underscored that the resolution did not establish customary international law."

A special dispensation from the law.

I'm an ass. "


<S>!