A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. Make the penalty huge for piracy. We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. Most of the ones we kill are minor players. Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.


$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.


Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

Exactly, that's not "Somali" money, that's AlQueda money. There isn't
enough to buy in Somalia for them to ask for that much...

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:09:03 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. Make the penalty huge for piracy. We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. Most of the ones we kill are minor players. Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.


$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.


Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I didn't realize that blowing up a mother ship would create a smoking
hole in the ground. Perhaps you can clarify.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

http://publicintelligence.net/money-...good-business/

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On Feb 26, 8:38*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:09:03 -0500, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. *Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. *Make the penalty huge for piracy. *We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. *Most of the ones we kill are minor players. *Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. *Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.

$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.

Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I didn't realize that blowing up a mother ship would create a smoking
hole in the ground. Perhaps you can clarify.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

http://publicintelligence.net/money-...li-pirates-is-...

Blowing up a mother ship would not create a "smoking hole in the
ground" D'Plume. It is a ship. If anything, the vessel would become a
smoking hull on the water.

And thank you for providing a link to someone's opinion.

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

"BAR" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
says...

To not see what is going on, is stupid on so many levels... These
people
tell you what they are doing and planning in their own words, and you
are still in denial.

Okay, so just when did Obama, "in his own words" say that he has "no
interest in anything that would bring stability to that area of the
world"? Just when did Obama say "in his own words" that "oil need to go
to 200 a barrel so he can finish collapsing the economy"? And what proof
do you have that he is "now paying thugs in Wisconsin, Ohio, and CT"?



Actions, actions speak louder than words.



So true.

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:46:53 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:38:47 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:09:03 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. Make the penalty huge for piracy. We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. Most of the ones we kill are minor players. Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.


$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.


Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I didn't realize that blowing up a mother ship would create a smoking
hole in the ground. Perhaps you can clarify.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

http://publicintelligence.net/money-...good-business/


The total cost of 9-11 was estimated to be less than $500,000 and you
are not concerned about $100 million dollar ransoms in a place where
Al Qaeda is one of the most powerful forces.
That can easily lead to another big smoking hole in the downtown of
some big city..

The total cost of 9/11 is about $2 TRILLION AND CLIMBING. Bush ignored
warnings that it was going to happen, then invaded a country that had
nothing to do with it. I guess when you get a memo that says OBL
determined to attack the US, it's ok to file it in the round file.


You have demonstrated how easy it is to launder money and you know
there are 100 guys as smart as bin laden, just not as rich.
Now they are rich.
This piracy is a clear and present danger to the US, certainly more
than some broke assed Taliban guys running around Kanahar.


Sounds like revisionist history to me. Maybe NOW the Taliban aren't
rich (OBL certainly still is) and they aren't attacking the US sans a
few people who were warned about going there (kind of reminds me of
those hikers who got arrested by Iran).

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:32:54 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:51:28 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:46:53 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:38:47 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:09:03 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. Make the penalty huge for piracy. We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. Most of the ones we kill are minor players. Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.


$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.


Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I didn't realize that blowing up a mother ship would create a smoking
hole in the ground. Perhaps you can clarify.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

http://publicintelligence.net/money-...good-business/


The total cost of 9-11 was estimated to be less than $500,000 and you
are not concerned about $100 million dollar ransoms in a place where
Al Qaeda is one of the most powerful forces.
That can easily lead to another big smoking hole in the downtown of
some big city..

The total cost of 9/11 is about $2 TRILLION AND CLIMBING. Bush ignored
warnings that it was going to happen, then invaded a country that had
nothing to do with it. I guess when you get a memo that says OBL
determined to attack the US, it's ok to file it in the round file.

Another non-responsive answer.

My error... you were talking about the cost of 9/11 to the terrorists.
Sorry. OBL had/has $100M to play with. Yet, the Somali pirates are not
terrorists. They're criminals. Since they're the ones who are getting
the money, an attack on the US from them is pretty unlikely. I know
you'd like to make the case that there is some equivalency between the
two, but there isn't. Bush tried that, unfortunately successfully.


We were talking about where the NEXT attack may come from and where
the money to finance is coming from. While Al Qaeda is amassing
millions in Somalia, we are still attacking goat herders in Pakistan
and Afghanistan who don't have 2 nickels to rub together.
OBL was just the money, not the brains.


You have demonstrated how easy it is to launder money and you know
there are 100 guys as smart as bin laden, just not as rich.
Now they are rich.
This piracy is a clear and present danger to the US, certainly more
than some broke assed Taliban guys running around Kanahar.


Sounds like revisionist history to me. Maybe NOW the Taliban aren't
rich (OBL certainly still is) and they aren't attacking the US sans a
few people who were warned about going there (kind of reminds me of
those hikers who got arrested by Iran).


OBL is very well cut off from his money ... if he still has any. We
have been targeting his finances for a decade.

Which has nothing to do with Somali pirates, who are mostly fishermen
and criminals. OBL for all his faults is well educated.

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On 2/27/11 2:51 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:32:54 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:51:28 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:46:53 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:38:47 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:09:03 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. Make the penalty huge for piracy. We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. Most of the ones we kill are minor players. Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.


$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.


Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I didn't realize that blowing up a mother ship would create a smoking
hole in the ground. Perhaps you can clarify.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

http://publicintelligence.net/money-...good-business/


The total cost of 9-11 was estimated to be less than $500,000 and you
are not concerned about $100 million dollar ransoms in a place where
Al Qaeda is one of the most powerful forces.
That can easily lead to another big smoking hole in the downtown of
some big city..

The total cost of 9/11 is about $2 TRILLION AND CLIMBING. Bush ignored
warnings that it was going to happen, then invaded a country that had
nothing to do with it. I guess when you get a memo that says OBL
determined to attack the US, it's ok to file it in the round file.

Another non-responsive answer.

My error... you were talking about the cost of 9/11 to the terrorists.
Sorry. OBL had/has $100M to play with. Yet, the Somali pirates are not
terrorists. They're criminals. Since they're the ones who are getting
the money, an attack on the US from them is pretty unlikely. I know
you'd like to make the case that there is some equivalency between the
two, but there isn't. Bush tried that, unfortunately successfully.


We were talking about where the NEXT attack may come from and where
the money to finance is coming from. While Al Qaeda is amassing
millions in Somalia, we are still attacking goat herders in Pakistan
and Afghanistan who don't have 2 nickels to rub together.
OBL was just the money, not the brains.


You have demonstrated how easy it is to launder money and you know
there are 100 guys as smart as bin laden, just not as rich.
Now they are rich.
This piracy is a clear and present danger to the US, certainly more
than some broke assed Taliban guys running around Kanahar.


Sounds like revisionist history to me. Maybe NOW the Taliban aren't
rich (OBL certainly still is) and they aren't attacking the US sans a
few people who were warned about going there (kind of reminds me of
those hikers who got arrested by Iran).


OBL is very well cut off from his money ... if he still has any. We
have been targeting his finances for a decade.

Which has nothing to do with Somali pirates, who are mostly fishermen
and criminals. OBL for all his faults is well educated.


I wonder if the pirates are incorporated in Delaware with officers and a
board of directors. They certainly emulate land-based multinational
corporations in many ways.

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 14:55:24 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

On 2/27/11 2:51 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:32:54 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:51:28 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:46:53 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:38:47 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:09:03 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:38:08 -0800, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:18:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:01:38 -0800, wrote:

I think we are only going to put a halt to the piracy when we sacrifice a
few hundred hostages held in Somalia and drop some huge conventional bombs
on the home areas of the pirates. Let god sort out who gets to go to heaven
and who goes elsewhere. Make the penalty huge for piracy. We will not do
it because of the collateral damage but that is probably one of the only
ways to stop the pirates. Most of the ones we kill are minor players. Not
the chiefs who are taking 80% of the ransom. Or figure out who the chiefs
are and destroy there home area.

So, it's ok to kill a bunch of innocent civilians? I guess there's no
reason to believe that most of these pirates are just acting out of
economic reality. The ultimate solution is a better economy in the
region.


$100m ransoms are not basic subsistence in a country where the average
annual income is about the price on an I phone.

Some day we will be asking "where is the money going"?

...OR ...

... We may be standing over another smoking hole in the ground and
know where some of it went.


Huh? Your solution is to bomb Somalia?

Try to keep up, I am the guy who wants to profile the mother ships and
sink them.

I didn't realize that blowing up a mother ship would create a smoking
hole in the ground. Perhaps you can clarify.

I still think this is a lot more serious than a few people being
killed or kidnapped. Have we ever really figured out who is getting
this money and what they are doing with it? They are certainly not
****ing it away on hookers and beer.

http://publicintelligence.net/money-...good-business/


The total cost of 9-11 was estimated to be less than $500,000 and you
are not concerned about $100 million dollar ransoms in a place where
Al Qaeda is one of the most powerful forces.
That can easily lead to another big smoking hole in the downtown of
some big city..

The total cost of 9/11 is about $2 TRILLION AND CLIMBING. Bush ignored
warnings that it was going to happen, then invaded a country that had
nothing to do with it. I guess when you get a memo that says OBL
determined to attack the US, it's ok to file it in the round file.

Another non-responsive answer.

My error... you were talking about the cost of 9/11 to the terrorists.
Sorry. OBL had/has $100M to play with. Yet, the Somali pirates are not
terrorists. They're criminals. Since they're the ones who are getting
the money, an attack on the US from them is pretty unlikely. I know
you'd like to make the case that there is some equivalency between the
two, but there isn't. Bush tried that, unfortunately successfully.


We were talking about where the NEXT attack may come from and where
the money to finance is coming from. While Al Qaeda is amassing
millions in Somalia, we are still attacking goat herders in Pakistan
and Afghanistan who don't have 2 nickels to rub together.
OBL was just the money, not the brains.


You have demonstrated how easy it is to launder money and you know
there are 100 guys as smart as bin laden, just not as rich.
Now they are rich.
This piracy is a clear and present danger to the US, certainly more
than some broke assed Taliban guys running around Kanahar.


Sounds like revisionist history to me. Maybe NOW the Taliban aren't
rich (OBL certainly still is) and they aren't attacking the US sans a
few people who were warned about going there (kind of reminds me of
those hikers who got arrested by Iran).


OBL is very well cut off from his money ... if he still has any. We
have been targeting his finances for a decade.

Which has nothing to do with Somali pirates, who are mostly fishermen
and criminals. OBL for all his faults is well educated.


I wonder if the pirates are incorporated in Delaware with officers and a
board of directors. They certainly emulate land-based multinational
corporations in many ways.

They're certainly closer to the pirates of Wall Street than they are
to OBL.

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

OBL is very well cut off from his money ... if he still has any. We
have been targeting his finances for a decade.

Which has nothing to do with Somali pirates, who are mostly fishermen
and criminals. OBL for all his faults is well educated.


I wonder if the pirates are incorporated in Delaware with officers and a
board of directors. They certainly emulate land-based multinational
corporations in many ways.

The union's pension funds are invested in OBL international.

A problem with deep-sixing pirates....
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:38:24 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:51:00 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:32:54 -0500, wrote:



The total cost of 9/11 is about $2 TRILLION AND CLIMBING. Bush ignored
warnings that it was going to happen, then invaded a country that had
nothing to do with it. I guess when you get a memo that says OBL
determined to attack the US, it's ok to file it in the round file.

Another non-responsive answer.

My error... you were talking about the cost of 9/11 to the terrorists.
Sorry. OBL had/has $100M to play with. Yet, the Somali pirates are not
terrorists. They're criminals. Since they're the ones who are getting
the money, an attack on the US from them is pretty unlikely. I know
you'd like to make the case that there is some equivalency between the
two, but there isn't. Bush tried that, unfortunately successfully.

"Gad" is the operative word. Our government thinks they have
sequestered/confiscated his money and there really are not that many
ATMs in the mountains of Pakistan anyway.

We don't have a clue who the Somali pirates are or who is behind them.
There is plenty of Al Qaeda activity in Somalia and is unreasonable to
think they don't have an eye on that money.
You admitted Somalia could be a problem about a month ago and said we
should invade them too if we could prove it.

I never said that. Prove it.

Most of the people who are profiting are war lords and have no great
interest in attacking the US. That's just nonsense.


Personally I think it is better to just cut off the money.

How? Who should we starve this time?


We were talking about where the NEXT attack may come from and where
the money to finance is coming from. While Al Qaeda is amassing
millions in Somalia, we are still attacking goat herders in Pakistan
and Afghanistan who don't have 2 nickels to rub together.
OBL was just the money, not the brains.


You have demonstrated how easy it is to launder money and you know
there are 100 guys as smart as bin laden, just not as rich.
Now they are rich.
This piracy is a clear and present danger to the US, certainly more
than some broke assed Taliban guys running around Kanahar.


Sounds like revisionist history to me. Maybe NOW the Taliban aren't
rich (OBL certainly still is) and they aren't attacking the US sans a
few people who were warned about going there (kind of reminds me of
those hikers who got arrested by Iran).


OBL is very well cut off from his money ... if he still has any. We
have been targeting his finances for a decade.

Which has nothing to do with Somali pirates, who are mostly fishermen
and criminals. OBL for all his faults is well educated.

How long are you going to fight the last war?
OBL has not been involved in any attacks since 9-11. The recent ones
came out of Yemen, right across the straight from Somalia.

?? So we should let bygones be bygones? Bush screwed up big time by
letting him slip away. Feel free to keep defending that loser.