In my article number 198, I wrote about the piracy off the coast of Somalia and the rescue by the United States government. Some disagreed with my position.

 

To explain a bit further, from the standpoint of right and wrong, I only understand that which is wrong from two things and that is thievery and violation of Natural Law. Admittedly there are things I may not like in my value system, but getting down to the nitty gritty of right and wrong; it’s only those two things I understand as being wrong.

 

I believe that taxation is taking of one’s property in violation of the will of the owner, hence stealing. Call it legal plunder or anything you choose but it is taking of one’s property at the point of a gun or the threat of a gun or jail, hence by a definition I understand its stealing. What the money is used for after its taken has no bearing on the act. I don’t believe there is any justification for thievery. I’m consistent in my belief and way of thinking in that regard

 

 With reference to the piracy relating to the privately owned cargo ship which was boarded by pirates and according to the news the Captains decision to volunteer to be a captive instead of one of his crew was a sad situation.

 

As I understand it the crew does not carry weapons to protect themselves traveling thru very dangerous waters where ships and crew members are taken hostage on a regular basis seems to me a foolish irresponsible decision. If one owns something, it’s their responsibility for it. In the case of the ship carrying cargo, it’s the responsibility of the owner to protect it. If he does not want the crew armed then he could hire armed guards to protect his ship, crew and cargo.

 

In the case of the recent piracy of an American ship, where the captain was kidnapped, the American government sent a military in with trained rifleman, trained Navy Seals to shoot 3 pirates simultaneously and killed them to rescue the Captain. Several days of standoff between the military ship and the lifeboat the pirates and captain was on. This was an operation of great expense to the American taxpayers.

 

Here in this country I frequently see armored trucks pulling up to grocery stores and places of business to pick up money deposits. The companies who own this kind of business carry insurance and pay drivers and armed guards to perform this kind of business. If a robbery is attempted or the armored truck or occupants are attacked they are armed and prepared to shoot to protect themselves and cargo. The United States military nor local police do not accompany these vehicles. The owners of the business pay guards to protect the workers and cargo.

 

My question is why is a privately owned ship carrying valuable cargo and a crew in known criminally infested waters any different than the armored vehicles carrying money and a crew here in the United States?

 

Why are the taxpayers of this country required to pay for the protection of a privately owned operation, when they are so irresponsible, they refuse to provide protection for themselves. A calculated decision not to.

 

A captain of a privately owned ship is hired and paid to be responsible for the ship, the cargo and the crew, and he abandoned his duties by volunteering to be the victim of terroristic pirates. Some say “Oh no they were not terrorists.” Obviously they terrorized an American crew. They are hoodlums and thieves who board a property at gunpoint to demand ransom money. And a well publicized fact that area is infested with them.

 

For anyone to enter those waters unarmed and expect to be unharmed is totally irresponsible behavior. So why should American taxpayers be required to pay for such irresponsible decisions?

 

It’s my position thievery is wrong and immoral. The taking of another’s life is an act of stealing a life in violation of the will of the owner. The taking of tax payers money is an act of thievery and immoral and wrong.

 

I do not sanction that entire modus operandi from beginning to end as being correct and moral. The killing, kidnapping, and thievery all involved on both sides in my opinion were wrong.

 

And I base my opinion of the fact on the concept ownership of property is a total concept, and one should be morally responsible for what they own. And taking from one owner (the taxpayer’s money) arbitrarily in violation of the will of the owner is wrong. And it cannot be justified because it’s for the protection of another’s property. It violates the Principle of ownership. And can arguably be established as a principle.

Accordingly, my disagreement with the actions taken in relationship to the piracy of the ship, does not stem from some whimsical value judgment but from a principle.

 

I am glad the American crew returned home safely, but am saddend at the price that was paid which could have been avoided if the owners of the ship had been responsible for their property.

 

Let Freedom Ring

 

Just Me AC

 

The Freedom Lady

 

Email:annecleveland@bellsouth.net

 

 

 

 

Tagged with →  
Share →

0 Responses to Piracy in the Sea of Aiden and the Actions of the US Government (Issue 204)

  1. The more I have read about the “Somali pirate” situation, the less clear it all becomes to me. I know governments lie, and I know why they lie, only the details of the specific lies are missing.