Shipping Exec. Calls for Arming Merchant Crews Against Pirates, MSM Largely Ignore Remarks

Photo of Ken Shepherd.
  • Bookmark and Share


After the hijacking of the MV Maersk Alabama, we often heard from the mainstream media about how shipping executive companies don't want to arm their civilian crews for fear of an escalation of violence from pirates, not to mention the potential legal and liability headaches presented by such a policy change.

Well, yesterday, shipping company executive Philip Shapiro threw a wrench in that meme in his testimony before a Senate subcommittee in which he called for Congress to remove the legal and regulatory obstacles to arming civilian merchant vessels.

Unfortunately the story was ignored this morning by the broadcast network morning shows. What's more, Nexis and Web site searches yielded no print stories from today's Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times  -- although there is an online article by Rebecca Cole available here -- or the New York Times. The Gray Lady also failed to report on Richard Phillips' pro-armed crew remarks last week.

To its credit, CNN, both in print and broadcast, reported the story. From a May 5 CNN.com story:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Philip Shapiro, head of Liberty Maritime Corp., told a U.S. Senate Commerce subcommittee that the owners of U.S.-flagged "have done all they can within the law to protect our crews."

Unfortunately, he said, U.S. vessels are still largely at the mercy of pirates in shipping lanes around the heavily trafficked Gulf of Aden.

"In light of the recent threats to U.S. merchant mariners, we respectfully request that Congress consider clearing the obstacles that currently block ship owners from arming our vessels," Shapiro said.

CNN "American Morning" anchor John Roberts interviewed Shapiro in the 7 a.m. half hour of the May 6 program, although his agenda of questions were skewed in favor of an anti-armed crew perspective. 

On rival Fox News Channel, the May 5 "Fox Report" aired a soundbite of Shapiro from his Senate testimony in a story filed by correspondent Jonathan Hunt.

Of course, Shapiro isn't a household name, while former Somali pirate hostage Capt. Richard Phillips is, which may factor into the lack of coverage a bit.

Even so, the print and broadcast media found little of interest in the Maersk Alabama captain's testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 30. The following morning, the New York Times failed to run any coverage of the story, while the Washington Post sort of covered the story with a column by Dana Milbank that centered around Phillips as the object of "hero worship" by U.S. senators.The Los Angeles Times ran its story about Phillips' testimony on page A25, while USA Today placed the story on page A4. 

The May 1 broadcast network programs failed to air any soundbites of Phillips' testimony, with the only mention from NBC's "Today" coming in this 47-word brief by Ann Curry (via Nexis):

An American cargo ship captain held hostage by pirates wants better protection for commercial shipping on the high seas. We're talking, of course, about Captain Richard Phillips, who testified on Thursday on Capitol Hill, saying that arming ship crews is one option but is not enough.

—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Sounds good to me

You can train the ship's crew to use AK-47s in a few hours.  You can set schedules to have them inspected & cleaned by trained smiths at ports.  Why not have the option to protect yourself?  The sailors would still have the main duty of being a sailor, but knowing that they have the ability to bite back would certainly deter pirates to some degree. 

 

" Courage - a perfect sensibility of the measure of danger, and a mental willingness to endure it. "  - William T. Sherman 

Bad Reporting

Reporting on Somali piracy in general has been lousy. We should be seeing reporting on these US laws that concern arming US flagged merchant ships, international laws-of-the-sea regarding arming of merchant ships, how to rationalize the two, US flagging in general which I think is a tiny percentage of merchant shipping (and why that is), etc.

Too busy reporting on the Doofus's hamburger with dijon mustard I guess.

piracy reporting

"Lousy" is generous, Slick. The pirates are either described as misguided yoots or protectors of the Somali environment. And don't forget, they don't kill anyone (so far), so its a victimless crime.

The lib MSM might be OK with firehoses as protection, but actual firepower, never.

Great Point

"The lib MSM might be OK with firehoses as protection, but actual firepower, never."

So true.  They are afraid that Americans will come to the realization that, hey, if they can protect themselves while the sailors are "at work", I should be able to protect myself, too.  Be it at home, or at work, or in my car, or hiking...

 

 

" Courage - a perfect sensibility of the measure of danger, and a mental willingness to endure it. "  - William T. Sherman 

Montana unafraid

Montana throws down the gauntlet. Or rather, prepares to insert said gauntlet into Presidential anus. 

http://hotair.com/gr...

Of course the msm ignores

Of course the msm ignores this...no doubt as to why either.

Keep your powder dry!

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Re Of course...

Re the reflagging issue, if this was discussed honestly, the folks might realize why ships are not flagged US, and realize the fact that corporations can be reflagged as well. The Bamster thinks our American corporations are captives that he can abuse any way he sees fit. He may learn otherwise.

Bout time they arm

Bout time they arm themselves...pilots, students, teachers, ship mates, everyone has a right to defend themselves.  The wild wild west wasn't that wild...and the bad guy rarely got away.

Indeed

"The wild wild west wasn't that wild...and the bad guy rarely got away."

I cant remember which gang it was, I think it was "James' Gang", but a town full of citizens tore them up with double barrel shotguns back in the "Wild" West.  Armed citizens can take care of a good number of problems. 

 

 

" Courage - a perfect sensibility of the measure of danger, and a mental willingness to endure it. "  - William T. Sherman 

Coffeeville, Kansas and the Dalton Raid

http://www.coffeyvil...

 Three Daltons, Bob, Grat and Emmet, Dick Broadwell and Bill Powers wanted to do what no one had ever done before - rob two banks at the same time. After camping on Onion Creek, west of Coffeyville, they rode into town on horseback heading east on Eighth Street early on the morning of October 5, 1892. The Dalton brothers, being former residents of Coffeyville, wore disguises. They had planned to tie their horses between the two banks, but because Eighth Street was torn up, they tied them in the alley close to the jail. That was their first mistake.

 Three of the bandits - Grat Dalton, Bill Powers and Dick Broadwell - went into the Condon Bank; Bob and Emmet entered the First National. When the gang demanded money from the safe at the Condon, the quick thinking bank employee told him that the safe would not open until 9:30 a.m. It was twenty past nine at the time. Grat said, "I’ll wait," which was their second mistake. That ten minutes (the vault did not have a time lock on it) gave the townspeople the time they needed to get to Isham Hardware, grab some guns and ammunition and begin defending the town. When the raid was over, which lasted 12 minutes, four of the Dalton gang were dead and four of Coffeyville’s citizens were killed. Three of the citizens - George Cubine, Charles Brown and Lucius Baldwin - were killed near Isham Hardware, Marshall Connelly died in what is today known as Death Alley. Bob and Grat Dalton and Bill Powers were killed in Death Alley and are buried in Coffeyville’s Elmwood Cemetery. Dick Broadwell escaped the on horseback and died about a half mile from the downtown. He was buried at Hutchinson.

 The Daltons were "laid out" in the city jail following their death prior to burial. There were souvenir hunters even in the Dalton’s days. Portions of the manes and tails of the Dalton’s horses were cut off and all the strings from the saddles. In addition, pieces of clothing from the gang members were cut off.

Emmet Dalton, the youngest of the Daltons, survived the Raid but received 23 gunshot wounds. These were removed, he was given a life sentence in the Kansas penitentiary at Lansing and pardoned after 14 years. He moved to California and became a real estate agent, author and actor, dying at the age of 66.

 The banks were robbed of approximately $25,000. After the day’s banking business was completed and the books were balanced, the Condon came up $20 short and First National was $1.98 over, so fortunately for the banks most of the money was recovered.

For information on the Dalton Museum, go to the Coffeyville Historical Society webpage.

 

 

Ken... Also the

Ken...

Also the Northfield, Minnesota bank robbery in 1876 resulted in the James and Younger gang being badly shot up by the armed and angered town folks.

Jer

Secret

Somewhere today I read about a ship available to deter the pirate terrorists.

JDW

DAILY WAVE

When people fear their government there is tyranny. When government fears the people there is liberty.

Or this one

Only Ship named where it was built, saw it on the big river last summer.

 

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Good looking ship!

That's a good looking ship!

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

John Kerry as Captain?

I wonder if john Kerry would volunteer for duty aboard that ship? I hear he's a war hero. That's quite a step up from a swift boat, wouldn't you say? ;)

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Just to add a few reasons

Just to add a few reasons why merchant ships don't carry weapons.  I've posted this link before:

http://randompokes.o...

 Now let me ask, how should the American government respond to heavily armed merchant ships wishing to dock on our soil?

Taking a little break from Miss Cali for awhile, huh?

But thanks for the link assembling 30 or so lame reasons, provided by an 'expert'... who writes about churches and pastors.

 

I've said enough about Miss

I've said enough about Miss Cali.  Did you have a response other than "you're dumb" for me?  Or is this the answer to my question?

Stew's Merchant Vessel List

I work for the M&R arm of Maersk. The list Stew linked doew have some lame excuses, but below are real reasons given to me by my excecs.

No matter how ships arm themselves, pirates will come back with bigger guns. If you escalate, pirates will escalate more. You can end up with pirates sitting far off and bombarding the ship or raking it with machine gun fire. 

Arming ships will increase insurance costs, since insurance must now cover a range of liability and death situations. 

Ships carrying chemicals or gas don't want weapons aboard, and don't want to provoke a firefight.

Shipping companies would rather pay ransom than risk crew members being killed. It's all a matter of liability costs.

Pirates rarely kill commercial crews on large vessels (though yacht owners are frequently killed). Their goal is ransom (whereas on yachts, it's just thievery). 

It's just easier to pay a piddly $3M to protect $300M of cargo. Money. Bottom line. Money.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

dvd... That is always the

dvd...

That is always the bottom line.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

They prepare (finacially)

They prepare (finacially) for these types of things. Just par for the course. It will continue until the end of time.

Protect the crew. Protect the cargo. Protect the profit. That about sums up the industry.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Would it have killed you to

Would it have killed you to admit that the reasons your execs gave you are all on the list I provided?  I didn't write the list, I merely did a search that came up with possible reasons.  

Regardless, anyone care to answer my question before the inevitable call to arms? 

Sorry Stew

I copied and pasted from the list. I didn't mean to undermine you.  I thought the italics were sufficient.

I was attempting to give it some credibility.

I'll make an edit.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

No need for an edit.  I

No need for an edit.  I just thought you were trying something sneaky. I'm glad you posted though.  Having the reliable source to back up these arguments helps explain why little can be done, short of a military response.

They can't escalate if they

They can't escalate if they are dead.  Arm the ships and raise the American flag.  If they attack, then the American Navy has a right to escort...in which case I say bring it on.

No one is saying its right

It's just about the money. It is easier to pay them off than to pay the Navy (who might be 12-14 hours away, anyway).

The merchant ships cannot out arm the pirate mothership.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

An American company

An American company shouldn't have to pay for the Navy outright, they already pay taxes and therefore should be protected as long as they are within the law.

not sure how to respond.

not sure how to respond. the ransoms are tiny compared to the value of the crew and cargo. it simple, fast, and easy and that is why the merchant ship owners pay it.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

These pirates do not

These pirates do not materialize out of thin air.  They have a base, or bases.  We know where they hang their hats and where their relatives sleep.

It is an historical statement of fact that the only certain remedy for piracy is to militarily reduce the pirate base of operations.  Every American President who ever successfully addressed the anti-piracy enforcement issue attacked the pirates' base of operations.

This is a simple matter.  The pirates hide in Somalia.  Not just in Somalia but in small harbors along its coast.  The normal diplomatic recourse is to seek the permission and assistance of the 'host' country to eradicate the pirates.  In this case, I think it highly likely the pirates have friends in government such as it is in Somalia.  Unofficial government sanction of piracy is an act of war.  Respond in kind.  Send the Marines.  Wipe the pirates and their supporters off the face of the map.

There you go!  Might makes

There you go!  Might makes Right!

Wage war on a country that you personally know is responsible for the acts of piracy.  Brilliant.  Do we wage war on every country who we feel might be supporting illegal operations?  Oh yeah, I guess we already do that. 

Wage war on a country that

Wage war on a country that you personally know is responsible for the acts of piracy.

No just the perpetrators of the piracy and if the base of the pirates is in Somalia then Somalia is resposible in some part for it and them.  They are complicit.  I know your brain cant comprehend such ideas so just take it as fact we have been combating piracy since 1800 with teh full might of USA Navy, even to teh extent of routing them out wherever they may be.

Do you insult everyone who

Do you insult everyone who disagrees with you?  Can you compose just one respectful post?  Or have you been called an idiot so many times that you think that's the appropriate way to address someone?  You know the Taliban is in Pakistan, but we're not just going to march into that country and attack.  

is the taliban taking over

is the taliban taking over merchant ships?

CV... That is exactly what I

CV...

That is exactly what I told my husband...and I still think I'm correct.

The msm won't say that...I no longer care...all you have to do is put two and two together...I don't care what group name one uses al Queda has been in that area long before Clinton left.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

You're kidding, right? No,

You're kidding, right?

No, they're not taking over ships.  They trained and protected the guys who attacked the US.  

Now let's see... Who's more dangerous?  Amateur Somali pirates or the Taliban?

How do you put out a

How do you put out a fire?  Do you wait until the fire is close to homes?  Or do you put it out as quickly as possible?  What takes less energy to put out?  When the fire only takes a garden hose, or when it requires every fire department in several states to put it out?

Pirates are small fires.  Every now and then they need to be reminded that we will shoot back.  They will think twice.  Allow the pirates to fester, and they will use your wealth to buy more weapons and pirates, until they are a full blown military might like the taliban.  

My question was simple, if the Taliban are taking out merchent ships, the navy should come in and bounce some sense to them until they realize that maybe attacking China's ships would be more healthy.  If the Taliban is training terrorists that are training to kill America, then we have a right to defend ourselves.  

Uh, I'm pretty sure they

Uh, I'm pretty sure they know we will strike back, as we've already done that.  But to patrol those waters will take a helluva lot of Navy forces.  It's impractical, and it's not the US's job to be the world police (though many consider that to be the case).  I refer you back to my original post and the guy who works for Maersk.  We gave reasons why merchant ships aren't going to be armed.  If military response is what you desire, write your congressman. 

Who said I want the Navy to

Who said I want the Navy to be the world's police?  I am talking about American Merchants.  Let China safe guard their own merchants.

If you're still talking

If you're still talking about arming our merchant ships, please refer to the comments above.

If you're talking about hiring mercenaries to patrol the seas, that's a whole other story. 

I will keep it simple,

I will keep it simple, since you seem to be having difficulties.  Merchants should arm themselves.  Pirates should be killed on site.  If American Merchants are finding that the Pirates are using military issue equipment, then the American Navy should step in and protect them.  If they are UK merchants, than the British Navy can protect them.

If its a country that is harboring the pirates / terrorists, then the country should get a knock on their door by our friendly neighborhood military.

Since you are having

Since you are having difficulty answering my question, let me put it out there again:

How should the American government respond to heavily armed merchant ships wishing to dock on our soil? 

You didn't ask me that

You didn't ask me that question, but I will answer it...if its an American vessle, the American Government should do NOTHING....2nd Amendment.  As long as that ship isn't planning on firing rockets into the city, they have a right to bear arms.

Let me clarify - foreign

Let me clarify - foreign merchant ships.

then the local police

then the local police escorts them in, note the local harbor can charge this escorting fee on to the foreign merchant

Is that how it should happen

Is that how it should happen in Somalia as well?  What happens when a heavily armed Chinese merchant ship docks in a US port?  Is it as simple as notifying the coast guard and having them policing the ship as long as it's in our port?

First off lets get rid of a

First off lets get rid of a false premise.  Guns don't kill, people do.  Ok, now I am not one to dictate how Somalia should manage their affairs, rather they need to clean up the pirate mess, or we will.

Now as far as Chinese merchant ships, it is in their best interest to behave.  So a simple police force, not coast guard, but the NYPD or San Fran Police, or LAPD can manage it.  As the ship is in our port.

If the ship is in international waters, and is coming toward us, then the coast guard can manage it...they don't necessarily need to send a ship.  A simple phone call...ring, hi we're the Chinese dropping off legos, but we are armed due to pirates.  Coast Guard, ok, papers in order...you're clear.   Then again, hi this is the Chinese dropping off legos...we are armed due to pirates...LAPD...dude!  its cool, come in.

They drop of their stuff and off they go.

that said, I'm not an

that said, I'm not an international lawyer...just using common sense.

This is just part of the mix

This is just part of the mix that no one seems to consider.  Knowing armed ships are docking in American ports becomes a pretty big security issue.  Thank you for your mature, respectful response.  Others here find it difficult to respect those with whom they disagree.

It depends, if its armed

It depends, if its armed with a nuke, then this becomes a big deal...but realistically we are talking about merchants who want to sell things, not take over the country.

Hazardous cargo is not

Hazardous cargo is not uncommon. Acids, fuel, chemicals, you get it.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Are they going to take out

Are they going to take out the pirates with their cargo?  The cargo is already watched, I assume...if not that is a different subject.  I am talking about giving the crew members guns.  Start with a sonic gun.  Then if that doesn't work, shoot them with sniper rifles.  Then with closer range rapid fire rifles.  Then if that doesn't work, when they are all on board, gas the premise, with the crew having masks.  With the pirates knocked out, give them all wedgies and throw them in the ocean.

And after all is said and done, gas their boat and set it on fire.

Howzit CV, always polite I see.

The VOG is thick here today, maybe we can toss a virgin pirate into the Kilauea vent?

As if the roudy merchant sailors are shooting up the pirates home, and the pirates are sailing into the open ocean to defend themselfs.

Reagan VS 0bama

sounds like a good

sounds like a good idea...problem finding a virgin pirate

Now let's see... Who's more

Now let's see... Who's more dangerous?  Amateur Somali pirates or the Taliban

I guess it would be whoever is point the gun at me.  The pirates are not amatuers, they are armed and ready to kill and die.  The Taliban are just as dangerous as the pirates.  You do remember Somalia 1993, Mogadishu?  The Somalia have had years of experience of terroism and killing without mercy.  Get those two brain cells and rub them together; yes just for you because of you obvious Trollish statement Stewie.

Dan, I'm done responding to

Dan, I'm done responding to your comments.  You can jump up and down and yell all you want about how you know everything and how stupid I am, my responses to you are over until you can grow up and be respectful.  Your name calling only proves how juvenile you are.

Do you insult everyone who

Do you insult everyone who disagrees with you?

No and my observation about your not being able to comprehend the USA has been fighting piracy since 1800 has been born out by your post.  And yes the USA does go into Pakistan and kills Al Quada; just google it.

Please provide a link to my

Please provide a link to my post where I denied that the US has been fighting piracy since 1800.  I must have missed that.

Secret unauthorized illegal missions versus starting a full fledged war claiming the Somali government is supporting the pirates are 2 different things.  Look at it this way - you get to bitch and moan about it for the next 4 years because it ain't gonna happen. 

Secret unauthorized illegal

Secret unauthorized illegal missions

Secret yes, unauthorized and illegal no.  And your post basically said we have not been legally fighting pitrates and we were not well within our rights to enter a country where the pirates are and operate out of complicit with teh country they inhabit.  You missed the point and did not address it and futhermore did not get the idea of qships.

Basically you showed ignorance in the same way you call the missions unauthorized and illegal.  Because they are both legal and authorized.  The President of the USA authorized them and they are legal because the Taliban are operating out of Pakistan with their full knowlege.  Just like the Taliban were in Afghanistan.

Do you take every

Do you take every disagreement with your pointy headed liberal positions as a personal attack on yourself?

"You know the Taliban is in Pakistan, but we're not just going to march into that country and attack"

No.  Because Pakistan is marching into that country and attacking the Taliban.  Were the Pakistani gov't officially or even unofficially harboring the Taliban, as the Somali gov't is harboring the pirates, do you think the present policy towards Pakistan would be in force?  I don't.  The Pakistanis correctly recognize supporting the Taliban would be seen as an act of war.  Too bad the Somalis don't get this idea about the pirates.

Static reasoning is a classic downfall of liberal ideology.  People respond to the circumstances.  Change the rules and behaviors shift.  This is one of the reasons raising taxes never has the effect those who proposed the raise predicted.    This rule also applies to the Taliban, Pakistanis and Pirates.  Take action with respect to them, and they will change their behavior. 

If the Somali government

If the Somali government harbors pirates on its shores, then it is engaged in acts of war against all those flags those harbored pirates have attacked.  The harbored pirates have attacked US flag vessels.  Therefore, there is casus belli between the US and Somalia.  In effect, a state of war exists right now between Somalia and the US because Somalia is committing acts of war against US flag vessels via these pirates.

Feel?  Who said anything about feel?  These pirates are largely Somalis operating from Somali shores. That is fact.  The Somali government does nothing about it, either intentionally or out of impotence.

The remedy:  Military reduction of the pirates.  Read about Stephen Decatur.  You might learn something.  This is not the first time pirates and their state sponsors have waged war on the United States.  One of the great differences between Thomas Jefferson and this Obama is the resolve to do just this.  Obama is a waste of skin.  He needs to read title 18 of the US Code.

Edit link is not coming up for me

Just for everyone's information, the list of reasons in italics above are dirctly copied and pasted from the link that Stew provided.

I believe they are credible because they are very similar to what the excecs have told me at my workplace.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

This is a reponse to you and

This is a reponse to you and Stewie. One thing I believe both of you seem to miss is that the harder it is for these pirates to ply their trade the easier it will be for them to cease their piracy.  We should make decoy ships armed to the teeth with weapon and sailors trained in theior use.  Any pirates we blow out of the water unmercifully.

Enough with the Stewie thing

Enough with the Stewie thing already.  Stew is not my real name, and only people who call me Stewie mean it to be condescending.  No one believes you to be an expert on piracy and you have no right to be condescending.  

I don't think anyone here disagrees with your statement:

 the harder it is for these pirates to ply their trade the easier it will be for them to cease their piracy

We're not stupid here.  I have no suggestions on how to stop piracy, but starting a war with Somalia, like the above poster suggested, is probably not the answer.  My post was intended to answer the question as to why merchant ships do not arm themselves, and it was reinforced by the poster who works for Maersk. 

We're not stupid

We're not stupid here

Perhaps but you are ignorant and Trollish.  And if "I have no suggestions on how to stop piracy" then shut up until you do.  I do know that dead men dont perpetrate piracy.  And I never said anything about arming the merchant ships.  I said "We should make decoy ships armed to the teeth with weapon and sailors trained in theior use.  Any pirates we blow out of the water unmercifully" the same way the Allies slowed submarines attacking mercghant ships in WWII using Qships.

And grow a thicker skin Stewart both you and your god need to grow it.  I personally dont carewht you call me; jus dont call me late for breakfast.

You're pathetic.  Good luck

You're pathetic.  Good luck with that.

Good, when is breakfast?

Good, when is breakfast?

So what was your solution?

I missed it?

 

 

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Couple of Points for StewMcKin

Simply:

 1.  If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen and quit crying.  People respond to posts in many different ways and no one invited you to be the "Post Police" on Newsbusters.  What you might call disrespectful others might say it's just calling a spade a spade. If the posts get out of hand or violate NB's posting guidelines I'm sure they will take care of the matter, however, in the absence of some action by the editors of NB then let free speech take it's course.

2. Your premise that the U.S. would be starting a war with Somalia if it pursued the pirates on land by attacking their coastal bases is fallacious.  And if you took the time to research it a little bit more before going off the handle then things might go a bit more smoothly for you.  In fact, the U.S./UN has already been authorized by the tenuous Somali Government to pursue the pirates on land.  Therefore, you are point-blank wrong on this issue.  There are obvious issues with doing that such as the loss of innocent civilian life etc. but to say it would be starting an unauthorized or unnecessary war is just plain wrong.  Here's one link FYI: 

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20081212/pirates12_st.art.htm

 I would agree with you on perhaps one point.  That people on both sides of the issues need to grow up a bit.  However, since reading most of your posts I have come to the tentative conclusion that you should get off your high horse since you are certainly not the epitome of respect and decorum that you demand from others.

"Respectfully",

ShanghaiRay 

 

Now I will tell you what you are missing

First, the merchant ships cannot out arm the pirates.

Second, the merchant ships would rather pay the ransom.

Third, getting rid of piracy is not as easy as arming the crew, the ship, or providing an escort.

I had your zeal to kick their ass, until someone with maritime experience told me how the real maritime world works.

Finally, this is about money. They pay a small ransom to save the crew and hundreds of millions in cargo. That's it. That's all.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Humm...

So, you're telling us that an armed crew will be UNABLE to prevent a few men from climbing aboard? That's wrong. If a single man can stop someone from shooting everyone in an office simply by KILLING that shooter with a handgun, then three or four men armed with automatic weapons can STOP several men from CLIMBING aboard a cargo vessel, and stopping those men from boarding would be a LOT easier as the crew already has the high ground AND is protected by the steel plating of the ship itself itself.

You have to remember that those ships are HUGE, with decks that are tens of feet above the water line. Tell me how easy it would be to climb up 50 feet of ladder along a steel hull when someone is SHOOTING at you! It would be impossible!

Arm the crew, stop the piracy, it's that simple.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

You are being naive to

You are being naive to think arming the crew will stop it. It is not that simple.

What about the mother ship that is armed with the RPG's?

And don't tell me how big these boats are. I work there.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Yes, it's that simple.

Yes, it's that simple. This isn't a WAR where the goal s the DESTRUCTION of shipping. This is a criminal enterprise where the goal is the capture of a ship, it's cargo, and it's crew for RANSOM! It's a money making operation. If the pirates know that they very well may DIE trying to board a ship, they won't attempt it. Who's going to DIE for ransom? No one! That's why kidnappers NEVER kidnap an armed victim, they capture an UNARMED subject as they don't get shot!

Like I said, arm the crews, stop the piracy.

As for the RPG, do you REALLY thing a few RPG's can SINK a cargo vessel? No way in hell! That would take several hits by a VERY large modern cannon. Besides, that would tend to destroy the object of the piracy, correct? Who's going to sink a ship they want to hold as ransom? No one is THAT stupid! Those RPG's are used to stop the ship, not sink it! Once the ship is disabled, the pirates board. Try climbing up a ladder, with an RPG in your hands, while someone is shooting at you! Good luck with that! And don't forget to tell me what you want carved onto your tombstone, as you're going to die!

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

If the pirates know that

If the pirates know that they very well may DIE trying to board a ship, they won't attempt it.

Not true. Most of these poor "fisherman" have nothing to live for anyway.

Like I said, arm the crews, stop the piracy.

Say it all you want to, it won't make it any more true.

These mother ships are armed with REAL military equipment. They are not a field goal away. Just face it, it is more complicated than you care to admit. Like I have said somewhere on this thread, the merchant ships cannot out arm the pirates.

Listen, I am not anti gun, anti war, or anti kick somone's ass. However, this is bigger than arming a crew on a mega vessel merchant ship.

Finally, you said it "It's a money making operation". That also goes for the ship owners that hand over a small ransom to save hundreds of millions in cargo and equipment.

You don't know of which you speak and pounding the same "arm the crew" point isn't going anywhere for reasons mentioned all over this thread.

Give it a rest.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

They maybe more armed,

They maybe more armed, doesn't mean they can't be taken out.  They aren't just poor fisherman...otherwise they wouldn't have the means to buy the weapons necessary to over power a rather large ship.  Fight back, and they will learn that it isn't worth the risk.

It doesn't relly matter how well armed the pirates are

Here's what people forget: It doesn't really matter how well the pirates are armed. It's rather difficult to both climb aboard a modern cargo ship AND seize the crew when that crew is shooting at you! Try climbing up the steel hull of a ship while someone is shooting at you. That's not an easy task and your odds of survival is VERY poor.

Even if you DO make it aboard, it won't stop there. The crew knows the layout of that ship and will continue to fire at you from concealed positions. The crew would be able to move their defensive positions at will, with the structure of the ship itself providing both cover and concealment, while the pirates will be continually fired upon, with no idea where the next attack will occur. That would be a very short fight for those attempting to seize that crew and ship. The pirates would all die, quickly. This is why a REAL military doesn't board a ship during war when the crew is liable to be armed, it's suicide. We SINK those ships instead.

Now imagine that the pirates actually win such a battle, IF the pirates had the firepower available to them to kill the crew and seize the ship (and that's a long shot by anyone's imagination), what good would that do? No company is going to pay a ransom for DEAD crewmen and the cargo is insured against loss, so the goals of the pirates, that of collecting ransom, would be as dead as the crew. That would defeat the very purpose of seizing the ship itself. The pirates can't really do anything with the cargo itself, there's no market, no economy, available to them in which to SELL that cargo and make money. The ship itself would become a liability as it is VERY visible, an easy target for an actual military to sink, once the crew is dead. It wouldn't be an asset to the pirates.

By arming the crew, we take away the goals of the pirates and make their mission impossible, that of easily seizing the crew without risk of death and holding them for ransom. The pirates aren't stupid. They're not going to risk dying for an impossible goal.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Cobra

I've listened to you belabor the point. I had your ferver to kick their ass too.

However, after speaking with my superiors who have over 20 years experience (a piece some more) in the maritime industry, they have convinced me its a bigger issue than arming the crew.

So with all due respect, I have attempted to relay thier experience, to obviously no avail.

My disposition is with the real experts.

Continue your rants...

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Oyu'r supervisors have no military experance.

Your supervisors have no military training in this type of situation. They've been taught not to fight back. I know this as I was told the same thing by EVERY company I've worked for. Also, those supervisors aren't at risk, so their viewpoint is limited at best. They want to protect their property, not stop the criminals from attacking. They'd rather pay the ransom because they THINK it's the best option, but that foolish as it will just guarantee that this activity continues.

Look at it from the point of view of the crew. Would you rather try to defend yourself from attack, or simply capitulate because someone who isn't going to face such a situation told you that it is the best course of action? Personally? I'm going to fight back ad prove those "supervisors" wrong.

BTW, how am I ranting, because I disagree with you? I'm station my opinion by offering you logical arguments formed through personal experience and deductive reasoning, that's hardly a rant. But don't let facts like that get in the way of your poor judgment.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

BTW

BTW, I;m glad Obama didn't listen to your 'supervisors" and their "20 years of experience." He ordered the seals to KILL the pirates, and that action not only saved the captain, it stopped the cycle of capitulation. No ransom was paid, no pirates set free, and no one else was harmed. Good for Obama, bad for your "superiors"

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

In addition....

"I have attempted to relay thier experience, to obviously no avail."

Has it occurred to you that your "supervisors" are wrong? Think it through. Even with "20 years" of experience, those "experts" have not been able to come up with a solution that works. They've been unable to stop the pirates from seizing the ships, despite their "expertise" in maritime matters. They're "plan" is to allow it to happen, like it's just an inconvenience. Is that a good plan?

They REFUSE to arm the crews (granted, that is a violation of maritime law so they don't have much of a choice, but aren't they part of the group that makes those types of laws?), and then tell us that arming the crews won't work? How do they know if they haven't even tried? None of their other suggestions have worked, so why should we even pay attention to them anymore? Their "plans" have not only allowed piracy to continue, it's allowed it to flourish! If that's what you call "expert" advice, I think it's time for a new group of experts to take charge. We all know the current "experts' have failed, miserably.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Experience is over rated. 

Experience is over rated.  President Carter has all kinds of experience, doesn't mean his word is worth spit.  President Obama has all kinds of experience as a community organizer...look where that is getting us.

Insanity is defined doing something over and over again and expecting different results.  Fact is killing the bad guys is as effective in deterring dead pirates from exercising piracy, as abstinence is in keeping girls from getting pregnant.

Give it a rest? Never!

Why should I give it a rest? The pirates sure won't!

The "poor fishermen" you describe are making thousands, and, in some cases, MILLIONS off dollars of their illegal activities! They are FAR from poor!. If they are so poor, like you claim, how can they afford that 'mother ship" you cited? It's obvious that these criminals are FAR more than some poor fishermen, they are well funded CRIMINALS!

Get this straight, you can't defeat or deter criminal activities by capitulating to those criminals, but that's exactly what you're proposing! You want to REWARD those pirates for their criminal activities and that's STUPID!

As for the companies paying the ransoms, he only reason the companies PAY the ransoms is because they CAN"T PROTECT THEIR CREWS! If maritime law ALLOWED them to arm their crews, that piracy wouldn't even occur!

Put yourself in their shoes, would you rather spend a few hundred dollars supplying arms to your crew, or spend thousands, or even tens of thousands, of dollar rescuing those crews because they don't have the ability to protect themselves from criminals?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

if I may jump in here

I've been following this somewhat and didn't want to intercede, but at this point I think I will.

These pirates are gangs of poor thugs who get recruited into joining. They personally see very little of the loot because they are told that they are fighting for the good of their country. Much like the foot soldiers who work for Hamas, they come from poor cities and really do feel like they have nothing else to lose.

I don't think daughtry is saying we should all capitulate and keep paying ransoms - just that having guns on the ship won't solve the problems.

 

Candance

Thanks for the assistance.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

The thugs would die

It WOULD sove the problem as thse thugs woud die attempting to board and seize the ship and crew. End of thugs, end of problem. Why is this so hard for people to accept?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

with all due respect, cobra

That's akin to assuming the suicide bombs will stop in Israel as soon as all of them die. They are recruiting young men from the slums back home, which means they will never run out of fresh bodies.

The more money they get, the more weapons they buy and more people they recruit. They already have machine guns that outperform civilian guns as it is - unless your plan is to arm ships with superior firepower. Even then, we must assume that they will find ways to escalate attacks, or maybe start attacking our allies who don't have a navy to protect themselves.

Bottom line, civilian security guards on a civilian ship cannot easily fend off an orchestrated piracy assault, even with guns.

The only real option we have to stop it is to use the navy as escorts for all the ships - which would be seen as an escalation. In the end that's probably what will happen anyway, cause we can only guess what they are doing with all the ransom money.

 

Here is one major

Here is one major difference...suicide bombers want to die...pirates not so much.

Second logical flaw.  The number of suicide bombers in Israel is actually minimal.  Israel does a fairly good job keeping Israel safe.  Are there some that get through...yes, but they don't win until Israel gives up.

Third logical flaw.  Suicide bombers are not the average Muslim.  They are either convinced because they were caught in sin...or they were coerced because their family member will be killed, raped or tortured if they do not.  More often then not, it isn't because they hate Israel.  The average Muslim over there is just like everyone else, they want to earn enough money to feed their kids and pay the rent.

Fourth logical flaw:  That the crew members couldn't be armed with equipment that would slow down and deter the pirates.  ( Watch Home Alone...out gunned but still won...I know its a movie not real life, but the fact remains, its easier to defend your home turf...there are many times in war where the aggresser was decimated, because they didn't have the higher ground...and when you add the fact that the pirates want to take the ship and crew alive...because there is more money...more to the crews advantage. )  They can wire the ladders with electric current.  They can set up traps.  Let the captain allow all the pirates in the cabin with a gun to his head...then a button is pushed, everyone including the captain goes sleepy sleepy.  Hidden crew then come in and take care of the pirates.  You see there are ways you can fight back even if the priates have better equipment.

well gee

Booby traps and electrical ladders? Why haven't these ships already put these ideas in place?

 

because they are not in the

because they are not in the mindset to defend themselves...their mindset is to pay them off and move on.

 And from the oh gee, I get the impression I am to be discounted.  Mine fields, barb wire, etc are still all effective means to slow down or deter the enemy...especially a non-military person.

Oh, really?

"These mother ships are armed with REAL military equipment."

Like what, missiles, cannons, and torpedoes? No, they're armed with AK-47's and, if they are lucky, RPG's. AND they are manned by small groups of three or four men. That's hardly what I would call a formidable force when trying to attack an ARMED cargo ship crew! It's obvious that you have NO idea what a military force really is and just how much force it takes to seize an ARMED crew!

You don't make any sense. First you tell me that these pirates are "poor fishermen" and then you tell me they are a formidable military force? Well, which on is it? it can't be both!

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

I'm a veteran, you idiot!

"You don't know of which you speak and pounding the same "arm the crew" point isn't going anywhere for reasons mentioned all over this thread."

I'm a veteran, you idiot. I've been trained in the application of military force and I know EXACTLY what I am talking about! I know what force is required to overcome armed and unarmed resistance. I know what the capabilities of the weapons the pirates are using and how to defend against them. And I know that an armed crew is a FORMIDABLE force as they have both cover and concealment while the pirates have nether! It would be suicide to attack an armed crew, unless your goal is to destroy the very vessel that crew is defending, and the pirates don't have that type of firepower available to them.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

If you think an RPG will kill the crew, you're mistaken

BTW, the effective range of an RPG is about 50 to 100 yards. If you get within 50 to 100 yards of a cargo vessel, you can't even see the deck, let along kill anyone who may be on it. The "mother ship' can't give the pirates cover, as when the ship get close enough to provide that cover, they too run into the sight problem. You can't kill what you can't see, especially if you're firing uphill with armed defenders in a well defended, and armored, position trying to stop you!

If the 'mother ship" is far enough away to SEE the crew, they can't kill them with covering fire, that's too far out of their range! This is why the pirates are attacking UNARMED vessels, they know that no one can stop them.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

In these last few attacks,

In these last few attacks, these 'mother ships' have been described as around 30 footers...

...incapable of carrying any substantial armament that could threaten a large vessel from a half mile away.

 

Dock on what?

"Now let me ask, how should the American government respond to heavily armed merchant ships wishing to dock on our soil?"

Dock on our what? You may not be aware of this, but ships "dock" in a port, on the water, with limited access to the actual land, and under constant observation by customs AND private security firms. Armed security guards already patrol those ports, to prevent theft, you know, so what difference would it make if the ship's crew was armed or not?

It's not like the merchants will start shooting at people on the docks. All THAT would do is make a crane operator drop a fully loaded cargo container on their heads while the security guards empty their handguns at those who are shooting at the docks. End of problem.

Think it through, ok?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

"...private security firms.

"...private security firms. Armed security guards already patrol those ports, to prevent theft, you know..."

You've never been to Port Elizabeth in Newark or the Port of Miami, have you? :)

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

They don't hire security firms?

Are you telling me that the ports don't hire security firms? Then who pays for the high insurance rates and unguarded port would incur?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

I was just being a pain.

I was just being a pain. NWK and MIA are different worlds. Stuff gets stolen all the time.

Including the containers, cargo, chassis, diesel and gensets.

The security in MIA is insane. Have to give advanced notice, letter, blah blah just to visit the port.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Inside jobs?

That sounds like an inside job. I know someone who got arrested for doing that at the company I work for. He was security too. Lol. Talk about stupid people! I wonder if he still thinks those laptops are worth 5 to 10 years in a State Prison?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Truckers, unions, etc. It's

Truckers, unions, etc. It's wild.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Man, how dumb do they think we are?

"don't want to arm their civilian crews for fear of an escalation of violence from pirates"

The pirates are ALREADY shooting small arms AND RPG's at the ships and their crews! What do they expect, that the pirates will start shooting 5 inch cannon shells at the ships? That's STUPID! The pirates want to capture the ship and it's crew, not sink them! You can't hold a sunken ship as ransom!

Want to stop piracy? Arm the crews! This isn't Pirates of the Caribbean when the pirates grapple the ship and jump aboard, this is REAL life where the pirates force the ship to stop and CLIMB aboard. It's rather hard to climb aboard a ship when someone is SHOOTING at you, especially if it's still moving!

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

DVN

said: 

"Second, the merchant ships would rather pay the ransom."

 Your making very little sense with your arguments since 1) Mr. Shapiro obviously represents a very large group of merchant ships and they are tired of paying ransoms and 2) there have been numerous merchant ship companies practically demanding armed naval assistance to stop this piracy, therefore, they also aren't happy about paying any ransom. 

 

I think you are talking to me

Here's your sense,

1) It looks like Liberty has a whole 7 ships.

2) I would Like to see the list of the "numerous merchant ship companies practically demanding armed naval assistance to stop this piracy".

Bonus Point

3) This guy doesn't speak for Maersk (read up a little for THE player in the maritime business). The military wasn't called in until the Alabama crew fought back the pirates, regained control, then lost it again.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

dvn aka idiot to the nth degree

Typical liberal b.s. Just because Mr. Shapiro represents a small group of ships his opinion means nothing.  However, a person such as yourself who allegedly works for shipping knows-it-all. 

If you don't think the majority of shipping companies are tired of paying ransoms and support naval intervention then you are as clueless as you sound.  Normally, I don't reply to idiots and just dispense with them as I would my Monday morning garbage, however, I'll humor you this time and this time only.  Here is a link to the World's international maritime organization representing numerous shipping organizations website.  If you read the link you will find that they obviously support naval intervention. 

http://www.imo.org/home.asp?topic_id=1178

Finally, you need to go back and read the timeline of the hijacking if you think that b.s. you are trying to sell is going to fly with me.  The skipper of the Alabama put out a distress call immediately upon realizing the pirates were attacking and the U.S.S. Bainbridge immediately set course for the Alabama's position.  Furthermore, NATO, Russian, China, India and numerous other nations have been patrolling the areas for months attempting to stop piracy. 

 

Sigh...

Typical liberal b.s. Just because Mr. Shapiro represents a small group of ships his opinion means nothing. However, a person such as yourself who allegedly works for shipping knows-it-all.

What I have said is not liberal BS. My point with his small fleet is that he does not "obviously represent a large goup". His opinion DOES NOT mean nothing, however, he only represents Liberty.

Call my bluff on where I work. 704-571-2328. It's a direct line.

I don't know it all, but I happen to have some information directly from the industry.

Here's the timeline. See if you can find in there if Navy force was used before or after the crew fought back and lost control.

Furthermore, NATO, Russian, China, India and numerous other nations have been patrolling the areas for months attempting to stop piracy.

You expect me to take your word for it?

Look, the Maritime Industry would love the Naval support. I don't argue that, but we can't baby sit that area. It's too big.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

DVN You're Alright.....

LOL....you really made my day.  Area Code 704 huh? Charlotte, North Carolina.  A well-known center for merchant vessel activity. 

The next thing you'll be telling us is about those little green men you saw up on the Blue Ridge Mountains....LOL.

Finally, I'm sure your superiors would love the fact you're giving out your direct line to strangers on websites so you can receive private and useless phonecalls during work time. 

By the way, is that your direct line or your dad's?

LOL.

 

Waiting on you...

What's the problem sharing my number among friends?

See if you can find where the North American corporate HQ is. There are Two actually, I'll give you the other one: Giralda Farms, NJ.

Call my bluff.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Just FYI, there is no such

Just FYI, there is no such town as Giralda, NJ.

Giralda Farms is an office park in Madison, NJ.

I know because I got my dog at St. Hubert's Giralda Animal Shelter.

Apologies

Alas, you are correct. We call it Giralda Farms here for obvious reasons.

But Madison is the city name.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

ShanghaiRay's Anti-Piracy Plan

I.  Summarily execute all pirates caught in the act of hijacking any sea-going vessel.

II.  Seek, detect and attack all confirmed motherships, execute all pirates and skuttle the ships.

III. Engage all pirate short installtions with naval bombardment after first giving a 24-hour warning to civilians. Additionally, use Special Forces (SEALS) onshore to pinpoint pirate strongholds etc.

 IV.  Station naval vessels outside of all known pirate bases to interdict and destroy all pirate vessels and crew.

I'll admit this is a bit drastic, however, it WILL eradicate piracy in that area.  These barbarians only understand and respect the use of force. 

Some will say, its only property and a bit of money.  No one has gotten killed yet etc.  Perhaps that is correct but it's only a matter of time before someone DOES get killed or maimed by accident or on purpose.  However, I do remember someone being killed by the pirate and some captives dying while in captivity due to the lack of medical attention from heart attacks etc. A person who dies of a heart attack while in the custody of a pirate is the same as the pirate putting a bullet to his/her head in my opinion.

 

"Some will say, its only

"Some will say, its only property and a bit of money.  No one has gotten killed yet etc."

And I would say...if you come at me with a gun, then be prepared to be shot at.

The idea of mostly white

The idea of mostly white folks shooting at black guys or other non-whites ("brown people" they call them) is always unacceptable to them no matter what the reason.

Now, peckerwoods get jacked or shot...too bad, the White Oppressors got what they deserved.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).

what?  This post didn't

what?  This post didn't make sense.

Bring in the navy

They need the target practice.  Pirates 5pts, mother boats...15pts, live pirates swiming in the water miles from shore....priceless.

dvdaughtry's ancestors...

were once overheard saying "that's one nice looking wooden horse, let's bring him inside"....pure genius.

 

You act like I am giving

You act like I am giving trade secrets away.

It's my work number, not a big deal. Many of my friends, families, and more have it.

Feel free to give me a buzz. Love to chat for a minute.

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

Like I said dvdaughtry

you are a idiot and proved it over and over by your stupid comments that have been torn to shreds by the numerous responses to your posts above.  You can't even get the city right of your theoretical HQ and then you have the audacity to proclaim some credibility. 

 In all the years I've been posting on numerous sites this is the first time I say "why don't you shut the up and grow up". 

You are a dangerous person and a loose cannon.  It's people like you who get innocent people killed. 

Aww Ray

Too bad you couldn't have told me that over the phone instead of sitting behind that keyboard.

I'll be in tomorrow 8 am EST. Hope to hear from you!

TGIF!

You trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?

is NB really pleased with this kind of dialogue?

*

Just call him

Ray, what are you afraid of?

 

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg