>The "American slaves" in question were American seaman and passengers captured by the Barbary pirates and being kept as slaves / hostages. As many Americans - especially those who have adopted names derived from Arabic as somehow more authentic than their "slave names" have never learned or forgotten - the slave trade flourished in the land of Islam both culturally and legally at least as long as it did in Christian countries and the anti-slavery movement was almost entirely a phenomenon of Western culture. Slavery was quite common in North Africa and East Africa. A good portion of Swahili is bastardized Arabic derived from the extensive slave trade. Prior to the trans-Atlantic African slave trade of the 17th and 18th centuries for new world plantations the most thriving slave trade was that of the Barbary corsairs raiding southern Europe for slaves.
>
>By the 1820s I believe the primary duty of HM Navy was the suppression of the slave trade. Decatur, however, would not have been representing a government with such noble aspirations. He was protecting American trade and flexing our new-found muscle as an emerging power.
Hi,
Thx. I read a bit more and, with a prompt from Agnes, worked out the alternative meaning to what was a somewhat ambiguous choice of words in the article....
>
>Incidentally, I find the idea of casting the Somali pirates as some kind of defenders of Somali fishing rights laughable and I'm sure they would as well - though once the idea has been handed to them I am sure they are prepared to exploit it as justification in any way they can. This is truly another example of cultural jujitsu.
I think the problem first arose as a direct reaction to illegal fishing - but, of course, now goes beyond that. I saw a documentary on the illegal fishing problem a couple of years ago. Not just about Somalia but that did figure as an area where the problem was particularly prelevant. Film of local fisherman out fishing all day in not much more than a dugout coming back with a few fish for the family and to sell at the local market. Then watching large modern fishing vessels operating very close inshore, almost dredging the seabed, with perfect impunity. No wonder they were p*****d off!
>
>>>I think it would be rather cool and anchronistically fitting if HR ER were to profer Letters of Marque to a new generation of sea dogs to go fight the Somali pirates (and maybe take out a few Iranian and Venezulan tankers as well.
>>
>>The link I came across earlier (
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=69204§ionid=351020501) seems to indicate that one half of the problem can be solved without involving middle men (s). And once the pirates recognize that they will be well paid for for capturing and allowing access to vessels flying specific flags they'd be less likely to bother with others......
>>
>>>
>>>Our Stephan Decatur made rather a name for himself when "millions for defense but not one cent for tribute" was the motto and the Barbary Pirates were "protecting the fishing rights" in the Med and being paid off by pusillanimous potentates of decadent Europe <s> (The Marine's Hymn still has that line about "to the shores of Tripoli" )
>>
>>Had to google him. I'm a little confused by this snip from Wikipedia (my bold):
>>"In May 1815, Commodore Decatur sailed his squadron of ten ships to the Mediterranean Sea to conduct the Second Barbary War, which put an end to the international practice of paying tribute to pirate states. Decatur was dispatched to Algiers
to secure the release of American slaves, to obtain an end to tribute, and finally, to procure favorable prize agreements."
>>
>>Given the date then why the remit to release slaves?
>>
>>Regards,
>>Viv
>>
>>>
>>>But I am not optimistic our current Commander in Chief would do anything so un-nuanced and smacking of profiling every Somali in an armed boat boarding a merchant ship and holding the crew for ransom a pirate. <s>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576165,00.html>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>They surrendered to terrorism years ago - I guess they might as well bankroll pirates too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The way it is now, they're still bankrolling them, but they're making the pirates work for it, and putting people in jeopardy. It would be a lot simpler and put fewer Spanish lives in the danger if they simply set up an account for the pirates and paid them a monthly salary.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Or maybe did something to stop Spanish trawlers fishing illegally in Somalian waters....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Somalia...Illegally....S-O-M-A-L-I-A...what the he$$ does illegal have to do with Somalia?? Somalia has no government. Hasn't for decades. Somalia does have thieves, Al Queda, pirates, and people waiting for handouts (that they steal from each other). Illegally anything in Somalia? Get real.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Seems a little hypocritical to argue that it is the responsibility of the Somali government to prevent pirates stealing ships - but it is not Spain's responsibility to prevent Spanish trawlers from stealing fish....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm with the pirates on this one :-}
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Anyway it looks like the rules are changing:http://www.policyinnovations.org/ideas/innovations/data/000147
>>>>>
>>>>>It's amazing the BS you spout.
>>>>
>>>>So do I get to join the club ? :-}
