Miscellaneous News

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Even the UN definition that you cited:

So it seems clear that the definition of piracy requires 2(or more) actual-physical things at sea no?

If that was the case then Article 102 or 107 doesn’t make sense.

Article102
Piracy by a warship, government ship or government aircraft
whose crew has mutinied

The acts of piracy, as defined in article 101, committed by a warship, government ship or government aircraft whose crew has mutinied and taken control of the ship or aircraft are assimilated to acts committed by a private ship or aircraft.​
Article107
Ships and aircraft which are entitled to seize on account of piracy

A seizure on account of piracy may be carried out only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect.​

They don’t require both parties to be using ships.
 

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
- Op Ed


by Sherelle Jacobs (The Telegraph)

Today, the enemy we face – the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is in some ways more frightening than al-Qaeda. This new enemy does not seek to destroy Western values by waging open war. Rather it is steadily rendering freedom and democracy obsolete, through infiltration of our economic and political system in the shadows. The CCP has been extraordinarily successful in capturing Britain plc..."
Duh! Off course the CCP is more frightening than al-Qaeda. Britain can't wage a War on Terror on the CCP, can't they? Unlike Al Qaeda, who could blow up some buses, the CCP can level all of London. So, all that is left for Britain to do is to sulk and write trash articles like this. Very dark times for Britain today. To have an enemies like the CCP, along with Vlad the Nuclear Impaler.
 
Last edited:
Top