Wyn Rolands was aboard the MSC Melody when hijackers attacked the ship just north of the Seychelles. A 63 year old Brit from Bangor-on-Dee in Wales picked up a deck-chair and flung it down at the armed pirates before raising the alarm. He was the first person on the ship to see what was happening and he took immediate action.

Captain Ciro Pinto sprung ito action, along with the team of armed Israeli security agents who returned the fire coming from the small boat. “It felt like war,” Pinto later said about the incident where both sides exchanged fire until the captain was able to maneuver the vessel away from the small white boat. The hijackers follwed the ship for about 20 minutes, continuing to fire sporadically.

This is just the latest incident of attempted piracy on a cruise ship in these waters, with two other incidents already in 2009. Fortunately, each ship was able to out-maneuver and outrun its assilants each time. But now shipping companies are saying they want more protection, either with the international right to carry arms, or by government intervention and protection in these waters.

Testifying before the U.S. Congress yesterday, Philip Shapiro of Liberty Maritime Corp. owners of the Maersk Alabama, said that an 1819 statute (after the second Barbary War) gives ships the right to self-defense, but modern laws forbid armed ships from docking at certain locations. These conflicting laws have ship owners between hell and high water.

“We’re doing everything we lawfully can do, but … it is apparent to everybody that we need to do more,” Shapiro said. “We need the authority to put guns on our ships, to arm our ships, so that our people can be protected,” Shapiro said.

That the MSC Melody was well protected when it was attacked proved to be pivotal in avoiding the hijacking. Original reports said the captain had handed out handguns to trained crewmembers, but later is was revealed that the ship was carrying trained Israeli marine guards who had boarded in the Seychelles and were dropped off in Sharm al Sheik on the Sinai Peninsula.

It was a military Spanish Frigate that later apprehended the nine pirates and took them into custody. Just as in the case of the Maersk Alabama, it was shown that having military in the area is not enough. The Alabama had its captain taken hostage and held in a tense standoff with U.S. Navy Seals that last nearly three days before he was recovered.

Still, the U.S. government and others have stated the zone of danger where these pirates are operating is far to big to ensure the safety of the great number of ships that use this shipping channel. The Gulf of Aden encompasses more than 1 million square miles — roughly four times the size of Texas but it cannot be avoided because the Suez Canal connects the Mediterranean Sea with the other side of the African continent.

Shapiro told Congress yesterday, “these incidents constitute a game changer and Congress needs to clear the obstacles that stand in the way of ship operators protecting their crews and cargo with armed force.”

Indeed, assigning military security to every U.S. merchant vessels in the area would put a “large dent” in the Navy’s capacity and funding, said Vice Adm. James Winnefeld. So arming the ships is the only other option short of hoping the passive evasive maneuvers will continue to work, which doesn’t seem likely. These pirates are usually armed with AK-47 automatic rifles and even rocket propelled grenade launchers. When MSC Melody was attacked there were reports of several windows being shot out by the attackers.

What was the result of the hearings? Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) compared onboard armed security to a shopping mall and said final responsibility for protecting the ships belongs in the private sector.

“We expect folks to provide their own security,” Levin said. “Why should we not expect that ships that are vulnerable going into that area will provide their own security personnel?”

Undersecretary of Defense for policy Michele Flournoy said it is the responsibility of the shipping companies to invest in methods to thwart attacks, and that many so far have been reluctant to adequately do so.

“Although pirate activity has doubled so far in 2009, pirates still attack only a small number of ships — less than half a percent of the more than 33,000 that sail around the Horn of Africa each year,” Flournoy said. “In most cases, crews foil marauders by using evasive or defensive actions.”

“The government could only possibly advocate an onboard armed security force for the most vulnerable ships — those that ride ‘low and slow,’ making them easy prey for pirates in skiffs to pull alongside and commandeer ,” she continued.

By all appearances, our government is recommending that ship companies arm themselves. Some people believe that ships arming themselves will lead to an arms race between the hijackers and the shipping companies, but I wonder if that isn’t inevitable anyway.

After all, didn’t Congress just tip our hand to the pirates that the military does not intend to take a more aggressive approach? At this point, the pirates have a green light to try even harder to commandeer these ships, as far as a military response is concerned. It looks like the shipping companies have little choice but to follow the advice of and start arming themselves.

I would prefer a military solution, however, and I can’t help thinking about the Barbary Wars. In 1801 the United States defended itself against several pirates states operating along the North Coast of Africa, from Morocco to Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli. Each was a quasi-independent state belonging to the all powerful Ottoman Empire. This is a much larger area than the coast off of Somlia.

In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli’s envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. The ambassador replied with a long speech about pirates being rewarded in Heaven with “the first to board receiving one slave over and above his share” in the afterlife.

Jefferson reported to Congress that paying tribute would only encourage more attacks. Still, nothing was done for many years and payments in ransom and tribute to privateering states amounted to 20 percent of United States government annual revenues in 1800.

When Jefferson was inaugurated as President these pirate states demanded $225,000 in tribute from the new administration. The pirates got the Barbary War instead, which led to the creation of the Marines division of the Navy. The war ended in something of a stalemate where the U.S. paid $60,000 in ransom to free 300 American prisoners.

Piracy continued until 1815 when a second Barbary War ensued. In this war we were joined by Great Britain, Ireland and the Netherlands. This war ended in victory and ushered in the era of colonization by the European powers.

What are the lessons here? That history repeats itself, that war is a very difficult solution but that government intervention in the end turned out to be the only solution. Paying booty to pirates does not end piracy. In other words, this thing is likely to escalate no matter what and ships are going to continue to seek protection. Future updates as they occur.

Related posts:

1. Should Cruise Ships be Armed?
2. Cruise Agencies Go Bust- So Do Other Businesses – Protection is Available
3. Should Cruise Ships Go to Haiti?

The CDC has a duty to protect us from diseases, especially deadly ones, and they do their job very well. Were they to mistakenly underestimate the H1N1 flu virus they alone would bear the responsibility, so they have nothing to lose by erring on the side of caution. Furthermore, as a government agency don’t expect anyone in government, especially the President, to contradict them.

Unfortunately, that leads to a very one-sided point of view. Doesn’t someone need to be the voice of moderation, or even contradiction to the CDC? In the past that would have been the media, but not this time around. Okay, so being in the travel industry maybe I need to say a few things. You can take my words with a grain of salt if you prefer.

We just got the latest H1N1 updates from the CDC, the new head of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sibilius, and Janet Napolitano of the Department of Homeland Security.

Interviewer Chris Wallace asked CDC spokesman Dr. Richard Besser if he would characterize the media’s response to flu reports as overreaction. Besser replied “if the virus had shown other factors that made it more serious, then the reaction would be warranted.” Perfect syntax, Richard, “If, then, would be…”

Then the CDC warned us once again that the virus could come roaring back next fall, as the 1918 Swine Flu pandemic did. This is the CDC’s trump card to keep us all on our feet. They have no way to give us the odds that will happen, however, but they have one case where a swine flu did that, and so we have to assume it is a possibility. Even though the CDC said the current H1N1 does not have the same genetic markers for “sustainability” as the 1918 flu did.

So, what are the chances a flu that currently does not have a certain genetic marker could develop one? Isn’t it a tenet of evolution that mutations are random, and survival is more or less a fortunate accident of nature? In other words, lets not put it in people’s minds that the virus has a will of its own to become more “sustainable.” It might happen, but its a roll of the dice, like growing spots.

Even if it does mutate for sustainability. What is different between 1918 and 2009? Today we have antibiotics, flu vaccines and robust quantities of anti-viral medicines such as Tamiflu which have proven to be very effective to H1N1. Put them all together and what do you have? Well, so far we know this virus has responded pretty well to many medicines they didn’t have back then, enough to make a difference…

Still, all we currently have to study is the existing flu. Besser says H1N1 in its current U.S. form has all the characteristics of a regular seasonal flu. That was a huge statement, in hugely understated terms.

Still pursuing the “are we overreacting theme” Besser was asked whether Fort Worth was right to close 147 Texas schools, leaving 80,000 kids with no place to go for two weeks, due to just one confirmed case of our flu. Besser replied, “If that one case had proven to be more virulent and the flu had spread to more students then it certainly was not an overreaction.”

“If that case had proven (which it didn’t) and it spread (which it didn’t) …

They sent 80,000 kids home instead of one student that never showed symptoms worse than an average flu. And where did he go? Not to the hospital as far as I know. The media has not been given one hospitalization to follow, to show the progression and severity of the disease. How many cases in the U.S. have been hospitalized out of some 230 confirmed cases? Only about 30.

Besser said on Sunday that schools should close if they have a “confirmed” case of H1N1 — But it was just last Tuesday that President Obama said a “suspected” case is enough to close a school.

In this country, after a week of full attention, we now have just 227 confirmed cases of H1N1. We have only 19 deaths in two months from this virus worldwide, all of them contracting the disease in Mexico, and we still have no answer as to why these people died. The CDC has suggested the Mexican form of the virus was much more virulent and there were likely mitigating circumstances such as no access to health care, other weaknesses, etc.

In Mexico, the virus affected mostly older children and young adults. The CDC suspects that older U.S. citizens are already immune to the virus. There have been strains of human, avian and swine flu in this country before, such as in 1976. Why don’t we have a better break down of the ages of people it has affected in the U.S.? Out of 227 confirmed cases, why have only 30 of them been hospitalized? What are the exact criteria for hospitalizing an H1N1 flu victim in this country, or for closing a school? That has not been defined for us by the CDC. In fact, almost nothing about this disease, as it exists in its current form, has been defined for us by the CDC – except the very scary possibility that it will lurk in the shadows until next autumn and return with a murderous vengence. Tuck in your kids and let your imagination run wild, mom!

To me it seems the CDC doesn’t want us to know much of anything. How many specifics do we really have about this disease? Has the CDC really been working on this, are did they go straight to the road show? Every tidbit of scientific evidence I have heard comes out in in convoluted and disjointed dribs and drabs between stern warnings about what might happen next year. Is this science, or the prelude to a horror movie?

We also heard this from the CDC; the health departments in individual states have now received test kits to verifying the flu independently. This explains the big increase in reported cases the last few days, but it will level off quickly at the end of the week because in fact the disease is not spreading much at all any more. There are more confirmed cases, but they are coming from the backlog. Oh, the CDC didn’t actually spell that out? Read between the lines, America.

The CDC further said that from now on they are less concerned about certifying the exact virus in every case(!) They are now only concerned about verifying the virus in serious cases where it is vital to the treatment. In other words, even the CDC is no longer officially verifying and counting cases of H1N1 anymore. Interesting.

The CDC has now confirmed yet another step to actually give us less information about the virus. I am not implying there is any harm in this, just the opposite. It tells me the concern by the CDC about the H1N1 virus has slipped yet another notch towards being just another flu virus. Even the CDC is getting bored.

Is the CDC warning the general public not to travel? No. Both Sebelius and Napolitano said today, “we are not asking people not to travel. People should go on with their normal daily lives.” Then they couched it as “If you are ill or if you are exposed to someone who is ill we ask you not to go into confined public places.”

I’m surprised they didn’t work longer on getting a better double negative for that last piece of advice.

And finally, after being pressed a third time, Dr. Besser said, “we are seeing encouraging signs that H1N1 is no more severe than any regular seasonal flu.” And that may be as close as we get to the CDC saying this is not be the crisis we were being led to believe.

So, what have we learned? We have learned the CDC is very unlikely to characterize ANY reaction to this flu as an overreaction, except one. And we finally heard the CDC say it acts pretty much like any other virus.

The absence of another reaction, that makes complete sense but is of no concern to the CDC, is an even larger unspoken confirmation that the CDC is not all that worried. What about closing the borders with Mexico? The argument that it is like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped is ridiculous. This is a herd of horses.

If they had any real concern about the obviously more virulent form of the virus continuing to escape from Mexico they would at least be monitoring and quarantining a few people at the border. But, have you heard of one person being denied entry to the United States due to exhibiting flu symptoms at any border crossing? I know I haven’t. The Administration won’t even step up illegal border crossing surveillance. Even though a sick person would probably not try to enter the United States through a monitored border crossing.

But, we did hear about an airliner landing in Boston because a woman onboard was sniffling. The CDC did not characterize that as an overreaction either.

All indications are that we should be hearing the CDC say that they are no longer obsessed with H1N1. We should hear them say it’s time to return to normal life. But they haven’t said it and they probably never will.

Yes, the CDC and other public health officials are doing their jobs very, very well.

Related posts:

1. Stand Up for Your Right to Cruise
2. Cruise Lines Venturing Back to Mexico
3. Should You Cancel Your Mexico Cruise?

The “H1N1 nee: swine flu” situation is overblown and the worst offenders are television media, especially cable news channel CNN using the phrase “eminent pandemic” at every opportunity. This is not a pandemic. In fact, this work week brought news of only two additional deaths from this disease, both of them from people who contracted the virus in Mexico.

Mexico, lagging in reporting because the government health agencies are not very robust reported the number of has gone up, but mostly because they are reviewing old, suspected case to see if they were H1N1. There are now more cases reported in Mexico than previously, but the Mexican Health Minister actually said new reported cases of the disease are slowing down. In fact, out of all deaths in Mexico only 12 have been confirmed as H1N1 deaths. Has the media told you that?

Obama just admitted there is no proof that this virus is any more lethal than any other flu virus, especially in its non ground-zero Mexican form. In fact, we still have not seen more than one death outside of Mexico.

There is a company called Veratect near Seattle that claims they discovered the virus long before the CDC did. Following their updates it is easy to see the panic in action. Many cases first believed to be H1N1 are later confirmed not to be. They also show that even in Europe and Asia, many suspected and confirmed cases are largely people who traveled to Mexico before they were warned to watch out for this virus. They caught something close to the original form and still noneof them have died.

Mexico is now largely shut down and tourism is dead. I doubt we will be hearing about many more cases of people going to Mexico and coming back with H1N1 within two weeks. That means the number of reported cases worldwide is going to drop very soon. And the touted European prediction “we haven’t seen any deaths, BUT WE WILL” could very well continue to be unfulfilled.

I have been getting email, and so far it is running five to one that people agree that H1N1 is overhyped by the media, for their own benefit and the administration in power. It is the perfect diversion from news of Chrysler going bankrupt.

It is an opportunity for our President to come out and sounding wise and concerned when he tells us “wipe your nose, you have a little something right there.”

Lets face it, the media loves to cover Obama, but the economy is a very dry subject. But Obama talking about something as common as the flu, that’s great TV, almost like adopting a puppy.

Joe Biden, aka “the gaffe machine” – said on the Today Show he wouldn’t take any subways or planes. The President’s spokesperson, Robert Gibbs, had to explain to the press what he “meant” to say. Did the administration forget to tell Joe how to couch his comments? Or did Joe uses his “oops” trick to say what no one else can say? When Joe makes a “gaffe” haven’t we all been conditioned to give the President a pass on it?

What does any of this have to do with cruising? All the cruise lines have been pressured by public opinion to cancel port stops in Mexico when they initially decided there was very, very limited danger of exposure. This is due to a flu virus that has killed nine people worldwide when 36,000 people die from flu in the U.S. alone every year.

There is another disease that the WHO already says is epidemic to the Caribbean, South America and other tropical areas called Dengue Fever. The WHO says some 2.5 billion people, two fifths of the world’s population, are now at risk from Dengue and estimates that there may be 50 million cases of dengue infection worldwide every year. It is spread by mosquitos. Dengue is now epidemic in more than 100 countries. Where is the 15-minute news update cycle on that disease?

What we are NOT being told is the message here.

Why do we keep hearing the words, “eminent Pandemic?” Why are other world health officials saying, “we haven’t seen any deaths yet, but we will,” but we haven’t? Why do we not hear about all the cases that have been proven NOT to be H1N1, when in fact it is ruled out in several cases every hour after tests. Why have all the things we are hearing will happen have not yet happened?

At some point the cruise lines are going to return to Mexico ports. There is a very good chance they could go back soon and not have a significant exposure to this virus as long as prudence is used when passengers go ashore. But that has always been the case in Mexico. Everyone already knows not to touch things and not to drink the water there.

The most likely thing to stop the cruise lines from going back to Mexico is panic on the part of the general public, not cruisers. We have heard from cruisers, they are NOT overly alarmed by this virus, and they want their cruise to Mexico. But if the media keeps boosting the H1N1 profile to boost their ratings, then we will hear an outcry from the general public not to let cruise ships go there. This will come from panicked moms, the same moms who stuff a kleenex and hand sanitizer in their kids’ pockets every morning.

All it will take is one comment from Obama or Joe Biden about cruise ships and this industry will take a multi-million dollar haircut. Hundreds of scheduled cruises to Mexico will have to be relocated to places that are already suffering from overcapacity.

And so it is up to you, dear cruisers, to tell the world that you want your Mexico cruises. Tell us you are willing to take responsibility for your own health. With your encouragement the cruise lines will be able to formulate a reasonable plan to continue cruising to Mexico.

By the way, where did I get the title “stand up for your right to cruise?” A Judith *** wrote this to me when I told her, “you have the right not to cruise to Mexico, but don’t infringe on my right to go there.” Here is her reply…

——————————————-

“Infringe on your right?” Please tell me you’re joking. (You know Colbert is joking, don’t you?) I have read the U.S. Constitution and doesn’t say anything about a “right” to cruise to Mexico. Maybe it’s
in the Arizona constitution? Second, the government is not suspending Mexican cruises–the companies are…

Seriously, if you believe that other peoples’ needs, interests, and perspectives amount to an infringement on your personal rights, then you’ve misunderstood the nature of a democratic society. I’m sorry I bothered you and I hope you can find someplace on this earth where everyone leaves you alone. No reply necessary or desired, you’re in my junk filter now.
——————————————

So, here is my reply, Judith. It seems to me it used to be acceptable to criticize the party in power in this country without being insulted. It was called free speech and as I learned in public school, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Judith, I happened to have a copy of the Constitution on my desk when you wrote that so I looked it up. The 14th amendment says every U.S. citizen has the right to leave the state and come back with full rights and liberties intact. No one can deny my rights for any reason just because I left. It is generally known as the “right to travel” amendment.

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Article 9 says that just because a right is not stated in the Consitution it does mean I do not have the right. It is called “the silent amendment.”

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

So Judith, I will never tell you to shut up or insult your intelligence for your opinion. I respect your opinion, although I disagree with it. Too bad as a ‘democratic society” American you don’t see it the same way. And for the record, I am NOT right wing as you obviously assume. In fact I am equally skeptical and critical of the conservatives. The thing I abhor the most is the newly accepted practice in this country of insulting people instead of disputing their ideas if you disagree with their political opinion.

Stand up for your rights, including the first amendment which allows the right to a free press and freedom of speech. And please don’t let anyone intimidate you with name calling.

Related posts:

1. Flu Alerts: Just Doing Our Job
2. Cruise Lines Venturing Back to Mexico
3. Should You Cancel Your Mexico Cruise?

People rarely if EVER just “fall” from a cruise ship – they jump, they dive, they inch out beyond the safety barriers and either lose their grip or just let go. Once the initial act is effected, they essentially “fall” through the air and into the sea. But what we are missing in almost every media report is the details of what happened immediately before the act of “falling” occured.

Last week we had a woman who was reported as missing. This case was probably the closest case to the infamous George Allen Smith case we have had yet. George Smith was the newlywed who went overboard during a cruise on a Royal Caribbean ship in the Adriatic Sea in 2005.

In that case, there were signs of an argument before he disappeared. There were even traces of blood below the balcony where he apparently “fell short” on his way down. This was a sad case, as they all are, but the media could not get enough of speculating about the circumstances and trying to prove there was foul play involved.

In the end, no one was ever charged in that case, and the one person who probably knows more details about it than anyone in the world, Jennifer Hagel (Smith), his new bride at the time, has subsequently announced that she fully believes it was a suicide. She said George was taking lots of prescription drugs that did not mix well with alcohol, as well as anti-depressants for his mental state, and that the night he disappeared he had been drinking excessively.

Through all the speculation, lawsuits and countercharges from his family (who were not there) her story has held up. This is despite the highly unusual circumstances where she could not even account for her own whereabouts at the time of his demise due to her own inebriation.

Jennifer Seitz, who apparently died last week after “falling” from Norwegian Pearl near Cancun, also is believed to have committed suicide. This time the media accusations and innuendo did not last nearly as long as the George Smith case because her very own mother was also on board, and she and the rest of the family all come forward to say that Jennifer was depressed, possibly bi-polar, and that they believe she chose her own fate.

Yesterday, we got yet another report of someone “falling” from a cruise ship. We are even told that he was a crewmember and that his friends (one report even says his family) saw him fall. Excuse me – but where are the details here? How did he fall? That is the the crux of the story, the main factor that puts the entire event into perspective.

Was he drinking? It was just after 1:00 am on New Years Day. Was he out on a railing doing a Kate Winslet “I’m flying?” impersonation. Was he on or off duty?

Hello, media? Please learn to ask the right questions before you report these stories. They should not even be reported unless you can say what the circumstances preceding the “fall” are – or at the very least be prepared to say “we do not yet know how or why the person got around the extensive safety systems in place on the ship.”

Why? Because there ARE extensive safety systems, but a large number of uninformed people who have never been on a ship simply do not get that. I have never seen a single story in a major newspaper about someone “falling” from a cruise ship where some idiot in the “comments” fields below the article doesn’t write something like “well, I’m am sure a crewmember killed them and dumped the body.” Outrageous innuendo and lies!

Even last week, for Jennifer Seitz, I was reading the report in the Miami Herald and someone made that comment, “I’ll bet a crewmember killed her, it happens all the time. It is time for Congress to do something about these floating death traps.”

Puleeeeezzzeeee People! How many times do you have to hear the facts before they intrude on your over-active imagination. No crewmember has ever even been accused of killing a passenger, at least that I know of in recent (post-1990) history. Certainly, no crewmember, or passenger, has ever even been tried or convicted of murder of a passenger on a cruise ship.

“It happens all the time?” Stop watching Jerry Springer and start taking some pride in having at least a modicum of awareness about the real world. What is the problem here? Is it too much violence on TV and Movies, is it people who live in a fantasy world, or is just a lack of care or respect for the truth?

Cruise Ships are by far the safest vacations ever. No passenger or crewmember has ever just “fallen” from a ship unless they were intentionally doing something they were not supposed to be doing.

As least as far as we know – because right now as I write this we still have a media report “pending” that a crewmember has “fallen” off of a cruise ship – but it has not yet been reported how this happened.

Carnival Sensation Crewmember Falls – Update
We know a little more from new reports about the Sensation crewmember who “fell” overboard from the ship. Various TV and radio web sites in Florida say he was either standing on or near the railing and taking pictures.

We assume they mean he was shooting pictures, not posing for them, but we are not sure. He was off duty, and being early after midnight on New Years Day (Eve) he had likely been drinking.

Some passengers said he was standing on a tall place close to the railing and that when the wind came up he lost his balance control. Another report says he was standing “on the railing” but that could mean on a lower crossbar, not the top of the railing. Exactky where he was standing is really not clear, yet.

In either case – it was obviously an accident, but it also has to be said that it was improper procedure to be standing anyplace where a loss of balance could mean going over the edge. So, the young man is not without some responsibility for what happened.

We are sorry for the young man and never mean to take these stories lightly. This is actually one of the first cases of a person “accidentally” going overboard who was not flagrantly doing something he should not have been doing. It is possible the seas were fairly rough and he normally would have felt fairly secure wherever he was standing under normal conditions. But conditions were not normal.

In any case – we are sad it happened, but relieved it did not happen to a passenger. Even with the shared responsibility that would have led to assumptions about cruise ship safety that really are not warranted. The safety is there, it is just up to people to use common sense.

* I am referring to the ships that belong to CLIA, the Cruise Lines International Assn, which includes all of the brands commonly known to American passengers; Carnival, Royal Caribbean, NCL, Princess, Holland America, Windstar, Cunard, Oceania, Silversea, Regent, Seabourn, Seadream, Costa, MSC and more.

Related posts:

1. Cruise Crime Act 2009 Questions
2. Cruise Ship Engine Explosions
3. Stand Up for Your Right to Cruise