By Hal G.P. Colebatch on 12.2.08 @ 6:06AM
The Royal Navy is nicer to pirates than the British Nanny State
can allow itself to be.
The Royal Navy may have been warned not to detain Somali pirates
in case their human rights are violated, but Britain has cracked
down firmly on pirates in other areas, such as children's
parties.
If real pirates are to be unmolested at sea, and domestic violent
crime has increased hugely in the last few years, still the Nanny
State has never been Nannier. After all, two-thirds of the new
jobs created in Britain since Labour came to power have been in
the public sector, and they have to do something productive and
useful for their salaries.
This is, after all, the society where an actor playing the brave
Lord Nelson had to wear a life jacket over his glittering uniform
when crossing the placid waters of the Thames near the Tower of
London by boat.
When a crude replica of a pirate ship was erected in memory of
the late Princess Diana at a children's playground in Kensington
Gardens, commemorating Peter Pan's duels with the wicked Captain
Hook, officialdom decreed that it should be purged of violent
imagery such as cannon, walking the plank, and
skull-and-crossbones flag.
Children's books featuring the exploits of the naughty
11-year-old schoolboy William Brown, who delighted in playing
pirates, have been attacked as creating bad role models.
Recently the skull-and-crossbones flag has also been banned from
being flown in the gardens of suburban houses hosting pirate
parties on the grounds that it is unneighborly.
Local authority officials told the parents of 6-year-old Morgan
Smith (not thought to be any relation to either the notorious
Bloody Morgan, who sacked Porto Bello, or Aaron Smith, tried for
piracy at the Old Bailey in 1823 but acquitted) that they must
apply for planning permission to fly the flag, at a cost to them
of about $150.
It was reported that an assessment of the 5'x4' flag's impact on
the surrounding area would be undertaken before a decision was
made as to whether the flag would be allowed for the party or
not.
The young would-be picaroon's father was quoted as saying: "When
the lady from the council came to see me she said the Jolly Roger
was of concern. She took some pictures and said that we would
have to take it down from now on. I've put in a planning
application but I shouldn't have to go to all this trouble."
Similar trouble befell fireman and ex-soldier David Waterman (not
known to be related to "Bully" Waterman, opium-runner and most
dreaded of the Western Ocean Packet Skippers), of Ashstead,
Surrey, when he flew a skull and cross-bones flag for his
four-year-old daughter's pirate's party.
A neighbor complained and it was reported Waterman was facing
court proceedings from the local council, whose spokesman said:
"We are duty-bound to investigate complaints and enforce
government regulations." Another neighbor then also hoisted a
Jolly Roger as a gesture of solidarity with the Brethren of the
Coast, but struck it after receiving a shot across the bows in
the form of a warning letter from officialdom.
That old sea-dog Sir John Hawkins has also felt the wrath of the
guardians of political correctness. One of the innumerable
government-funded multiculturalism enforcers, the Plymouth
Council for Racial Equality, attacked a proposal that a pub near
Hawkins's birthplace in Plymouth be named after him, although in
this case it was not because he cut out the occasional Spanish
treasure ship but because he was a slave-trader.
Meanwhile, off the coast of Somalia the Royal Navy has reportedly
received instructions from the Foreign Office not to detain
pirates in case their human rights are breached. If sent back to
Somalia they could, under Islamic law, face beheading for murder
or having a hand chopped off for theft. (In Britain the death
penalty for piracy on the high seas was only abolished in 1998.)
Captains of British warships patrolling off Somalia and other
pirate-infested waters have also been warned that there is a risk
captured pirates could claim asylum in Britain. Presumably they
would be a charge on the State because they would not even be
able to make new careers for themselves there at children's
parties, or at least not without planning permission.
topics:
Piracy