The idea of piracy has made a sensational comeback in popular culture and world politics in the last several years. Hollywood has cashed in millions of dollars popularizing the old mischief. I have attended enough pirate themed children birthday parties to start to consider pirates lovable rascals.

That’s until the Somali pirates enter the picture and ruin the facade for all of us. The news of teenage Somali pirates has infiltrated the airwaves around the world, coming to its climax a few weeks ago with the murderous act of the U.S military. With what is called a ‘failed state’, we have come to expect anything from Somalia. Piracy is not the worst of them. After all, it has been drummed into our psyche that we humans are self destructing beings if not watched over by the more prudent amongst us, such as governments, despite how tyrannical. Lo and behold, Somalis don’t have one.

Such is the picture that is being painted for us of the Somali pirates. A bunch of unruly teenagers causing trouble on high sea. Given our modern education/conditioning that the state is our guardian, the image of Somali pirates quickly conjures thoughts of undisciplined and out of control children.

On May 12, 2009, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) released a report showing that same air cargo companies transporting humanitarian aids to Africa also funneled arms into the same volatile parts of the continent.  The research is performed by two British nationals with former ties to governmental and non-governmental organizations.  The report focuses primarily on the messengers of the destabilizing efforts as supposed to the sources.  What could be the logic given by the researchers to go after the air cargo companies, as supposed to the sources who are paying them to transport their cargo?  The former are easier to track. It is from that perspective a recommendation is also offered to boycott the air cargo companies.  The logic behind such recommendation is that, if reputable governmental and humanitarian organizations cease to utilize the services of these messengers, the problem may be obviated.  This approach clearly assumes that reputable organizations (such as governments and NGOs) are not involved with the ‘bad’ cargo (some weapons and illicit drugs) that the aircraft are carrying.  It is also implicitly assumed that if reputable organizations cut off income to these airliners by denying them business, the problem can be curtailed.  Furthermore, it is assumed that the weapons that go to destabilize a region are those that originate from non-reputable organizations, as the report mentions the ones coming from western government are for logistic defense support only.

"They cut off my clothes with some kind of doctor’s scalpel. I was totally naked … They took the scalpel to my right chest. It was only a small cut. Maybe an inch. Then they cut my left chest. One of them took my penis in his hand and began to make cuts. He did it once, and they stood still for maybe a minute, watching my reaction. I was in agony, crying, trying desperately to suppress myself, but I was screaming … They must have done this 20 to 30 times in maybe two hours. There was blood all over. They cut all over my private parts. One of them said it would be better just to cut it off, as I would only breed terrorists. This was repeated many times over the next 15 months … "

These are the words of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian-Briton who was just released from Guantanamo, detailing his extraordinary rendition to Morocco. Morocco was chosen for two reasons. CIA wanted a confession related to the "dirty bomb plot," and thought if anyone could extract it, the Moroccans could.