The precious marine resources of some of the world's poorest people are being targeted by industrial-scale pirate fishing operations, to feed the seafood hungry markets of Europe and Asia.
In a special two-part investigation, People and Power sets out to identify and expose some of those involved in the multi-million dollar trade and to look in particular at its consequences for the impoverished West African nation of Sierra Leone.
In part one, reporter Juliana Ruhfus and producer Orlando von Einsiedel take to the seas off Sierra Leone with an NGO, the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), which has been trying to raise awareness about the issue.
In part two of Pirate Fishing, the identity of one of the trawlers is revealed and in a nail biting climax, the captain and crew are confronted with the evidence of their crimes.
Technology recording every boat in the sea would be a start.
To be blunt this planet deserves better and we so called greatest creations are merely over endulged lack of compassion,power hungry,money hungry idiots.The Dinosaurs survived longer than us and it wasn't overpopulation that caused their dying off but a rock slamming into this rock called Earth.It is time we can do something about it but it takes one courageous woman from Aljazera not the BBC as some stated.This is no conspiracy theory but facts absolute facts.Notice it is China who are responsible for the mess on the other side of their world.They don't care about us.Exotic animals are being wiped out while the leaders do nothing accept lie lie somemore and come back after their bowl of shark fin soup otr their piece of whale meat and lets not forget their medicines taken from tigers and for what you may ask? Their penis of course.
This is a crime on all levels if a troller has boxed fish that says from China yet it is caught in the illegal zone.That is fraud and I have no doubt none.The games will continue until someone really gets fed up wiyh the bastards and commit murder.I don't blame any of the people who only want to live with some hope that they can catch fish not exploit it like these sad sacks of **** who destroy their own waters and pay off corrupt officials who only make it worse.When the oceans become unliveable or depleted I will never have any sympathy for those who do this and starve to death I only hope this to happen to all who are greedy scumbags who care nothing,nothing about the world's oceans.It is repulsive to see the fat pig who was one of the agents who is obviously corrupt with his fat pig face while every one else is nothing but starving boneracks.He certainly did not get fat from poverty but greed and repulsive sick crimes against all people of the planet not just this area.Very angry people deserve justice.China is now hated bye me and all who are criminals.
Complete liberal wishy washy nonsense, her tone throughout this documentary is reminiscent of modern british BBC (or the KGBBC as it is now known) liberal leftist brainwashing, does she honestly think these 'locals' are going to manage and farm the fishing in a productive way... its a joke, dont spin this 'older wiser people' notion as people are more aware now and know the score.
Mostl these pirates are from China and Taiwan, China doesn't only want to steal your fishing rightx but your wealth in land and sea. China is the bully of the Asia
I also wonder whether the "evil" captain and his crew were also victims in this story. Al Jazeera as always likes to paint the world black and white - its programming seems addressed to a rather simple audience. It would be really interesting to learn about the aftermath of this investigation and about the backgrounds of all the involved people. But instead we get this smug "corruption fighting" lady who will of course have her ass out of harm's way as soon as the filming is finished.
Nosferat is clearly in love with his straw man that some dark powers want to forcibly exterminate people and benefit from reducing the population. In reality the opposite is true: it aids the establishment when the poor and dumb multiply without bounds and bicker with each other. Which happens pretty much automatically among the poor and dumb when you leave them alone. External oppression exacerbates things, but is not strictly required for this to happen. Witness what happens when you put too many animals in the same cage.
Whatever utopian theories about technological paradise, pro-social upbringing and lowering everyone's expectations towards a common goal are spun, the reality is that allowing the population to grow is like trying to extinguish a fire with gasoline. There was a time in the history of humanity when additional people were needed just to maintain a level of prosperity in the current population. But this is no longer the case, exactly due to the technological advances you praise so much. Today when you create further people, the main result is that you have more to share the pie with, not that the pie grows bigger because of their contributions. Hence unemployment, corruption, social unrest, you name it.
Also, Nosferat, who are you exactly to prescribe for people of developing countries or future generations in general how high their desire to eat fish or drive cars should be? What exactly is your plan for achieving that? Do you think they will give up quality of life after watching Adam Curtis' movies? "Of course, the Earth can support 20 billion people, but you have to eat grass and no travel for you, must be nice to your 100 neighbors, and don't forget to use your genius mind to develop new ways of eating sand (all the while limiting your energy consumption, of course)!" This is some beautiful world you have in your mind...
While I showed few facts, I showed the one's relative to our argument. I only needed a few to prove my point.
I didn't quote unrelated facts and research to make myself sound smart or confuse the argument.
I simply made my point.
Good day to you aswell
Crestryder well said
Please choose to refute any of the facts I presented (hint:I labeled them as fact) and please be specific about which ones you refute. Use quotes even.
Please feel free to use an "actual scientific fact" of your own that doesn't come from a fringe nutter or a stone tablet to refute anything I've said. Again please be specific. Use quotes.
And saying i said something I didnt, and then refuting that doesnt count by the way. Let's not confuse the argument again. (It actually has to be something I said about the specific argument.) Again Use quotes.
grrr wish we could edit these things. Disregard the first paragraph from my post below as it was incomplete
You are incoherent. Your connections are tenuous and or nonsensical. Just because you can't see the facts that we have presented to you doesnt mean they dont exist. We only presented the definition of "overpopulation and tried to demonstrate to youMany of your so called facts are unproven comments you've quoted from conspiracy theory documentaries or some rock carvings(monuments) as is your research. It's really a waste of my time
Some of your comments are incoherent. Some of Your connections are tenuous and or nonsensical.
Most of your facts and research seem to come from unproven comments you've quoted from conspiracy theory documentaries or some rock carvings(monuments) . It's really a waste of my time to argue with you because you cant stay on topic.
We only attempted to argue your assertion that overpopulation (by defintion) isnt't a problem today and only this.
This was and where we remain in disagreement with you.
We presented the actual definition of "overpopulation" (fact out of dictionary not off a stone tablet) and how some or all of these things within the defintion are cleary manifest in virtually every region of the globe today. We tried to show you with actual math that exponential population growth(which is occuring now)(fact) cannot be sustained given finite resources no matter how efficient the use and management of those finite resources. (fact) .
Then we also presented some suggestions to resolve this problem and others(again contrary to what you just said). We didn't suggest that these are all the problems facing humanity and its human nature. Only that overpopulation is in fact one of them.
Just because you can't or refuse to see the facts that the rest of us have presented to you doesnt mean they dont exist.
And your argument where you say "Adam Curtis explains that the overpopulation thesis is mainly based on a flawed ideology."
We aren't talking about an "overpopulation thesis" man!!!!! We are talking about actual overpopulation by its defintion and that by its defintion it does exist and is a problem today.
Good to see there are still some investigations that come to a fruitful end !!!
Most enjoyable film - Cheers Vlatko. Whether it changes things in the long-term remains to be seen, but the ordinary folk who rely on fishing for their food and livelihoods need support and protection of the governments and navy. The reporter and official were very brave and without the film crew were unlikely to return alive from the trawler's refrigerated hold.
If the earth was used in a proper way as to not be wasted by feeding few animals for slaughter with many acres of grazing land that could be used for feeding people instead of cattle the earth could grow and feed approx. a consertive 12 times the current world population. The invalid excuse of we need Meat for protien unfortunately blocks the truth of man is frugivorous by nature.
I know I said I wasn't going to comment further, However, I feel compelled to respond once more to Nosferat. Only because some people here may be trying to learn something and they may actually believe some of your argument here. This doesn't sit well with me.
Nosferat you keep saying "You do know that....." followed by (90% of the time) an unproven conspiracy theory or some kind of psuedo-fact.
I mean seriously. When you said "You do know that the main argument of "overpopulation" is that the earth can't sustain realistically more than 500 million people," I swallowed half a popsicle whole and got serious brain freeze when I read this. Where dude did you get this important information resource?
Here are the facts sir:
Definition for overpopulation: Excessive population of an area to the point of overcrowding, depletion of natural resources, environmental deterioration, and the prevalence of famine and disease.
Overpopulation and its inevitable effects are facts based on rudimentary logic/maths and supported observations in nature.
To David Ewar. Thanks David. Contraception and or family planning are very good places to start.
Unfortunately some governments and other groups resist this because they want to maintain or increase their power base, not reduce it.
Simultaneously reducing our populations by having less children, finding and implementing truely green energy alternatives, and better managing our natural resources will reduce the immediate threats to our survival.
If this isn't about fishing for pirates I'm going to be very disappointed! ;)
Its nice to be able to look at corruption up close for a change. And you can bet your ass the navy is in on it.
I'll use you're words here "It sounds so ridiculous and childish that I have to imply a face like "for real man? Are you for real? so you are not kidding, for real now, this is no joke right?"
While I'm going to try not to be as disrespectfull and condescending. Without population management (which is a form of resource management) then all the the other resource management in the world will not be able to sustain an uchecked population growth.
Resources we use:
fresh water, minerals,oil, food, wood etc.
These are finite NATURAL resources. The greater the population, the more that is consumed. Yes we already said we need to implement better management. But management of our population aswell.
If you don't think we need you manage our populations aswell sir, then I don't know what to say to you. But It will inevitibly lead to dwindling resources and conflict for them as well pollution and destruction of our environments( so we can say overpopulation is the cause). In my opinion your argument is incomplete. Being rude and condescending won't change it sir.
This is my last post regarding this doc and its related arguments.
P.S. I still admire your passion and Will to move towards solving the issues.
What happens to the rest of the aquatic life in the seas and oceans when industrialised fishing has decimated the fish/crustacean population to the point of extinction? Has nature employed industrialised spawning and accelerated growth paterns yet to compensate for this?
A probable answer in the future, if this trend continues, is that certain fish would become a rare delicacy and be so expensive that only the super rich could afford to buy it, which, would drive people to catch whats left because of the money it would bring, however, as history shows those fishermen would still remain in poverty while someone else gains all the so called capital and those species become extinct and all you've got is worthless promissory notes as well as dead oceans and dead seas.
You dont need to have wars or extermination etc to reduce the population. People just need to have less children.
Within a couple of generations the population would move in the right direction.
Nosferat while I admire your passion against war I think your arguement has logical flaws. Here's why.
Higher population = higher consumption
This is consumption of everything we consume or use not just food.
Given finite resources, a population simply cannot grow indefinitely and be sustainable. Doesn't matter what species we are talking about.
We do need to impliment better management technologies and solutions, I agree. But we also need to address overpopulation. Otherwise overpopulation itself will justify wars, extermination , social breakdown, among other things.
In some corrupt official's pocket I'm sure.
Of the $90,000 (US) fine, I wonder how much, if any, will be used to compensate the local fishermen for their destroyed nets and loss of income.
Read ALL my comments and I have never said the problems we face are not solvable. My point was they are not problems that exist in a vacuum. If population continues to grow unchecked these problems can not be solved by very minimal improvements we have seen so far. Look at the reality of our efforts to make even very small changes such as the Kyoto Treaty or simply controlling starvation in the Sudan. The politics and greed always take us a step back for every step in the right direction. How then can we hope to "take the pressure off" a volatile situation while the population puts pressure on food, health, housing, water and every other resource? The "elite class" is whoever happens to be in power at the moment with some better than others but always having their own outlook on life. If someone has a solution for the fact we all see things from our own experiences I would be interested to hear it. How we would go about reducing population growth in a meaningful way with invoking world wide authoritarian rule is a bigger challenge than any of these other "micro-problems" The only equitable method might be something like the "Children of Men" scenario where a world wide virus wipes out or reduces fertilty rates. I know this sounds like "debbie downer" but I would love to hear a viable alternate scenario.
over consumption, and its tainted at that. bunch mad hatters running around
Over-fishing is not the problem. "Over-population" is. You can never manage micro problems with unlimited human population growth on a finite planet. Now you dont have to watch the doc.