Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
670
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 22:19:00 -
[61] - Quote
Seven days have passed, and the Disciples of Ston have completely failed to co-operate with my perfectly reasonable request.
Disciples of Ston pilots are hereby advised that PIE officers are now authorised to fire upon their vessels. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Silas Vitalia
Khanid Provincial Vanguard
159
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 23:58:00 -
[62] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote:Seven days have passed, and the Disciples of Ston have completely failed to co-operate with my perfectly reasonable request.
Disciples of Ston pilots are hereby advised that PIE officers are now authorised to fire upon their vessels.
Has there been a formal CONCORD wardec, or will this be more of a "lowsec" sort of affair?
|
Aphoxema G
Teraa Matar
198
|
Posted - 2012.01.15 01:14:00 -
[63] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote:Seven days have passed, and the Disciples of Ston have completely failed to co-operate with my perfectly reasonable request.
Disciples of Ston pilots are hereby advised that PIE officers are now authorised to fire upon their vessels.
And you call us terrorists. EVE Online IdeaTorrent |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
434
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:25:00 -
[64] - Quote
Aphoxema G wrote:Rodj Blake wrote:Seven days have passed, and the Disciples of Ston have completely failed to co-operate with my perfectly reasonable request.
Disciples of Ston pilots are hereby advised that PIE officers are now authorised to fire upon their vessels. And you call us terrorists.
What galls me is that PIE is not only allowing but authorizing the attack of unarmed and/or lightly defended civilian vessels.
Guess we know where they stand on morality now, don't we? |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
673
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:04:00 -
[65] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote:Aphoxema G wrote:Rodj Blake wrote:Seven days have passed, and the Disciples of Ston have completely failed to co-operate with my perfectly reasonable request.
Disciples of Ston pilots are hereby advised that PIE officers are now authorised to fire upon their vessels. And you call us terrorists. What galls me is that PIE is not only allowing but authorizing the attack of unarmed and/or lightly defended civilian vessels. Guess we know where they stand on morality now, don't we?
I think that quite a few people would agree with me that it's immoral to loot other people's property which is what D-STON have been doing.
But if they don't want to be shot at they simply need to cease operations near PIE vessels. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Valerie Valate
Church of The Crimson Saviour
51
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:23:00 -
[66] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote:What galls me is that PIE is not only allowing but authorizing the attack of unarmed and/or lightly defended civilian vessels.
Guess we know where they stand on morality now, don't we?
In the interests of stimulating debate, I point out that Bestowers and other similar vessels carrying people and goods between stations in Amarr space are also Unarmed or Lightly Defended Civilian vessels.
And are occasionally attacked by persons who do not consider these attacks to be immoral.
Including the Tribal Liberation Force. |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
434
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:52:00 -
[67] - Quote
Valerie Valate wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote:What galls me is that PIE is not only allowing but authorizing the attack of unarmed and/or lightly defended civilian vessels.
Guess we know where they stand on morality now, don't we? In the interests of stimulating debate, I point out that Bestowers and other similar vessels carrying people and goods between stations in Amarr space are also Unarmed or Lightly Defended Civilian vessels.
And are occasionally attacked by persons who do not consider these attacks to be immoral. Including the Tribal Liberation Force.
The TLF has a fair number of 'flyboys' that just want to pad their flight logs. So does the Empire. So does the Caldari State. Frell, even the Gallente have that problem. Nobody's perfect.
You know what we call pilots that raid shipping convoys, though?
Pirates.
Or possibly mercenaries. In the end, I suppose it all comes down to who pays the bills.
My point is that an unprovoked attack on a civilian vessel for the purpose of interfering with legitimate trade and business interests is piracy. Are we going to hold PIE to a lesser standard that we would any other capsuleer in that regard? Are they somehow above the law when it comes to firing on unarmed ships?
If you take that argument as a given, where does it stop? Are we going to start unilaterally executing civilians in the streets of our cities, simply for being suspected of subversive behavior? ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Valerie Valate
Church of The Crimson Saviour
51
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:58:00 -
[68] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote:Valerie Valate wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote:What galls me is that PIE is not only allowing but authorizing the attack of unarmed and/or lightly defended civilian vessels.
Guess we know where they stand on morality now, don't we? In the interests of stimulating debate, I point out that Bestowers and other similar vessels carrying people and goods between stations in Amarr space are also Unarmed or Lightly Defended Civilian vessels.
And are occasionally attacked by persons who do not consider these attacks to be immoral. Including the Tribal Liberation Force. The TLF has a fair number of 'flyboys' that just want to pad their flight logs. So does the Empire. So does the Caldari State. Frell, even the Gallente have that problem. Nobody's perfect. You know what we call pilots that raid shipping convoys, though? Pirates.Or possibly mercenaries. In the end, I suppose it all comes down to who pays the bills. My point is that an unprovoked attack on a civilian vessel for the purpose of interfering with legitimate trade and business interests is piracy. Are we going to hold PIE to a lesser standard that we would any other capsuleer in that regard? Are they somehow above the law when it comes to firing on unarmed ships? If you take that argument as a given, where does it stop? Are we going to start unilaterally executing civilians in the streets of our cities, simply for being suspected of subversive behavior?
In the interests of stimulating debate, I point out that you have now indicated that attacking Bestowers engaged in the legitimate trade of humans and related business interests is Piracy.
And thus, you are calling e.g. Electus Matari who do or did such things, Pirates.
Edit: I also will point out, in the interest of stimulating debate, that numerous civilians have been executed in the streets of your cities for being suspected of "subversive behaviour".
Such as those poor Starkmanir and other refugees who were beaten to death for "un-minmatar activities", i.e. being religious. |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
434
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:14:00 -
[69] - Quote
Valerie Valate wrote: In the interests of stimulating debate, I point out that you have now indicated that attacking Bestowers engaged in the legitimate trade of humans and related business interests is Piracy.
And thus, you are calling e.g. Electus Matari who do or did such things, Pirates.
Edit: I also will point out, in the interest of stimulating debate, that numerous civilians have been executed in the streets of your cities for being suspected of "subversive behaviour".
Such as those poor Starkmanir and other refugees who were beaten to death for "un-minmatar activities", i.e. being religious.
I apologize for any unfavorable comparisons I might have created.
What I'm trying to say is that if we're to alllow PIE to run roughshod over anyone who displeases them, then they have no right to complain when someone decides to return the favor. Regardless of whether our hypothetical Bestowers are capable of shooting back, killing civilians that for moral reasons won't shoot back isn't only dishonorable, it's cowardly. ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Valerie Valate
Church of The Crimson Saviour
52
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:18:00 -
[70] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote: I apologize for any unfavorable comparisons I might have created.
What I'm trying to say is that if we're to alllow PIE to run roughshod over anyone who displeases them, then they have no right to complain when someone decides to return the favor. Regardless of whether our hypothetical Bestowers are capable of shooting back, killing civilians that for moral reasons won't shoot back isn't only dishonorable, it's cowardly.
In the interests of stimulating debates, I point out that if "we" are to allow e.g. various Minmatar persons to run roughshod over e.g. Imperial Human Resources, then "they" have no right to complain when Someone decides to take action against Someone Else.
I am reasonably sure that various persons have fired on Imperial Human Resources flagged civilian ships. Bestowers and such.
I consider the debate reasonably stimulated. Enjoy. |
|
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
434
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:27:00 -
[71] - Quote
Valerie Valate wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote: I apologize for any unfavorable comparisons I might have created.
What I'm trying to say is that if we're to alllow PIE to run roughshod over anyone who displeases them, then they have no right to complain when someone decides to return the favor. Regardless of whether our hypothetical Bestowers are capable of shooting back, killing civilians that for moral reasons won't shoot back isn't only dishonorable, it's cowardly.
In the interests of stimulating debates, I point out that if "we" are to allow e.g. various Minmatar persons to run roughshod over e.g. Imperial Human Resources, then "they" have no right to complain when Someone decides to take action against Someone Else. I am reasonably sure that various persons have fired on Imperial Human Resources flagged civilian ships. Bestowers and such. I consider the debate reasonably stimulated. Enjoy.
As do I, so I'll sit back and watch for a while, after one more post.
As far as I know, there hasn't been an active declaration of war between PIE and the Disciples of Ston. There is, however, active military conflict between the Empire and the Republic.
Aside from a few assignments that I took from independant agents earlier in my career, all of my combat engagements have been against military targets. Quite frankly, my commanding officer would put my head on a spike were I to engage a civilian.
Various persons have fired on civilian targets -- I, however, am not in a position to render judgement on those pilots (and I wouldn't want that responsibility, anyway). All I'm saying is that the Disciples have not taken an active role in any kind of combat duty against the Empire, and attacking a neutral target has little to do with 'protecting the Empire'. ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Silas Vitalia
Khanid Provincial Vanguard
160
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 20:41:00 -
[72] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote: All I'm saying is that the Disciples have not taken an active role in any kind of combat duty against the Empire, and attacking a neutral target has little to do with 'protecting the Empire'.
Thievery of property counts as an act of aggression and combat, yes?
|
Reann Amelana
PIE Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 21:11:00 -
[73] - Quote
You do realise that you have severely set these poor people back significantly on their path to enlightenment and redemption don't you? Taking Hard working people who are earning thier way in Gods sight, who families may well have been nearing The Empresses emancipation act? How dare you remove those who through no fault of their own were placed into these straights and viciously deny them the opportunity to better themselves in Gods sight?
I can only pray that God will take pity on the souls of those so cruelly ripped from the bosom of the Empire. |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
434
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 21:13:00 -
[74] - Quote
Silas Vitalia wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote: All I'm saying is that the Disciples have not taken an active role in any kind of combat duty against the Empire, and attacking a neutral target has little to do with 'protecting the Empire'. Thievery of property counts as an act of aggression and combat, yes?
Agression? Possibly. Stealing could be considered an inherently aggressive action. However, I don't consider what the Disciples are doing to be 'theft', for the primary reason that the holder has willingly discarded unwanted property.
I also disagree that a non-violent organization who have retrieved discarded goods peacefully can be considered 'combatants'. By that standard, my going through your trash would make me a combatant (for the record, I am not attempting to make any inference towards the worth of the people the Disciples rescue).
I've said from the beginning that PIE has done very little to justify a declaration of hostility against a non-combatant organization. Several attempts were made to negotiate reasonable terms, but PIE decided to pretend those letters were not sent and ignore anyone who attempted to contradict that view.
In my eyes, that makes the actions of PIE entirely unreasonable and unjustified. ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
673
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 21:37:00 -
[75] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote:Silas Vitalia wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote: All I'm saying is that the Disciples have not taken an active role in any kind of combat duty against the Empire, and attacking a neutral target has little to do with 'protecting the Empire'. Thievery of property counts as an act of aggression and combat, yes? Agression? Possibly. Stealing could be considered an inherently aggressive action. However, I don't consider what the Disciples are doing to be 'theft', for the primary reason that the holder has willingly discarded unwanted property.
Firstly, the Disciples have failed to provide any evidence that all of the slaves in their possession were gathered in this way.
Secondly, simply coming across slaves in a jetcan is not in itself indicative that they were willingly abandoned by their legal owner.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
435
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:12:00 -
[76] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote:Silas Vitalia wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote: All I'm saying is that the Disciples have not taken an active role in any kind of combat duty against the Empire, and attacking a neutral target has little to do with 'protecting the Empire'. Thievery of property counts as an act of aggression and combat, yes? Agression? Possibly. Stealing could be considered an inherently aggressive action. However, I don't consider what the Disciples are doing to be 'theft', for the primary reason that the holder has willingly discarded unwanted property. Firstly, the Disciples have failed to provide any evidence that all of the slaves in their possession were gathered in this way. Secondly, simply coming across slaves in a jetcan is not in itself indicative that they were willingly abandoned by their legal owner.
The Disciples of Ston have kept quite an extensive list on this very forum that outlines the results of their rescue operations. Wherever possible, the Disciples have attempted to communicate with the person who discarded the can and verify that ti was an intentional 'dumping' (and at least one pilot has openly admitted that her slaves were dumped in favor of a crate of munitions).
Furthermore, I'm curious about your logic -- the slaves have been dumped, with limited air and very little food, in the depths of space. In the vast majority of cases, the ship in question has continued on its rounds -- often to areas of space that far outstrip the volume of breathable air in a jetcan.
Tell me: how is that not 'willingly abandoning' their property? I think we can both agree that living slaves would logically be more useful than dead ones. That being the case, the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that the holder decided to abandon his property, and had no intent to return and reclaim it. ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
562
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:22:00 -
[77] - Quote
Drawing firm conclusions out of lack of evidence is the basis of Amarrian faith. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
673
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:39:00 -
[78] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote: The Disciples of Ston have kept quite an extensive list on this very forum that outlines the results of their rescue operations. Wherever possible, the Disciples have attempted to communicate with the person who discarded the can and verify that ti was an intentional 'dumping' (and at least one pilot has openly admitted that her slaves were dumped in favor of a crate of munitions).
If their list were that extensive, they would have had no difficulty in complying with my request.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
436
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:51:00 -
[79] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: If their list were that extensive, they would have had no difficulty in complying with my request.
The Disciples attempted to communicate privately and resolve any issues that were preventing an inspection of their facilities from going forward. I can provide messages posted by your own representitives that not only flatly refused to acknowledge any reasonable compromise (to the point of blatantly ignoring that the Disciples had even [made the attempt), but further escalated their aggressive posture.
That's a matter of public record, Captain Blake. It occured in full view of witnesses from both sides of the issue. ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
673
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:03:00 -
[80] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote:Rodj Blake wrote: If their list were that extensive, they would have had no difficulty in complying with my request.
The Disciples attempted to communicate privately and resolve any issues that were preventing an inspection of their facilities from going forward.
In my view one does not attempt to communicate privately by publishing confidential messages for all to see. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
|
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
436
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:21:00 -
[81] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote:Rodj Blake wrote: If their list were that extensive, they would have had no difficulty in complying with my request.
The Disciples attempted to communicate privately and resolve any issues that were preventing an inspection of their facilities from going forward. In my view one does not attempt to communicate privately by publishing confidential messages for all to see.
Granted, the matter could have been handled more delicately. I'm not disputing that.
The Disciples later made the public aware that they had made further attempts to communicate with PIE, in private, to resolve any issues with the inspection and make it possible to proceed in as impartial a manner as possible, given the obviously-escalated situation.
The Disciples then later further communicated that they were awaiting a response to their attempted communication. Your own organization deliberately ignored any attempt that was made to compromise and allow the inspection to go forward. In addition to what I'm forced to characterize as an intentional 'snub', PIE resorted to inflated chest-beating and rhetoric, ultimately trying, convicting and sentencing the Disciples in absentia.
You and PIE can play the martyr all you want, Captain Blake, but the whole thing is in plain view for all to see. ((Please note:-áAt times, my characters-ámay be a-holes, but-áI am most certainly not.-áWhat they say IC has no bearing on my OOC opinions or behaviors, and I apologize in advance if you are offended OOC by anything I might say or do-áIC.)) |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
675
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 08:18:00 -
[82] - Quote
We refused to compromise?
We started off by wanting to inspect their facilities.
When this was unacceptable to them without the presence of terrorists, we offered them the presence of neutral observers.
When this was still unacceptable to them we offered to forget about the inspection and instead asked for a manifest.
And they still refused.
We've done little but compromise during this whole affair.
They have been given every opportunity to defend themselves, but they have continually refused. And now it would appear that they are even refusing to speak in public about this despite originally insisting that this was how they wanted things to proceed.
Clearly they have something nefarious to hide. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Khazarn Areth
The Black Pigs The Black Pigs Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 08:43:00 -
[83] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote:We refused to compromise?
We started off by wanting to inspect their facilities.
When this was unacceptable to them without the presence of terrorists, we offered them the presence of neutral observers.
When this was still unacceptable to them we offered to forget about the inspection and instead asked for a manifest.
And they still refused.
We've done little but compromise during this whole affair.
They have been given every opportunity to defend themselves, but they have continually refused. And now it would appear that they are even refusing to speak in public about this despite originally insisting that this was how they wanted things to proceed.
Clearly they have something nefarious to hide.
Clearly they dont want some Imperial lackeys poking around in buisness they have nothing to do with in the first place. Bloody Omir's coming back Monsters from the endless black Wading through a crimson flood Omir's come to drink your blood |
Thgil Goldcore
PIE Inc.
309
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 08:44:00 -
[84] - Quote
They operate within imperial space, this is very much our business. |
Khazarn Areth
The Black Pigs The Black Pigs Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 09:30:00 -
[85] - Quote
I operate within Imperial space yet i never recall receiving a search order from PIE, is this because you prefer to go against those that cant defend themselves? Bloody Omir's coming back Monsters from the endless black Wading through a crimson flood Omir's come to drink your blood |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
676
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:53:00 -
[86] - Quote
Khazarn Areth wrote:I operate within Imperial space yet i never recall receiving a search order from PIE, is this because you prefer to go against those that cant defend themselves?
You may recall that this is not the first investigation that we've carried out, and previously investigated parties such as No.Mercy have been more than capable of defending themselves.
Maybe you've never been investigated because your blasphemies are in plain sight for all to see. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rek Jaiga
Teraa Matar
195
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:55:00 -
[87] - Quote
I've been reading through here and while I (of course) agree with my comrades, I have an entirely different point to raise.
Not to doubt the incredible capabilities of PIE Inc, but shouldn't this be left to the MIO? Or do you doubt your own government's prowess in investigating even capsuleers? I'm quite certain if the Disciples of Ston were breaking Imperial law they'd have been arrested, kicked out of Empire space, or at least added to the Amarr Imperial Navy's kill-on-sight list.
Perhaps by doing less you can do more. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
676
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 12:54:00 -
[88] - Quote
Rek Jaiga wrote:I've been reading through here and while I (of course) agree with my comrades, I have an entirely different point to raise.
Not to doubt the incredible capabilities of PIE Inc, but shouldn't this be left to the MIO? Or do you doubt your own government's prowess in investigating even capsuleers? I'm quite certain if the Disciples of Ston were breaking Imperial law they'd have been arrested, kicked out of Empire space, or at least added to the Amarr Imperial Navy's kill-on-sight list.
Perhaps by doing less you can do more.
So you'd be quite happy for me to go into Republican space and do pretty much anything I liked as long as the Minmatar authorities didn't object?
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Ava Starfire
Teraa Matar
187
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 13:02:00 -
[89] - Quote
A little slaving piglet tried to stick her little pink nose into a trough that wasnt hers, got caught, and began to squeal in protest that it was all the trough owner's fault.
Perhaps her keepers should have stuck an apple in her mouth to prevent further squealing? |
Rek Jaiga
Teraa Matar
195
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 13:29:00 -
[90] - Quote
Rodj Blake wrote: So you'd be quite happy for me to go into Republican space and do pretty much anything I liked as long as the Minmatar authorities didn't object?
If you did something illegal (such as human trafficking) the Fleet and RSS would come down on you with swift Matari speed. If you're just fetching a bottle of Chest Wound I don't think they'd mind, though your status as an Imperial militiaman would still result in justice being dealt.
But remember, Ston and gang are pacifists. What real crimes have they commited as compared to the actual outlaw gangs you really should be fighting? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |