Ransom and hacking? Blame Queen Elizabeth I

History always repeats. In the 16th century, England had a strong Navy for defense. They defeated the Spanish Armada (mainly thanks to a “divine” storm — they were outnumbered 20 to one at the time) and could protect the country. But Her Majesty’s Navy was not capable of effective offensive force — with almost no foreign ports, no territories to rely on support from. In short, they could defend but could not expand.

Meanwhile, the Spanish and the Portuguese (staunch enemies of non-Catholic England) had huge Navies and had begun the plunder of gold, jewels and silver from the Americas. The Spanish and Portuguese galleons were well armed and their Navies ready to fight and defend precious cargo, ports and settlements. It was only when the ore and treasure needed to be carried back to the motherland on the vast open seas that the ships were vulnerable.

So, what Queen Elizabeth did was license privateers, especially Sir Francis Drake — to ply their trade on the open seas that belonged to no one. If Drake’s cutthroats happened to run up against a well-loaded Spanish galleon, well then, it was just a privateer who stole the cargo. As part of his license as a privateer (never a pirate), he paid the Crown for that license to freely trade in foreign waters. When the Spanish protested Drake was little more than a licensed pirate of the Queen’s, paperwork was able to show that she never ordered him to attack anybody.

Today, Russia has a very strong defense. There can be no question about that. Any nation thinking they could attack and prevail against Russia would be quickly shown how wrong-headed such thinking is. 

Similarly, Russia learned after Afghanistan how feeble their offensive capability is. Assist local insurrections? Sure. Crimea and Syria prove that. Actually go conquer any country on their own? Unlikely. So, how does Russia handle the growing influence, power, wealth of the USA, how can they slow that down and level the playing field? The same way Elizabeth I did — license privateers to rob, pillage, kidnap and ransom wealthy American interests.

Computers and the machines’ need to link up are the vulnerable sea-routes of today. All the ransom attacks, hacking, pillaging of American computer systems are, in effect, the Sir Francis Drake gambit replayed. It will all stop one day, just as it did for all the Caribbean privateer “pirates” who were, at one time, secretly working for the queen: Edward Teach (aka Blackbeard), Jean-David Nau, Jack Rackham, Black Bart, “Red Legs” Greaves, Henry Jennings and many more. 

Why did they stop? Diplomacy, tit-for-tat attacks on English shipping, and the pirates were all hung, made the scapegoats. If I were a hacker for Putin or Beijing, I’d think about the endgame here…

 

Writer Peter Riva, a former resident of Amenia Union, now resides in New Mexico.

The views expressed here are not necessarily those of The Millerton News and The News does not support or oppose candidates for public office.

Latest News

Millerton’s 175th committee advances plans for celebration, seeks vendors and sponsors

The Millerton 175th anniversary committee's tent during the village's trunk-or-treat event on Oct. 31, 2025.

Photo provided

MILLERTON — As Millerton officially enters its 175th year, the volunteer committee tasked with planning its milestone celebration is advancing plans and firming up its week-long schedule of events, which will include a large community fair at Eddie Collins Memorial Park and a drone light show. The events will take place this July 11 through 19.

Millerton’s 175th committee chair Lisa Hermann said she is excited for this next phase of planning.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why the focus on Greenland?

As I noted here in an article last spring entitled “Hands off Greenland”, the world’s largest island was at the center of a developing controversy. President Trump was telling all who would listen that, for national security reasons, the United States needed to take over Greenland, amicably if possible or by force if necessary. While many were shocked by Trump’s imperialistic statements, most people, at least in this country, took his words as ill-considered bluster. But he kept telling questioners that he had to have Greenland (oftenechoing the former King of France, Louis XIV who famously said, “L’État c’est moi!”.

Since 1951, the U.S. has had a security agreement with Denmark giving it near total freedom to install and operate whatever military facilities it wanted on Greenland. At one point there were sixteen small bases across the island, now there’s only one. Denmark’s Prime Minister has told President Trump that the U.S. should feel free to expand its installations if needed. As climate change is starting to allow a future passage from thePacific Ocean to the Arctic, many countries are showing interest in Greenland including Russia and China but this hardly indicates an international crisis as Trump and his subordinates insist.

Keep ReadingShow less
Military hardware as a signpost

It is hard not to equate military spending and purchasing with diplomatic or strategic plans being made, for reasons otherwise unknown. Keeping an eye out for the physical stuff can often begin to shine a light on what’s coming – good and possibly very bad.

Without Congressional specific approval, the Pentagon has awarded a contract to Boeing for $8,600,000,000 (US taxpayer dollars) for another 25 F-15A attack fighters to be given to Israel. Oh, and there’s another 25 more of the F-15EX variant on option, free to Israel as well.

Keep ReadingShow less
Truth and evidence depend on the right to observe

A small group of protesters voice opposition to President Trump's administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Amenia's Fountain Square at the intersection of Route 44 and Route 22 on Saturday, Nov. 8, 2025

Photo by Nathan Miller

The fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, and before him Renée Good, by federal agents in Minnesota is not just a tragedy; it is a warning. In the aftermath, Trump administration officials released an account of events that directly contradicted citizen video recorded at the scene. Those recordings, made by ordinary people exercising their rights, showed circumstances sharply at odds with the official narrative. Once again, the public is asked to choose between the administration’s version of events and the evidence of its own eyes.

This moment underscores an essential truth: the right to record law enforcement is not a nuisance or a provocation; it is a safeguard. As New York Times columnist David French put it, “Citizen video has decisively rebutted the administration’s lies. The evidence of our eyes contradicts the dishonesty of the administration’s words.”

Keep ReadingShow less