PDA

View Full Version : Japan 'to arrest anti-whaling activists'



Sonnabend
12-06-2008, 04:46 AM
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24761126-23109,00.html

From correspondents in Tokyo

Agence France-Presse

December 06, 2008 06:22pm

ANTI-whaling activists will be arrested if they forcibly interrupt Japan's whale hunting in the Antarctic Ocean, a report said today.

Ha ha.

Japan's fisheries agency and justice ministry made the decision to arrest intruding activists as a ship belonging to the US-based Sea Shepherd Conservation Society set sail from Australia in a bid to disrupt the Japanese whaling fleet, the Sankei Shimbun said.

Crew members from Japan's fleet would capture activists who board the whalers' boats and hand them over to the Japanese Coastguard, the report in the daily added.If arrested by the coastguard, they would be charged with forcible obstruction of business under Japanese law.

I'd prefer charges of piracy, but seeing those eco terrorists in jail will be a distinct pleasure.

During the last Antarctic hunt, Japan alleged that Sea Shepherd activists tracked down and hurled bottles of chemicals at the fleet to disrupt its operations, leading Japan to label them as “terrorist”.

Which they did.

Two activists boarded a Japanese whaler in January, sparking a two-day standoff before they were handed over to an Australian customs vessel.

Note to eco terrorists: stay on your own ship from now on.

Japan's fleet set off in mid-November heading for the Antarctic Ocean with plans to slaughter hundreds of whales, despite strong opposition from Australia and New Zealand, where whale-watching is a popular pastime.

Media lies again, they were in international waters...the whale watchers are inside Australian national maritime boundaries which the whalers never entered....so that's a load of bullshit.

Japanese whalers kill about 1000 whales a year using a loophole in a 1986 global whaling moratorium that allows “lethal research” on the ocean giants.Tokyo makes no secret of the fact that the meat ends up on dinner tables and accuses Westerners of insensitivity to its whaling culture. Only Norway and Iceland defy the whaling moratorium outright.

wiegenlied
12-06-2008, 06:46 AM
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/pics21/whalesashimi.jpg

I happened to find the picture of whale sashimi.

FlaGator
12-06-2008, 09:11 AM
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/pics21/whalesashimi.jpg

I happened to find the picture of whale sashimi.

I thought it would be bigger.

wiegenlied
12-06-2008, 09:21 AM
I thought it would be bigger.

Um yeah, this is the raw meat:

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_02/WhaleSharkWENN_468x336.jpg

megimoo
12-06-2008, 09:25 AM
Prison in Japan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, please forgive any bad spelling or grammar.
I recently read about Prisons in Japan. From what I read, the prisoners have no rights at all, and are treated badly even begfore convicted! Although I believe that people who commit crimes should be punnished, I still think that the innocent shouldn't suffer with the guilty. And humans should still be treated as humans, and shown mercy. ( but I am NOT against death penalties.)

For instance, when a person is arrested for a crime, they may be interrogated for many hours, even days, without food, water, or rest. there

have been many police brutality cases of kicking and hitting. This is to force a confession out of a person. After this, the person is held in a detention ward, and finally get to see a lawyer!

Some people have been held in detention wards waiting trial for long times, there have been people who were there ten years before they were finally released! If convicted of the crime and sent to prison, it gets worse.

Your head is shaven, and you were this gray uniform. There are rules that the prisoners must abide by. They can't move or speak unless they are permitted to. in single cells, there is barelly enough room to put a tatami! There are multiple cell rooms, where the prisoners are allowed to converse, but quietly. They can't exercise or even stretch unless permitted to. they take baths two times a week in the winter, and three times in the summer. they get three meals a day, breakfast and supper served in their cell. if they work, they eat lunch at a seperate room. They are allowed to work at factories.

For dissobediance, even for the slightest things, like looking at someones eyes, ( which is strickly forbidden!) they can be put in solitary confinement, sometimes they are bound up in a straight jackt like position, and not even permitted to move to go to the bathroom.

The conditions of the cells are pretty dirty and unsanitary. the guards often beat the prisoners. if anyone tries to bring suit against them, the police make sure to give there family a hard time.

They are permitted to receive and send letters only to memebers of immediate family, and everything is censored. A low grade prisonner may recieve a visit from one famliy memeber once a month. high grade prisonners even more.

Death Row inmates have a much worse time. they are not given work, but may request some. usually it is glueing something together in their cell. they only leave the cell for a solitary walk. they live in complete isolation, always in solitary confienment. Not a word can they say.
One man was on death row for ten years, and without any family to write to, he never saw anyone but his gaurd durring that entire time! photos are not permitted.

Also, there have been many miscarriages of justice. One man spent forty years on death row before he was finally found to be innocent.

Waiting on Death row isn't easy either. because of "secret" executions, the prisonner never knows when his last day will be. Not the family, lawyer, or anybody is told before the execution, which is done by hanging. The prisonner himself may not know in as little as an hour before it happens. ( so much for last meals.)
Some instances when the family was not even told about the death. they inquired about it, but no one would tell them anything. sometimes they don't notify the family of the death.

Prisonners are allowed radio, and TV, but all monitored by the prison. books are allowed up to two. and one note pad, two pens are permitted. however, these may be taken away for no given reason.

Please note that this is NOT what I have said. I have read this information from the International Human Rights Orginazation. I do not say that it is comepletly accurate, and please feel free to say anything contrary.
I think prison should be bad enough that people want to stay out, but I also think that precautions must be taken to avoid the innocent suffering.

I would like to hear your opinion on this. and please don't mind my writting.
Arigatou! http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18229

Sonnabend
12-06-2008, 09:40 AM
My opinion? Simple. Don't commit any crimes on Japanese soil or commit an offence for which the Japanese may try, convict and imprison you.

If you do and land in a Japanese prison? Your tough luck.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

lacarnut
12-06-2008, 11:15 AM
I would like to see some of these anti-whaling law breakers wind up in jail. Tough shit if others consder treatment in Jap jails too harsh.

M21
12-06-2008, 12:04 PM
My opinion? Simple. Don't commit any crimes on Japanese soil or commit an offence for which the Japanese may try, convict and imprison you.

If you do and land in a Japanese prison? Your tough luck.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.


My opinion? We should nuke the Japanese again. I quit offending the Japanese after Pearl Harbor but of course some in America and abroad drive Mitsubishi cars. I don't forget.


Japanese whalers kill about 1000 whales a year using a loophole in a 1986 global whaling moratorium that allows “lethal research” on the ocean giants.Lethal research? Kinda like what Unit 731 was doing in China on human beings?

"I don't think I'll let you arrest us today Behan" Maybe the Japanese should do a background check on the crew of the Sea Shepard. They might find out there are a few ex and retired Navy Seals on board. :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOS20plm7UM

FlaGator
12-06-2008, 01:06 PM
Um yeah, this is the raw meat:

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_02/WhaleSharkWENN_468x336.jpg

Now that's more like it. Surround it with rice and put a Kelp wrapping on it then let's dig in!

Sonnabend
12-06-2008, 06:14 PM
"I don't think I'll let you arrest us today Behan" Maybe the Japanese should do a background check on the crew of the Sea Shepard. They might find out there are a few ex and retired Navy Seals on board.

Then maybe those ex and retired Navy Seals would be better off finding a better line of work than associating with eco terrorists.

If they board a Japanese ship in international waters then they are subject to arrest and subject to Japanese law. Actions have consequences.

JB
12-06-2008, 06:51 PM
Put me down in the "Don't hunt the whale" camp.

Speedy
12-06-2008, 06:57 PM
Put me down in the "Don't hunt the whale" camp.

I am in the "don't hunt the whale" camp also, but this does not mean that I advocate piracy to prevent it. In that case, it is okay to spike trees and burn SUVs in dealerships since it is for a good cause and all. Blowing up abortions clinics and killing abortion doctors shouold not have consequences either. The motives are noble in the end.

wiegenlied
12-06-2008, 10:20 PM
[SIZE="3"]Prison in Japan

As long as it doesnt intervene with american interests overseas, I dont see any points why we should care about their own domestic policies.

M21
12-07-2008, 01:34 AM
Then maybe those ex and retired Navy Seals would be better off finding a better line of work than associating with eco terrorists.

If they board a Japanese ship in international waters then they are subject to arrest and subject to Japanese law. Actions have consequences.

Just what acts of crimes or acts of terrorism has the crew of the Sea Sheperd ever been charged with by ANY nation?

NONE and you know it, but none the less you continue to call them terrorists. They just sailed from your nations port and weren't arrested for terrorism. Apparently Australia looks the other way and harbors terrorists. :rolleyes: Well that couldn't be it so maybe your just hyping this up a bit. You seem to have a MUCH bigger hard on for these folks than your own government does.

djones520
12-07-2008, 03:33 AM
My opinion? We should nuke the Japanese again. I quit offending the Japanese after Pearl Harbor but of course some in America and abroad drive Mitsubishi cars. I don't forget.

Lethal research? Kinda like what Unit 731 was doing in China on human beings?

"I don't think I'll let you arrest us today Behan" Maybe the Japanese should do a background check on the crew of the Sea Shepard. They might find out there are a few ex and retired Navy Seals on board. :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOS20plm7UM

From someone who has lived in Japan for 7 and a half years, and spent 4 and a half defending her shores, I got a big heart FUCK YOU to give you.

Have a nice day.

Sonnabend
12-07-2008, 05:17 AM
Just what acts of crimes or acts of terrorism has the crew of the Sea Sheperd ever been charged with by ANY nation?

I posted that in the last thread. Go back and look. Or do your own research.


NONE and you know it

Sinking ships.Ramming ships. Assaulting crews at sea. Boarding foreign flag ships without permission.

The Japanese Whaling Association has labeled the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society as eco-terrorists for boarding and attempting to sink whaling vessels


Second, let there be no mistake: By its attitudes and its actions, Sea Shepherd has clearly demonstrated that it refuses to behave as a responsible member of civil society, preferring to resort to the law of the jungle instead. This group has sunk 10 ships around the world, and its leader, Paul Watson, has done jail time in Canada and The Netherlands. It has also been reported that they carry AK-47s on board when they go to sea.


but none the less you continue to call them terrorists

Eco terrorists and they are.


They just sailed from your nations port and weren't arrested for terrorism. Apparently Australia looks the other way and harbors terrorists.

Unfortunately they kept their noses clean.The law protects them, as well as punishes them.As it should be.


:rolleyes: Well that couldn't be it so maybe your just hyping this up a bit. You seem to have a MUCH bigger hard on for these folks than your own government does.

That bleeding heart of yours needs medical attention.

M21
12-07-2008, 09:15 PM
From someone who has lived in Japan for 7 and a half years, and spent 4 and a half defending her shores, I got a big heart FUCK YOU to give you.

Have a nice day.

Fuck me? Fuck WITH me weather boy. Just how did you "defend' :rolleyes: Japan? Get a grip Junior.
I come from a long line of Warriors. My Uncle, who was a Marine Raider, was bayoneted in the back by a Jap on the beaches of Tarawa. Probably by a rat bastard who produced the progeny you "think" you were defending. I bet they appreciated you defending them too. :rolleyes:

My Grandfather sailed from Pearl on December 6th 1941 for San Francisco but was later on the carrier Lexington when she was sunk by the Japs in the Battle of the Coral Sea. He survived.

So you've gone native? Good for you. Maybe AAFES will give you a great deal on a POS Jap car like a Mitsubishi and then you can support a company with a history of killing Americans.

djones520
12-08-2008, 02:46 AM
Fuck me? Fuck WITH me weather boy. Just how did you "defend' :rolleyes: Japan? Get a grip Junior.
I come from a long line of Warriors. My Uncle, who was a Marine Raider, was bayoneted in the back by a Jap on the beaches of Tarawa. Probably by a rat bastard who produced the progeny you "think" you were defending. I bet they appreciated you defending them too. :rolleyes:

My Grandfather sailed from Pearl on December 6th 1941 for San Francisco but was later on the carrier Lexington when she was sunk by the Japs in the Battle of the Coral Sea. He survived.

So you've gone native? Good for you. Maybe AAFES will give you a great deal on a POS Jap car like a Mitsubishi and then you can support a company with a history of killing Americans.

And you obviously don't know a fucking thing about the Japanese, their society, or how they are one of our closest allies in this world. Yeah, a lot of Americans where killed by the Japanese. News flash dip shit. We killed 2.7 million Japanese in return.

The score was settled long ago, and the rest of us have stopped living in the past with our heads shoved up our ass. My grandfather was in Germany fighting the Nazi's. I guess thats justification for me to call for the nuclear bombardment of Germany today! NUKE THEM KRAUTS!!! :rolleyes:

What did I do while I was there? Someday you feel like showing up to a secure area with proof of a security clearance, I'll tell you a lot of what went on in Japan a couple years back when N. Korea was playing with their nukes. I'll tell you about the joint work I coordinated with the JASDF Weather Service on resource protection, and aircraft movements, and other things that I can't talk about here. I haven't shed blood for the Japanese, but I most certainly took part in the defense of that nation and our interests in that part of the world, and anyone who feels to say otherwise can shove it up their fucking ass.

It's ignorant fuckhead racists like you who make me further appreciate the time I spent there. Because they've long ago forgave the atrocities that we where forced to bring to their soil. They long ago stopped seeing us as an occupying force, but as friends who are there to help keep them safe from the dangers of the world. They long ago proved that they are better people then you are.

AmPat
12-08-2008, 03:08 AM
My, my lads, This has come a long way from Whale meat. Back to the issue. I don't see why the Japanese have to continue to hunt whale when there are other things to eat. It's much like the Koreans and their dog ranches. Too many other things to eat. Stop killing endangered whales and eat more rice. This cultural crap needs to end. Bite a seal or something.:rolleyes:

expat-pattaya
12-08-2008, 09:57 AM
Any way they can fuck with the whalers is OK with me. The whales are a species that the vast majority of the civilized world has decided is one that should not be hunted to extinction. That a few barbaric nations think they have a historic RIGHT to kill them is pathetic.

Or let them whale. In historic wind/oar drivin boats with human thrown harpoons. Let them pay for their historic right in human blood.

Fuck the whalers.

lacarnut
12-08-2008, 10:00 AM
Sinking ships.Ramming ships. Assaulting crews at sea. Boarding foreign flag ships without permission.

The Japanese Whaling Association has labeled the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society as eco-terrorists for boarding and attempting to sink whaling vessels

Eco terrorists and they are.


That bleeding heart of yours needs medical attention.

Even Greenpeace does not want their organization tainted by any association with this outlaw outfit.

FlaGator
12-08-2008, 10:01 AM
Any way they can fuck with the whalers is OK with me. The whales are a species that the vast majority of the civilized world has decided is one that should not be hunted to extinction. That a few barbaric nations think they have a historic RIGHT to kill them is pathetic.

Or let them whale. In historic wind/oar drivin boats with human thrown harpoons. Let them pay for their historic right in human blood.

Fuck the whalers.

The goverments of the world should get together and stop Japan. However, these Sea Shepperds should be tried as terrorists in a court of law and if found guilty they should be imprisoned.

M21
12-08-2008, 12:28 PM
Any way they can fuck with the whalers is OK with me. The whales are a species that the vast majority of the civilized world has decided is one that should not be hunted to extinction. That a few barbaric nations think they have a historic RIGHT to kill them is pathetic.

Or let them whale. In historic wind/oar drivin boats with human thrown harpoons. Let them pay for their historic right in human blood.

Fuck the whalers.

That's a great post and I doubt that very few would be opposed to traditional methods used by indigenous peoples for example as the Intuits do in Alaska.

M21
12-08-2008, 12:32 PM
Even Greenpeace does not want their organization tainted by any association with this outlaw outfit.Cowards. Let the whole world turn their heads away from what the Japanese are doing in the southern oceans because If we don't look it isn't happening.

There is one lone NGO vessel watching them.

Seriously what will we do when all the great whales are gone?

M21
12-08-2008, 12:42 PM
The score was settled long ago, .........Bullshit. Tell it to the dead in military cemeteries across the Pacific Rim.

PoliCon
12-08-2008, 12:57 PM
It cracks me up that people will get all up in arms about animals being killed for food - but they ignore humans being slaughtered for convenience and demand the right to be allowed to participate in that slaughter. I have noticed a HIGH correlation between people who fight for animal rights and AGAINST rights for the unborn. Dumbasses.

Sonnabend
12-08-2008, 05:25 PM
Bullshit. Tell it to the dead in military cemeteries across the Pacific Rim.

Speaking as a member of the Pacific Rim, where Japan is one of our biggest trading allies...do us all a favour and shove it?

War's over.

lacarnut
12-08-2008, 05:37 PM
It cracks me up that people will get all up in arms about animals being killed for food - but they ignore humans being slaughtered for convenience and demand the right to be allowed to participate in that slaughter. I have noticed a HIGH correlation between people who fight for animal rights and AGAINST rights for the unborn. Dumbasses.

Right! What's next? Save the polar bears or the Seals that stink up the San Fran Wharf.

PoliCon
12-08-2008, 06:09 PM
Bullshit. Tell it to the dead in military cemeteries across the Pacific Rim.The Japan of today is NOT the same Japan who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.

expat-pattaya
12-08-2008, 07:16 PM
Right! What's next? Save the polar bears or the Seals that stink up the San Fran Wharf.

No one is hunting the polar bears to extinction. No comparison.

Look, there is NO NEED to hunt these animals for FOOD. They do not reproduce rapidly and they are an amazing creature with a highly developed intelligence. With modern technology they could be wiped out in a few years.

Maybe in 1805 the japanese needed to kill some of these to add to their protein intake. But they do not now. And I for one don't think the Japanese have the right to hunt the whales to extinction when the rest of the world says that is wrong.

The japanese have a reputation for roving the seas fishing in disputed waters and taking more than allowed species using techniques banned for local fisherman. The pillage the world seas. This is just one example of their greed and lack of respect for the rest of the worlds opinion. If they want to pillage their own coastal waters fine. But not the open seas.

I am not certain I endorse everything the Sea Shepards are doing. But, even if they are outside the law they are better than the fucking whalers. And since the world governments are such pussies they will talk about it until the end of the whales I say go for it.

Fuck the whalers.

expat-pattaya
12-08-2008, 07:17 PM
The Japan of today is NOT the same Japan who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.

That is true. They are a valued and loyal trading partner.

But they are also quite self centered when it comes to use of the worlds oceans. And this is one example. They do need more than another (useless) UN mandate.

AmPat
12-08-2008, 09:17 PM
That is true. They are a valued and loyal trading partner.

But they are also quite self centered when it comes to use of the worlds oceans. And this is one example. They do need more than another (useless) UN mandate.

I am no tree-hugger but I do care about the environment enough to see common sense. The Japanese DO NOT NEED these animals. They do it because it is lucrative and some idiotic sense of culture. It needs to go the way of bound feet. Eat something else! This is so obvious it falls into the Way Stupid category.

The Japanese over harvest the oceans and rub the rest of the world's face in it. The U seless N ations is not going to stop it and the law is powerless. Individuals like the Sea Sheppard take the law into their hands precisely for this reason. We should tell the Japanese to stop or we will confiscate their vessels.

djones520
12-08-2008, 09:36 PM
I am no tree-hugger but I do care about the environment enough to see common sense. The Japanese DO NOT NEED these animals. They do it because it is lucrative and some idiotic sense of culture. It needs to go the way of bound feet. Eat something else! This is so obvious it falls into the Way Stupid category.

The Japanese over harvest the oceans and rub the rest of the world's face in it. The U seless N ations is not going to stop it and the law is powerless. Individuals like the Sea Sheppard take the law into their hands precisely for this reason. We should tell the Japanese to stop or we will confiscate their vessels.

Do we need 5 differant major burger fast food chains? Do we need to slaughter all the cows that it takes to supply those?

PoliCon
12-08-2008, 10:08 PM
I am no tree-hugger but I do care about the environment enough to see common sense. The Japanese DO NOT NEED these animals. They do it because it is lucrative and some idiotic sense of culture. It needs to go the way of bound feet. Eat something else! This is so obvious it falls into the Way Stupid category.

The Japanese over harvest the oceans and rub the rest of the world's face in it. The U seless N ations is not going to stop it and the law is powerless. Individuals like the Sea Sheppard take the law into their hands precisely for this reason. We should tell the Japanese to stop or we will confiscate their vessels.you do realize that your objections are also culturally rooted - right?

M21
12-08-2008, 11:39 PM
Speaking as a member of the Pacific Rim, where Japan is one of our biggest trading allies...do us all a favour and shove it?

War's over.

That's what it's all about. $

expat-pattaya
12-09-2008, 12:09 AM
Do we need 5 differant major burger fast food chains? Do we need to slaughter all the cows that it takes to supply those?

The comparison is so totally not related. Cows are not about to become extinct. Do you get it? Whales reproduce slowly, are an important part of the oceans ecology, and are becoming extinct because of whaling.

When the last cows are being hunted down in the midwest and face extinction and all the other nations of the planet are banning harvesting of cows THEN it would be valid.

Jeez. I am stunned by the sheer magnitude of "fail" in that comparison.

expat-pattaya
12-09-2008, 12:15 AM
I am no tree-hugger but I do care about the environment enough to see common sense. The Japanese DO NOT NEED these animals. They do it because it is lucrative and some idiotic sense of culture. It needs to go the way of bound feet. Eat something else! This is so obvious it falls into the Way Stupid category.

The Japanese over harvest the oceans and rub the rest of the world's face in it. The U seless N ations is not going to stop it and the law is powerless. Individuals like the Sea Sheppard take the law into their hands precisely for this reason. We should tell the Japanese to stop or we will confiscate their vessels.

The sad part is that there appears to be an attitude here that since the idiot tree huggers that try to impede any and all use of nature are pathetic losers and liberal weenies that the cause of whales must fall under the same lame liberal weenie umbrella.

There is a BIG difference between using natures harvest and pillaging and destroying it for future generations. It isn't just whales. It is the entire looting of the oceans that has the potential to cause major food shortages in our lifetimes if some fish stocks don't recover fast enough. And if we remove too many links in the food chain who knows how the oceans will recover or when? I say use some common sense and take only as much as is regenerated each year. And if a species is endangered it is only self preservation that says STOP killing it. And if one nation thinks the rules don't apply to them use military force to stop them.

Being aware of the world and how the resources are managed doesn't make one liberal or a weenie. It makes someone aware. I just can't care enough about what someone else thinks of me on the internet to be a lemming ;)

M21
12-09-2008, 12:23 AM
Civilized nations kill domestic livestock with as little fear, pain and delay as possible. Domestic animals are also a creation of man that have been bred to docility, tractability, stupidity, and dependency. Introducing a cow into the "wild" means nothing to the cow.

Now let's view the CONTRAST of " little fear, pain and delay as possible." These are the kinder, gentler Japanese we should all embrace.

WARNING - This video may not be suitable for minors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaDcDwwt6as

wiegenlied
12-09-2008, 12:43 AM
Do we need 5 differant major burger fast food chains? Do we need to slaughter all the cows that it takes to supply those?

I am wondering why the Japanese eats whales, so I found a bit information. Apparently the whale meat is high in protein (higher than other meats) and iron as well as low in cholesterol. But, I also read that in some of the whale species, contaminants have been found in blubber at levels far in excess of what is considered safe, because they feed higher on the food chain. So seemingly relying on whale meat as a source of protein is unhealthy both for adults and their future offsprings.

djones520
12-09-2008, 01:12 AM
The comparison is so totally not related. Cows are not about to become extinct. Do you get it? Whales reproduce slowly, are an important part of the oceans ecology, and are becoming extinct because of whaling.

When the last cows are being hunted down in the midwest and face extinction and all the other nations of the planet are banning harvesting of cows THEN it would be valid.

Jeez. I am stunned by the sheer magnitude of "fail" in that comparison.

Mink Whales comprise 85-95% of what the Japanese hunt. They are considered a "near threatened" species which is one step below "least concern". They are not considered a threatened (endangered) species of whale.

And Norway hunts nearly the same number of Mink Whales that the Japanese do, so where's the cries of indignation against them?

djones520
12-09-2008, 01:17 AM
I am wondering why the Japanese eats whales, so I found a bit information. Apparently the whale meat is high in protein (higher than other meats) and iron as well as low in cholesterol. But, I also read that in some of the whale species, contaminants have been found in blubber at levels far in excess of what is considered safe, because they feed higher on the food chain. So seemingly relying on whale meat as a source of protein is unhealthy both for adults and their future offsprings.

The vast majority of the whale meat harvested is the Minke whale though, and the level of contaminants fall within safe levels set by the Japanese government.

wiegenlied
12-09-2008, 02:22 AM
The Japanese Whaling Association has labeled the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society as eco-terrorists for boarding and attempting to sink whaling vessels Eco terrorists and they are.

Er, but, I think Sea Shepherd is cool, it is a kind of privateers... historically pirates and privateers actually did played invaluable role in building america...

But nowadays I do understand if Im saying "pirates pride", it is quite the same as if im saying "terrorists pride"

It's quite difficult to say..

wiegenlied
12-09-2008, 02:40 AM
Speaking as a member of the Pacific Rim, where Japan is one of our biggest trading allies...do us all a favour and shove it?

War's over.

Sorry Sonnabend, but the japanese did killed alot of westerners for the sake of their own nation. They can be very cruel.

But I think we just leave it to americans are always fighting for american flag and american families, and that the values and principles we hold until the end.
Japanese might do the same, but it's none of our businesses.

djones520
12-09-2008, 02:53 AM
Sorry Sonnabend, but the japanese did killed alot of westerners for the sake of their own nation. They can be very cruel.

But I think we just leave it to americans are always fighting for american flag and american families, and that the values and principles we hold until the end.
Japanese might do the same, but it's none of our businesses.

And we enslaved millions of Africans and killed off untold numbers of Native Americans. Are we any less cruel?

AmPat
12-09-2008, 02:56 AM
Do we need 5 differant major burger fast food chains? Do we need to slaughter all the cows that it takes to supply those?

As soon as we do two things to make this an equal argument I'll answer.
1. We raise whales as food sources
2. Cows become rare to the point of extinction.

Until then,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,piss off.
This poster requires intelligent responses.:cool:

AmPat
12-09-2008, 02:58 AM
you do realize that your objections are also culturally rooted - right?


Originally Posted by AmPat
I am no tree-hugger but I do care about the environment enough to see common sense. The Japanese DO NOT NEED these animals. They do it because it is lucrative and some idiotic sense of culture. It needs to go the way of bound feet. Eat something else! This is so obvious it falls into the Way Stupid category.

The Japanese over harvest the oceans and rub the rest of the world's face in it. The U seless N ations is not going to stop it and the law is powerless. Individuals like the Sea Sheppard take the law into their hands precisely for this reason. We should tell the Japanese to stop or we will confiscate their vessels.
Observe the bold section.:cool:

djones520
12-09-2008, 02:58 AM
As soon as we do two things to make this an equal argument I'll answer.
1. We raise whales as food sources
2. Cows become rare to the point of extinction.

Until then,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,piss off.
This poster requires intelligent responses.:cool:

Read a few posts up asshole. Minke whales are NOT near the point of extinction. Their not even considered Threatened.

AmPat
12-09-2008, 03:00 AM
Read a few posts up asshole. Minke whales are NOT near the point of extinction. Their not even considered Threatened.

I read it pissboy. The japanese harvest any whale they can. Don't be naive.

djones520
12-09-2008, 03:02 AM
I read it pissboy. The japanese harvest any whale they can. Don't be naive.

850 Minke Whales, and 50 Humback Whales was their qouta for 2008. Yep... their reaping the fuckin oceans. :rolleyes:

AmPat
12-09-2008, 03:03 AM
850 Minke Whales, and 50 Humback Whales was their qouta for 2008. Yep... their reaping the fuckin oceans. :rolleyes:

Yep, that's what they reported. :rolleyes:

djones520
12-09-2008, 03:03 AM
Yep, that's what they reported. :rolleyes:

And your proof otherwise?

AmPat
12-09-2008, 03:17 AM
And your proof otherwise?

I see. Common sense eludes you. One may CLAIM officially that they did thus and so. Thus and so is then duly written down and reported as fact.

I did not claim proof. Where is your proof? See how that works?:rolleyes:

You are dismissed.:cool:

djones520
12-09-2008, 03:25 AM
I see. Common sense eludes you. One may CLAIM officially that they did thus and so. Thus and so is then duly written down and reported as fact.

I did not claim proof. Where is your proof? See how that works?:rolleyes:

You are dismissed.:cool:

Right... so published statistics does not constitute proof, but your made up assertation is more accurate?

I thought you said you required intelligent conversation? :rolleyes:

Sonnabend
12-09-2008, 05:48 AM
That's what it's all about. $

Grow up :rolleyes:

wiegenlied
12-09-2008, 05:48 AM
The vast majority of the whale meat harvested is the Minke whale though, and the level of contaminants fall within safe levels set by the Japanese government.

But earlier in the decade, minke whales were mostly ignored because of the abundance of the larger species of whales. It was not until the 1970s when the number of larger species of whales became critically low did the whalers turn attention the the smaller and more numerous minke whales.So basically minke is hunted as replacement. Now with an annual take of 500-1000, Minke probably lives for 40-50 years. How if all whales are gone?

Now another reason whales are being hunted is because of commercial profit. Whereas in fact, whales are more valuable alive than dead. Whale-watching, for instance, can provide non-consumptive way to profit from whales. Also, why should we eat whales when there are other fishes such as salmons or tunas?

wiegenlied
12-09-2008, 05:50 AM
And we enslaved millions of Africans and killed off untold numbers of Native Americans. Are we any less cruel?

But we’re cruel for our own survivals, same like the Japanese slaughtering the Chinese for their own survivals and dominance. That’s part of history we could not deny. But the Japanese, unlike us, aren’t killing each other because of what have been done by their predecessors – well, probably because they don’t have a congress and freedom of speech.

Sonnabend
12-09-2008, 06:17 AM
But the Japanese, unlike us, aren’t killing each other because of what have been done by their predecessors – well, probably because they don’t have a congress and freedom of speech.Wrong (http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Japan/English/english-Constitution.html#CHAPTER_III)


Article 13: All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs. And then this


Article 19: Freedom of thought and conscience shall not be violated.

Article 20:Freedom of religion is guaranteed to all. No religious organization shall receive any privileges from the State, nor exercise any political authority. 2) No person shall be compelled to take part in any religious acts, celebration, rite or practice. 3) The State and its organs shall refrain from religious education or any other religious activity.

Article 21: Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. 2) No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated. And here.

Article 42: The Diet shall consist of two Houses, namely the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors. Article 43: Both Houses shall consist of elected members, representative of all the people. 2) The number of the members of each House shall be fixed by law

AmPat
12-09-2008, 06:23 AM
Right... so published statistics does not constitute proof, but your made up assertation is more accurate?

I thought you said you required intelligent conversation? :rolleyes:

One more time for the simple one. The Japanese have reported a catch. It may or may not be accurate. Are you really that stupid?

I used to deer hunt. The annual harvest was reported and still is. That harvest is directly related to how many deer are tagged through the check points. the ones killed before and after the season, along with those killed during the season yet not checked through a check point, are not in that annual harvest statistic.

Have an adult explain this for you.:cool:

PoliCon
12-09-2008, 09:51 AM
Mink Whales comprise 85-95% of what the Japanese hunt. They are considered a "near threatened" species which is one step below "least concern". They are not considered a threatened (endangered) species of whale.

And Norway hunts nearly the same number of Mink Whales that the Japanese do, so where's the cries of indignation against them?I think these cries of indignation are just plain stupid. if you don't like it - don't participate. Move on.

Odysseus
12-09-2008, 11:13 AM
I think that we're at the point where this discussion of who can beat up who can only be settled in the men's room with a ruler. Somebody else will have to judge it, though, as there's got to be some UCMJ rule against it, and even if there isn't, I'm not doing it.

I don't like the whalers, but I don't hold with the idea that you get to break good laws (such as anti-piracy laws) in order to protest bad ones. The Sea Shepperd's captain and crew have attacked vessels in international waters, sinking ten. That makes them eco-terrorists and pirates, and anyone who takes them down is within his rights to do so.

As for the whaling treaties, if this isn't a demonstration of the impotence of international agreements, I don't know what is. You have nations that have signed on to something that they all agree is necessary, the protection of whales, and not one of them will put their money where their mouths are when the treaties are violated. I hope that the new administration is watching this.

expat-pattaya
12-09-2008, 11:32 AM
I'd like those who are so angry with the Sea Sheppards to put their anger to the test.

Do you feel as angry at abortion protesters who burn down abortion clinics?

Is there a difference?

PoliCon
12-09-2008, 12:18 PM
I'd like those who are so angry with the Sea Sheppards to put their anger to the test.

Do you feel as angry at abortion protesters who burn down abortion clinics?

Is there a difference?Is there a difference between killing ANIMALS and killing HUMAN BEINGS - HELL YES!! That being said - I'm against vandalism in any form even when done by prolifers - ESPECIALLY when done by prolifers.

M21
12-09-2008, 01:05 PM
850 Minke Whales, and 50 Humback Whales was their qouta for 2008. Yep... their reaping the fuckin oceans. :rolleyes:
The Humpback whale is an ENDANGERED species and the Japanese have published ZERO data from their research on Humpbacks. There is not another nation that agrees with the Japanese that their research data must be collected by lethal means.

Face it guy. This is a meat hunt of endangered species.

expat-pattaya
12-09-2008, 01:05 PM
Is there a difference between killing ANIMALS and killing HUMAN BEINGS - HELL YES!! That being said - I'm against vandalism in any form even when done by prolifers - ESPECIALLY when done by prolifers.

That is different. But the concept of seeing a wrong and acting in the face of the law is the commonality.

If one approves of using terror tactics to burn down an abortion clinic then how can one be outraged at another group using illegal tactics to stop what they feel is an injustice. Just wondering how folks feel about that.

For myself, so long as human life is not taken (by anti-abortion or anti-whaling) and one is willing to pay the legal piper for your actions then do what you feel you must.

M21
12-09-2008, 01:07 PM
Grow up :rolleyes:
Evolve ;)

Sonnabend
12-09-2008, 02:37 PM
Evolve ;)

Check your own trade figures with Japan. That avatar suits you soooo well.

Odysseus
12-09-2008, 03:22 PM
I'd like those who are so angry with the Sea Sheppards to put their anger to the test.

Do you feel as angry at abortion protesters who burn down abortion clinics?

Is there a difference?
As I said before, I don't agree with breaking good laws in protest of bad ones. I despise anyone who resorts to terrorism in support of any goal, because once someone decides that they have the right to kill those who disagree with them but do them no harm, they've chosen the way of the totalitarian dictator.

That is different. But the concept of seeing a wrong and acting in the face of the law is the commonality.

If one approves of using terror tactics to burn down an abortion clinic then how can one be outraged at another group using illegal tactics to stop what they feel is an injustice. Just wondering how folks feel about that.

For myself, so long as human life is not taken (by anti-abortion or anti-whaling) and one is willing to pay the legal piper for your actions then do what you feel you must.
You've created a straw man. No one here approves of burning down abortion clinics. If the Sea Shepperds really believe that what they are opposing is evil, they can impose themselves between the whalers and the whales as some activists do. Of course, that's a bit more dangerous than shooting at them, but if the only life that you're willing to risk is your adversary's, then you really don't have a lot to say on the subject.

M21
12-09-2008, 03:24 PM
Check your own trade figures with Japan. That avatar suits you soooo well.
Irrelevant to me because I do my level best to NEVER buy Japanese, Canadian, or Chinese products. Boycotts never work they say but my conscience isn't for sale.

PoliCon
12-09-2008, 03:26 PM
if the only life that you're willing to risk is your adversary's, then you really don't have a lot to say on the subject. well said.

expat-pattaya
12-09-2008, 04:14 PM
As I said before, I don't agree with breaking good laws in protest of bad ones. I despise anyone who resorts to terrorism in support of any goal, because once someone decides that they have the right to kill those who disagree with them but do them no harm, they've chosen the way of the totalitarian dictator.
.

So you would feel that those who frighten women entering an abortion clinic, or those who send threatening letters to doctors and the like are NOT admirable people.

I agree. However, if someone believes that abortion is a sin and taking human life and can not stand by in good conscience and then acts in an illegal manner to stop the taking of human life, hey, I respect them provided they are NOT killing someone else in the name of their conscience.



You've created a straw man. No one here approves of burning down abortion clinics. If the Sea Shepperds really believe that what they are opposing is evil, they can impose themselves between the whalers and the whales as some activists do. Of course, that's a bit more dangerous than shooting at them, but if the only life that you're willing to risk is your adversary's, then you really don't have a lot to say on the subject.

Not a straw man at all. Checking the hypocrisy level of this thread. I have heard the term "terrorist" used in conjunction with the Sea Shepards. And support for jailing them, even without trial in Japan. Just wondering if that same level of law an order applies to issues they agree with.

As to "but if the only life that you're willing to risk is your adversary's, then you really don't have a lot to say on the subject" I haven't a clue what you mean. Please elaborate.

For the record, I respect anyone that takes action for what they believe provided they do not cross the line of taking an opposing persons life. Just because we fel strongly about something doesn't mean we are RIGHT. And, for the record, if you are breaking the law doing so be prepared to do the time.

I might send money to the legal defense of the Sea Shepards. I would also probably vote guilty if I were a juror on their trial. ;)

Jumpy
12-09-2008, 06:06 PM
I am adding myself to the side of saving the whales. It would be a crime for them to go extinct.

Sonnabend
12-10-2008, 02:47 AM
Irrelevant to me because I do my level best to NEVER buy Japanese, Canadian, or Chinese products. Boycotts never work they say but my conscience isn't for sale.Half the technology on that computer you use has its basis in Japanese developement. Your sound system and sound card and graphics card uses Japanese developed technology.

That car you drive was made in a factory using Japanese designed, developed and built computers and robots. Many of the goods you have been carried to the US in ships built by the Japanese, using navigation technology developed by the Japanese.

Virtually everything you see around you has been in some way influenced by them, as they have been the leading edge in computers and advanced technology for decades.

Boycott all you like...you're like one of these rabid anti Americans screeching hate...using a computer built in the US using an operating system created in the US and on US webspace.

DUH.....:rolleyes:

Odysseus
12-10-2008, 11:42 AM
Er, but, I think Sea Shepherd is cool, it is a kind of privateers... historically pirates and privateers actually did played invaluable role in building america...
But nowadays I do understand if Im saying "pirates pride", it is quite the same as if im saying "terrorists pride"
It's quite difficult to say..
Privateers carried letters of marque from sovereign governments, on whose behalf they acted as if they were naval vessels. The letter of marque meant the difference between being treated as a lawful combatant and a pirate, which is an important distinction. Now, if the Sea Shepperd were to acquire a letter of marque from a signatory to the anti-whaling treaty, they'd be within their rights to engage the whaling ships as agents of another government, but that government would be effectively declaring war on Japan. I don't see that happening any time soon.

And we enslaved millions of Africans and killed off untold numbers of Native Americans. Are we any less cruel?
Yeah, we are. We renounced and abolished slavery over a century ago, and while the Indian Wars were apalling in terms of body count, it's not like the Indians weren't fighting us. Many of the plains tribes embraced warfare as part of their culture and refused any settlement with the white man, and their concept of warfare was pretty cruel, too. The ultimate difference is that we had technologically superior weapons and the means to supply armies and they didn't.

So you would feel that those who frighten women entering an abortion clinic, or those who send threatening letters to doctors and the like are NOT admirable people.
The people who threaten doctors or patients are committing a crime. The overwhelming majority of protesters aren't engaged in that, even at clinics. Mostly, they are trying to convince the patient not to have the abortion. When it goes from persuasion to threat, then it crosses the line.

Not a straw man at all. Checking the hypocrisy level of this thread. I have heard the term "terrorist" used in conjunction with the Sea Shepards. And support for jailing them, even without trial in Japan. Just wondering if that same level of law an order applies to issues they agree with.
And the answer appears to be, "yes," it does apply.


As to "but if the only life that you're willing to risk is your adversary's, then you really don't have a lot to say on the subject" I haven't a clue what you mean. Please elaborate.
I mean that if your morals require you to put your own life on the line, then you are acting out of conviction. If, however, you act as the Sea Shepperds do, endangering the lives of others while demanding the full protection of the same laws that they are breaking, then you're deep in the hypocrisy well yourself. Think of it this way, the standard for civil disobedience was the Civil Rights Movement, when African-Americans exercised their constitutional rights of free assembly and free speech, and were subjected to assault by those who wanted to keep segregation in place and deny them those rights and more. In doing so, they risked their own lives in order to expose the moral bankruptcy of their adversaries. The Sea Shepperds, rather than place themselves between the whalers and the whales, and put themselves on the line for the cause, have chosen to use illegal force against people who are acting within the letter of the law, if not its spirit. They aren't there because they love the whales, they're there because they hate the whalers. It's not exactly the same motivation, now is it?

M21
12-10-2008, 12:06 PM
Half the technology on that computer you use has its basis in Japanese developement. Your sound system and sound card and graphics card uses Japanese developed technology.

That car you drive was made in a factory using Japanese designed, developed and built computers and robots. Many of the goods you have been carried to the US in ships built by the Japanese, using navigation technology developed by the Japanese.

Virtually everything you see around you has been in some way influenced by them, as they have been the leading edge in computers and advanced technology for decades.

Boycott all you like...you're like one of these rabid anti Americans screeching hate...using a computer built in the US using an operating system created in the US and on US webspace.

DUH.....:rolleyes:

Are you drunk? You sound like one of the idgets in IT that told me that "Computer geeks rule the world" :rolleyes: That may be true for a moment in time, but the next language won't be ones and zeros but 5.56 and 7.62 and the Japanese don't build guns and parachutes.

I guarantee you that the technology of Japan plays VERY little role in my personal lifestyle.

M21
12-10-2008, 12:20 PM
I mean that if your morals require you to put your own life on the line, then you are acting out of conviction. If, however, you act as the Sea Shepperds do, endangering the lives of others while demanding the full protection of the same laws that they are breaking, then you're deep in the hypocrisy well yourself. Think of it this way, the standard for civil disobedience was the Civil Rights Movement, when African-Americans exercised their constitutional rights of free assembly and free speech, and were subjected to assault by those who wanted to keep segregation in place and deny them those rights and more. In doing so, they risked their own lives in order to expose the moral bankruptcy of their adversaries. The Sea Shepperds, rather than place themselves between the whalers and the whales, and put themselves on the line for the cause, have chosen to use illegal force against people who are acting within the letter of the law, if not its spirit. They aren't there because they love the whales, they're there because they hate the whalers. It's not exactly the same motivation, now is it?

Sir you are woefully ignorant of the issues. The Sea Shepherd demands no protection from any nation. The Sea Shepherd has not violated the law or they would have been charged and arrested. The Sea Shepherd is sponsored by a major US television network and millions of citizens worldwide by their donations. The Sea Shepherd society maintain a US based website that accepts donations under the full watch of the US Government. No Government on the planet has named them as a terrorist organization and all the screaming that they are doesn't make it so. The Sea Shepherd places their crew members in Zodiacs directly between the whales and the whalers. The Japanese are not acting within the spirit of the law and barely within the letter. The Japanese are in a barbaric manner taking endangered Humpback whales under the guise of research and have produced NO peer reviewed research data. The Sea Shepherd has a goal of stopping whaling for the sake of the whales and the ecosystem of the oceans. They don't hate the whalers, they hate what they do.

Seriously research the issues.

noonwitch
12-10-2008, 02:31 PM
I am in the "don't hunt the whale" camp also, but this does not mean that I advocate piracy to prevent it. In that case, it is okay to spike trees and burn SUVs in dealerships since it is for a good cause and all. Blowing up abortions clinics and killing abortion doctors shouold not have consequences either. The motives are noble in the end.


If they see whale hunters violating international law, they shouldn't board those ships. They should take photos or videos of the activities and report them to whomever enforces those laws. I'm not big on whale-hunting, either.

M21
12-10-2008, 02:56 PM
If they see whale hunters violating international law, they shouldn't board those ships. They should take photos or videos of the activities and report them to whomever enforces those laws. I'm not big on whale-hunting, either.

And there lies the crux of the issue. There is no internationally agreed upon enforcement mechanism. We musn't offend the Japanese while they are being offensive.

Odysseus
12-10-2008, 07:56 PM
Sir you are woefully ignorant of the issues. The Sea Shepherd demands no protection from any nation. The Sea Shepherd has not violated the law or they would have been charged and arrested. The Sea Shepherd is sponsored by a major US television network and millions of citizens worldwide by their donations. The Sea Shepherd society maintain a US based website that accepts donations under the full watch of the US Government. No Government on the planet has named them as a terrorist organization and all the screaming that they are doesn't make it so. The Sea Shepherd places their crew members in Zodiacs directly between the whales and the whalers. The Japanese are not acting within the spirit of the law and barely within the letter. The Japanese are in a barbaric manner taking endangered Humpback whales under the guise of research and have produced NO peer reviewed research data. The Sea Shepherd has a goal of stopping whaling for the sake of the whales and the ecosystem of the oceans. They don't hate the whalers, they hate what they do.

Seriously research the issues.
Sorry, but I do know what I'm talking about. The Japanese, while barely within the letter of the law, are still within the letter of the law. It sucks, but that's life, and as long as they remain on the legal side of the treaty, then there's not much that can be done. As for the Sea Sheppards, I have no problem with their Zodiacs getting in front of the whales, it's the forcible boarding of the whaling ships and the firing of small arms that makes them pirates, and as long as they conduct themselves as such, they have no moral standing. The patronage of a television network and like-minded supporters doesn't make their actions any less flagrantly illegal (the Democratic Party has just about every TV network on their side, but it doesn't make them any less dishonest). Also, they do demand the protection of the law even as they violate it, as noted above when a whaler captain detained several of them after they'd forcibly boarded his vessel. That makes them hypocrites. The Sea Shepperds undermine their own cause by engaging in lawlessness while the Japanese strengthen theirs by presenting themselves as victims, and that's the worst part of the Sea Sheppard's conduct, that it sacrifices the moral high ground for expediency and ultimately makes it harder for nations to support them.

And there lies the crux of the issue. There is no internationally agreed upon enforcement mechanism. We musn't offend the Japanese while they are being offensive.
A treaty without an enforcement mechanism is an exercise in geopolitical masturbation. It may feel good at the time, but it doesn't accomplish anything in the long run. That's the real shame, that the signatories put their names on a piece of paper that ultimately means nothing because none of them ever intended to enforce it, but they walked around congratulating themselves for their moral certitude and enlightenment as if they'd accomplished something. They might as well have been the League of Nations before WWII.

M21
12-10-2008, 10:39 PM
Sorry, but I do know what I'm talking about. The Japanese, while barely within the letter of the law, are still within the letter of the law. It sucks, but that's life, and as long as they remain on the legal side of the treaty, then there's not much that can be done. As for the Sea Sheppards, I have no problem with their Zodiacs getting in front of the whales, it's the forcible boarding of the whaling ships and the firing of small arms that makes them pirates, and as long as they conduct themselves as such, they have no moral standing. The patronage of a television network and like-minded supporters doesn't make their actions any less flagrantly illegal (the Democratic Party has just about every TV network on their side, but it doesn't make them any less dishonest). Also, they do demand the protection of the law even as they violate it, as noted above when a whaler captain detained several of them after they'd forcibly boarded his vessel. That makes them hypocrites. The Sea Shepperds undermine their own cause by engaging in lawlessness while the Japanese strengthen theirs by presenting themselves as victims, and that's the worst part of the Sea Sheppard's conduct, that it sacrifices the moral high ground for expediency and ultimately makes it harder for nations to support them. .

Research who detained who and also who fired on who. I think you'll find the facts are just the opposite. They didn't force their way onto the Japanese whaling ship they boarded unopposed to deliver a message to their Captain. You'll also find that they provide themselves as a guide to the Japanese whaler when the Japanese whaler was encircled in an ice flow. They used their helicopter to scout a way to safety for the Japanese crew. The Japanese asked for help in a dangerous situation and the Sea Shepard like honorable seamen came to their aid.

All the time that the Sea Shepard pesters, bothers, and distracts the the Japanese from their "research" the Japanese are losing money. If they are merely conducting research the Japanese whalers would be funded by the Japanese Government and the "research" would continue regardless of the profitability. Follow the money. When this becomes unprofitable and an embarrassment to the Japanese they will stop.

wiegenlied
12-11-2008, 02:44 AM
Privateers carried letters of marque from sovereign governments, on whose behalf they acted as if they were naval vessels. The letter of marque meant the difference between being treated as a lawful combatant and a pirate, which is an important distinction. Now, if the Sea Shepperd were to acquire a letter of marque from a signatory to the anti-whaling treaty, they'd be within their rights to engage the whaling ships as agents of another government, but that government would be effectively declaring war on Japan. I don't see that happening any time soon.


The Sea Shepperds undermine their own cause by engaging in lawlessness while the Japanese strengthen theirs by presenting themselves as victims, and that's the worst part of the Sea Sheppard's conduct

So, a letter of marque will never be issued because there's a high level of politics is being played here? The Japanese are wrong because they hunt all kinds of whales for commercial profits negligent about the negative consequences of such action to the balance of marine ecosystem, but the government is staying away from the issue because of the potential trade conflicts. We are judging that the crews of Sea Shepherd have chosen to use illegal force against Japanese people who are acting within the letter of the law, but in fact, they do so because the letter of law for the Sea Shepherd is improbable to be issued.

I dont agree if the crews of Sea Shepherd don't love the whales and if they are doing what they are doing because they hate the whalers - well, I can't agree before there's a fact proving that they do what they are doing because they hate the whalers aka the Japanese. In my understanding, the boarding of the whaling ships and the firing of small arms put them as "pirates" because an internationally agreed upon enforcement mechanism is almost impossible to be reached, for the sake of trade and economy, pretty much the same like what happened with the Kyoto protocol.

I am baffled, could I say that the Sea Shepherd's crews are actually hidden heroes, doing something that the law, in which for the sake of politics, can't pass?

nacho
12-11-2008, 03:12 AM
And there lies the crux of the issue. There is no internationally agreed upon enforcement mechanism. We musn't offend the Japanese while they are being offensive.

Rock on M21, your posts in this thread are awesome.

Sonnabend
12-11-2008, 03:47 AM
Are you drunk? You sound like one of the idgets in IT that told me that "Computer geeks rule the world" That may be true for a moment in time, but the next language won't be ones and zeros but 5.56 and 7.62 and the Japanese don't build guns and parachutes.

If you dont know about the evolution of that technology you are using right now, not my problem.


I guarantee you that the technology of Japan plays VERY little role in
my personal lifestyle.

You live in a cave?


Sir you are woefully ignorant of the issues. The Sea Shepherd demands no protection from any nation. The Sea Shepherd has not violated the law or they would have been charged and arrested.

They were. And if they board the Japanese ship, they will be again.


The Sea Shepherd is sponsored by a major US television network and millions of citizens worldwide by their donations.

The Sea Shepherd are eco terrorists and telling me they have credibility because they get support from the MSM???

BWAHAHAHAH......


The Sea Shepherd society maintain a US based website that accepts donations under the full watch of the US Government. No Government on the planet has named them as a terrorist organization and all the screaming that they are doesn't make it so.

Bottom line: the whalers are engaged in legal activities in international waters, all your screaming wont change that fact, and the Shepherds acts of violence make them the criminals.

If they are lost to Japanese law...well, them's the breaks.


Seriously research the issues.

Love to.

If the Shepherd commits acts of violence against a foreign flag ship in international waters, their asses will be in jail for a loong time.

If they pursue their goals peacefully and within the law, they will have my support. the moment they break the law, attack, try to sink, assault or commit acts of piracy, they are eco terrorists and deserving of whatever bad karma comes their way.

Incidentally, they are required by international law to request permission of the ship's Captain to board. If such permisson is not given, then they are breaking the law the moment they set foot on the ship, and are subject to arrest and imprisonment.

M21
12-11-2008, 01:34 PM
I am baffled, could I say that the Sea Shepherd's crews are actually hidden heroes, doing something that the law, in which for the sake of politics, can't pass?

All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

Odysseus
12-11-2008, 02:56 PM
Research who detained who and also who fired on who. I think you'll find the facts are just the opposite. They didn't force their way onto the Japanese whaling ship they boarded unopposed to deliver a message to their Captain. You'll also find that they provide themselves as a guide to the Japanese whaler when the Japanese whaler was encircled in an ice flow. They used their helicopter to scout a way to safety for the Japanese crew. The Japanese asked for help in a dangerous situation and the Sea Shepard like honorable seamen came to their aid..
Jean LaFitte came to the aid of the US during the battle of New Orleans. Still a pirate.

All the time that the Sea Shepard pesters, bothers, and distracts the the Japanese from their "research" the Japanese are losing money. If they are merely conducting research the Japanese whalers would be funded by the Japanese Government and the "research" would continue regardless of the profitability. Follow the money. When this becomes unprofitable and an embarrassment to the Japanese they will stop.
It's already an embarassment. What it isn't is unprofitable. Get someone who signed onto the treaty to agree to enforce it, otherwise, stop advocating piracy.

So, a letter of marque will never be issued because there's a high level of politics is being played here?

More like a high level of indifference. The nations that signed the convention don't care enough about enforcing it to do anything, and the downside of enforcement is that it alienates a wealthy nation.

I am baffled, could I say that the Sea Shepherd's crews are actually hidden heroes, doing something that the law, in which for the sake of politics, can't pass?

You can say whatever you want, but I still consider them pirates.

M21
12-11-2008, 03:48 PM
You can say whatever you want, but I still consider them pirates.It seems that your definition of pirate is very broad. I'll be waiting to see the day that the Japanese taking into custody, on the high seas , Americans, Australians, and New Zealanders, and haul them back to Japan for trial. Figure the odds.

Odysseus
12-11-2008, 04:21 PM
It seems that your definition of pirate is very broad. I'll be waiting to see the day that the Japanese taking into custody, on the high seas , Americans, Australians, and New Zealanders, and haul them back to Japan for trial. Figure the odds.

Pretty good, actually. Remember the global outrage over the French attack on the Rainbow Warrior? The US interdiction of French shipping? The brutal bombardment of Marseilles by the US Mediterranean Fleet? Me neither. That's because it didn't happen. Oh, there were a few outraged notes in the letters page of Mother Jones, but other than that, not so much. Why? Because ultimately, the various nations of the world are indifferent to such things (regardless of what they say over champagne and brie at the signing ceremonies), and the French had more interest in sinking the ship than anyone else had in avenging it. The Japanese have a motivation for going after the Sea Sheppards (they've lost face over this), and the US, Australia and New Zealand aren't going to do much more than the odd not-so-strongly-worded diplomatic note. The same inertia that makes the signatories unwilling to commit lives and treasure to enforcing the treaty will guarantee inaction on their part when the Sea Sheppards end up as Yakuza sex-toys in a Japanese prison. This is why international treaties mean nothing when there's no means of enforcement, and why guys like us are kept gainfully employed, because at the end of the day, things get to a point where the impotent posturing has to end and someone has to settle things through the deliberate and carefully planned application of superior firepower and maneuver, and the UN's not going to do it.

Now, compare this with the situation involving the Somali pirates. The Somalis are targeting lucrative shipping through heavily travelled sea lanes that happen to be the routes for critical commodities such as oil. Note that India, which isn't exactly known as a seafaring power, was willing to engage them, while the US and other nations are moving naval assets into the region. Do we have any treaty obligations that require us to protect Ukrainian-flagged arms shipments from Russia or Iranian oil tankers? Nope, but we do have an interest in making sure that tankers from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq can freely navigate and we have an interest in preventing the enrichment of seagoing jihadi fanatics who will cheerfully use their new wealth to undermine our allies. Nations act in their own interests, or in what they perceive to be their own interests. Right now, those interests don't involve the Sea Sheppards, nor would they even if they were completely peaceful, law-abiding folks who just happened to love whales. The fact that they are in a morally dubious position simply makes the inertia more understandable.

Sonnabend
12-12-2008, 02:16 AM
It seems that your definition of pirate is very broad. I'll be waiting to see the day that the Japanese taking into custody, on the high seas , Americans, Australians, and New Zealanders, and haul them back to Japan for trial.

You'll see it soon And I'll be sitting here laughing.


Figure the odds.

The moment they set foot on the whaler? 100%

M21
12-12-2008, 01:07 PM
You'll see it soon And I'll be sitting here laughing.You would think it's funny. The Japanese are the true pirates in this but you'll never see it.

Just because a group of men, the Japanese, have the flag of their nation to hide behind doesn't make what they do right. What is happening to those Dolphins in the video will never be right and that's bigger than any nation. That video is barbaric by medieval standards and completely unnecessary.

wiegenlied
12-12-2008, 02:19 PM
Some facts:

Sea Shepherd dont establish their actions based on the hatred toward Japanese because they hunt all kinds of whalers: Norwegian (Nybraena), Spanish (Ibsa I and Ibsa II), Costa Rican, and Iceland (Hvalur 6 and Hvalur 7).
Sea Shepherd intimidate and harass whaling fleets mostly by using stink bombs which are made from diluted butyric acid which some claim less acidic than citric acid and by disabling ships. They do not burn ship because they do not want to sink vessels full of chemicals in the pristine ocean water.
The lobbed acid sometimes did injured the crew members, because even though it is non-toxic but it is a corrosive chemical which can cause severe irritation and burns for eyes and skins, leading to permanent damage. Obviously, a slight irritation to the Japanese skins could result in unprecedented adverse effects.
One crew member namely Rodney Coronado, did used unregistered explosives, comitted arson, destructed government properties, and received the stolen properties (1993). His crime related to the Feb 29, 1992 fire bombing of Michigan State which destroyed 32 years of research dedicated to protect wild mink from pollution.
Sea Shepherd was almost awarded to the owner of Sierra (1979) to be converted as a whaling operation and the Captain was shot recently on March 08 but it is disputable somehow.
There will always be the case when non-violent acts of civil disobedience are categorized as terrorism when they substantially disrupt corporate profits or connected business.


We can label Sea Shepherd as “pirate to the whalers” or “pirate to the animal-based corporate profit”; we can label the whalers as “pirate to the ecosystem.” The whalers are doing good for the sake of economy; the Sea Shepherd are doing good for the sake of marine ecosystem (against poaching), and it had achieved in one year what 10 years of rhetoric and national posturing had failed to do.


This is why international treaties mean nothing when there's no means of enforcement, and why guys like us are kept gainfully employed, because at the end of the day, things get to a point where the impotent posturing has to end and someone has to settle things through the deliberate and carefully planned application of superior firepower and maneuver, and the UN's not going to do it.

I couldnt agree more.

Sonnabend
12-12-2008, 06:19 PM
We can label Sea Shepherd as “pirate to the whalers” or “pirate to the animal-based corporate profit”; we can label the whalers as “pirate to the ecosystem.”

Or we can label them pirates, because they commit acts of piracy as described in international maritime law. We can label them terrorists, because they use violence to further their means in direct violation of said international law.

Y'know what I'd love to see? The Japanese putting their military on their whalers, and opening fire on these bozos if they get into range. The message would be clear "keep away or else"

You treehuggers just dont get it do you...what the Japanese are doing is distasteful, yes, it is also legal.

What the Sea Shepherd is doing is illegal and has put lives in peril before. I dont give a rats ass what they think, the moment they use violence to further their goals? They're eco terrorists.

All your moral equivalence and handwringing wont change these basic facts.

Greenpeace also protests what the whalers are doing...yet they do so within the letter of the law. Seems pretty clear cut to me.


You would think it's funny. The Japanese are the true pirates in this but you'll never see it.

Aren't you due for your daily singalong of Kum Bay Yah?


Just because a group of men, the Japanese, have the flag of their nation to hide behind doesn't make what they do right.

There are laws that govern the passage of vessels in international waters.Those laws there there for a reason. The flag of the ship is a very good point..its called national soveriegnty, and it means when you stand of the deck of a Japanese ship, their ship, their flag, their territory, their law.

Do I need to remind you of what maritime law says of the powers of a ship's captain at sea?

He has the full and complete authority to order anyone who assaults his vessel to be captured, subdued and imprisoned as he may deem fit, and his orders have the full force of the law.

Hell, under laws that have not been repealed, he can have them keelhauled, flogged or if he so desires, thrown overboard. You do realise that if the Japanese decide to shoot whoever boards their vessel...that the world may be outraged, but there is jack shit they can do about it?

You support these people, I take it from that that you also support Earth First, ELF and other eco looney outfits?

M21
12-12-2008, 06:47 PM
Aren't you due for your daily singalong of Kum Bay Yah?
I actually prefer "He's got the whole world in His hands"

Take some time and ponder this;

The world God loves is being subjected to destructive use even while we debate how God made it. As we (seemingly) defend Creation by our words, we may find that we destroy it by our deeds. These are deeds of omission and commission.

A meditation by Abraham Kuyper on John 3:16 is helpful in this regard. He confesses with Scripture, "God loves the world. Of course not in its sinful strivings and unholy motions... But God loves the world for the sake of its origin; because God has thought it out; because God has created it; because God has maintained it and maintains it to this day."

Kuyper reminds us that "Not we have made the world, and thus in our sin we have not maltreated an art product of our own. No, that world was the contrivance, the work and the creation of the Lord our God. It was and is His world, which belonged to Him, which He had created for His glory, and for which we with that world were by Him appointed. Not to us did it belong, but to Him. It was His. And His divine world we have spoiled and corrupted. And herein roots the love of God, that He will repair and renew this world, His own creation, His own work of wisdom, His own work of art, which we have upset and broken, and polish it again to new lustre."

And he warns: "But the children of men meanwhile can fall out of that world. If they will not cease to corrupt His world, God can declare them unworthy of having any longer part in that world, and as once He banished them from Paradise, so at the last judgement He will banish them from this earth, and cast them out into the outermost darkness, where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And therefore whoever would be saved with that world, as God loves it, let him accept the Son, Whom God has given to that world, in order to save the world."

The scriptures, in their depiction of the last judgement, confirm dire consequences for the destroyers: "The time has come... for destroying those who destroy the earth" (Rev. 11:18). And so it is that we, are sitting in judgement, not fully cognizant of God's final judgement.

If God in his final judgement of your eternal soul asks you "What did you do with my Creation?"

What is your answer?

Sonnabend
12-12-2008, 06:58 PM
Here's my answer.

Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's.

Now you answer this.

You support these people, I take it from that that you also support Earth First, ELF and other eco looney outfits?

M21
12-13-2008, 02:11 AM
Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's.

....and unto God those things which are God's. I will continue to be a good steward of the gifts God has given me.

wiegenlied
12-13-2008, 04:51 AM
Anyhow, the international maritime law is the crux of the matter. The reality is that, the law will always be at the side of preserving the wealthy nations either it is injustice or not. Discussing this subject is as polemical as discussing global warming.

If the whale sashimi is pleasant-tasting and is an important nutrient for the Japanese; then probably it would be a good idea for the Japanese to catch a pair of minke whales and then breed them domestically for their own economic consumption. That way they aren’t reaping the ocean, our grandchildren would still be able to see whales, and then the Sea Shepherd would find a good enough reason to retire.

Sonnabend
12-13-2008, 05:41 AM
....and unto God those things which are God's. I will continue to be a good steward of the gifts God has given me...and you have continued to ignore the question i have asked you. Incidentally, M21. the render unto caesar? means you may worship God but obey the law.

Since when did Christ exhort his followers to use violence to achieve their ends?

That's the Koran, not the Bible.

M21
12-13-2008, 12:02 PM
..and you have continued to ignore the question i have asked you. Incidentally, M21. the render unto caesar? means you may worship God but obey the law.

Since when did Christ exhort his followers to use violence to achieve their ends?

That's the Koran, not the Bible.Because it's a condescending question that doesn't merit a serious answer? Kinda like name calling and labeling people terrorists when no Cesar you so adore has done so themselves. Why didn't YOUR Government arrest these terrorists? Why did YOUR Government allow these terrorists to buy fuel and provisions in YOUR country. Why did YOUR Countrymen sell them fuel and provisions. It seems that YOUR country aids, abets, and provides sanctuary to pirates.

Why do YOU support pirates and terrorists?

Not even a nice try. The simple solution is for you to send a message to the Japanese asking them to stop their un-Christ like violence.


95 Posts and 1500 reads. :cool:

lacarnut
12-13-2008, 01:03 PM
I watched a program on Animal Planet last night about whales and the Sea Shepard on the Steve Irwin vessel. I got the impression that these people are not only extremists but law breakers.

I am not a fan of whale hunting but I am also not a fan of ships being vandalized. After reading info. in Wikipedia, this group has a sordid past of criminal activity. Also, Greenpeace does not want anything to do with these outlaws.

nacho
12-13-2008, 02:50 PM
..and you have continued to ignore the question i have asked you. Incidentally, M21. the render unto caesar? means you may worship God but obey the law.

Since when did Christ exhort his followers to use violence to achieve their ends?

That's the Koran, not the Bible.

Some say you cannot commit violence against inanimate objects like ships. I'd call that vandalism, not violence.

By the way, were you using these arguments when the Iraq War started? And must all believers necessarily be pacifists?

Sonnabend
12-13-2008, 04:21 PM
Some say you cannot commit violence against inanimate objects like ships. I'd call that vandalism, not violence.Those ships have crews on them. Sink the ship and put the crew in peril. Damage the ship and put the crew in peril.

That settles that.


By the way, were you using these arguments when the Iraq War started?Straw man.Irrelevant. Next.


And must all believers necessarily be pacifists?Ya wanna break the law? Be prepared for the consequences.

Sonnabend
12-13-2008, 04:28 PM
Because it's a condescending question that doesn't merit a serious answer?Uh huh. Nice dodge.


Kinda like name calling and labeling people terrorists when no Cesar you so adore has done so themselves. I call em as I see them. You havent done anything to refute any of the facts I have brought to the table, the law I have quoted or the fact that they are eco terrorists.


Why didn't YOUR Government arrest these terrorists? On what charges? DUH. If they dont break the law here then they are free to go.


Why did YOUR Government allow these terrorists to buy fuel and provisions in YOUR country. Why did YOUR Countrymen sell them fuel and provisions. It seems that YOUR country aids, abets, and provides sanctuary to pirates.I'd like nothing better than to see them in prison and their ship on the bottom of the ocean. Unfortunately, the law that punishes them also protects them..and so long as they keep their noses clean in our national waters, we have nothing to arrest them for.

Yet.


Not even a nice try. The simple solution is for you to send a message to the Japanese asking them to stop their un-Christ like violence.Well,, seeing as the Japanese are Shinto and Buddhist, and not Christian, I'd say that even for you, that's the stupidest comment I have ever seen.

So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?

lacarnut
12-13-2008, 04:38 PM
Some say you cannot commit violence against inanimate objects like ships. I'd call that vandalism, not violence.



I agree with that but from what I saw on TV last night was the Sea Shepard's crew throwing objects at the crew on the Jap ship. I would call that violence plus that is a good way to get shot. The Captain of S.S stated that he would enjoy sinking the ship that they were pursing. If it sank, don't you think that there would be injuries or death in those frigid waters? Like I said I am no fan of whale hunting; Greenpeace does not want anything to do without outlaw outfit. That tells me a lot about their radical organization if they are on Greenpeace's shit list. A dumb broad crew member exclaimed that whales are more important than people. That is plain crazy. BTW, I have an environmental Lic. plate on my car which the state charges extra for.

M21
12-14-2008, 01:38 AM
Uh huh. Nice dodge. So why does your country support terrorists? Because by your own admission they aren't terrorists as defined by your government. Pretty simple and folks recognize it for what it is - name calling.



I call em as I see them. You havent done anything to refute any of the facts I have brought to the table, the law I have quoted or the fact that they are eco terrorists.

On what charges? DUH. If they dont break the law here then they are free to go.So they haven't broken your laws but should be arrested and their ship sent to the bottom? Great logic. Again try to keep your story straight. What facts? It's all opinion, bluster and smoke. Not very accomplished pirates and terrorists are they? "Free to go" if they don't break the law? Why would they be detained if they haven't broke the law?



I'd like nothing better than to see them in prison and their ship on the bottom of the ocean. Unfortunately, the law that punishes them also protects them..and so long as they keep their noses clean in our national waters, we have nothing to arrest them for. Hold on I thought you've over and over said this was all going on in International waters and therefore the Japanese have every right to do as they damn well please. Now you admit this is going on in your counties declared sanctuary that the Japanese refuse to recognize. They do this under the nose of your own Navy who is conspicuously absent in the face of pirates and "terrorists operating in your waters. I'm not sure if they are more afraid of the Steve Irwin, the Japanese commercial fleet, or the bad press.



Well,, seeing as the Japanese are Shinto and Buddhist, and not Christian, I'd say that even for you, that's the stupidest comment I have ever seen. Christianity and the Christian Church in Japan have been around since about 1908 and one to two million Japanese are Christians. Good grief.




So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?Oh look you INVENTED a new word. I'll take it as seriously as the others. Stamp your feet some more and maybe I'll give you an answer.

M21
12-14-2008, 01:53 AM
BTW, I have an environmental Lic. plate on my car which the state charges extra for.What do your politicians do with that money?

Sonnabend
12-14-2008, 05:39 AM
So why does your country support terrorists? Because by your own admission they aren't terrorists as defined by your government. Pretty simple and folks recognize it for what it is - name calling.Do you have trouble reading or are you just thick? My answer to that is in my last post.


Hold on I thought you've over and over said this was all going on in International waters and therefore the Japanese have every right to do as they damn well please.Correct.


Now you admit this is going on in your counties declared sanctuary that the Japanese refuse to recognize.Correct. They are not a signatory, hence the zone is not binding on them. A little thing called national sovereignty.


They do this under the nose of your own Navy who is conspicuously absent in the face of pirates and "terrorists operating in your waters. They are not in our waters.They are outside the national boundary. The zone is not recognised by the Japanese , hence does not affect them, hence the Japanese are free to do as they please. I see you haven't bothered to do any research, otherwise you'd know that the sanctuary in question is OUTSIDE our national borders. DUH.


I'm not sure if they are more afraid of the Steve Irwin, the Japanese commercial fleet, or the bad press.None of the above. And they care even less what you think.


Christianity and the Christian Church in Japan have been around since about 1908 and one to two million Japanese are Christians. Good grief.1908?? Man, you really have no idea, do you?

If you knew anything about Japan, you'd know that a Japanese is Shinto in the same way they are born Japanese, and that Japan was Buddhist and Shinto for uncounted centuries, before the Meiji Restoration.

Japan's history stretches back thousands of years, and it is a nation of many faiths. Christianity is by no means the majority..in fact it is in the minority.

Their faith and their beliefs go back to the first Emperor, and Japan was trading and was a seafaring race whilst Australia and the US were terra nullius.

Japanese care little for the opinion of gai-jin, and their memory is long, and their distrust of Europeans is rooted in an incident that still rankles. It involved Commodore Perry. Can you tell me what happened?


Oh look you INVENTED a new word. I'll take it as seriously as the others. Stamp your feet some more and maybe I'll give you an answer.Environazi? Has been around for decades, long before I was born.

I'll ask again

So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?

M21
12-14-2008, 01:17 PM
Sea Shepherd sets off to stop slaughter


A Sea Shepherd ship is on its way to intercept a Japanese whaling fleet in the Southern Ocean.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's Steve Irwin, with a crew of 40, has left Brisbane, Australia, for the Ross Sea, off Antarctica. <snip>



Captain Paul Watson, speaking from aboard the Steve Irwin this week, said he and his crew were confident about their mission to stop the whale slaughter in the Ross Sea.

He said that if the operation were successful it would take between two and three months

"We are under no illusion that this will be an easy campaign.

"Japan has budgeted $8 million (about R80 million) to oppose our efforts. What this means we have no idea.

<snip>

Watson said the Steve Irwin had been "improved substantially" since its last sortie against the Japanese whalers earlier this year.

"We have a newly constructed helicopter deck and hangar, a completely overhauled helicopter, our very experienced [former US Marine] pilot and two new fast interceptor boats. <snip>


The crew includes a master welder, a master carpenter, experienced engineers and qualified divers.

Also aboard is an eight-man team from the satellite TV channel Discovery, which is filming the second season of "the Whale Wars" for the Animal Planet show.

Crew members are from Australia, America, Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Bermuda, New Zealand, South Africa, Sweden, Hungary and Japan. About half of them are women.<snip>


"The key to success with the Japanese whalers is persistence. We must never retreat or surrender the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary to them.

"We must continue to undermine their profits and expose their illegal activities to the world."

Watson is the founder and president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, and a co-founder of the Greenpeace Foundation and Greenpeace International.

LINK TO FULL STORY (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=143&art_id=vn20081214084620137C146236)

nacho
12-14-2008, 04:51 PM
That tells me a lot about their radical organization if they are on Greenpeace's shit list.

From what I can see, Greenpeace collects a ton of money to go down there and hold up signs. They did the same this year but didn't even bother sending a ship. Maybe they've given up the pretense and realized they can hold up signs anywhere. Sea Shepherd competes with them for donations and actually does something in return plus there's personal bad blood between Watson and them.

Sonnabend
12-14-2008, 05:06 PM
So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?

lacarnut
12-15-2008, 12:09 PM
What do your politicians do with that money?

Your ignorance is showing. I support environmental causes; I don't support vandalism.

PoliCon
12-15-2008, 02:30 PM
Your ignorance is showing. I support environmental causes; I don't support vandalism. and do you support humanitarian causes with equal or greater fervor? Trouble with most environmental causes is that they are invariably anti-human being causes.

M21
12-16-2008, 02:35 PM
From what I can see, Greenpeace collects a ton of money to go down there and hold up signs. They did the same this year but didn't even bother sending a ship. Maybe they've given up the pretense and realized they can hold up signs anywhere. Sea Shepherd competes with them for donations and actually does something in return plus there's personal bad blood between Watson and them.

That's what Greenpeace does. They see a woman being raped and they take pictures and lobby to make rape illegal....er. See a puppy being kicked? Take pictures so people know how disgusting kicking puppies is.

I see why Paul Watson a co-founder of Greenpeace went his own way.

Sonnabend
12-16-2008, 02:39 PM
So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?

PoliCon
12-16-2008, 03:34 PM
That's what Greenpeace does. They see a woman being raped and they take pictures and lobby to make rape illegal....er. She a puppy being kicked? Take pictures so people know how disgusting kicking puppies is.

I see why Paul Watson a co-founder of Greenpeace went his own way. A PUPPY is not a human being. It does not have a soul. It is ONLY an animal. It was NOT made in the image and likeness of God. Compairing kicking a puppy to rape shows me how far from reality the whole animal rights movement are. :mad:

M21
12-16-2008, 04:23 PM
Your ignorance is showing. I support environmental causes; I don't support vandalism.I simply asked what your state does with the money to protect the environment from your vanity plates.

M21
12-16-2008, 04:58 PM
A PUPPY is not a human being. It does not have a soul. It is ONLY an animal. It was NOT made in the image and likeness of God. Compairing kicking a puppy to rape shows me how far from reality the whole animal rights movement are. :mad:
Don't read too much into it. :cool:

M21
12-16-2008, 05:00 PM
Trouble with most environmental causes is that they are invariably anti-human being causes.How is that?

PoliCon
12-16-2008, 05:07 PM
How is that? Take the anti DDT campaign for example. Not only have the claims about DDT been proven false - but because it has been banned - Malaria which had almost been completely wiped out is killing people by the thousands.

Odysseus
12-18-2008, 09:27 PM
Okay, it's really on now!:D
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/get_galleryfile.asp?idOLG={7409C028-0F9A-4302-8FFD-

M21
12-19-2008, 12:21 AM
Take the anti DDT campaign for example. Not only have the claims about DDT been proven false - but because it has been banned - Malaria which had almost been completely wiped out is killing people by the thousands.

I thought that had more to do with DDT resistance development within mosquitoes in those nations where DDT is still used. Just a different way of looking at the problem. Birds eat mosquitoes and DDT kills birds so we need more DDT to kill more....

Sonnabend
12-19-2008, 05:30 AM
So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?

I'm going to keep asking.

PoliCon
12-19-2008, 11:13 PM
I thought that had more to do with DDT resistance development within mosquitoes in those nations where DDT is still used. Just a different way of looking at the problem. Birds eat mosquitoes and DDT kills birds so we need more DDT to kill more.... does it? What evidence is there that DDT kills birds?
http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm#ref10 This site shows evidence that populations of birds increased when DDT was in use. The Malaria clock demonstrates how anti-human environmentalism is. http://junkscience.com/malaria_clock.html

M21
12-20-2008, 12:03 AM
does it? What evidence is there that DDT kills birds?
http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm#ref10 This site shows evidence that populations of birds increased when DDT was in use. The Malaria clock demonstrates how anti-human environmentalism is. http://junkscience.com/malaria_clock.html

Here's what I know Policon. The US Government was convinced by their science conducted that the environmental damage from DDT was greater than the compound's possible benefits, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency banned the use of DDT in the United States in 1973. In December 2000, in a convention organized by the United Nations Environment Program, 122 nations agreed to a treaty banning twelve very toxic chemicals. Included among the twelve was DDT.

We could argue back and forth about studies and acceptable sources for several more pages. You also know that DDT is still used for vector control in developing countries to control malaria.

PoliCon
12-20-2008, 12:12 AM
Here's what I know Policon. The US Government was convinced by their science conducted that the environmental damage from DDT was greater than the compound's possible benefits, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency banned the use of DDT in the United States in 1973. In December 2000, in a convention organized by the United Nations Environment Program, 122 nations agreed to a treaty banning twelve very toxic chemicals. Included among the twelve was DDT.

We could argue back and forth about studies and acceptable sources for several more pages. You also know that DDT is still used for vector control in developing countries to control malaria. Dude - read the report I linked to. It's all based on Junk science. Environmentalism is anti-human. You might also find - http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr50/en/index.html - interesting.

Sonnabend
12-20-2008, 12:52 AM
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/african-nations-lift-ddt-ban-to-fight-malaria/2006/05/30/1148956344979.html

THE pesticide DDT is making a comeback in Africa.

Concerns over environmental damage led to a ban on the pesticide in the United States in 1972 and later in many parts of the world, including several African countries.

But now some leaders in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania say the ability of the chemical, whose full name is dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, to kill mosquitoes is their last hope to stem the continent's number one killer: malaria.

Malaria kills 1 million Africans a year, and the toll is rising. One African child dies every 30 seconds from malaria, three times the toll from AIDS.

"DDT is the answer to our problems," said Dr John Rwakimari, head of the national malaria program in Uganda, where malaria rates have increased five-fold in 15 years. "We must do something."

European Union officials recently warned Uganda that it would be "taking a risk" if it reintroduced DDT.

In Kenya, flower growers say Western supermarkets are wary of the chemical, putting the nation's $US400 million ($A528 million) horticulture industry at risk. Kenya is the top supplier of fresh-cut flowers to the EU.

But African officials complain of hypocrisy on the part of Westerners, who used DDT to eradicate their own malaria problems decades ago and now push Africa to rely on harder-to-implement methods such as mosquito nets.

"The human cost of the Western policies is very high," said economist James Shikwat, director of the Inter Region Economic Network in Nairobi.

Mr Shikwat said that in addition to the human toll, malaria cost Africa $US12 billion a year in lost gross national product and absorbed more than 20 per cent of health-care costs in some countries.

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni said his country would proceed with DDT spraying, despite the EU warning.

"Why should we look on and watch our people die when it is within our means to make a difference?" Mr Museveni said during a speech in April on Africa Malaria Day.

The US has re-evaluated its stance, with the Bush Administration saying recently that the Agency for International Development would provide money for spraying this year as part of its $US99 million anti-malaria program.

DDT projects funded by USAID are expected to begin this year in Ethiopia, Zambia and Mozambique, according to Richard Greene, director of the agency's Office of Health, Infectious Diseases and Nutrition in Washington. Funding is also available to five other countries, including Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, he said.

The Stockholm Convention, a global treaty signed in 2001, called for the eventual elimination of DDT worldwide, but it also permitted some countries to continue using the chemical under certain circumstances to combat malaria.

Several African countries have had DDT-spraying programs in recent years with impressive results. South Africa, which reintroduced DDT in 2003 after a seven-year ban, had an 80 per cent reduction in malaria rates.

But environmentalists worry about the long-term effect.

"Bringing back DDT would be a disaster," said Hassan Ali, a department head at Kenya's International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology. "It's taken the US 30 years to recover from its widespread use."

Studies suggest DDT can seep into water and streams and remain in soil for up to 15 years. It has been detected in fish and birds, threatening the food chain.

DDT was developed into a pesticide during World War II by Swiss chemist Paul Hermann Mueller, who won a Nobel Prize for helping to save more than 500 million lives.

Whether DDT is harmful to humans is hotly debated, and there is no conclusive evidence on either side, experts say.

PoliCon
12-20-2008, 12:56 AM
Whether DDT is harmful to humans is hotly debated, and there is no conclusive evidence on either side, experts say.Perhaps - but there is plenty of conclusive evidence that malaria*** IS*** harmful to humans and that DDT *** IS*** harmful to Malaria.

Sonnabend
12-20-2008, 04:23 AM
Perhaps - but there is plenty of conclusive evidence that malaria*** IS*** harmful to humans and that DDT *** IS*** harmful to Malaria.

Policon, I could not agree more.

M21
12-20-2008, 12:40 PM
Perhaps - but there is plenty of conclusive evidence that malaria*** IS*** harmful to humans and that DDT *** IS*** harmful to Malaria.

You remember Love Canal? (http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm)

One of the chemicals buried there by Hooker Chemical was DDT.

FlaGator
12-20-2008, 12:56 PM
You remember Love Canal? (http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm)

One of the chemicals buried there by Hooker Chemical was DDT.

There is evidence accumulating that the hazards of DDT where greatly exaggerated. BTW DDT wasn't banned because of it being dangerous to humans. It was banned because it was believed to have adverse effects on wildlife, particularly birds. It was thought to cause the shells of bird eggs to be abnormally thin and thus not viable in the wild. If I remember this correctly, it was blamed for the decline in bald eagles. Keep in mind that I'm citing this from memory because I'm too lazy to look it up.

M21
12-20-2008, 01:15 PM
There is evidence accumulating that the hazards of DDT where greatly exaggerated. BTW DDT wasn't banned because of it being dangerous to humans. It was banned because it was believed to have adverse effects on wildlife, particularly birds. It was thought to cause the shells of bird eggs to be abnormally thin and thus not viable in the wild. If I remember this correctly, it was blamed for the decline in bald eagles. Keep in mind that I'm citing this from memory because I'm too lazy to look it up.


You're right. If I spray an Apple with DDT will you eat it?

PoliCon
12-20-2008, 02:52 PM
You remember Love Canal? (http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm)

One of the chemicals buried there by Hooker Chemical was DDT.and? that makes it harmful?

wiegenlied
12-20-2008, 03:33 PM
The campaign was finally abandoned in 1969, its collapse traceable to three main causes: the onset of mosquito resistance to DDT, the insuperable logistics of indoor spraying in endemic areas, and a dawning awareness that DDT was toxic to more than just mosquitoes and other pesky arthropods.


Resistance to DDT was first detected in Italy, in houseflies, in 1947


Environmentalists' objections to DDT, Berenbaum said, were just one piece of an intricate puzzle. In a 2005 Washington Post article that discussed mosquito resistance to DDT, she warned: "Overselling a chemical's capacity to solve a problem can do irretrievable harm not only by raising false hopes but by delaying the use of more effective long-term methods."


DDT kills by attacking a mosquito's nervous system. But in any given population, a random smattering of individuals will have a genetic mutation that renders them resistant to certain toxins. At first the number is insignificant, but over time it will grow until the only mosquitoes that continue to breed will be resistant ones.


ICIPE physician Patrick Sawa acknowledged that "DDT is a cheap and effective method of controlling malaria, with the capacity to drastically reduce infection rates." Initially.


Born in 1961, Saoke grew up in an area near Mbita that used to be "fumigated," as he put it. Through the 1960s and 1970s DDT periodically rained down to control agricultural pests and to combat mosquitoes, ticks, and tsetse flies. Saoke and his boyhood pals would often peel off their clothes to swim in Lake Victoria, and as they grew older they dared one another to leap off a high, rocky ledge into the water. Some of the kids were afraid to jump. So, in a kind of rough-and-tumble, let's-see-what-you're-made-of scramble, they would reach between one another's legs to check. Lo and behold, Saoke recalled to the group of fidgeting dignitaries, by this crude measure a number of the boys were not made of much. His serious point: according to a growing body of evidence, cryptorchidism -- undescended testes -- and other genital malformations can result from in utero exposure to DDT.


His particular concern is that the international chemicals industry and its promoters are using the millions of African babies they claim DDT can save as a "human shield" behind which to begin rehabilitating an industry with a long history of lousy PR.


In the end, Saoke concedes, it was not concern about the health effects of DDT that carried the day; it was fears about lost trade. The European Union tests agricultural imports for traces of banned chemicals, and it refuses goods that test positive. DDT was not being considered for agricultural use, but wind and water can carry the stuff; moreover, in Kenya, as in most African countries, once the chemical is in distribution it is nearly impossible to monitor and control the manner in which it's deployed (a vexing problem for the Stockholm Convention). The Kenyan government was not about to adopt a policy that could threaten exports. This was fine with Saoke, but it is the health issues that consume him.


A growing number of peer-reviewed studies suggest links between DDT exposure and a range of ills, such as breast and liver cancer, neurological and developmental abnormalities, and a variety of hormonal effects. Some of these conditions may not manifest themselves for years, but others may take a more immediate toll.


DDT can interfere with the feedback loop in the pituitary gland, which releases the milk-producing hormone prolactin. Studies show that exposure to DDT at critical points in pregnancy or just after childbirth can reduce the output of breast milk, or even dry it up. In such instances the mother will turn to formula, which is expensive.And in Africa formula feeding often leads to another death sentence for babies: diarrhea (infants have no immunity to the microbes that abound in contaminated drinking water throughout much of the continent). Here, then, exposure to DDT may cause as swift and bleak an outcome as exposure to a mosquito.


Many of today's DDT promoters concede that the toxin cannot eliminate malaria all by itself. They endorse the idea of Integrated Vector Management (IVM), which combines indoor house spraying with bed nets, larvicides, and whatever other control measures may be applicable in a given area. But they insist that DDT can and should be part of a comprehensive, multifaceted response.


They correctly point out that the amount of DDT necessary to keep mosquitoes from biting inside a house is far less than the amount required for agricultural pest control. However, according to Gina Solomon, associate clinical professor of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco and a senior scientist with NRDC, "There's not much reassurance in that argument. These applications occur where people live and therefore involve direct human exposures, so there's still a human health concern." Moreover, she says, "Hormone concentrations are minuscule, by definition. That's the entire point." Hormones are chemical signals released by glands at varying intervals to initiate and modulate an organism's development, and there is compelling evidence that DDT and its metabolite DDE can interfere with that delicate process. Encountered at the wrong time, at a critical moment in the growth of a fetus or a baby, the smallest amount may disrupt the messages that hormones exist to convey


In Africa, airtight longitudinal health studies of any kind are extremely difficult to execute, given the continent's ramshackle health care infrastructure, its migratory populations, and the sheer multiplicity of medical issues that challenge any long-term attempt to isolate and track the factors involved in disease. But a crowded spectrum of reports, studies, and anecdotes like Paul Saoke's link DDT exposure to low birth weight, increased miscarriages, impaired neural development in children, low sperm count in men, and a long list of other ailments.


Parable can be found in the events that finally routed malaria in the United States. By the early twentieth century, the disease had been eliminated everywhere except in the deep South, where the climate was warm and wet and many of the people were poor. Cash-strapped local governments had been unwilling or unable to fund malaria programs, but during World War I heads were turned by the army's successful mosquito-elimination campaigns at arsenals and bases in the South. When the war was over, and with assistance from the Rockefeller Foundation, municipal governments revved up their own programs. Two essential tactics were to drain swamps and to install screens in windows and doors. Even through the Depression, FDR's Works Progress Administration dug thousands of miles of ditches and drained hundreds of thousands of swampy acres. Quinine (the drug of choice back then), combined with greater prosperity and education, delivered the final blow. Some historians assert that DDT rescued the American South from malaria, but the spraying campaigns of the 1950s merely ran up the score on a game that had already been decided.

Source: http://www.onearth.org/article/bad-blood

Hm, Im going to face alot of oppositions soon but I personally simply think if I'm ever going to own a business, I'll avoid owning both DDT and whale factories.

wiegenlied
12-20-2008, 03:41 PM
Perhaps - but there is plenty of conclusive evidence that malaria*** IS*** harmful to humans and that DDT *** IS*** harmful to Malaria.

But why I couldn't find any conclusive evidences that Sea Shepherd is anti-human? I knew they spray acid (which I dont agree) and board ships.

wiegenlied
12-20-2008, 04:02 PM
does it? What evidence is there that DDT kills birds?

"DDT was a major reason for the decline of the bald eagle in North America in the 1950s and 1960s as well as the brown pelican and the peregrine falcon. DDT and its breakdown products are toxic to embryos and disrupts calcium absorption, thereby impairing eggshell quality."

Source 1 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17588911)
Source 2 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=9410&dbname=2008_register)

Do rebuke me if Im wrong, Sir.

Sonnabend
12-20-2008, 05:02 PM
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24830137-401,00.html

THE Sea Shepherd anti-whaling group says it has the Japanese whaling fleet on the run, after intercepting a harpoon vessel in Australian Antarctic waters.

The anti-whaling ship Steve Irwin, led by Captain Paul Watson, intercepted the Japanese harpoon vessel Yushin Maru 2 in the Australian Antarctic Economic Exclusion Zone at 10.45pm AEDT, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society said in a statement.

"We've got them on the run. They are not in the Ross Sea where they said they would be. They are in Australian waters,'' Capt Watson said.Uh no, Captain Liar, the Zone is not recognised as Australian waters, it is a zone signed by Australia and not by Japan, hence it does not apply to them.

Try telling the truth once in a while.


Capt Watson said the Steve Irwin was now in pursuit of the Yushin Maru 2. "They have ceased whaling operations and they are now running from the Sea Shepherd crew,'' Capt Watson said.That's your story.


"If we can keep it on the run or shut down there's no whaling.''He called on the Federal Government to order the whalers to stop the hunt.The Federal Government would prefer to stay as far away from you as is possible.


"The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is officially calling on Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett and Foreign Minister Stephen Smith to order the Japanese fleet to comply with the orders of the Australian Federal Court and to cease and desist from killing whales in Australian waters,'' he said.The Court has zero influence on an agreement to which Japan is not a signatory. Call on them all you like, you'll get silence in return.


During Saturday's encounter, Steve Irwin crew members attempted to throw rotten butter bombs at the Japanese vessel from a small boat, but blizzard conditions forced them back.Ah, such peaceful means.


"The winds were up to 45 to 50 knots and the waves got big and there were extremely hazardous conditions, so we called the boat back from doing that,'' Capt Watson said.

Capt Watson said his crew also planned to throw methylcellulose - a substance used as a gelling agent and a laxative - at the Japanese vessels.

"I call it an organic, non-toxic biodegradable form of chemical warfare,'' Capt Watson said.Oh, how sweet....an environmentalist who has found a new justification for the use of what he terms "chemical weapons". My, the hypocrisy is stunning, isn't it?

Would he be singing the same tune if the Japanese decided to use the same tactics?...and I don't think we'd like the yowling and weeping from our resident treehugger.


"I think this will have a significant impact on their quota and on their profits.''He remained scathing of the federal government's call for calm in the situation.

A joint statement from Foreign Minister Stephen Smith and Environment Minister Peter Garret was made on the matter earlier this month.

"We call upon all parties to exercise restraint and to ensure that safety at sea is the highest priority,'' the statement read.Watson would not blink at the chance to sink one of the whalers and kill the crew...all to save the whales.

Paul Watson, eco terrorist.

PoliCon
12-20-2008, 06:37 PM
"DDT was a major reason for the decline of the bald eagle in North America in the 1950s and 1960s as well as the brown pelican and the peregrine falcon. DDT and its breakdown products are toxic to embryos and disrupts calcium absorption, thereby impairing eggshell quality."

Source 1 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17588911)
Source 2 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=9410&dbname=2008_register)

Do rebuke me if Im wrong, Sir.I already linked to a website with documentation that refutes these claims. Silent Spring and all the research based off it and for it were and are bullshit phony crap made up by an enviroweenie and sold to the public by MSM hysteria. ANOTHER prime example is the addition of the polar bear to endangered species status. THEIR POPULATIONS HAVE SKY ROCKETED! lol. Another example - the ecoweenies and their protests of the Alaska pipeline which they claim was going to decimate caribou populations - it hasn't. It's caused a BOOM in their populations.

Sonnabend
12-20-2008, 06:56 PM
So, tell me M21, do you support ELF and other environazi groups?

M21
12-21-2008, 12:34 AM
I already linked to a website with documentation that refutes these claims. Silent Spring and all the research based off it and for it were and are bullshit phony crap made up by an enviroweenie and sold to the public by MSM hysteria. ANOTHER prime example is the addition of the polar bear to endangered species status. THEIR POPULATIONS HAVE SKY ROCKETED! lol. Another example - the ecoweenies and their protests of the Alaska pipeline which they claim was going to decimate caribou populations - it hasn't. It's caused a BOOM in their populations.

Monsanto didn't think it was BS. They had a meeting of their highest executives and spent big money trying to completely destroy her life. They were that scared of one little lady and her book.

You remember Monsanto? The same outstanding corporate citizens who brought us Agent Orange. These are the same guys who continue to refuse compensation to Veterans and families for exposure to the toxic chemical.

You can still see the aircraft that were used in Operation Ranch Hand at the Davis Monthan AFB boneyard. They are quarantined and have been since after the Vietnam War.

So let's get back to that apple. If I spray an apple with DDT will you eat it?

M21
12-21-2008, 12:50 AM
Would he be singing the same tune if the Japanese decided to use the same tactics?...and I don't think we'd like the yowling and weeping from our resident treehugger.


The poachers have been throwing live explosives at the Sea Sheperd for years. It doesn't bother me in the least and who would expect different from the Yakuza? What comes around goes around.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ipVAf5QPO4

BTW - At Chrch tonight we sang;

Joy to the world, the Lord is come!
Let earth receive her King;
Let every heart prepare Him room,
And heaven and nature sing, :D

We win!

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 03:23 AM
I already planned to post this a while back

http://www.whale-images.com/data/media/2/funny_killer_whales.jpg

Merry Christmas for PoliCon and Sonna from the whales!

Sonnabend
12-21-2008, 04:13 AM
The poachers have been throwing live explosives at the Sea Sheperd for years.The whalers have every right to defend their ship from PIRATES. I also note that the SS came within less than a few feet of the Japanese ship, which is in itself a violation of the laws of sea traffic.

Foreign flag ship / foreign territory / any close approach with hostile intent merits immediate defensive measures.

They have every right to use any measure they wish, up to and including using the harpoon on Watsons ship. Yakuza don't wear uniforms, you dolt.

If you wanted sympathy, sorry, wrong window. You dont get it, do you?

Watson is the criminal here, regardless of his intent, he is breaking the law, placing lives in peril, and the Japanese have every right to self defence.

Here's a cold hard fact for you. If one person is injured, if one is killed, it's MURDER on the high seas...the penalty for which is laid down under Japanese law.


What comes around goes around. As Paul Watson found out to his regret.

The law is on the side of the whalers. If you have an issue, go whine to the UN.

So tell me, M21, do you also support ELF and other environazi groups?

LC EFA
12-21-2008, 05:06 AM
How is the sea-sheperd any diffrent to the pirates operating in the gulf of Aden , except in their degree of success ?

djones520
12-21-2008, 05:15 AM
How is the sea-sheperd any diffrent to the pirates operating in the gulf of Aden , except in their degree of success ?

The Somali's don't have camera crews from the Animal Planet cheering them on? :rolleyes:

djones520
12-21-2008, 05:44 AM
I haven't watched the show, but these are some episode descriptions on Wiki.


Giles Lane and Benjamin "Pottsy" Potts volunteer to board the Japanese whale catcher Yushin Maru № 2 without permission and were temporarily detained on the ship by the whaling crew. The incident received immediate attention from the international media. The MV Steve Irwin radios the Australian Federal Police under a charge of kidnapping, even though Lane and Potts boarded the vessel voluntarily and without permission.

Sounds like a clear cut case of Piracy to me.


Without negotiation and confrontation with the MV Steve Irwin, the Yushin Maru № 2 agreed to transfer Pottsy and Giles to a government ship that would then meet with the Steve Irwin at a rendevous point to return the two members. A leader decides to launch an attack on the Yushin Maru № 2 at dusk. Four crewmembers are sent on the Zodiac inflatable boat Delta to carry out the risky mission. After losing radio contact with them, recon pilot Chris Aultman, who was sent too late to survey the situation, reports that they are heading in the wrong direction and must return as night falls. The lone Delta was feared to be forever lost out in the middle of the dark, frigid, vast Antarctic Ocean. Fortunately, contact was finally made with Delta, which eventually returns to the MV Steve Irwin over two hours later and behind schedule to retrieve Pottsy and Giles.

Uh huh...


Giles Lane and Ben Potts safely return to the MV Steve Irwin. The crew then discovers that an unknown ship, which was allegedly spying for the Japanese whaling fleet, has been following them, decides to recon it from behind a tabletop iceberg for any military personel aboard, and temporarily drives it away after seeing no sign of illegal military activity. The crew later plans to ambush the mystery ship, soon identified as the Fukuyoshi № 68, to prevent information about the Steve Irwin's whereabouts from being given to the rest of the whaling fleet. They plan to do this by boarding the vessel and sabotaging its communication equipment, shutting off any communication with anyone. Before the mission, a hydraulic crane used to launch the motor rafts somehow got damaged, jeopardizing the Sea Shepherd's mission.

So they plan on attacking the ship, and then destroy it's communication equipment. And what if the ship was then damaged due to stormy weather or something? I also love how they only worked up the courage to do this after learning that the ship wasn't protected.


After noticing that the spy ship Fukuyoshi Maru № 68 has found and followed the Steve Irwin again, Captain Watson unsuccessfully attempts to send four female crewmembers to board the vessel to deliver a warrant. This leads to a man's injured thumb and a woman's injured pelvis. At dusk, the entire ship experiences a power outage, leaving it drifting through an iceberg field without operating engines.

They again attempt to illegally board a Japanese ship.

Tell me how these people are not pirates? :rolleyes:

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 06:23 AM
How is the sea-sheperd any diffrent to the pirates operating in the gulf of Aden , except in their degree of success ?

Aren’t the pirates in the gulf of Aden robbing merchant ships and oils, while the Sea Shepherd is protecting the whales? They are robbing ships for their own profits, asking ransom money for their own benefits. Plus, those pirates equip themselves with AK-47s, machine guns, and rocket-propelled grenade launchers which obviously are more dangerous than acid? If they aren’t given money, then they’re going to sink the ship which is full-of-oil adding more oil pollution into the sea. Plus, they are disrupting international oil and trade shipments, and there is a suspicion that they are using this money to support the enrichment of extremist muslim.

Sea Shepherd don’t ask for ransom money, do they? Their actions were triggered by the ineffective enforcement of international whale treaties because it will disrupt the interest of nations whose economies lie primarily on fishing.

LC EFA
12-21-2008, 06:27 AM
Aren’t the pirates in the gulf of Aden robbing merchant ships and oils, while the Sea Shepherd is protecting the whales? They are robbing ships for their own profits, asking ransom money for their own benefits. Plus, those pirates equip themselves with AK-47s, machine guns, and rocket-propelled grenade launchers which obviously are more dangerous than acid? If they aren’t given money, then they’re going to sink the ship which is full-of-oil adding more oil pollution into the sea. Plus, they are disrupting international oil and trade shipments, and there is a suspicion that they are using this money to support the enrichment of extremist muslim.

Sea Shepherd don’t ask for ransom money, do they? Their actions were triggered by the ineffective enforcement of international whale treaties because it will disrupt the interest of nations whose economies lie primarily on fishing.

Their motives and equipment are irrelevant.

They both demand that they're given what they want through illegal use of force and intimidation.

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 06:28 AM
I haven't watched the show, but these are some episode descriptions on Wiki.
Sounds like a clear cut case of Piracy to me.
Uh huh...
So they plan on attacking the ship, and then destroy it's communication equipment. And what if the ship was then damaged due to stormy weather or something? I also love how they only worked up the courage to do this after learning that the ship wasn't protected.
They again attempt to illegally board a Japanese ship.
Tell me how these people are not pirates? :rolleyes:

They are pirates but they aren't harming ppl's life just simply to save the whales. They will always be pirates until the international treaties of not hunting whales can be enforced or until the Japanese is willing to breed a couple of minke whales to fulfill their domestic economic interests.

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 06:36 AM
Their motives and equipment are irrelevant.
They both demand that they're given what they want through illegal use of force and intimidation.

Because it is difficult to make the whale protection to be legal. Japanese, Iceland and Norway will always oppose it no matter what. If waiting until these nations are willing to compromise, how if all whales are gone?

Actually, if organizations such as Greenpeace is effective enough, there is no need for things such as Sea Shepherd to exist.

djones520
12-21-2008, 06:44 AM
Because it is difficult to make the whale protection to be legal. Japanese, Iceland and Norway will always oppose it no matter what. If waiting until these nations are willing to compromise, how if all whales are gone?

Actually, if organizations such as Greenpeace is effective enough, there is no need for things such as Sea Shepherd to exist.

The Japanese are not going to hunt the whales into extinction. They primarily hunt a species of whale that isn't even considered threatened, and who even with their hunting still have a 3% population growth.

There are legal means to attempt to force the Japanese government to agree to adhere to the rest of the world on these matters. Throwing acid bombs, sabatoging ships, and attempting to get your crew members killed for international "sympathy" is only going to make you look worse. The crew of the Sea Shepherd deserve to be in jail, plain and simple.

LC EFA
12-21-2008, 06:48 AM
Because it is difficult to make the whale protection to be legal. Japanese, Iceland and Norway will always oppose it no matter what. If waiting until these nations are willing to compromise, how if all whales are gone?

What's your point ?

The sea-sheppard engages in illegal use of force and intimidation tactics, their goal being to force the imposition of their will. I'd add that they also make sure that every breech of law by the enemy is procecuted to the fullest ecxtent of law available.

They and their supporters are no better then the pirates that operate in the Gulf of Aden.

FWIW , I don't agree completely with the hunting of whales , but the actions of the sea sheppard are inexcusable. Their methods are not the way to go about it.

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 07:09 AM
What's your point ?

The sea-sheppard engages in illegal use of force and intimidation tactics, their goal being to force the imposition of their will. I'd add that they also make sure that every breech of law by the enemy is procecuted to the fullest ecxtent of law available.

They and their supporters are no better then the pirates that operate in the Gulf of Aden.

FWIW , I don't agree completely with the hunting of whales , but the actions of the sea sheppard are inexcusable. Their methods are not the way to go about it.

Even if the crews now are jailed, once they are freed, they will still continue their activities. So, in my opinion, jailing them is a short-term solution but not long-term solution.

That’s why the diplomat should be skillful to handle this matter. The sooner they can negotiate fair terms with the Japanese, the sooner Sea Shepherd can stop their activities.

djones520
12-21-2008, 07:14 AM
Even if the crews now are jailed, once they are freed, they will still continue their activities. So, in my opinion, jailing them is a short-term solution but not long-term solution.

That’s why the diplomat should be skillful to handle this matter. The sooner they can negotiate fair terms with the Japanese, the sooner Sea Shepherd can stop their activities.

So we should just let the terrorist/pirates continue to do what their doing, because we can't stop them forever?

LC EFA
12-21-2008, 07:29 AM
Even if the crews now are jailed, once they are freed, they will still continue their activities. So, in my opinion, jailing them is a short-term solution but not long-term solution.

That’s why the diplomat should be skillful to handle this matter. The sooner they can negotiate fair terms with the Japanese, the sooner Sea Shepherd can stop their activities.

Now apply that same logic to any other criminal. Let's not bother to punish them them as they're possibly going to reoffend.

Negotiating with Japan on "fair terms" in this case doesn't mean "force them to do as we say". There must be compromise.

Sonnabend
12-21-2008, 08:04 AM
If the Japanese use armed force to prevent illegal boarding, then there is jack shit anyone can do to stop them.

International law states that a ship's Captain has broad ranging powers...and if they retaliate with armed force against illegal boarders hurling bombs....too bad.

The corollary here is if you don't want to get shot breaking into a persons home...don't break in.

M21
12-21-2008, 12:06 PM
The Japanese are not going to hunt the whales into extinction. Man you did drink their kool-aid.



There are legal means to attempt to force the Japanese government to agree to adhere to the rest of the world on these matters. Rats are poor guards for cheese.

M21
12-21-2008, 12:11 PM
How is the sea-sheperd any diffrent to the pirates operating in the gulf of Aden , except in their degree of success ?

S: (n) piracy, buccaneering: (hijacking on the high seas or in similar contexts; taking a ship or plane away from the control of those who are legally entitled to it) "air piracy"

There has to be a "taking" Here there is no "taking" or any attempt to "take." from the poachers.

M21
12-21-2008, 12:18 PM
So we should just let the terrorist/pirates continue to do what their doing, because we can't stop them forever?
Are you a Japanese poacher :confused: What's your interest in the protection of the Japanese whaling fleet? I know you don't care what happens to the Steve Irwin and their crew. Maybe you'll get lucky and the Japanese will sink their ship and kill them all.

Nobody stepping up to eat the apple sprayed with DDT yet?

M21
12-21-2008, 12:22 PM
Because it is difficult to make the whale protection to be legal. Japanese, Iceland and Norway will always oppose it no matter what. If waiting until these nations are willing to compromise, how if all whales are gone?

Actually, if organizations such as Greenpeace is effective enough, there is no need for things such as Sea Shepherd to exist.

In addition the Japanese BUY votes from member nations who have no stake in whaling. The vote buying is used to prop up many small undeveloped nations tourism industries.

lacarnut
12-21-2008, 01:09 PM
Are you a Japanese poacher :confused: What's your interest in the protection of the Japanese whaling fleet? I know you don't care what happens to the Steve Irwin and their crew. Maybe you'll get lucky and the Japanese will sink their ship and kill them all.

Nobody stepping up to eat the apple sprayed with DDT yet?

You are the one drinking the kool-aid. The Captian of the S.I. stated on Animal Planet he would like to sink the ship that processes the whales. One of the female crew members stated that whales are more important than people. These are statements made on TV. FYI, this band of radical nuts have engaged in sinking ships and vandalism. Their crew members have been tried and convicted of criminal activity. Read Wikipedia.

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 01:25 PM
In addition the Japanese BUY votes from member nations who have no stake in whaling. The vote buying is used to prop up many small undeveloped nations tourism industries.

This statement is supported by an article here (http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/japan-buys-votes-to-take-control-of-whaling-body-482351.html)


At this year's meeting in St Kitts and Nevis in the West Indies, there is likely to be no such slip-up. Japan has persuaded three more small nations - Guatemala, Cambodia and the Marshall Islands - to join the IWC as its voting allies. Their applications for membership are being processed by the State Department in the United States, which is the "depository nation" for the IWC, as the treaty setting up the commission was signed in America.

After their membership is confirmed, there will be 37 member states likely to vote with Japan and 30 on the anti-whaling side. The anti-whaling states, led by Britain, the US, Australia and New Zealand, and known in the IWC as the "like-minded" nations, have tried in the past few months to organise a counter-offensive. There were hopes that Slovenia, Croatia and Israel could be persuaded to join their side - but it has not happened.

Japan's 51 per cent majority will not enable it to scrap the 1986 commercial whaling moratorium. For that it needs a majority of 75 per cent.

My comment: this is a practice of Asian countries which I don’t like: you can not just bribe everyone to influence them and ask them to do what you want to do. Well true, the opposite of getting what you want is broke, but broke with integrity is far more preferable than enrichment with bribery.

M21
12-21-2008, 01:28 PM
The Captian of the S.I. stated on Animal Planet he would like to sink the ship that processes the whales.

I bet if you asked the Captain of the Nisshin Maru he'd say the same of the Sea Sheperd.


Read Wikipedia.
Oh well that settles it then. :D LOL!

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 01:30 PM
Now apply that same logic to any other criminal. Let's not bother to punish them them as they're possibly going to reoffend. Negotiating with Japan on "fair terms" in this case doesn't mean "force them to do as we say". There must be compromise.

Im not saying don’t punish them. Sea Shepherd have gone to jail back and forth so many times (and clearly they don’t mind, they took the risk of going to jail), but Im thinking of finding a solution over this debate, and jailing them wouldn’t solve the root of the matters.

The only solution I can think of is for the Japanese to breed a pair of whales domestically, or for us to win the votes for international whale moratorium. I couldn’t think of another example which can solve this problem, but that shouldn’t close the possibility of other solutions.

lacarnut
12-21-2008, 02:40 PM
I bet if you asked the Captain of the Nisshin Maru he'd say the same of the Sea Sheperd.


Oh well that settles it then. :D LOL!

Anyone that I catch vandalizing my property will only do it once. You can bet on that. Plus, Wikipedia kinda disses your statements on your previous posts that the S.I. crew members have not broken the law.

Not a fan of whaling and that goes for the kooks that oppose them. This country has been f. up royally by Env. nuts that are against new nukes, refineries, drilling for oil, coal production, etc. etc. These screwballs have stopped highway construction because it might kill a few butterfilies or close down construction of a dam because of tadpole endangerment.

PoliCon
12-21-2008, 02:43 PM
Monsanto didn't think it was BS. They had a meeting of their highest executives and spent big money trying to completely destroy her life. They were that scared of one little lady and her book.

You remember Monsanto? The same outstanding corporate citizens who brought us Agent Orange. These are the same guys who continue to refuse compensation to Veterans and families for exposure to the toxic chemical.

You can still see the aircraft that were used in Operation Ranch Hand at the Davis Monthan AFB boneyard. They are quarantined and have been since after the Vietnam War.

So let's get back to that apple. If I spray an apple with DDT will you eat it?Sure. I'm not afraid of DDT.

PoliCon
12-21-2008, 02:44 PM
How is the sea-sheperd any diffrent to the pirates operating in the gulf of Aden , except in their degree of success ? There is a key difference - they are popular with enviroweenies.

PoliCon
12-21-2008, 02:45 PM
Their motives and equipment are irrelevant.

They both demand that they're given what they want through illegal use of force and intimidation.yup. exactly.

PoliCon
12-21-2008, 02:46 PM
Because it is difficult to make the whale protection to be legal. Japanese, Iceland and Norway will always oppose it no matter what. If waiting until these nations are willing to compromise, how if all whales are gone?

Actually, if organizations such as Greenpeace is effective enough, there is no need for things such as Sea Shepherd to exist.If all the whales end up gone - so be it. But since that is not going to happen - these guys need to be called what they are - criminals.

M21
12-21-2008, 04:28 PM
Anyone that I catch vandalizing my property will only do it once. You can bet on that. Plus, Wikipedia kinda disses your statements on your previous posts that the S.I. crew members have not broken the law.

They have broken the law. They freely admit that they have scuttled ships. Here from their own website (http://www.seashepherd.org/whales/sea-shepherd-history.html)

They even take pictures. Now ask yourself this;

How is it that they remain free? :confused: How come in January 1988, Captain Paul Watson flew to Iceland to accept responsibility for the sinking of ships and the Icelandic government refused to charge him?



These screwballs have stopped highway construction because it might kill a few butterfilies or close down construction of a dam because of tadpole endangerment.

I kayak in this place and the only thing that keeps it from being underwater are rare butterflies. Half of this canyon is already under water so folks in Denver can irrigate non-native Kentucky Bluegrass on a tall grass arid prairie. It is one of the greatest recreation areas in Denver's backyard and one day it will be destroyed and turned into yet another lake. It's short sighted madness. Water in the west is the new oil and if you control it you can force people to buy it. One day all the wild places will be gone and we will all be worse for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLZtdDc_qVk

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 09:29 PM
They have broken the law. They freely admit that they have scuttled ships. Here from their own website (http://www.seashepherd.org/whales/sea-shepherd-history.html)
How is it that they remain free? :confused: How come in January 1988, Captain Paul Watson flew to Iceland to accept responsibility for the sinking of ships and the Icelandic government refused to charge him?


Easy - Because that will expose those nation's and companies' illegal whaling activities which are a violation toward the International Whaling Commission's global moratorium on commercial whaling which came into law in 1986, and toward the protection regulations granted to the whales inside the official Southern Ocean Sanctuary (AKA the Antactic Whale Sanctuary) in which US,UK, and Australia are taking the lead to enact the law - it relates to economic interests as well as an addition to the benefits it will bring to the environment.

wiegenlied
12-21-2008, 09:38 PM
Actually more interesting question, who are we :confused: and whose economic interests do we protect?

PoliCon
12-21-2008, 11:25 PM
It would be a PR nightmare. THAT'S Why they do nothing about it.