[Nuggie77]

Before you get on the "Japanese Whalers are innocent" band wagon, just remember that one of the Japanese chase ships ran over the Ady Gill while it was disabled and pretty much cut her in half.

[saturn_656]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Before you get on the "Japanese Whalers are innocent" band wagon, just remember that one of the Japanese chase ships ran over the Ady Gill while it was disabled and pretty much cut her in half.

No one is innocent here. Sea Shepard behaves like a gang of reckless vigilantes, and the Japanese whalers are bloody poachers exploiting a loophole to conduct commercial whaling.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Before you get on the "Japanese Whalers are innocent" band wagon, just remember that one of the Japanese chase ships ran over the Ady Gill while it was disabled and pretty much cut her in half.

Hmmm yes, it was definitely the Japanese fault despite this

$1:

an investigation into the collision by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) was inconclusive and unable to assign blame for the collision. AMSA was unable to verify claims made by Sea Shepherd

Further to that, Bethune disassociated himself from Sea Shepherd by posting an open letter on his Facebook page on 4 October 2010, condemning the organization and its leader Paul Watson as "dishonest" and "morally bankrupt". According to his letter, he was directed by Paul Watson to sink the Ady Gil deliberately for PR purposes after the collision with the Japanese whaling ship. He insists that the senior members of Sea Shepherd regularly lie and conspire over the serious matters, detailing many cases in his letter. Pete Bethune has since founded his own conservation organization, Earthrace Conservation.

[Prof_Chomsky]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

The sea shepherds are exploiting international maritime law. They aren't breaking any international laws doing what they do so no country's navy can come arrest them. They're skirting the system the same way the Japanese are. Again, turn about is fair play.

Exploiting maritime law? Geez dude, just how far is your head lodged in your rectum?
According to its mission statement, Sea Shepherd Conservation Society "uses innovative direct-action tactics to investigate, document, and take action when necessary to expose and confront illegal activities on the high seas". Those actions have included scuttling and disabling commercial whaling vessels at harbor, using limpet mines to blow holes in ship hulls, ramming other vessels, throwing glass bottles of butyric acid on the decks of vessels at sea, boarding of whaling vessels while at sea, and seizure and destruction of drift nets at sea. As of 2009, Paul Watson has said that the organization has sunk ten whaling ships while also destroying millions of dollars worth of equipment. Their practice of attacking and sinking other ships has led to reports of injuries to other sailors as well as the Sea Shepherd crew, including concussions and complications from chemical attacks.

Good to see you justify outright criminal acts as merely "exploiting the laws".

If I come and steal your car and burn down your garage because I don't like what you do for a living, is that merely exploiting the law or would you call the cops and expect them to treat it as the crime it is?

Burning down my home would get you tossed in jail. As would me coming to your property and killing an animal I didn't own. What Sea Shepherd does is classified as harassment and not punishable to an extent that can shut them down. When they rammed those ships they did it under circumstances that kept them "skirting" the law. Sometimes it was in the coastal waters of a country that agreed with what they were doing and wouldn't press charges, other times it was a "mutual collision".

Now, they HAVE gone too far on occasion, such as the time they cut the nets of blue fin tuna fisherman. And because that was outright illegal, they paid for it with an arrest warrant and the confiscation of their ship.

Again, the whalers are skirting the anti-whaling law calling it "research" the same way the Sea Shepherds are skirting international maritime law by only committing offenses that cannot be punished.

Sounds fair to me.

[Xort]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Before you get on the "Japanese Whalers are innocent" band wagon, just remember that one of the Japanese chase ships ran over the Ady Gill while it was disabled and pretty much cut her in half.

Stupid speed boat looking thing that had a video of the crash? The video that clearly shows the Ady Gill starting it's engines to move into the path of the Japanese ship when it was clear that on the straight course the Japanese ship was taking they wouldn't get hit? The same boat that the guy piloting it later said was under orders to get his boat rammed for the PR?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dXCR9LX-Kc

14s you can see the wake of the Ady Gill, 19s you can see the Ady Gill under acceleration to get in front of the ships while the crew moves to the back.

The Ady Gill wasn't disabled, or rather wasn't any more disabled than what it's crew normally did to it.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

The sea shepherds are exploiting international maritime law. They aren't breaking any international laws doing what they do so no country's navy can come arrest them. They're skirting the system the same way the Japanese are. Again, turn about is fair play.

Exploiting maritime law? Geez dude, just how far is your head lodged in your rectum?
According to its mission statement, Sea Shepherd Conservation Society "uses innovative direct-action tactics to investigate, document, and take action when necessary to expose and confront illegal activities on the high seas". Those actions have included scuttling and disabling commercial whaling vessels at harbor, using limpet mines to blow holes in ship hulls, ramming other vessels, throwing glass bottles of butyric acid on the decks of vessels at sea, boarding of whaling vessels while at sea, and seizure and destruction of drift nets at sea. As of 2009, Paul Watson has said that the organization has sunk ten whaling ships while also destroying millions of dollars worth of equipment. Their practice of attacking and sinking other ships has led to reports of injuries to other sailors as well as the Sea Shepherd crew, including concussions and complications from chemical attacks.

Good to see you justify outright criminal acts as merely "exploiting the laws".

If I come and steal your car and burn down your garage because I don't like what you do for a living, is that merely exploiting the law or would you call the cops and expect them to treat it as the crime it is?

Burning down my home would get you tossed in jail. As would me coming to your property and killing an animal I didn't own.

So the Sea Shepherd owns the whales. Check.

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

What Sea Shepherd does is classified as harassment and not punishable to an extent that can shut them down.

Using limpet mines is NOT harassment. IT is an illegal act of destruction of private property. In fact, it was against the law even having those mines aboard their ship.

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

When they rammed those ships they did it under circumstances that kept them "skirting" the law.

First off, intentionally ramming a merchant vessel is in direct contravention of Maritime Law. They aren't skirting it, they're stomping all over it.

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Sometimes it was in the coastal waters of a country that agreed with what they were doing and wouldn't press charges, other times it was a "mutual collision".

Mutual collision Yeah, one huge ocean and yet the Sea Shepherd manages to get rammed. They have interfered with the rescue efforts of overboard sailors, in direct contravention of Maritime Law. They have refused to respond to distress signals despite being the closest ship available, in direct contravention of Maritime Law. They have interfered in or attempted to disrupt the navigation of commercial vessels, in direct contravention of Martime Law.
There's no skirting the law here, all they've done is break it at pretty much every turn.

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Again, the whalers are skirting the anti-whaling law calling it "research" the same way the Sea Shepherds are skirting international maritime law by only committing offenses that cannot be punished.

Again, you're an idiot. There are no anti-whaling laws that apply to international waters concerning the hunt for Minck Whales.

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

Sounds fair to me.

It does? So ramming and/or sinking ships that aren't doing anything illegal is what you call fair? Needlessly endangering the crews of ships taking part in a LEGAL activity is what you call fair?
I'll tell you what sport, you show me where there's laws against hunting Minck Whales in international waters. Like it or not, there are no laws against it. The only laws that are enforceable are individual nation laws prohibiting the catching of whales in their territorial waters and the sale of whale products in their countries.

The IWC is a voluntary and toothless organization that has no mandate to enforce "their laws" because they lack the mandate to create laws.

Which brings me back to my original scenario. Just because you are ideologically opposed to how someone earns a LEGAL living, does NOT give you the right to interfere in that person's ability to earn that living, whether on land or at sea.

Watson et al are nothing but egotistical, attention whoring eco-terrorists. They are of the same ilk who go around sabotaging pipelines, terrorizing children with scenes of animal slaughterhouses and who basically think they're so fucking enlightened we need them to guide us to a better life.

Watson has admitted to sinking 10 ships. I gotta wonder how beneficial those sinkings were to their local marine environments.
But hey, as long as the Sea Douches are getting their continued 15 minutes of fame, what do they care.