Japanese whale whores

[coremelt]

eco-terrorism is bullshit. Terrorism is deliberately going out of your way to harm civilians who are not involved in the conflict.

Has the SSCS ever done that? I’m fine with “eco-saboteurs”, but attaching terrorism as a label to anyone whose opinions you disagree with is pretty pointless.

[XT]

You should look up the word ‘terrorism’ some time. I dinna thin’ it means what you see to thin’ it means, kimosabe.

-XT

[cckerberos]

@coremelt

the southern ocean sanctuary was declared by IWC, and it explicitly states that using a factory ship in that area is illegal (cannot be considered research). All linked above. Australia recognizes the sanctuary and so do other IWC signatories.

Where does it do so? I just looked through the IWC International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling which established the Southern Ocean Sanctuary and found that:

1. the restrictions on the use of factory ships (paragraphs 2 and 8) don’t apply in the case of minke whales
2. the clause establishing the Southern Ocean Sanctuary (paragraph 7(b)) doesn’t apply to Japan in the case of minke whales (see footnote)

Minke whales make up 99.9% of Japanese whale catches in the southern hemisphere. So I don’t see how Japanese actions are in violation of their obligations towards the Sanctuary.

[levdrakon]

@xtisme

And they were just out there minding their own business, right? :dubious:

Where did I say that? Did anyone say that? What game are you playing?

[Whack-a-Mole]

@cckerberos

Where does it do so?
<snip>

I don’t see how Japanese actions are in violation of their obligations towards the Sanctuary.

From the quote in xtisme’s Post #247 (bolding mine):

DR. TIMOTHY STEPHENS: "Now, [the Madrid Environmental] protocol did a couple of important things. One thing it did is that it bans mining in Antarctica. That was the great achievement of the protocol. But the other thing it does is it sets up very specific, detailed, demanding rules in terms of all governments having to comply with when they have any kind of expedition or activity in Antarctica. And at the moment, Japan is not complying with those rules, particularly because Japan is not telling the international community what steps it is taking to insure that its whaling operations do not cause damage to the Antarctic environment.

"So the federal court of Australia recently made an order finding that Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean near Australia’s Antarctic Territory was unlawful as a matter of Australian law. No question about that. I think even the Japanese would acknowledge that it’s unlawful as a matter of Australian law.

"What the Japanese say is that they don’t recognize Australian law in the Southern Ocean. The Japanese say Australian law does not apply there because Japan does not recognize Australia’s claim in Antarctica. […] I cannot ever see any Australian government enforcing Australian law against non-nationals, including the Japanese, in Antarctica because of the political stink that that would cause on the Antarctic continent.

"The question about what you can do in Antarctic waters is a critical one. Now, Japan sends a very large whaling fleet to Antarctica each year. We’re talking upwards of six, seven, eight vessels, including whale sighter vessels, whale harpoon vessels, factory ships, resupply vessels, refueling vessels. So it’s a big operation that’s going on down there. And arguably — in fact, I think very strongly arguably — Japan is not complying with its environmental obligations in Antarctica in relation to refueling or any of the other ancillary matters connected with the whaling. So even if you put whaling to one side, right — even if you disregard what Japan’s doing with the whaling — all the other stuff that you have to do to maintain a whaling fleet in Antarctica is arguably not compliant with the law.

"Japan’s not telling us what the environmental impact of its activities is, not preparing contingency plans, just not communicating with the international community generally, and it’s a big concern.

"Japan says that it can do whatever it wants in Antarctic waters in relation to whaling. Why? Because Japan says that […] it’s the whaling convention that applies in Antarctica, not the Antarctic Treaty.

“So this is kind of a big contest, which convention applies: the whaling convention or the Antarctic Treaty? States — as unpalatable as it sounds — states have the right to catch whales on the high seas if consistent with the whaling convention, if it’s for scientific research. And if they have that right, then they have a right not to be harassed in so doing.”

It seems the laws are conflicting on this and (of course) Japan is picking the one it wants. Thing is they are in violation of the law just the same. At least I am not sure how legally you say this agreement trumps that one.

That said considering Japan is using a loophole in the first case and in the second case they are non-compliant I’d say Japan’s stance on this is shaky at best from an ethical standpoint. Legally they are walking a very fine line and quite possibly past it as mentioned above.

[Princhester]

@levdrakon

Who cares about reality show editing for our entertainment? The skipper of the Ady Gil also built it and set a world record with it. I’ll take his sea experience over arm-chair reality show seamanship.

I didn’t realise he was still skipper.

Anyway, he shouldn’t have gone forward at the wrong moment. He panicked. We can argue all day about whether his panic was understandable, but let’s not lose sight of who was happy to play close quarters silly buggers with large vessels but then lost his nerve and fucked up bigtime when things came down to the wire.

You can pretend the sudden acceleration of the Gil didn’t happen. You can pretend that the spurts of white water from the stern of the Gil were, I dunno, co-incidental horizontal whale spouts or something. Ain’t going to change reality.

[drachillix]

@coremelt

eco-terrorism is bullshit. Terrorism is deliberately going out of your way to harm civilians who are not involved in the conflict.

and the whaling ships/SS are millitary?

[levdrakon]

If you’re looking for vigilantism, look no further than the Japanese. No legally recognized court will stop the Sea Shepherds so they’ve decided to carry out their own justice and punishment which now involves attempted murder. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, THAT fits the vigilante definition you are looking for.

[butler1850]

@muldoonthief

I liked the one where half the crew was leaving because they had no confidence in Watson or the first mate, and were completely disillusioned with what they were trying to do. The first mate said he didn’t care, because there were plenty of other starry-eyed idealists who’d jump at a chance to be on the crew.

I’d love to see a 5 year followup of these idiots after they leave the ship. How many have changed their attitudes, and ideas about radical environmental movements, and how exactly have they changed.

[cckerberos]

@Whack-a-Mole

It seems the laws are conflicting on this and (of course) Japan is picking the one it wants. Thing is they are in violation of the law just the same. At least I am not sure how legally you say this agreement trumps that one.

That said considering Japan is using a loophole in the first case and in the second case they are non-compliant I’d say Japan’s stance on this is shaky at best from an ethical standpoint. Legally they are walking a very fine line and quite possibly past it as mentioned above.

The point made by the legal experts is interesting, and not something I’ve come across before. But while it sounds to me like they have a point and the Japanese are quite likely in violation of environmental pollution laws for their actions in the Antarctic, they also seem to be a bit off topic. The SSCS isn’t attempting to interfere with the Japanese because of such relatively minor violations (I assume that the environmental impact of the handful of ships that make up the Japanese whaling fleet is minor, but I could be wrong), they’re pursuing them because of the whaling issue. And as far as whaling is concerned I don’t think that the Japanese are violating the letter of the law (regardless of how badly they are violating the spirit of the law).

Of course, “law” is perhaps too strong a term here, since IIRC the only thing binding nations in regards to whaling is voluntary agreements that can be unilaterally abrogated at any time.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@cckerberos

The point made by the legal experts is interesting, and not something I’ve come across before. But while it sounds to me like they have a point and the Japanese are quite likely in violation of environmental pollution laws for their actions in the Antarctic, they also seem to be a bit off topic. The SSCS isn’t attempting to interfere with the Japanese because of such relatively minor violations (I assume that the environmental impact of the handful of ships that make up the Japanese whaling fleet is minor, but I could be wrong), they’re pursuing them because of the whaling issue. And as far as whaling is concerned I don’t think that the Japanese are violating the letter of the law (regardless of how badly they are violating the spirit of the law).

::shrug::

They got Al Capone for tax evasion.

Whatever works.

[Labrador_Deceiver]

Why is this such a big issue? I mean that as an honest question. Why are the SS trying so hard, and endangering so many lives over the killing of very small numbers of a species of whale that isn’t in any danger of becoming underpopulated? Does it have something to do with the legalities of the whaling industry, or is it perceived as a slippery slope?

I don’t imagine that the FBI would have been so desperate to take down Al Capone on tax evasion charges if his only crime was trespassing.

[Uzi]

I think the Japanese have a good point on the anthropomorphizing of whales. It also applies to cute seals.

[Happy_Poster]

@Uzi

I think the Japanese have a good point on the anthropomorphizing of whales. It also applies to cute seals.

Yup.

There’s no real difference between minke whales and, say, cows to be honest.

Be under no mistake, fellow carnivores. The sea shepherds would have us all vegan if they could. They MUST be stopped.

[XT]

They will take away my rare, juicy steak when they pry it from my cold, dead FORK! OOOOORRRRAAAHHHH!

-XT

[drachillix]

@levdrakon

If you’re looking for vigilantism, look no further than the Japanese. No legally recognized court will stop the Sea Shepherds so they’ve decided to carry out their own justice and punishment which now involves attempted murder. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, THAT fits the vigilante definition you are looking for.

First, the Japaneese are not the agressors in this “war”. So if anything they have a far greater claim to self defense than the SS.

Because the japaneese somehow forced the little SS boat to accellerate. Its painfully obvious that it was applying forward throttle, and the SS have been more than happy to play chicken and partake of risky close quarters manuvers with their boats on many occasions, so why should anybody think this incident was different.

You logic also fails to acknowledge that no recognized court is taking action on the Japaneese or any other complaints from the SS.

The SS should be thankful that Japan has not seen fit to send along a naval vessel or two to assure that their people are not harassed. Naval crews are not going to respond as gently to being toyed with via SS methods, and actions that look like an attempt to bump or board will be met with far less gentle responses.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@drachillix

Because the japaneese somehow forced the little SS boat to accellerate. Its painfully obvious that it was applying forward throttle, and the SS have been more than happy to play chicken and partake of risky close quarters manuvers with their boats on many occasions, so why should anybody think this incident was different.

Would you stand still with a near 500 ton ship 5 seconds from running you over or are we to assume you have psychic powers to be able to know the ship will turn at the last moment and (probably) miss? That the pilot of the ship is so skillful he can, at will, thread his 500 ton ship in high seas and max speed to within a meter of anything he wants without touching it?

[coremelt]

@drachillix

First, the Japaneese are not the agressors in this “war”. So if anything they have a far greater claim to self defense than the SS.
.

Australian public largely doesn’t see it that way, the whaling fleet is an aggressor by chosing to hunt in waters declared protected by the IWC and by Australia. Painting “research” on the side of your vessel doesn’t make it so.

poll here on Australian opinions:
http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/news-100115-1.html

8 out of 10 of us disagree with the governments response. I’d love to see Australia take Japan to court or for an Australian destroyer to patrol the SOS to protect it from poachers. Since thats not happening I support the SSCS instead.

[Odesio]

@coremelt

8 out of 10 of us disagree with the governments response. I’d love to see Australia take Japan to court or for an Australian destroyer to patrol the SOS to protect it from poachers. Since thats not happening I support the SSCS instead.

I would as well. If the Australians are going to claim the waters as theirs then they need to grow a pair and enforce their laws.

[coremelt]

Majority of Australian public agrees with you but we don’t command our coast guard. I can’t find it now but there was another recent poll showing that the majority of Australian’s favor stronger measures by our government to halt whaling in the Antarctic even if it harms us economically.

google is failing me, can anyone find that one?