R.I.P. Ady Gil [Sea Shepherd boat]

The TV show “Whale Wars” has finally shown the episode in which the Ady Gil gets hit by the Japanese ship.

The Ady Gil was a way cool boat, and I’m sorry that it is no more.

But I am in no way sorry that Pete Bethune, the Ady Gi’s builder and captain, lost his precious boat. He took it down there to play chicken with the big Japanese ships. He knowingly gambled his boat, and he lost.

Pete Bethune, before recklessly charging at the Japanese: “This team is amped and looking for a fight.” Behind him is a Sea Shepherd shirt that lists the ships that they have sunk.

Pete Bethune, after his boat has been hit: “This is 18 ton against a thousand ton. It’s just not a fair fight.”

Or to paraphrase: Before: “We’re looking for a fight.”

After: “They fought back, that’s not fair.”

Cripes, what part of “hypocrite” do those Sea Shepherd idiots not understand? You’re proud of the ships that you’ve sunk, but when one of yours gets sunk, it’s not fair.

And more hypocrisy: after the crash, Peter Hammarstedt of the Sea Shepherds gets on the radio and tells the Japanese ship, “International law requires you to answer this mayday.”

Um, doesn’t international law also require that you operate your vessel in a safe manner, rather than deliberately hassling other vessels? Doesn’t international law require that you NOT hurl projectiles at the ships of a sovereign nation? Doesn’t international law require that you NOT deliberately drag a rope in front of another vessel’s path, with the specific intent of disabling it?

The Sea Shepherds are the lowest form of evil, hypocritical humanity that there is. Anyone who has watched a few episodes of “Whale Wars” can see that they are more interested in having a fun adventure, playing pirate, being cool, than they are about actually saving the whales. And when their game turns serious, they cry.

If they really wanted to save the whales, they would do it in the legal arena and in the court of public opinion. But that’s not fun; it involves real work and drudgery, writing briefs, having meetings in stuffy board rooms, talking to endless numbers of people, repeatedly trying to convince them that yours is the just cause. It’s much more fun to go boating around the Antarctic, playing chicken with large ships, throwing “harmless” projectiles at them, and pretending that you’re making a difference.

I took great joy in seeing the million dollar bat mobile go down to the bottom of the sea in splinters. It’s not that I approve of whaling, I just disapprove of camera whoring anarchists.

Second the idea of fighting the cause in the court of public opinion and with legal briefs.

The really sad thing here is that the Ady Gil sank unaccompanied by any of the Sea Shepherds.

Is this what I saw?

The crew of Ady Gil were hanging out topside, and the boat was dead in the water?

So what’s the real-life status of things? Are any investigations or whatver being conducted? Certainly someone will be charged with causing the collision, right?

My feelings are mixed. These “Pirate-Activists” clearly see themselves as playing a game of some sort, with big dangerous toys. I have NO sympathy whatever for these bozos, and was a little surprised to find myself enjoying their utter disbelief when they got hit with an adult dose of reality. Not “Reality TV”, but plain old real reality.

At the same time, I am strongly opposed to the whaling fleets.

Anyway, are any charges in the future for any of the captains?

Agreed. I’m against whaling, but the show should be called Ship Of Fools.

As much as I dislike Watson & Co, from what I’m seeing on the show (still in progress), the Japanese captain caused the collision.

Inquiry into Ady Gil crash inconclusive

I’m actually glad nobody died because the Sea Shepherds are human beings. That said, I do think it’s a bit silly of them to get pissed off at the Japanese whaling fleet. The incident with the Ady Gil does not exist in a vacuum as there is a long history between the Shepherds and the fleet that led up to the incident.

Given the Shepard’s acknowledgment of deliberately sinking ships I think they should be treated as a hostile force. Their mere presence should be enough to deliberately sink them.

To which the response should be “Sure, eventually.”

If ever something would make me develop a taste for whale meat sushi, it’s these jerkoffs.


Well I’ll be donating money for a replacement boat.

The Sea Shepherd people are heroes in my eyes. Whalers and huge fishing companies that are killing the oceans, hunting whales into extinction and breaking laws and treaties, not so much. But then I’m an idealistic greenie with silly fluffy unrealistic ideas.

But I do think it is interesting that on this issue, it seems that everyone on this board is in the same corner as Big Corporations and Sarah Palin. Enjoy the company :stuck_out_tongue:

Wouldn’t they have been surprised if the response was, “Sure, we’d love to. Problem is we’re also dead in the water because you clowns disabled our ship!”

Sarah Palin is against whaling? :confused:


Interesting take.

Imagine you are my neighbor and you are constantly harassing me. So, one day when I see you hanging out in your yard, I decide to get in my car and run you over but you survive and I only smash the lawn chair you were in.

The only sad thing then would be that I didn’t kill you and it is ok that I tried to run you over?

Is this a zombie thread?

Uh, you got your analogy backwards - fixed below:
'Imagine I am your neighbor and you have been harassing me continuously as I go about my legal business due to the color of my skin. Other people who are of similar skin color as your own go about the same business with no hassle. Anyhow, one day you see me driving down the street in my semi-truck, which I use for my legal business, and you decide to jump in front of my vehicle by placing your lawn chair, and your fat ass, in the middle of the street. You manage to get out of the way just in time as I try to maneuver my very large vehicle in such a way that I avoid killing you and avoid plowing into every other obstacle on the road. Sorry about your lawn chair. Next time park it on your lawn, not in the middle of the road.

I fully agree with this. Even the recent commercials for the new season has that Cap’n stating that he only asked potential crew one question ~“Are you willing to put your life in danger?” or similar wording. My take on that is that the clear plan is cause harm/violence and anything else accomplished is just gravy. Aren’t potential suicide-bombers are asked this same question (equivocally)? :wink:

Just how close is Sea Shepherd Conservation Society to being a bona-fide ‘terrorist organization’ (per International law/definition, so to speak)? I ask this honestly, and not snarky. It seems the definition can be all over the map at times, and saying that we (SSCS) are going to attack/harm vessels and/or persons in open water (that are doing legal actions) is splitting the hair of the definition, afaik. I seem to remember that the species whale being caught are not endangered - am I right in this aspect?

Uzi: :slight_smile:

The only difference between Sea Shepherd and Somali Pirates is that they get paid in donations to attack ships.

If I were the Japanese government, I would assign a military vessel to escort the whalers and seize any ship interfering with them and prosecute the crew for piracy. Problem solved.

If by harassing you mean burn your house down then yes, you are entitled to defend your house by force if necessary.

Why do you hate the ocean so much you would wish the Sea Shepherds’ corpses onto it? What was Njord ever done to you?