Fugitive Watson eyes anti-whaling battle from afar

"Sea Shepherd, founded by former Greenpeace activist Watson in 1977"

Come on AFP let's be honest. Greenpeace kicked him out because he was too violent.

"He was expelled from the leadership of Greenpeace in 1977 by a vote of 11 to one (only Watson himself voted against it)."

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/news-and-blogs/news/paul-watson-sea-shepherd-and/

Yes he was kicked out of the organisation, hence the part where it says 'former greenpeace activist', so they got it right. How he became a former member is completely irrelevant to what the article is conveying, Ossan.

In an interview with AFP the 62-year-old said he expects to take the stand in a Seattle courtroom on Wednesday, to defend himself against accusations of piracy brought by Japanese whalers.

The ninth district court said last year he was a pirate. I believe he is in court fighting a contempt of court which was brought about due to the SS ignoring the ruling last year where SS ships were banned from going within 500 metres of Japanese ships.

The man believes he's above the law.

Japan says it conducts vital scientific research using a loophole in an international ban on whaling, but makes no secret of the fact that the mammals ultimately end up as food.

Wow, since when is smithinjapan writing for AP? Typical biased reporting that passively insinuates that it's somehow illegal or wrong that the whale meat that results from lethal research is processed and consumed when it's precisely what is required by IWC Convention, Article VIII.

Hope Watson gets jail or at least a big fine for his effort. There's no place for any kind violent actions against what is basically environmental transgressions and Watson has to 'pay' for this first.

I would like to comment that The Sea Shepard does not represent America in the slightest. They are cowards.

So are the Sea Shepherd eco-terrorists or cowards? They can't be both because then it'd be an oxymoron.

Pretty soon Mr Watson you won't have to worry about the whales. The Japanese will eat them all up until there is none left, what will you do then?

NeneswswNov. 06, 2013 - 09:12AM JST Yes he was kicked out of the organisation, hence the part where it says 'former greenpeace activist', so they got it >right. How he became a former member is completely irrelevant to what the article is conveying, Ossan.

Wrroooong. He was kicked out of Greenpeace because of his tendency for violence. He has returned to the United States to answer charges of Violence. Totally relevant and deliberately not mentioned by the SS supporting AFP.

At least one country has finally got their hands on him. Now Costa Rica can request extradion for him to answer the crime he commited, or did not, in their country.

If Japan is seeking legal action to drain the coffers of Sea Shepherd, then Australian can counter Japan by jacking up the price of coal that it sells to Japan since they are the second largest coal mining country after China.

CoconutE3Nov. 07, 2013 - 11:13AM JST If Japan is seeking legal action to drain the coffers of Sea Shepherd, then Australian can counter Japan by jacking up >the price of coal that it sells to Japan since they are the second largest coal mining country after China.

I can't even begin to tell you how bizarre the above sounds. You really have the players all mixed up. "Japan" is not bringing legal action against SSCS, the ICR is.The ICR is bringing action against SSCS to stop their interference and harassment of their Research Whaling. Not to "drain the coffers" since it cost them to bring legal action as well. "Australia" is not a party to this legal action in a US Federal Court. Furthermore the price of export coal is not set by "Australia".

Ossan, the article and my comment never gave an excuse as to why he was kicked. I'm absolutely baffled as to how you could say that me or the AFP are wrong when we didn't even mention such a thing.

Also when I said the AFP got it right, I was referring to the fact that he is a former Greenpeace activist, as clearly shown in my post and the article itself.

CoconutE3 - If Japan is seeking legal action to drain the coffers of Sea Shepherd, then Australian can counter Japan by jacking up the price of coal that it sells to Japan since they are the second largest coal mining country after China.

Neither Australia or Japan will ever get into a trade war over some minor character/bit player such as Watson. If Australia is interested in maintaining international law, they will detain Watson when he next appears on their shores. And then ship him to Costa Rica.

marcelito - As much as that thought might make you feel all warm and fuzzy - would never happen because of the anti -whaling opinion of large part of the Australian electorate.

Would you please define "large part of the Australian electorate"? 0.1%, 2%, 25%?

Most of Australia (and the world's population) doesn't give a rats patootie about whales, whaling, or Watson. This isn't an issue that nations are going to risk an actual trade war over simply because Watson's continous use of violence and pirate-like action would be too embareassing for them to associated with. (Except for the speeches of a few politicians pandering to their pro-violence constituants.) There are are only a small minority of vocal, pro-violence, supporters of Watson and his eco-terrorist SS who think nations will actually go to war over the actions of chalatans/morons.