national

Anti-whalers claim aggressive ramming by Japanese fleet

74 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

74 Comments
Login to comment

The Sea Shepard's are modern day maritime terrorists. They care more about who they are then than any cause related to whales. There are international maritime laws which govern the high seas and they have decided they do not apply to them. Forget about NZ and Aussie sending out patrol boats - I'd like to see a Japanese warship down there, sink their boats, drag them out of the water and put them in a Japanese prison. This is way beyond whales.

16 ( +43 / -27 )

Dear SimondB you are a Dick your parents know it your partner knows it . Your a Dick

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

The fools don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.

11 ( +28 / -19 )

They aren't doing anything illegal (the whalers) if there's a loophole than it's legal. Plus science shows what they are doing is sustainable.

6 ( +31 / -26 )

"Unprovoked?" Yeah, and what were you doing there in the first place?

22 ( +35 / -14 )

Bob Barker captain Peter Hammarstedt said the Sea Shepherd vessels were “unprovokedly attacked” by the Japanese harpooners in a “ruthless” fashion.

"Unprovokedly attacked"? Yeah, okay, you silly little man.

The only ones being "unprovokedly attacked" are the whalers.

9 ( +26 / -18 )

Lawsuits are inbound.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Whilst I don't agree with the tactic of trying to disable a ship at high seas, it's very interesting to hear that the SS are complaining when their own tactics are used against them.

Bullies have always hated being bullied.

12 ( +28 / -18 )

Seems like the Eco-terrorist whalers are getting frustrated and angry. Not long to go in their hunting season - and it is likely to be yet another failure, possibly lower numbers than last season.

-5 ( +20 / -23 )

Well the Japan apologists are out in force today. SimondB, methinks even the nationalist warmongers that have way too much power in this country would have enough sense to not heed your brilliant plan and send a Japanese warship way down to the Southern Ocean on Australia's doorstep. Hey, here's a crazy idea. Why don't those poor whalers just hunt nearby around the Japanese archipelago? Ohhhh, that's right, out of stock.

-1 ( +20 / -19 )

So the next time Sea Shepherd have their cables extended I assume there'll be no complaints from the whalers. Stand off tactics seem to be working, the whalers are getting desperate.

4 ( +19 / -15 )

Well the Japan apologists are out in force today.

Though I would not call anybody hear "apologist", it is only fair as the Japan bashers are out in full force today ;)

3 ( +19 / -16 )

Aside from the Se Shepherd It would be interesting to see some casualties on the human side too with the whalers ... like in Moby Dick. A real challenge then to do what they do.

-17 ( +2 / -18 )

Go Japan

0 ( +16 / -17 )

The whalers are modern day maritime terrorists. They care more about how much meat they take than any cause related to whale research. There is the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling which forbids the killing of whales for commercial purposes and they have decided it does not apply to them.

The only reason the wailers get so stroppy about their activities being hindered is because they are engaged in a commercial activity, and no one likes their bottom line being hurt. Bona fide researchers do not go around body-tackling folk in their way.

-24 ( +16 / -38 )

The whalers are modern day maritime terrorists.

@Cleo No they aren't. Terrorists cause violence or threaten violence to push a political agenda -- the United States government being a good example. The whalers are just greedy butchers, not terrorists. They are causing violence to just make a buck.

-11 ( +8 / -19 )

Sea Shepherd said the Japanese had attempted to damage the fleet's propellers with steel cables, had thrown projectiles including grappling hooks at the Steve Irwin and fired water cannon on the Bob Barker's crew as they tried to cut the cables from a small boat.

And what tactics does Sea Shepherd use? Let's see...

In its Antarctic campaigns, Sea Shepherd employs a wide range of direct action tactics aimed at disrupting whaling operations, which have included throwing canisters of butyric acid (stink bombs, which contaminate whale meat and make decks unworkable), throwing cellulose powder (a white powdery substance which makes decks slippery), attempting to disable whaling vessels by entangling prop fouling lines in their propellers, and boarding whaling ships.

I guess it's no fun when you're on the receiving end of a prop fouling line. But then you know what they say, it's better to give than to receive.

10 ( +19 / -10 )

@SimondB- Agreed. Especially with your first two points...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Terrorists cause violence or threaten violence to push a political agenda ......

You think there isn't a political agenda?

The whalers are just greedy butchers

Yup. Also dishonest.

-15 ( +9 / -23 )

Kakurenbo - Your description of terrorism described the Japanese whalers perfectly. Thanks for that! - Japan should just go home and pilfer what is left of its own decertified oceans instead of pilfering pristine environments protected by other nations.

-10 ( +9 / -18 )

Militant anti-whaling campaigners Sea Shepherd on Sunday said one of their ships was rammed during “aggressive” and “unprovoked” confrontations with the Japanese in the Southern Ocean.

Sea Shepherd and unprovoked don't belong in the same sentence.

“These harpoon ships came in heavy and hard. They hit my bow with about 300 metres of steel cable with the express intent of causing damage to my rudder and propellers,” he told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Even if it is the case that the Japanese whalers attacked the SS ships SS don't have a leg to stand on. Don't whinge when the very tactics you use are used against you.

8 ( +15 / -8 )

That's a good move Whalers, piss off another country, soon your going to have no friends left. Why not go "researching" whales around the Senkakus or Takashima, see how long you last against a real aggressor.

-15 ( +7 / -21 )

It depends on what your definition of "unprovoked" and "aggressive" are. And the definition of "is".

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I totally agree with the goal that the Sea Shephard is trying to accomplish.

Japan should abide by the wishes of the International Whaling Committee which they are a member of.

This whaling is unnecessary and in no great demand by the Japanese themselves.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

Sea Shepherd has never been good at following orders, especially court orders.

... the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, Watson and anyone acting "in concert" with them to keep 500 yards away from the whaling vessels.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

The Japanese should just sink those sea shepherd terro-pirates, and the Japanese would be within their rights in defending themselves and their vessels.

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

House Atreides, the 9th US Circuit Court has no jurisdiction over Australia or the high seas.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

hmm SS ships sounds appropriate to call a sea Shepherd ship one of the SS

they are that brutal

so what happens to a man when the deck becomes too slippery and they fall into the ocean because of a cellulose bomb. Do you think a SS ship will pick him up? do you think the whaler will notice when it is being harassed by the SS ships?

anything you do to a commercial ship during operations can kill a man, these are not cruise liners.

no empathy from me for the SS cause

7 ( +13 / -6 )

SwissToni: House Atreides, the 9th US Circuit Court has no jurisdiction over Australia or the high seas.

We're not talking about Australia or the high seas. Just Sea Shepherd. See International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945). The Court held that a party may be subject to the jurisdiction of a state court if it has "minimum contacts" with that state. Court finds "minimum contacts", court issues ruling.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Praak, when the deck is too slippery, the whaler can stay in his cabin. The meat has been tainted anyway.

In the past when the whalers lost a crewman, Sea Shepherd did indeed offer to look for him.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

It was bound to get worse, wasn't it? It's only a matter of time before there is a real disaster and loss of (human) life with this tension mounting year after year.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Atreides, were not talking about shoes and Australian Sea Shepherd has no connection with any US state. The courts ruling only affects SS in the US who are not attending the protest in the Southern Ocean. When the court order was issued Watson was on board the Bob barker as an observer only. Rather like the Maritime Self Defence force security staff on the Nissin Maru.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

The next time around they should sink the Japanese whaling ships followed by blockading the dolphin killing beaches.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ JaneM

Though I would not call anybody hear "apologist", it is only fair as the Japan bashers are out in full force today ;)

I think there are apologists here, people who habitually defend Japan's precious honour whenever it's questioned, even when it's indefensible. You expect that from local nationalists but not from foreigners. I'm no basher. I'll objectively look at each issue on it's merits and in the case of whaling I think Japan clearly is contemptible.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

I objectively look at each issue on its merits as well, but I don't see anything wrong with Japanese whaling.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

Strangerland

That's fair enough.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"I totally agree with the goal that the Sea Shephard is trying to accomplish.

Japan should abide by the wishes of the International Whaling Committee which they are a member of."

...but Japan IS abiding by the IWC legally.

.....Also there is no international wish/consensus, not even inside countries ...not everyone in the world has the same opinion.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

I'd never looked at the recorded catches taken on the IWC website...

Could someone explain to me why Japan had no recorded commercial catches during 2012/13, but has 848 recorded as "scientific" catches for the same period?

Not trying to start a fight here or anything, just wondering if anyone here knows more about how this works?

For such a small number of whales, I'm not that concerned about the population, but I don't understand why they won't call it as it is and stop saying it's for "science" when it clearly isn't...

Link for reference: http://iwc.int/catches#comm

2 ( +6 / -4 )

StrangerlandFEB. 02, 2014 - 09:26PM JST I objectively look at each issue on its merits as well, but I don't see anything wrong with Japanese whaling.

Sure, there's nothing wring with a lot of things until you actually look into them Strangerland.

Read up on the method they use to kill the whales, what happens to the meat (hint; stockpiled), the waste of Japanese tax money's for what amounts to nothing more than pride, the embarrassingly fake 'science' and negative image this sends the world about Japan plus the fact that attempting to begin commercial whaling is inherently not possible because of the damage it does to whale populations and you may have a different opinion.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Ah, spring must be getting close when I hear news of the annual class between these two close friends.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Sea Shepherd are desperate now. The ICJ ruling is expected this year. If Japan wins, the next SSCS attack will probably be dealt with as it should have been, eco-terrorists arrested for interfering with a legitimate and legal IWC sanctioned activity. If Australia wins, Japan will comply with the ICJ ruling and withdraw from these waters and no research whaling will be conducted in the area. In either case, Sea Shepherd will no longer be able to play this game that has become their bread and butter for years.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

OssanAmerica

If Australia wins, Japan will comply with the ICJ ruling and withdraw from these waters and no research whaling will be conducted in the area. In either case, Sea Shepherd will no longer be able to play this game that has become their bread and butter for years.

How on earth you came to the conclusion that SS are some how a for-profit organisation is beyond me. They practically all full-time volunteers - they only money they get is for running their operations and food.

I hope you are right about the ruling going Australia's way - pretty sure SS will pack there bags, go back to their waiting families and jobs and live out their lives happy in the knowledge that they did their part in beating human ignorance and greed and helped conserve the earth's wildlife for future generations.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

igloobuyerFeb. 02, 2014 - 11:34PM JST OssanAmerica "If Australia wins, Japan will comply with the ICJ ruling and withdraw from these waters and no research whaling will be conducted in the area. In either case, Sea Shepherd will no longer be able to play this game that has become their bread and butter for years."

How on earth you came to the conclusion that SS are some how a for-profit organisation is beyond me. They >practically all full-time volunteers - they only money they get is for running their operations and food.

Do you honestly believe that SSCS hasn;'t received compensation from Animal Planet? Do you think that the media exposure of the Antarctic anti-walking campaigns hasn't been the driving force for contributions?

I hope you are right about the ruling going Australia's way - pretty sure SS will pack there bags, go back to their >waiting families and jobs and live out their lives happy in the knowledge that they did their part in beating human >ignorance and greed and helped conserve the earth's wildlife for future generations.

Don't hold your breath. I've read through the ICJ filings and while the claimants submitted the exact arguments I expected them to, I did not see anything new or overwhelmingly in the favor. The outcome is quite uncertain. Meantime it was obvious that the IWC Scientific Committee was backing Japan.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

OssanAmerica

I've read through the ICJ filings and while the claimants submitted the exact arguments I expected them to, I did not see anything new or overwhelmingly in the favor.

and your legal expertise is???

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

And, what if the ICJ rules in favor of Australia and Japan's farcicle research is banned? Are all you supporters of Japan's whaling gonna shut up or just cry foul? The actions of SS may not be appropriate and many consider them to be pirates, but if you look at the meaning of 'pirate' in the dictionary the Japanese whaling fleet fill the definition completely.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Sure, there's nothing wring with a lot of things until you actually look into them Strangerland.

I've been in Japan for long enough to have heard all sides of the argument repeated ad infinitum. I actually used to be more on the other side (against whaling), but the arguments on the side of whaling have brought me around to be ok with it.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

DisillusionedFeb. 03, 2014 - 12:02AM JST And, what if the ICJ rules in favor of Australia and Japan's farcicle research is banned? Are all you supporters of >Japan's whaling gonna shut up or just cry foul?

Boy you really miss the point. Those who support Japan's Research Whaling don't really care WHERE it is conducted. Therefore they would no reason to cry foul. In contrast, those against the current Research Whaling contain a large portion of people, mostly Australians and New Zealanders, who consider this a "territorial issue". Meaning most of them couldn't care less about the issue if the Research Whaling was being conducted somewhere else. Therefore, the real question you should be raising is what are these people going to do if the ICJ rules that Japan's current Research Whaling is legitimate? Are the anti-whaling crowd going to shut up or cry foul?

The actions of SS may not be appropriate and many consider them to be pirates, but if you look at the meaning >of 'pirate' in the dictionary the Japanese whaling fleet fill the definition completely.

A US Federal Court Judge determined Sea Shepherd to be pirates. Not the Research Whalers. ""You don't need a peg leg or an eye patch. When you ram ships; hurl containers of acid; drag metal-reinforced ropes in the water to damage propellers and rudders; launch smoke bombs and flares with hooks; and point high-powered lasers at other ships, you are, without a doubt, a pirate, no matter how high-minded you believe your purpose to be." Chief judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th US circuit court of appeals. No one but the Sea Shepherd supporters makes the absurd claim that you do.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

"A US Federal Court Judge determined Sea Shepherd to be pirates."

He didn't, he called them pirates, so what? The US Federal Government, the UK Charities Commission the Ozzie ACNC and others consider them a bona fide charity.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

SwissToniFeb. 03, 2014 - 01:21AM JST "A US Federal Court Judge determined Sea Shepherd to be pirates." He didn't, he called them pirates, so what? The US Federal Government, the UK Charities Commission the Ozzie >ACNC and others consider them a bona fide charity.

A "Charity" and "Piracy" are not mutually exclusive. Furthernore the entities you named are not Courts of Law of any jurisdiction.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

The whalers are modern day maritime terrorists. They care more about how much meat they take than any cause related to whale research. There is the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling which forbids the killing of whales for commercial purposes and they have decided it does not apply to them.

and you why are you teaching English in the country these terrorists call home? You need to be down there putting your life on the line for these mammals.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Australia doesn't consider them to be a charity.

It was deemed that they were more interested in attacking the Japanese than protecting the whales.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

@House Atreides - The Japanese whalers, ICR, filed suit in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals asking the court to find Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in violation of the Court Ordered injunction to remain 5oo yards from Japanese whaling ships. The Court found that SSCS had separated themselves from the anti-whaling activities, that these activities were carried out by non-US Sea Shepherd organizations, and that SSCS and its board members honored the injunction.

Note that the original case that led to the injunction has still not been determined.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Bob Barker captain Peter Hammarstedt said the Sea Shepherd vessels were “unprovokedly attacked” by the Japanese harpooners in a “ruthless” fashion.

I don't like whaling and overfishing of our oceans, but the claim that they were unprovoked is sheer nonsense. Everyone here knows how far this group will go to stop whaling. I hope there no human injuries in this eco-war being waged by the Sea Shepard and it's crew. This group has been labeled eco-terrorist by the FBI.

In my opinion they need to go about this legally and not through these types of tactics. Maybe they should also be targeting other nation and not just Japan. The more they only attack Japanese whalers the more the whaler's can claim racism.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@ Heda_Madness - you are twisting the words of the Australian court. Australia recognizes groups that provide short-term direct care to animals as a tax exempt charity.

"Taking steps to interrupt or prevent others harming animals in the wild, as Sea Shepherd does, is not the provision of 'short-term direct care to animals'"..."What Sea Shepherd attempts to do is to prevent the killing of whales. The object of its campaigns is the Japanese whaling fleet. It does not provide care to any animal."

The court recognized that Sea Shepherd attempts to prevent the killing of whales. However that does not qualify as a tax exempt charity under Australia tax law.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

I have seen these programs on television, and I have to say that the behavior of the so-called anti-whalers is at least irresponsible, and at most criminal. Someone above noted “maritime terrorists.” I believe that is an adequate description of them. I am not sympathetic.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

@ Heda_Madness - you are twisting the words of the Australian court

What Sea Shepherd attempts to do is to prevent the killing of whales. The object of its campaigns is the Japanese whaling fleet. It does not provide care to any animal.

The precise words of the Australian court.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@JoeBigs

Maybe they should also be targeting other nation and not just Japan.

They tried that once in the Faroe Islands and got hauled into shore, manhandled, and charged. The reception for them at the harbor wasn't very civil, hence they've learned their lesson about attacking peoples that fight back.

Supposedly, they're going to have another go at the Faroese this year as well. Hopefully, whatever naval force the Faroese have will be used to sink the SS ship(s).

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Keep up the good work SS - keep the clowns from causing unnecessary suffering. Imagine if there were no SS - how many more whales would have been slaughtered?

3 ( +10 / -7 )

Seashepherd has now claimed that the Bob Barker was "struck" by a Whaler vessel. The video shows the Bob Barker chasing the Japanese vessel and ramming it from behind. And yet the media report this as a "collision" or that the whalers "struck" the Bob Barker. What do these people have in their collective craniums?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/2014/02/03/06/01/sea-shepherd-collision-with-whaling-ship-filmed

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Yasmin Torpelund WeaverFeb. 02, 2014 - 10:44PM JST

why they won't call it as it is and stop saying it's for "science" when it clearly isn't...

It is "research whaling". The purpose of the research whaling is to study the population, age distribution and reproduction ratios of the whales. When the commercial whaling went into moratorium in 1986, it was AGREED that the population, the age distribution, and the reproduction ratios of whales must be studied and sustainable catch limits must be set. The research is an obligation of IWC member countries. It is not a zoological research. It is scientific research for whaling.

As the anti whaling group keeps saying that the research sample is not large enough to estimate the numbers with statistical significance, Japan needs larger data sample.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

It is "research whaling".

It is commercial whaling in everything but name. The 'researchers' are obliged to process the whales as far as is practicable, but all they are interested in taking is the meat. They went and got themselves halal-certified and the only possible reason for that is the meat. Islam prohibits the taking of an animal's life except for food or because the animal poses an immediate danger, and since the whales in the Antarctic pose no immediate danger to anyone it is obvious that Japan is taking them for the meat.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

just watched the footage on TV. I am no fan of the japanese whalers... but it was 100% clear that SS rammed the Ushin Maru

3 ( +8 / -5 )

just watched the footage on TV. I am no fan of the japanese whalers... but it was 100% clear that SS rammed the Ushin Maru

The only footage they'll show you on Japanese TV is footage that seems to show the wailers in the right. The SS footage (which you will never see on Japanese TV) clearly shows the harpoon ship cutting in dangerously in front of the BB.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Cleo, surely you are about name calling a la "wailers". I have the greatest of respect for you and wince when I see you do that.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

taj, it's just a little foible I allow myself. Don't let it bother you. :-)

The names I call them in my head are way worse.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

CH3CHOFeb. 03, 2014 - 12:59PM JST

it was AGREED that the population, the age distribution, and the reproduction ratios of whales must be studied and sustainable catch limits must be set. The research is an obligation of IWC member countries. It is not a zoological research. It is scientific research for whaling.

So, research whaling... by whaling?

You know how Greenpeace does the exact same thing with other species, such as sea turtles? They tag them, attach GPS trackers, and take blood samples. Obviously such tactics would be difficult with creatures such as whales, but they don't go and kill several hundred turtles for the sake of doing "tests", thus skewing the "reproduction ratio" you speak of by taking a chunk out of the breeding population.

I'm not sure what you were trying to say, but it doesn't answer the question I was asking... if anything, you just made me think that them justifying their hunt by saying it's for "science" is even more bogus than I had thought when I posted my original question.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Sea shepherd are heroes, go get em

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The activists also threw rope at the Yushin Maru No. 1. The rope is now tangled in the ship’s screw.”

The eco-terrorist SS are up to their same old dangerous tactics of trying to disable other vessels with rope. Not much of a surprise. The eco-terrorist SS then rammed the Yushin Maru 3 from behind and are now trying to claim that the whaler must have backed into the bow of the eco-terrorist SS garbage scow Bob Barker.

I don't believe the eco-terrorist SS are fooling anyone. The people who support eco-terrorist SS violence applaud the ramming and violence. The people who reject the eco-terrorist SS violence are appalled at the deliberate ramming of the YM3. But both sides know that the YM3 didn't back into the bow of the eco-terrorist SS scow Bob Barker.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The activists also threw rope at the Yushin Maru No. 1. The rope is now tangled in the ship’s screw.”

The eco-terrorist SS are up to their same old dangerous tactics of trying to disable other vessels with rope. Not much of a surprise. The eco-terrorist SS then rammed the Yushin Maru 3 from behind and are now trying to claim that the whaler must have backed into the bow of the eco-terrorist SS garbage scow Bob Barker.

I don't believe the eco-terrorist SS are fooling anyone. The people who support eco-terrorist SS violence applaud the ramming and violence. The people who reject the eco-terrorist SS violence are appalled at the deliberate ramming of the YM3. But both sides know that the YM3 didn't back into the bow of the eco-terrorist SS scow Bob Barker, with it's stern.

-2 ( +0 / -3 )

now trying to claim that the whaler must have backed into the bow

I can find no mention of any such claim on a the SS site. They're claiming the harpoon ships repeatedly cut in front of them at high speed, and that's certainly what the video appears to show. Do you have a link to back up your statement that SS is claiming the harpoon ship backed into it? Or are you just making stuff up as you go along?

I don't believe the eco-terrorist SS are fooling anyone.

It certainly looks like the mendacious 'we're only here for the research' wailers are fooling some folk.....

both sides know that the YM3 didn't back into the bow of the eco-terrorist SS scow Bob Barker, with it's stern

Can't see that anyone's claiming that, nor is it what the video shows.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I suppose we'll get to the truth once the Australian authorities finish their investigation. However I have a question to pose. If the SS ships were standing off the Nissin Maru's stern in order to protest and stop loading, how did the harpoon ships get amongst them without maneovering dangerously? Seems this was instigated by the whalers and let's face it history shows they aren't that accurate when pointing their ships in the general direction of Sea Shepherd.

0 ( +2 / -1 )

I want to see the Japanese Defense forces doing something to stop the terrorists. Perhaps arresting them by armed commandos and putting them to a jail.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The bow of eco-terrorist SS garbage scow struck the stern of the YM3. The weasel faced capt then claimed that the YM2 (all of those Japanese boats must look the same to him?) rammed the eco-terrorist SS scow. According to the eco-terrorist SS spokesmodel, the STERN of the YM3 was driven into the BOW of the Bob Barker. It appears that weasel capt is too incompetent to have done everything possible to avoid the collision, which was happening right in front of his eyes.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The maximum speed of Sea Shepherd vessels is 16 knots, enough to keep up with the Nisshin Maru, while that of the harpoon vessels is 20 knots. That being said, how were the Sea Shepherd vessels able to get into a position to entangle the harpoon ships, as the Japanese claim? Not buying this one from Japan

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites