national

Anti-whalers find Japanese harpoon ship

39 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

Ok, what next?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

whale wars may be interesting this year

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Not much of a victory. In fact not much of anything other than to stay in the news. SSCS being told by the Australian government that those "drones" require an EIA before use is more news. Or the fuel tax.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Or the Japanese sending an armed ship into the Australian EEZ. Staying in the news is surely a good thing, staying in the public eye. http://m.theage.com.au/national/federal-action-urged-over-whalers-incursion-20120104-1pl7t.html Lets hope cool heads prevail down there but the lack of Governmental action after the ramming of the Bethune boat will surely embolden the Japanese on the Shonan Maru 2

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Both sides are money draining idiots.

0 ( +3 / -4 )

Locating the YM3 only means that the other harpoon ships are free to operate without concern of being attacked by eco-terrorist. The YM3 was probably waiting for the eco-terrorist B(oo)B to catch up to them so they could lead it around international waters on a totally useless "merry goose" chase.

''I do not recall drones being included in your EIA,'' AAD manager, Gillian Slocum said after eco-terrorist use of drones became public. ''If you do intend to use them in the Antarctic Treaty area then this activity must be subject to the same assessment as the rest of your season activities have been.''

Of course, eco-terrorist Watson objected to being told what he could or couldn't do by some nobody in Australian authority. Can I assume the eco-terrorist Watson has already lodged a complaint with the Australian Green party? The same pro-violence, eco-terrorist supporting party that overrode the Australian government's decision not to allow the eco-terrorist helicopter pilot and mechanic to enter Australia.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Both sides are money draining idiots.

Probably right - but at least the environmentalists are not taking our tax money like the whale hunters.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The whalers need a hacker to knock down the drone. They should contact the Iranians.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It's a sad news the other vessel with Watson is out of the game and BB cheeses the J fleet. Watson is more experienced and is a balancing power while BB's captain will be more aggressive and blindfolded.

Japan works hard to eliminate Watson only to understand that that's the point where the tough game begins.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

spudmanreincarnated - Or the Japanese sending an armed ship into the Australian EEZ.

What "armed" ship are you talking about? Is this another "fantasy" of the ever inventive, eco-terrorist Watson or did you make this up yourself?

According to the link you provided:

Professor Rothwell said it would assist not only to watch over the whalers and Sea Shepherd, but also to demonstrate the federal government's commitment to the safety of life at sea and the suppression of maritime terrorism.

.....The federal Environment Department said that in steaming through the EEZ, Shonan Maru No. 2 was acting within its rights to free navigation under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

'"The action of the Japan Fisheries Agency vessel is legal under both international and domestic law,'' a spokeswoman said.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

It's a shame that the world is so willing to tolerate eco-terrorism and those who perpetuate it. Japan is operating within the law and within the rules and regulations of International Maritime Law. Regardless of whether it is a loophole in the whaling regulations or not does not matter, it is still within the law. The Sea Sheppard is operating as a terrorist pirate. These are the folks with the mentality that would run you off the road and kill or injure your family because you are driving a SUV.

2 ( +7 / -6 )

The word eco-terrorism is used so often. What is eco-terrorism????

A./

Commercial whaling is banned under an international treaty but Japan has since 1987 used a loophole to carry out "lethal research" in the name of science

That costs 1000 mammal lives a year that ens up on dining tables, (proven fact and even the Japanese don't deny it) that makes them earn a nice illegal profit, a monetary gain that is certainly an "eco" thing, that they gained by cheating the law , illegally misusing disaster funds, and their hands are bathing in blood?

or

B./ Volunteers try to prevent it by causing them monetary loss?

it was not an opinion just a question, maybe not without any reason.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The Munya TimesJan. 05, 2012 - 12:24PM JST The word eco-terrorism is used so often. What is eco-terrorism????

"Since 1977, when disaffected members of the ecological preservation group Greenpeace formed the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and attacked commercial fishing operations by cutting drift nets, acts of "eco-terrorism" have occurred around the globe. The FBI defines eco-terrorism as the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature."

http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/the-threat-of-eco-terrorism

Hope this helps.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

OssanAmerica

Thanks. I will read that link very carefully.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

illegally misusing disaster funds,

The disaster funds were not illegally used; funds from a extra budget that was passed because of the disaster were used to put JCG personnel on the whaling vessels. The funds were JOG funds not donations and it is their prerogative to use the money as they see fit. I am not defending the moral issue of whaling, just the rule of law. Eco-terrorists flaunt due process and reason to further their agenda. Let’s face it, the Japanese are limited in how many whales they can take for “research” this amount in no way is capable of depleting the whale population. If the whole world went back to whaling, then there would be a problem. Sea Sheppard is a group of Zealots who girdle themselves in a holy mantle of saving the ocean and ride off on a crusade to trample international law and anyone who disagrees with their violent doctrine. They revel in violence and media attention. They routinely break the law and endanger people in the name of conserving nature, if they were anything other than eco-terrorists , they would be working within the law to eliminate the whaling loophole in a lawful and civilized manner.

4 ( +7 / -4 )

Thanks Riffraff for the very clear exlpanation on both the whaling funds and the nature of SSCS.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

If the whole world went back to whaling, then there would be a problem.

Yes, there would be. And they don't which is a fact against a hypothetical point of an arguments. They have a good reason for not going back. The point is Japan went back.

Sea Sheppard is a group of Zealots.......

Well, that's the way they do but they must have some point if we consider that Australia sued Japan officially and is dragging them to the international court. No physical interception, though.

Moreover, SSCs has more and more supporters while Japan losing more and more and is left without friendly relations with any other countries.

They routinely break the law

Japan routinely toys with the law and evades the law.

Personally, I am trying to be impartial, I don't approve what SSCS does, neither what Japan does, but I like to listen even what my opponents or enemies say. Doing so all I can see that SSCS is not that black and Japan is not remotely so white and righteous as they say.

Also, the term eco-terrorist must have a very different meaning when is understood from legal points and carries different meaning from the point of common sense and interpretation.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

RiifRaff.

SS does the time warp year after year and they should be arrested for high treason on the open seas.

They are a danger and should be locked up. Now we need to find loop holes in the laws to do just that.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

They have a good reason for not going back. The point is Japan went back.

Japan never stopped whaling, neither did Norway or Iceland. The United States still allows limited whaling. But since you never hear anything Norway or Iceland or… God Forbid… the United States, all the hatred is focused on Japan. The Nords and Icelanders are looked upon as politically correct countries and therefore get a free pass. Besides they are “European” and therefore the good guys on the world scene. The United States has enough quasi-eco-terrorists that make donations to Sea Sheppard to ensure the US is not vilified in a too serious manner. Don’t want to foul you own nest eh? The other factor is Japan goes down below the 50th parallel to whale, way off the grid for law enforcement, so any eco-terrorist activities not caught on tape become hearsay. Sailors have a saying for that area….. Below the 40th latitude there is no law; below the 50th there is no god;

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

OssanAmerica: Yeah, that kind of definition helps if you believe the FBI 'definition' as absolutely true. It's not a bad definition... I'm just saying.

Anyway, good on SS for finding them. Now go get 'em!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Well, Australia took legal steps, we will see how the case ends. I do regard this step for :

If it fully justifies Japan's action, then possibly no other countries will sue Japan for some time and Japan will have all the means to legally remove SSCS.

If Japan lose they can't even go out for whaling, scientific or not, and SSCS usefulness will run out and they won't go where there are no Japanese.

By all means I prefer legal solution, hopefully something positive will happen. I mean positive is, whatever that can end this dangerous skirmish in one way or other.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The whalers need a hacker to knock down the drone. They should contact the Iranians. .......................

already in the works, didn't we read a few days ago on JT that J government started " cyber weapons " ?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Riffraff - "Japan never stopped whaling"

Oh contraire, Japan did in fact agree to the moratorium ine xchange for fishing rights off the US coast. When those fishing rights were rescinded Japan then came up with the 'Research' whaling programme as a way of maintaining a veneer of legality. The number of whales Japan takes is not in fact limited. They can take as many as they decide to declare.

"But since you never hear anything Norway or Iceland or… God Forbid… the United States, all the hatred is focused on Japan"

Again incorrect. Norway and Iceland both lodged objections to the moratorium and continue to hunt. Pressure is brought to bear and very publicly too. The Norway and Iceland hunt are heavily criticised by the EU. There are annual and very public demonstrations at the Faroes hunts which like Japans are often justified on the basis of maintaining food culture.

Muddying the waters with technical arguments of legality, paltry results of research from bought and paid for scientists, accusations of racism and cultural imperialism, name calling and nationalism are great tools of deflection for the lobbyists.

Diplomacy, and lobbying has fallen on deaf ears. Sea Shepherds robust demonstration is proving effective at raising the public profile of the cruelty of whaling and the ongoing madness of overfishing. More grist to their mill!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

These fools need to get a real job and while they at it they should get a flaming life too.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

People say the whaling is legal. Okay. I guess it is.

But then they say that the actions of SS are illegal. Are they? The only person I remember getting arrested was the guy who boarded the whaling vessel. So if all their actions are illegal, why so few arrested?

The way I see it, neither the actions of SS nor the retaliation by the whalers is all above board. But, welcome to the high seas!

You know, this could all end if the whalers just stopped whaling. I can't see how its necessary or even profitable of itself.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The Munya Times - Moreover, SSCs has more and more supporters while Japan losing more and more and is left without friendly relations with any other countries.

Japan does trillions of euros/dollars/yen of international business with other nations. That's not going to end.

Most of the world's population doesn't care about whales. Most nations don't care about whaling. There is a vocal minority that promotes the violence of the eco-terrorist SS. They like to pretend that they speak for a majority.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

smithinjapanJan. 05, 2012 - 03:53PM JST OssanAmerica: Yeah, that kind of definition helps if you believe the FBI 'definition' as absolutely true. It's not a bad >definition... I'm just saying.

Yes, I am not at all surprised that you should question the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a U.S. Federal law enforcement agency's own definition of "eco-terrorism".

Anyway, good on SS for finding them. Now go get 'em!

I am also not surprised that you support criminal violent actions without authorization or jursdiction as long as the target is "Japan" in some form.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

SwissToni - Muddying the waters with technical arguments of legality, paltry results of research.....

It's been established that the whalers are operating in international waters which any nation, technically-speaking, is entitled to use.

It's also been established that research is being conducted. Research that you don't agree with or recognize as legitimate but you are not in a position to force others to do your bidding.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

The Munya TimesJan. 05, 2012 - 02:56PM JST "If the whole world went back to whaling, then there would be a problem." Yes, there would be. And they don't which is a fact against a hypothetical point of an arguments. They have a good >reason for not going back. The point is Japan went back.

No, Japan did not "go back". They are conducting research whaling as authorized under IWC Article VIII and complying with it in it's entirety. They are authorized to conduct research whaling and are exempt from moratoriums and sanctuaries, and must consume the whales that are taken.

"A major area of discussion in recent years has been the issuing of permits by member states for the killing of whales for scientific purposes. The use of such permits is not new. The right to issue them is enshrined in Article VIII of the 1946 Convention. Whilst member nations must submit proposals for review, in accordance with the Convention, it is the member nation that ultimately decides whether or not to issue a permit, and this right overrides any other Commission regulations including the moratorium and sanctuaries. Article VIII also requires that the animals be utilised once the scientific data have been collected."

http://iwcoffice.org/conservation/permits.htm

"Sea Sheppard is a group of Zealots.....".

Well, that's the way they do but they must have some point if we consider that Australia sued Japan officially and is >dragging them to the international court. No physical interception, though.

What Australia is doing, ie; pursuing a lawful means to stop the research whaling is the right thing to do. What SSCS is doing, resorting to acts of criminal violence is not.

Moreover, SSCs has more and more supporters while Japan losing more and more and is left without friendly >relations with any other countries.

Nonsense. SSCS's activites have hardened Japan's position and undermined the efforts of "real" conservation groups like Greenpeace abd the World Wildlife Fund.

"They routinely break the law"

Japan routinely toys with the law and evades the law.

Really? Please cite examples.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

TinMadDog - People say the whaling is legal. Okay. I guess it is.

But then they say that the actions of SS are illegal. Are they? The only person I remember getting arrested was the guy who boarded the whaling vessel. So if all their actions are illegal, why so few arrested?

You know, this could all end if the whalers just stopped whaling. I can't see how its necessary or even profitable of itself.

Since when is it "legal" for a private, non-government-authorized, group to drop bottles of acid from helicopters or launch glass bottles of acid and throw red phosphorus flares from Dutch, Australian, and New Zealand registered vessels onto another nations vessels?

If you want to end the eco-terrorist attacks then you should be demanding that NZ, AUS, and NL remove the eco-terrorist ships from their national registry the same way several other nations have done. No registration (flag) = no entering/leaving any nations ports.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Arrestpaul, your arguments are all manufactured doubt designed to undermine confidence. Until the ICJ makes its determination the whalers are technically operating within the law. However it's impossible to argue that the method of killing whales is anything other than cruel. That is why the whalers can never be in the right and this issue can't go away.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

TinMadDogJan. 05, 2012 - 11:30PM JST People say the whaling is legal. Okay. I guess it is. But then they say that the actions of SS are illegal. Are they? The only person I remember getting arrested was the >guy who boarded the whaling vessel. So if all their actions are illegal, why so few arrested?

For one, the reason they aren't arrested immediately is because they deliberately operate in international waters where no specific country's legal jurisdiction applies. Peter Bethune, who boarded a Japanese vessel was arrested under Japanese laws because the laws of the flag of the vessel apply onboard. SSCS and Paul Watson has a long history of being charged and arrested.

"Watson was sentenced to 10 days in prison and fined $8,000 for his actions during a Canadian seal hunt protest in 1980. He was convicted of assaulting a police officer. He was also found guilty under the Seal Protection Act for painting harp seal pups red and being on what is known as the "front". Watson was arrested in 1993 in Canada on charges stemming from actions against CubaCuba The Republic of Cuba is a socialist state in the Caribbean. The nation of Cuba consists of the main island of Cuba, the Isla de la Juventud, and several archipelagos. Havana is the largest city in Cuba and the country's capital. Santiago de Cuba is the second largest city... n and Spanish fishing boats off the coast of Newfoundland. In 1997, Watson was convicted in absentiaIn absentia In absentia is Latin for "in the absence". In legal use it usually means a trial where the defendant is not present, and pertains to a defendant's right to be present in court proceedings in a criminal trial.... and sentenced to serve 120 days in jail by a court in LofotenLofoten Lofoten is an archipelago and a traditional district in the county of Nordland, Norway. Though lying within the Arctic Circle, the archipelago experiences one of the world's largest elevated temperature anomalies relative to its high latitude.-Etymology:... , Norway on charges of attempting to sink the small scale Norwegian fishing and whaling vessel Nybrænna on 26 December 1992. Dutch authorities refused to hand him over to Norwegian authorities although he did spend 80 days in detention in the Netherlands pending a ruling on extradition before being released.

There have not been any successful attempts at prosecuting Watson for his activities with Sea Shepherd since the trial in Newfoundland. Watson himself defends his actions as falling within international lawInternational law Public international law concerns the structure and conduct of sovereign states; analogous entities, such as the Holy See; and intergovernmental organizations. To a lesser degree, international law also may affect multinational corporations and individuals, an impact increasingly evolving beyond... , in particular Sea Shepherd's right to enforce maritime regulations against illegal whalers and sealers. Watson caught a Costa Rican fishing boat poaching in Guatemalan waters while he was on a journey to Costa RicaCosta Rica Costa Rica , officially the Republic of Costa Rica is a country in Central America, bordered by Nicaragua to the north, Panama to the east and south, the Pacific Ocean to the west and south and the Caribbean Sea to the east... , having been invited by its president to help in the fight against shark poaching there. The authorities in Costa Rica later filed a charge of attempted murder against Watson and a colleague, Rob Stewart, in what Watson and Stewart have described as an effort to cover up mafia-funded illegal shark finning operations. They eventually fled to international waters to escape arrest by Costa Rican coast guards after they had filmed what they attest was mafia-funded shark-finning in private docks. These events are featured in SharkwaterSharkwater Sharkwater is a 2007 Canadian documentary film written and directed by Rob Stewart, who also narrates it. In the film, Stewart seeks to deflate current attitudes about sharks, and exposes how the voracious shark-hunting industry is driving them to extinction.Filmed in high definition video,... , a documentary about sharks and activism.

Watson was also told to leave Iceland after disabling two ships in harbor and turning himself in to the Icelandic police . Kristjan Loftsson of Iceland's largest whaling company told The New Yorker that Watson is persona non grataPersona non grata Persona non grata , literally meaning "an unwelcome person", is a legal term used in diplomacy that indicates a proscription against a person entering the country... in that country.

In April 2010, the Japanese Coast Guard obtained an arrest warrant for Watson "...on suspicion of ordering sabotage activities against Japan's whaling fleet", and InterpolInterpol Interpol, whose full name is the International Criminal Police Organization – INTERPOL, is an organization facilitating international police cooperation... has listed him as wanted at the request of Japan. The blue noticeInterpol notice An Interpol notice or international notice is issued by Interpol to share information between its members. There are seven types, six of which are known by their colour codes.... asks national police forces to provide information on Watson's whereabouts and activities, but does not seek an arrest."

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Paul_Watson

The way I see it, neither the actions of SS nor the retaliation by the whalers is all above board. But, welcome to the >high seas! You know, this could all end if the whalers just stopped whaling. I can't see how its necessary or even profitable of >itself.

Why should the whalers stop conducting a totally legal activity sanctioned and authorized by the IWC just because of the threat of criminal violence?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

SSCS being told by the Australian government that those "drones" require an EIA before use is more news

More like a damp squib. They have the EIA.

http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/2012/01/04/australia-approves-the-use-of-drones-by-sea-shepherd-1308

*I refer to the additional Preliminary Assessment of Environmental Impacts submitted in relation to the proposed activity to be conducted, namely the conduct of Operation Divine Wind by Sea Shepherd Australia Pty Ltd including the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.

In accordance with section 12N(2) of the Act, the delegate has considered the additional information and has determined that the activity is likely to have no more than a negligible impact on the environment. Accordingly, the authorization issued under section 12F of the Act, subject to your compliance with the conditions set out in the attached Determination and Authorization, has been varied to include the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as proposed.*

1 ( +1 / -0 )

SwissToni - your arguments are all manufactured doubt designed to undermine confidence. Until the ICJ makes its determination the whalers are technically operating within the law. However it's impossible to argue that the method of killing whales is anything other than cruel.

So you're saying that the whalers are actually operating within the current rules, laws, and regulations regarding whaling in international waters.

Technically, legally, and in reality, the eco-terrorist SS are repeatedly using acts of violence to force their zealotry on others. Currently, the eco-terrorist SS are trying to disable the YM3 and injure it's crew. You must be very proud of their feeble attempt.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

No mate, I'm saying the whalers are arguing on a technicality. The ICJ will decide whether they're operating within the law or not.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I'm proud that the crew of the BB have the courage of their convictions to resist the torture of wild animals.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@ Ossan America - is there really a need to persist in cutting and pasting from Wikipedia reams and reams of superfluous information in your posts? Like this:

The Republic of Cuba is a socialist state in the Caribbean. The nation of Cuba consists of the main island of Cuba, the Isla de la Juventud, and several archipelagos. Havana is the largest city in Cuba and the country's capital. Santiago de Cuba is the second largest city

and this -

Costa RicaCosta Rica Costa Rica , officially the Republic of Costa Rica is a country in Central America, bordered by Nicaragua to the north, Panama to the east and south, the Pacific Ocean to the west and south and the Caribbean Sea to the east.

and this -

persona non grataPersona non grata Persona non grata , literally meaning "an unwelcome person", is a legal term used in diplomacy that indicates a proscription against a person entering the country...

With respect, we are able to use Wikipedia to access information on the location of countries. We know what Persona non Grata means. Cutting and pasting in order to pad out a 2-foot long post does not mean your argument is therefore stronger than say a 3 line job!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

All readers back on topic please. Posts that do not focus on what is in the story will be removed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SwissToni - I'm proud that the crew of the BB have the courage of their convictions to resist the torture of wild animals.

The eco-terrorist BB is currently attacking and trying to disable a vessel that wasn't actively whaling. That's nothing to be proud of.

SwissToni - No mate, I'm saying the whalers are arguing on a technicality. The ICJ will decide whether they're operating within the law or not.

And until a decision is made, you intend to support and promote violence as a means to your end.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

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