national

Japanese whaler, activist ship Bob Barker again collide off Antarctica

122 Comments

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

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

122 Comments
Login to comment

It is like a demolishing derby on the "High Seas." Who will bring out the Tyrannosaurus Rex that breathes fire with the Kung fu grip first?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tone it down? To what? BB guns and slingshots? I don't understand how these attacks go on and nothing is done to stop them. If they were on land, wouldn't they all be arrested for assault?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good some people are away from the worldly affairs , barking and colliding with each other that too with high pride !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Arrested by whom?

wouldn't they all be arrested for assault?

Good to see no-one was hurt again, but it's only a matter of time. J Whalers should go home!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They are legally allowed to fish whales. The Sea Shepherd Society is in the wrong. If they want to fight take them to court and prove their case otherwise stop the crap... By the way i dont agree with the whaling practise but what they are doing is within the law.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

New Zealand and Australia may send out a Naval vessel each to observe the protest. Then we will see who is right and who is wrong.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Makukun is exactly right. "Critics say the scientific program is a front for commercial whaling, and much of the meat is eaten." Yes, that's also true, but it's also exactly in accord with the arrangement forced on Japan by the IWC. It is entirely to save the face of the IWC that this silly arrangement exists.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hope the Bob Barker also goes down like Ady Gil.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I thought that they usually finished their slaughter by the end of January

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dead whalers=2 Dead activists=0

Whose winning this war?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Makukun is exactly right. "Critics say the scientific program is a front for commercial whaling, and much of the meat is eaten." Yes, that's also true, but it's also exactly in accord with the arrangement forced on Japan by the IWC. It is entirely to save the face of the IWC that this silly arrangement exists.

Well in essence there would be no IWC if Japan could not whale. Some fat cats would lose their big expensive homes if whaling was banned internationally.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Typical Japanese ineptitude right here when it can't even stick to pro-whaling principle by leaving the IWC nor giving these whalers adequate protection from SS apart form a 'protest'

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese ICR has photos and videos of the incident: http://www.icrwhale.org/gpandsea-img.htm http://www.icrwhale.org/gpandsea.htm

Seems Sea Shepherd is trying to blind the whalers with high-power green pen lasers as well as throwing smoke bombs onto the whaling ships.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They are legally allowed to fish whales

Sorry to be pedantic, but Makukun it is "hunt whales" - they actually aren't fish (as most Japanese believe).

Seems Sea Shepherd is trying to blind the whalers with high-power green pen lasers as well as throwing smoke bombs onto the whaling ships.

Cry me a river over these poor whalers, cadmium. The rest of the world isn't.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sea Shepherd founder Captain Paul Watson is nothing but a Terrorist. The Japanese Navy should escort the Whaling ship and shoot the Terrorists. Paul Watson you are a Terrorist. Your ship should be fired upon and sunk.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese Navy should escort the Whaling ship and shoot the Terrorists.

Controversial statement, considering Japan has no constitutional right to shoot anyone...let alone in Antarctic waters. They would be well out of their limited depth, brother.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SS won't be able to stop the whaling by throwing smoke bombs.

Ramming another ship in the middle of the sea is not a legal way to complain about SS harassment. The whalers are doing much worse by ramming. Piracy laws need to be reviewed and proper action taken.

Definitely navies should get involved.

The videos on both sites are usually edited in favor of whoever is publishing them. We need an objective third party to document this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cadmium above: dead link for me. :8(...

J news sources are saying the BB came too close so the J ship turned away. This would account for a) the hole in BB's hull, and b) possible damage to the J ship's screw(s) or rudder, although they are saying as of this evening that there was no damage.

So now we have Paul Watson's version, and the preliminary whalers' version of the latest hit. Piccie here: http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20100206-00000029-maip-int.view-000

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SS Bob Barker's ship is hoisting the Norwegian flag. He ignores the rule. Norway is now accusing SS about it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am quite anti whaling, but emotions are running far too high on both sides. I wil be upset to see deaths,but it may happen if this continues.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I always find it humourous when people ask questions like, "Why aren't they complaining that we eat cows?", as kwatt is suggesting.

kwatt: are cows endangered? are whales domestic (farm) animals? do cows pose a threat to the consumer with extremely high mercury levels? and as was pointed out to you above, the Japanese side is supposedly not about the meat, but about the science, no?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is a thread about whales. Mod don't like folk going off topic.

Not really. No whales were involved in this collision between whalers and eco-terrorists.

If cows were killed the same way whales are killed, there'd be all hell >to play, and rightly so.

Whales suffer less than cows in slaughhterhouses. At least they have a chance at evasion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

i have seen whale hunting on telly and i can assure you the deaths i saw >were long and prolonged, causing the whale terrible suffering. Granted >these may be the exeption but the suffering is true and cows do not take >up to 35 minutes to die.

Mildred you are misinformed and misguided. Death through loss of blood over whatever prolonged period of time poses the least suffering to animals. 35 minutes or 35 houtrs makes no differnce. Anumals don't suffer during loss of blood. Cows don't immediately die on impact, you can find videos taken from slaughterhoues where the cows don't die and are repeatedly hammered while they are concious, falling and standing. Even a steak lover like me can see that the animal is aware of what is happening and clearly suffering.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To the Japanese whaling fleet; pull into an Australian port, we'll be waiting for ya boys!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a hypocritical statement, cows suffer when continually hit with a >bolt gun, but a whale harpooned & dragged upside down to drown in its >own blood does not!?!?!

Harpoons have explosive heads and on contact transfer an enorous amount of energy to the target, usually causing instananeous death. In the event that such instantaneous death does not occur the damage is so great that there is little "awareness" left. The body being in water faciliates the death by bleeding which is a painless non-suffering way to kill any animal.

Where do you get these facts?

From having killed deer by both firearm and by bow. Do you have as much personal on-hand experience with killing animals?

The same place as you get the "fact" it is only Australia that agrees to >the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

The United States does not recognize it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

& once again the BIG difference between whales & cows is cows are NOT >endangered. I do not eat either, but the poaching of endangered species >is ILLEGAL

Then do you support the hunting of the abundant nowhere near endangered Minke whales? Which incidentally compete with the endangered Blue and Fin whales for the very same plankton and under a normal conservation program would be "culled" for that reason?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That is funny because SSCS has never lost a crewmember while out at sea, yet the Japanese whaling fleet has lost 2 in recent years!!! Who's incompetent "seamen" died? Not SSCS...

& by Japans reports of the accident with the AG, it was a unfortunate accident, yet it was the J-whaling vessels approach, from her port quarter,(illegal by maritime law), to the AG that caused the same accident, once again an incompetent Captain at the helm of a J-vessel, very similarly 2 J-fishing vessels fired on for being in banned waters recently, yet they both had GPS's on board! I think the incompetence has been shown to be Japanese seamanship many times over...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, your claim that America does not recognise the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, is also completely wrong, it also a signatuary on said document, & to prove it;

Given the lack of any evidence that Japan is bringing its whaling activities into conformance with the recommendations of the IWC, I am directing the Secretary of State under the Packwood-Magnuson Amendment to withhold 100 percent of the fishing privileges that would otherwise be available to Japan in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Japan has requested the opportunity to fish for 3,000 metric tons of sea snails and 5,000 metric tons of Pacific whiting. These requests will be denied. In addition, Japan will be barred from any future allocations of fishing privileges for any other species, including Pacific cod, until the Secretary of Commerce determines that the situation has been corrected. [50]

U.S. President Ronald Reagan, 1988

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan has no constitutional right to shoot anyone...let alone in Antarctic waters.

I'm willing to make an exception for the Japanese Navy in this case: torpedo and sink the morons on the Sea Shepherd. Whether you agree with whaling or not, the Japanese are not breaking any int'l laws. When you provoke and endanger vessels in international waters, as these Sea Shepherd pinheads do, expect retaliation. Next!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This site is really lacking in photos. What gives?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am quite anti whaling, but emotions are running far too high on both sides. I will be upset to see deaths, but it may happen if this continues.

And if it does, you can thank the Sea Shepherd captain, who breaks about 50 international maritime laws every time he takes his boat out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

J-whaling vessels have broken every rule in the Maritime rulebook, about time they get tried for their crimes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Looking forward to another SS boat being sunk. Course, even they aren't so stupid as to park a boat in front of an oncoming ship. At least not twice. Wonder when they'll realize that maintaining some distance while at sea, is a good thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"they actually aren't fish (as most Japanese believe)." Huh? I've never met a Japanese person who thought they were fish. We actually have schools here where people learn such basic facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am directing the Secretary of State under the Packwood-Magnuson >Amendment to withhold 100 percent of the fishing privileges that would >otherwise be available to Japan in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone.

The Japanese are hunting whales today because we screwed them over on fishing rights. You do know that don't you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese are hunting whales today because we screwed them over on fishing rights. You do know that don't you?

You have that backwards. They were revoked their privilege because they insisted on ignoring rebukes about their whaling violations.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm willing to make an exception for the Japanese Navy in this case: torpedo and sink the morons on the Sea Shepherd.

Hardly a mission for the JMSDF. It'll be enough for a couple of JCG clippers to go along with the fleet and pepper the SS with nicely placed 20mm rounds. They had plenty of practice from sinking the alleged NK spy ship from back in 2003, they should do fine against the SS pirates.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hardly a mission for the JMSDF. It'll be enough for a couple of JCG clippers to go along with the fleet and pepper the SS with nicely placed 20mm rounds. They had plenty of practice from sinking the alleged NK spy ship from back in 2003, they should do fine against the SS pirates.

Dream on, Japan. Giving more reasons for the world to hate you might not be such a good idea. Boycott Japanese products, the calls are getting louder, and louder.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Japanese are hunting whales today because we screwed them over on fishing rights. You do know that don't you?

Oh, so you now admit the research is a bold faced lie, and are now blaming the USA, the Japan appeaser has harpooned his previous statements. Poor Japan, always the victim.

Congress will have to ponder future sanctions, Bob Barker, has a few friends in America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The icr are usually quick off the mark to get their 'look at how the big bad tewwowwists are attacking our poor innocent widdle scientific wesearch vessels' videos, but this time, although they're complaining that the 'Togo-registered Bob Barker' 'suddenly approached' the YM3, causing a collision, their video of the incident is conspicuous by its absence. The best they can come up with is evil stink-bombs from a dastardly catapult. Why is that, one wonders.

Maybe because it was impossible to get video of the BB shot from the YM3 without showing the NM butcher ship on the other side, making it clear that the BB was unable to manoeuvre to avoid the approach of the YM3, and that it was in fact the YM3 that caused the collision?

But the upright, respectable, scientific researchers carrying the ancient traditions of Japan on their shoulders wouldn't stoop to such dishonesty-by-omission....would they?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Paul Watson attacks ships, he is responsible for dangerous acts causing human lives at risk. He is specifically targeting Japanese whale hunters, not those of Norway. The reason is that the Norwegian marine sees any violent action against it's whale fleet as an act of war, they warned him before for that. In a way Paul Watson is a very cowardly man. The Japanese marine should take an equal standpoint as the Norwegian, time of politeness should be over.

Whale hunting is very cruel, it is of a similar cruelty of hunting down any other animal. That it is a whale or a wild bore does not matter, it matters only for our human hypocrisy to give one animal (it doesn't matter if it cute or intelligent) the status of sweet and the other the status of meat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Once again Japan completely in the wrong here and resorting to bullying and violence. One day soon they will realise that the majority of people in the world (and maybe even Japan) does not support their whaling.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, so you now admit the research is a bold faced lie, and are now >blaming the USA, the Japan appeaser has harpooned his previous >statements. Poor Japan, always the victim.

Pleased change your name from guest. Here, read up and educate yourself. http://animal.discovery.com/tv/whale-wars/whaling/japan-withdraw-moratorium.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The video footage of the incedent clearly shows it was the manouvering of the YM3 that caused the collision, despite maritime laws stating a Master of a vessel must do all to avoid a collision. Even the still shots from the ICR clearly show the wake from the YM3 as it turns towards the BB for the ramming manouver. Once again we have been showed the J-whalers do not believe they have to follow this law of the sea, or any other laws, or agreements it signs up to.

P.S. Poor widdle Japanese whalers got hit by a stink bomb! This complaint coming from a vessel that only weeks ago deliberately rammed & sank another vessel, & in doing so was lucky not to kill any crew members, quite a comparison in actions, I know who the rest of the world see's as terrorists, & aggressors in this situation, NOT SSCS...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The video footage of the incedent clearly shows it was the manouvering >of the YM3 that caused the collision

hobby alot of us couldn't care less anymore. Watson is a known liar and a showman. Does anyone really believe he was ever shot? SS are running around harssing ships that whether anyone likes it or not is LEGAL. If not, let's see someone with real authority stop the whalers. Not some fat retard flying the jolly roger. If watson was responsible for 911 he'd be claiming that the building crashed into his plane.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh, so you now admit the research is a bold faced lie, and are now >blaming the USA, the Japan appeaser has harpooned his previous >statements. Poor Japan, always the victim.

I'm not claiming anything about research one way or the other. Here, please feel free to read up and educate yourself. http://animal.discovery.com/tv/whale-wars/whaling/japan-withdraw-moratorium.html"

Congress will have to ponder future sanctions, Bob Barker, has a few >friends in America.

Good luck since the FBI classifies Sea Shepherd as eco-terrorists. http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/jarboe021202.htm

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica; look mate, it doesn`t matter what side you take, both sides look like idiots.

Stop whaling in Antartica. Go back to traditional small boat laocalised whaling and the public outcry will finish, easy innit?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica; look mate, it doesn`t matter what side you take, both >sides look like idiots.

I don't particularly care about whaling. And if people want to stop it they should do it through peaceful lawful means. Greenpeace is actively anti-whaling and they don't support SS. Sea Shepherd are eco-terrorists conducting criminal activity under the guise of conservation. If you condone SS's actions where is the limit? Can anyone flaunt the law and harass and interefere im your work because they disagree with you? If you want to stop whaling in Antarctica, implore the Ozzie govt to do something through legal channels. The "public outcry" is nothing more than mostly well meaning but simple minded sheep being played by Watson.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny thing is the video I see it is the BB hitting the SM3 in the aft left side. So I'd say it was up to the BB to move the heck out of the way instead of closing the gap. How can you ram from the rear part of your ship?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bushlover, Oh i see, sorry, arent i stupid!! Of course Sea Shepherd are embarking on a mass terrorist assault on America as we speak arent they?

Let me ask you matey. Who is most likely to endanger human life SEa Sgepherd or the IRA and their cohorts?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, you keep screaming how the FBI class SSCS as terrorists, how many other musicians, actors & activists do the FBI have derogatory files on, too many to mention, were all these people truely dissedents? If SSCS is listed as a terrorist organisation then how can they have offices & the main base in America, if they were truely labeled as terrorists they would all be locked up wouldn't they? America does not let terrorist organisations opperate on its soil does it?

Previous to GP pulling out of Antarctica, "due to the increasingly violent tactics employed by the Japanese whalers", the IRC labelled them as terrorists, & even published a paper stating GP & SSCS were working together.

Japan is currently holding 2 GP members for exposing corruption in the IRC, yet has not charged the guilty IRC officials? Yet you agree with GP, well Japanese politicians do not. Just as Japan is the only country in the world that has SSCS listed as a terrorist organisation!

The world is not anti-Japanese, the world is sick of being lied to by the Japanese over whaling, it is sick of the violence used by the J-whalers, deliberately ramming vessels, & endangering lives. Funnily enough the very same thing you state SSCS is doing wrong, very hypocritical of you don't you think? & these latest round of rammings, & sinking of vessels by the Japanese is enraging the world more, & showing the Japanese whaling industry exactly for what it is, violent, & with no respect for another life, human, or whales. The world is sick of the lie; it is about research, there is no research in it, as stated by the Japanese foreign minister, "it is not about research, it is about food culture". That is why it is ILLEGAL what they are doing in Antarctica, because they are using the lie of research to hunt in a designated sanctuary, to which Japan is a signatory. You state Paul Watson lies, what about the entire lie put out by Japan to whale in Antarctica?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bushlover, as you can see in the video, the YM3 is traveling faster than the BB, then turns towards her, thus breaking the first rule of avoiding a collision, it then turns using prop thrust to swing the aft end of the boat into the BB, completeing its deliberate ramming manouver. & before you say the BB was opperating to close to the NM, you can clearly see her off in the distance, the YM3, SM2, & other harpoon boats were opperating in much closer quarters to the BB.

Japan does NOT own the oceans, other vessels have the right to use the sea without being rammed by J-whaling vessels, even if the Japanese do not agree with them protesting, they are allowed to be there without their lives being put in danger. J-fishing vessels seem to have taken notice to being shot at by the Russians, maybe the rest of the world needs to treat other J-vessels the same way?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I must say every video I see that is supposed to demonstrate ill behavior on the part of the whalers is inconclusive. I can't tell from any of these videos who is causing the crashes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

BurakuminDes i realize it is hunt whales i just misspoke. BTW most Japanese do not belive whales are fish.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone who sails a large ship on the open seas close enough alongside another in order to hurl stink bottles should expect a collision.

If such a collision doesn't happen then that in itself would be surprising.

If a collision does happen then you absolutely cannot blame the ship you are sailing close to.

To me, it's a bit like constantly and deliberately getting in Asashoryu's face when he's out drinking. The very least that will happen is you might get a grazed face from his unshaven chin. Would you then have any right to complain?

Unless you have already made a firm decision that whatever happens the other will be in the wrong de facto, because he/she is morally inferior to you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@nandakandamanda I do not think that you understand the argument. I think that there is zero doubt as to whether the Japanese boats rammed the 2 Sea Shepherd boats. The only defence/justification they have is that their "work" had been interferred with

@stevecpfc The Japanese cannot hunt whales around Japan as it would interfere with lucrative whale watching operations.That is why they go to the Antarctic

0 ( +0 / -0 )

michaeltodd. There are at least three positions.

There are many people in the world like Junnama above who have studied the videos and cannot judge either way. They see both interpetations.

There are many like you who have seen the videos and see the J whalers at fault. These people see only one side.

There are many who have seen the videos and see the Sea Shepherd boats as being in the wrong. They have little doubt.

I understand the argument (sic)... = arguments. I do not think you do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, you keep screaming how the FBI class SSCS as terrorists, >how many other musicians, actors & activists do the FBI have derogatory >files on, too many to mention, were all these people truely dissedents?

No hobby, I don't scream anything. Read he link, it's the FBI who considers SS eco-terrorists. I'm not privy to all the files the FBI may have and I wasn't aware that musicians, actors and activists were all automatically innocent of any criminal activity. That is what you are suggesting right?

If SSCS is listed as a terrorist organisation then how can they have >offices & the main base in America, if they were truely labeled as >terrorists they would all be locked up wouldn't they?

Watson has been very careful to avoid conducting any of his eco-trrprost activity in US waters or anywhere that the US might even remotely have any jurisdiction for just that reason.

Previous to GP pulling out of Antarctica, "due to the increasingly >violent tactics employed by the Japanese whalers", the IRC labelled them >as terrorists, & even published a paper stating GP & SSCS were working >together.

Well the sure aren't now, are they? Does it irk yo so much that I condone GP's lawful efforts but I don't condone SS' criminal activity?

Japan is currently holding 2 GP members for exposing corruption in the >IRC, yet has not charged the guilty IRC officials? Yet you agree with >GP, well Japanese politicians do not. Just as Japan is the only country >in the world that has SSCS listed as a terrorist organisation!

Again hobby read the link. The FBI considers SS an eco-terrorist organization. I can assure you the Canadians do too.

The world is not anti-Japanese,

No but I think you are.

the world is sick of being lied to by

No the world doesn't give a hoot either way. Just the whale huggers have their panties in a knot ton the point they can't tell right from wrong, legal from illegal.

it is sick of the violence used by the J-whalers, deliberately ramming >vessels, & endangering lives. Funnily enough the very same thing you >state SSCS is doing wrong, very hypocritical of you don't you think?

No the world is sick of Sea Shepherd and it's criminal antics. Here's a poll from an American boatring a marine forum. Most Americans consider Sea Sheperd to be criminals.

http://www.thehulltruth.com/boating-forum/260910-poll-do-you-support-sea-shepherd.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

nandakandamanda, you stated;"Anyone who sails a large ship on the open seas close enough alongside another in order to hurl stink bottles should expect a collision."

If this is true why do the Japanese continue to bring, & opperate their vessels so close to SSCS vessels? In all the photo's & video you can clearly ee the distance between the BB & the NM, the vessel they were tailing, it was the J-whaling vessels that chose to come into such close quarters with another vessel, NOT SSCS. So thank you for arguing a point for us...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

why do the Japanese continue to bring, & opperate their vessels so close >to SSCS vessels?

The Japanese whalers are there to hunt whales. SS are there to harass them and interfere with their operations by their own declaration. It is SS which stalk the whalers and approaches them to close proximity for the purpose of such intereference which includes obstruction, attempting to disable ships by entaglement with rope, shooting lasers at the whalers which despite SS's claims of being "non-lethal" are known to be capable of permanent eye damage. SS is conducting activities that the FBI calls eco-terrorism amd if they ever did this to ANY US fisheries vessel they would be arrested by the USCG, IF they survive being fired upon in the first place. The Japanese are being ridiculously passive in their dealings with the eco-terrorists by American standards. It is Sea Shepherd that is going out of their way to get clodse to the whalers therefore ANY collision, damage to life or property is the fault of Sea Shepherd. Common sense. You want to stop whaling? Do it through lawful and peaceful means, not criminal activity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hobbsy70, No, the SSCS vessels should not even be there. By their presence and by their continued attempted baiting of the whalers, they are asking for trouble.

They feed on trouble and this turns it into free publicity. This is their agenda.

They have been lucky so far, but Paul knows he is risking people's lives on this chosen path.

My impression is that the whalers have been extremely forbearing. By nature I don't think they would deliberately hit SS ships, but I certainly wouldn't blame them if they did. At the same time I do understand that the whalers probably see themselves as the last upholders of some kind of tradition, and as such, they are probably just as much extremists as the SS folks, in a kind of mirror-image way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If this is true why do the Japanese continue to bring, & opperate their vessels so close to SSCS vessels?

Ah, I see, the SS were just out in the Southern Ocean for a pleasure cruise, when they stumbled accross the Whalers, and rather then giving them wide berth, the whalers gave chase, and eventually managed to ram the fleeing SS ships. Is that the way you interpret this?

My thought is, that having searched high and low for days, they finally found the whalers, came up into close proximity, to begin their assaults, and wow, look they actually rammed into each other. What a shock. Now, who is to blame? Those going about their business? Or those who deliberately set out to sabotage that business? I believe the answer is more then obvious to anyone not completely biased.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

[What a shock. Now, who is to blame? Those going about their business? Or those who deliberately set out to sabotage that business? I believe the answer is more then obvious to anyone not completely biased.]

Yeah you're right Molenir but it is funny to read hobbsy70's posts and try to get your head around his interpretation of events. People like that make these threads "entertaining" in a word. Ossan and yourself both have a level head but these SS guys and supporters really seem to be doing too many drugs. They can't even set up a Atariya type of situation very well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

(TLDNR the thread)

Hobby writes: "So thank you for arguing a point for us..."

Ah, so you are one of them. I wonder how long you've been following the discussions on JT and whether you have seen for yourself the actual effects of the Sea Shepherd campaign on regular folk like the readers and posters here. I can fully credit SS for increasing my awareness of the different scarcity/abundance levels of certain species of whales, the fact that the IWC is a whaling group, the fact that the moratorium of the IWC was intended to allow for a resumption of whaling after stocks increased, that the moratorium calls for using any and all carcasses taken for research in order to avoid waste, etc. etc.

4 years ago I was arun of the mill "save the whaler" with little knowledge and little interest. Now I say, save the whalers and screw the smarmy publicity gits who are Sea Shepherd.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Any person with any experience operating sea going vessels, or even small vessels for that matter can tell you it is impossible to use your midships to ram another vessel, only the bow or stern can be used for such actions. Funnily enough the AG was struck by the bow of the SM2, & the BB was struck amidships by the stern of the YM3. SSCS has every right to be in these waters, they are NOT Japanese waters, they also have every right to act as a conservation group, & DO NOT need Japans approval to do so, just as GP. GP was called eco-terrorists when it went to these waters to do the exact same thing. GP stop acting in Antarctic waters, "due to the increasingly violent tactics employed by the Japanese whaling vessel", so was bullied out of Antarctica by J-whalers. J-whalers were ramming GP vessels back in 1999, long before SSCS sent ships to Antarctic waters. So it is the Captains of the J-whaling vessels who have been ramming other vessels, acting as open water pirates/terrorists, for years too, history shows us this, & unlike SSCS they are willing to put human lives at risk doing so. Vessels rammed & sunk by SSCS have all been at anchor, with NO crew aboard.

The BB was following the NM at a distance, all shots & video from ICR show this, it was the J-whaling vessels coming into close quarters with the BB, & if it is illegal to operate vessels in such close quarters, what was the Capatain of the SM2 doing a month or so back, being within distance to use his water cannon on the stern deck of the SI, in an attempt to destroy a helicopter as it was landing, once again with crew onboard? You cannot use one rule of the sea & say it applies to them, but not to us, sorry but that is blatent hypocrasy!

You say ohh but they use stinkbombs, & a photonic disrupter, sorry but the other side is using, LRAD's,(which cause permenant hearing damage), flashbombs, & by their own admission have fired firearms,(a lethal weapon), at civilians! All military grade weapons. Once again this is NOT Japanese waters they are protecting.

Japan knows it is only there to hunt whales commercially, but lies to the world, & corrupts the IWC, using the lie of "research" to hunt in a designated whale sanctuary. Japan has been repeatedly asked by both the IWC, & many trading partners to abide by its agreements in the IWC, it chooses not to, ergo its banning from American fishing grounds. Japan has NO RIGHT to commercially hunt whales in a designated sanctuary, by the Foreign Ministers own admission, it is NOT about research. Conservation groups have every right to protect animals in designated sanctuaries, these waters are NOT OWNED by Japan, far from it.

As for the FBI calling them terrorists, once again I ask you then why are they allowed to operate as a NPO in America? America does not commercially hunt whales in a designated sanctuary, under the lie of doing research, so SSCS has no need to protect whales from American harpoon boats! America abides by the treaties it signs, Japan for whatever reason does not believe it has to, as was shown just in the last week with Russian CG having to fire on & chase ILLEGAL J-fishing vessels from its waters. Fishing vessels that by the own enquiry by the JCG deliberately turned off their location devices, once again showing the skullduggery & deceipt the Japanese Fishing Industry is willing to use, & NOT abide by its agreements...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My thought is, that having searched high and low for days, they finally found the whalers, came up into close proximity, to begin their assaults

The BB positioned itself at the back of the factory ship so that whale carcasses could not be loaded for butchering, effectively putting a stop to the hunt. That is obstruction, but it is not an 'assault', nor is it dangerous. The icr propaganda page admits that the harpoon ships 'maneuvered to contain the Bob Barker and thus secure a safe distance between the Nisshin Maru' - in other words, according to the whalers themselves, it was the whalers doing the dangerous moves, not the BB.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Too bad about the Bob Barker. I never knew he was such an idiot until I found out he would purchase this ship for them and have his name adorn it. If they are playing with fire they should expect to get burned. It's funny to see the crybabies like hobbsy70 and cleo out here crying afoul when something happens. Too Funny.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The BB had no business positioning itself in close proximity to the factory ship to start with. That in itself is act of intereference and harassment that puts both vessels at risk of collision. Sea Shepherd has no jurisdiction at all, no authorization from any government or authorative body to be doing what it is doing, other than it's own self declared crusade. Put simply, it's taking the law into it's own hands, a crime in every country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

a crime in every country.

Which country is it they're in?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

[Which country is it they're in?]

Let me get that for you cleo. International Waters. It's not one country's waters so if it's not a crime in Australia it's still a crime. One day your beloved Sea Shepherds will be paying by having licenses and insurance revoked. So who insures the Steve Irwin and Bob Barker? ... oh and Ady Gil at that matter.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The BB was at a safe distance from the NM, this is clearly shown in all the ICR photo's. By their own admissions from the ICR, it was the J-whaling vessels that engaged the BB, & came within close quarters with it, NOT the BB attacking them.

Bushlover I think it is a sad inditment on yourself & your intelligence level when all you can bring to the argument is this completely wrong assumption;"these SS guys and supporters really seem to be doing too many drugs."

For a start the crew on the SSCS vessels have checked in & left ports, do you really think customs let them take drugs onboard?

Secondly I am university educated, & also have completed a Boatbuilding degree, & do NOT do any drugs, sorry to dissapoint you, & destroy that assumption, & senseless argument that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. It is sad that all you can do is to personally attack others rather than coming up with a valid reason for the J-whalers ramming civilian vessels.It clearly shows your lack of understanding of the situation, & where you want to take the discussion, & how you want to make it an emotional argument. Lift your game or bow out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taj, I an a coservationist yes, & support SSCS yes, but am not one of them, I am Aus director of another conservation group.

"I can fully credit SS for increasing my awareness of the different scarcity/abundance levels of certain species of whales, the fact that the IWC is a whaling group, the fact that the moratorium of the IWC was intended to allow for a resumption of whaling after stocks increased"

I am glad you have been educated by SSCS, but you seem to be wrong on one point, the IWC was set up to protect whales. It was not set up because countries like Japan were destroying everything, & anything they could lay their harpoons on, & continued to do so even after the moratorium. It was set up to protect the oceans, because when you take one creature out of an ecosystem, you then destroy the whole ecosystem. It was set up because extinction is forever, not just for a few years then they replenish, & that is the way it was headed, & still would be if Japan had its way. Remember these quotas are NOT given by the IWC, the Japanese government gives its own quotas, despite many attempts by the IWC, & many trading nations with Japan to get them to stop this senseless slaughter...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

a crime in every country. Which country is it they're in?

"A crime in every country" means that it is universally accepted on this planet by civilized peoples and nations. Or perhaps you are suggesting that because no country has legal jurisdiction over these Antarctic waters, Sea Shepherd is free to do as they please?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

coming up with a valid reason for the J-whalers ramming civilian vessels.

Civilian vessels that are harassing and interfering the whalers operations despite having no authority or jurisdiction to do so. If the whalers are acting illegally SS can go inform the proper authorities who do have the authority to enforce laws. Not take the law into their own hands.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica;"Or perhaps you are suggesting that because no country has legal jurisdiction over these Antarctic waters, Sea Shepherd is free to do as they please?"

This exactly the argument you have used before stating Australia has no juristiction over these waters! So what are you saying now, Japan does?!?! & J-whalers are free to act as they please, not abide by any maritime laws, & ram other vessels with complete impunity? Japan does not own these waters, SSCS does not need permission from Japan to protest these ILLEGAL actions by the J-whalers, they are well within their rights to be there. & as the BB was breaking no maritime laws the other day,(just as the AG wasn't either), the J-whalers have no right to deliberately ram these vessels. Even if they were breaking any laws that does not give J-whaling vessels the right to ram another vessel, that is the law, J-whalers need to start abiding by it...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I do understand that the whalers probably see themselves as the last upholders of some kind of tradition,

@nandakadamanda What tradition exactly? Harpoons with explosive heads launched off large ships using sonar in the Antarctic? This is not traditional.It is barbaric, unnecessary and because research has nothing to do with it also illegal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

[Taj, I an a coservationist yes, & support SSCS yes, but am not one of them, I am Aus director of another conservation group.]

Ahhhh this is why we hear the same rhetoric post after post about "J-Whalers ramming civilian vessels". I got you now. You are totally and completely BIASED.

The J-Whalers have the right to be there. The SSCS has the right to be there. The SSCS does not have the right to interfere with other vessels. It's called piracy. The SSCS is responsible for an accident at sea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is not traditional.It is barbaric, unnecessary and because research has nothing to do with it also illegal.

So True!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hobby says, "the IWC was set up to protect whales. "

The IWC homepage History page says, "... and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry."

I am a conservationist of the kind that grew up in a natural environment: where humans are considered one part of the ecology.

I ask, why do you insist this controlled killing is "senseless slaughter"? Would you consider any killing of wild animals the same? Do you believe that there can be a sensible slaughter of whales or other ocean mammals at some point in the future? Does you concern extent to sharks?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

(Sorry about the mistake in your name, Hobbsy70!)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is barbaric, unnecessary and because research has nothing to do with it also illegal>

According to what law(s)?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yes 'Taj" my concern also extends to sharks, I am currently running a campaign in Aus to remove all shark nets, because they also kill indescriminately, & senselessly. I am also involved in campaigns to end shark finning, so yes my interests are not just with whales, but all animals, especially ones inhabitants of the oceans. The oceans require balanced ecosystems, & by removing apex predators you destroy this balance, & in turn destroy the ecosystem, & the oceans & its ecosystems a responsible for also sustaining life on land. Therefore when we destroy one, we also destroy the other.

Scientific studies have shown using DNA that the very same whales Japan is now hunting were once much more prevelent, so their numbers are NOT at such a state they can be continually slaughtered. To the contrary, these studies have also shown a decrease in their numbers during the "scientific" hunts by Japan. 600,000 of a species on the planet is NOT considered prevelent, African elephants number slightly less & are protected as endangered, just as Minke & Fin whales are listed on the CITIES critical list.

Also on the opening page of the IWC;"prescribe open and closed seasons and areas for whaling; and prohibit the capture of suckling calves and female whales accompanied by calves."

Yet Japan continues to hunt in perscribed sanctuaries, it continues to hunt suckling calves & mothers accompanied by calves, so if you are going to use one sentence also include the rest which shows exactly why what Japan is doing is ILLEGAL, & against conventions & treaties it has signed. For the record that one line you use was put in at the insistency of the Japanese, no other country in the IWC. Therefore it is a senseless slaughter, NOT a controlled killing, if it was they would abide by the regulations of the IWC, & there wouldbe no need for any organisation to protest or prevent & document their actions...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bushlover;"The J-Whalers have the right to be there. The SSCS has the right to be there. The SSCS does not have the right to interfere with other vessels. It's called piracy. The SSCS is responsible for an accident at sea."

NOT if they are caused by another vessel not abiding to the rules of safe navigation. As is clearly shown in the ICR photo's the distance between the BB & the NM, as was stated by said ICR, our ship approached & engaged the BB, & in doing so came into close quarters, & created the contact between the vessels, just as the SM2 came around onto the AG, from a totally ILLEGAL position I may add. Ships are not allowed to overtake, cut across, cause a collision, as has been done by the YM3. Even if a vessel has opperated dangerously, or you do not agree with what they are doing, that DOES NOT give you the right to ram them. & under what juristiction do the JCG have in Antarctic waters? It is not Japanese waters, other vessels are allowed to opperate there without the permission of the Japanese government, or does Japan own all the sea's now? If the BB rammed the stern of the Nm you woud have an argument, but it did not, neither do you...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hobbsy70 at 12:51 PM JST - 8th February

This exactly the argument you have used before stating Australia has no >juristiction over these waters! So what are you saying now, Japan >does?!?! & J-whalers are free to act as they please, not abide by any >maritime laws, & ram other vessels with complete impunity?

When a ship gets in your way to harass it takes a risk. Sea Shepherd are deliberately putting all ships at risk.

Japan does not own these waters, SSCS does not need permission from >Japan to protest these ILLEGAL actions by the J-whalers,

ILLEGAL by what standards? You just said that Australia has no jurisdiction. ILLEGAL according who? Sea Shepherd?

they are well within >their rights to be there. & as the BB was breaking >no maritime laws the other day,(just as the AG wasn't either), the J->whalers have no right to deliberately ram these vessels. Even if they ?>were breaking any laws that does not give J-whaling vessels the right to >ram another vessel, that is the law, J-whalers need to start abiding by >it...

That's a load of bull. SEa Shepherds ships, if they deliberately approach another ship for the purpose of harassment and interference, are breaking the laws of the high seas. End of argument.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sea Shepherd brought a diesel-powered powerboat to those pristine waters and danced around big lumbering whaling ships until they ran out of diesel. As they were idling along, laughing at the success of their tactics that day and what fun they had had, the whalers' ship caught up with them. We know what happened next.

The BB then emptied her out to some extent and started towing her towards land. 30 or 40 kilometers later enough water had poured in to make towing no longer feasible, so they unhitched the line and let her sink! Who eventually sank the Ady Gil in those waters? Go figure. Protecting the whales by messing up the environment?

Michael Todd. Granted it's barbaric, but then so are slaughterhouses. And what are those ships that they are using? These are not ships they have suddenly built out of the blue. They are the physical manifestation of an industry that once was viable. All right, you don't like this word 'traditional'. Sure the fishing industry in Britain or the USA is not traditional. It's, erm, a long-standing industry.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica,"When a ship gets in your way to harass it takes a risk. Sea Shepherd are deliberately putting all ships at risk."

The BB was behind the NM, it was at a safe distance, clearly shown in all video & photo's, even released of the ICR. The ICR stated its vessels "moved in", this means the BB was not in the way of J-whaling vessels, J-whaling vessels moved in on it in an attempt to harass, menace, intimidate, & eventually collide with the vessel. If a vessel chooses to close in on another, no matter what has happened previously, the vessel that closed in is responsible for the collision. The JCG have no juristiction in Antarctic waters, it is NOT Japanese territorial waters.

"ILLEGAL by what standards? You just said that Australia has no jurisdiction. ILLEGAL according who? Sea Shepherd?". By the agreements made in the IWC. It is the IWC that has declared these waters a sanctuary, by the admissions of the Japanese Foreign Minister, "these hunts are NOT about research, they are about food culture". Therefore commercially hunting in a designated sanctuary, slaughtering mother, calves, & pregnant females is outlawed by the IWC. If the Japanese do not want to comply with these agreements then why has it signed up to them, why is it still a part of the IWC, spending millions of dollars each yr bribing 3rd world nations to vote with it? If it was not against all agreements Japan has made then why did President Reagan introduce a bill barring Japanese from fishing within American territorial waters in 1988? Why does not Japan just go & hunt in American waters despite this outlawing? Because it knows it will be shot out of the water, just as the Russian's have just done.

"That's a load of bull. SEa Shepherds ships, if they deliberately approach another ship for the purpose of harassment and interference, are breaking the laws of the high seas. End of argument.".SSCS or any other organisation, or vessel is allowed to "stand to", just as the BB was doing, & as the AG was doing. The Japanese do not own the Antarctic oceans, or any other ocean for that matter. If they want to cry when someone breaks laws, they need to abide by these very same laws themselves. They may have rammed & bullied GP out of Antarctic waters, but SSCS have stated they will not be scared off by the very same tactics employed by J-whalers.

nandakandamanda;"Sea Shepherd brought a diesel-powered powerboat to those pristine waters and danced around big lumbering whaling ships until they ran out of diesel. As they were idling along", exactly thank you for admitting that point. Guess what the J-whaling vessels are powered by? Diesel, then why are J-whalers taking,"diesel-powered powerboat to those pristine waters", then using same said vessels to deliberately ram another, with intent to sink it, in aid "pristine waters"? Once again you cannot have it one way then not another, while we are at it, why did the J-whaling fleet transfer diesel from one vessel to another,(refuel), below the 60th parallel, against the "Mexico treaty" to which Japan is a signatory, & within 12km of an endangered penguin colony if they are so concerned about the environment down there? & why deliberately ram with intent to sink another vessel, knowing the environmental damage it would cause? Once again you cannot have it both ways, saying SSCS is responsible for the sinking of a vessel, when in just a sentance previous you stated the J-whalers deliberately rammed it, & knowing the consequences of, ergo the sinking of said vessel.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So OssanAmerica, you being an experienced hunter as you have previously stated, when you are hunting if you see someone behaving irresponsibly does that give you the right to shoot them, because you did not like/agree, or think their actions responsible? It is much the same in the oceans, no matter if someone upsets you as a Master of a vessel that does not give you the right to deliberately ram them, sink them, & with intent to injure/kill the crew. As you have stated there are organsations responsible for this, it is not up to the crew of the J-whalers to take these matters into their own hands. If they do not like the actions of the SSCS then they need to have them dealt with in a maritime court, NOT take matters into their own hands & deliberately ram & sink them themselves. The J-whalers also need to abide by said laws, otherwise how are they any better than what they are saying they are opposed to? But then again J-whalers have been documented doing these very same things since 1999, long before SSCS entered the Antarctic waters, so what was their excuse for it back then? The Captain of the AG has presented himself to an investigation into the collision of the SM2 & the AG, when is the Captain of the SM2 going to present himself to same said investigation?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So OssanAmerica, you being an experienced hunter as you have previously >stated, when you are hunting if you see someone behaving irresponsibly >does that give you the right to shoot them, because you did not >like/agree, or think their actions responsible?

Of course not. But that's exactly what Sea Sheperd are doing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, I am sorry but that is exactly what the J-whalers are doing, & have been documented doing since 1999, long before SSCS entered Antarctic waters. & you have previously stated the whalers are just in their actions of breaking every maritime law to ram another vessel it does not agree with! So which is it my friend?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The JCG have no juristiction in Antarctic waters, it is NOT Japanese >territorial waters.

And it is not Australia's either, correct? And it most certainbly is not Sea Sheperds, right? Sea Shepherd is not authorized by any entity besides themselves to act to enforce what they deem is illegal. This is vigilanteism which is a crime in every country.

"ILLEGAL by what standards? You just said that Australia has no >jurisdiction. ILLEGAL according who? Sea Shepherd?". By the agreements >made in the IWC. It is the IWC that has declared these waters a sanctuary

The IWC in not a government. Consequently it has no authority whatsoever to declare what is legal or illegal because it has no jurisdiction.

SSCS or any other organisation, or vessel is allowed to "stand to", just >as the BB was doing, & as the AG was doing.

They were harassing the whalers thruogh obtruction, lasers and attempting to entagle their props. When the SS ships are there for that declared purpose, rules of navigation hardly apply.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And what are those ships that they are using? These are not ships they have suddenly built out of the blue. They are the physical manifestation of an industry that once was viable

Shonan Maru 2 - launched 1972

Nishin Maru - launched 1987

Yushin Maru 2 - launched 2002

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssnAmerica please explain how you entangle a prop of a vessel that is at least 800m in front of you? Once again showing your complete lack of knowledge of the sea, & how you make stoopid assumptions by looking at propaganda put out by the ICR without looking at the obvious evidence...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hobbsy70 at 12:57 AM JST - 9th February

What he said!

If Japanese fisherman keep using their ships as weapons, The next season of Whale Wars, will be mighty exciting!

Monster House, could get a show or two ,Pimping Out, a Sea Shepherd.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica;"

So OssanAmerica, you being an experienced hunter as you have previously >stated, when you are hunting if you see someone behaving irresponsibly >does that give you the right to shoot them, because you did not >like/agree, or think their actions responsible?

Of course not. But that's exactly what Sea Sheperd are doing."

Was it not you who stated the AG spent hours harrassing the NM, so therefore the SM2 was completely within its rights to break all maritime laws, approach & overtake from the port quarter of a vessel without proper communication of its intent, then turn hard to starboard onto, & cause a collision which endangered her crew, & sank said vessel? Threatening the lives of all crew onboard in completing the afore mentioned manouver...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It seems the Steve Irwin has been fitted out with a bigger, better, more powerful water cannon than the whaling ships have.

The Nisshin Maru butchers got a surprise taste of their own medicine with a blast of frigid water that sent the wimps scarpering below decks.

Not a single whale has died since the 6th, when the BB caught up with the whalers. Now both SS ships are on the tail of the whalers, preventing whaling, and have enough fuel to stay with them for a month. Great.

There is no sign of the Yushin Maru 3, which appears to have done itself a damage when it rammed the BB. If they're in a bad way, I hope they're limping out of the Antarctic before they start sinking and/or spilling fuel.

http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/news-100208-1.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo,"If they're in a bad way, I hope they're limping out of the Antarctic before they start sinking and/or spilling fuel"

& they will have to limp all the way back to Japan, because there is not a single country in the Southern Hemisphere that will let them pull into port for repairs! Popular bunch these Japanese whalers...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Was it not you who stated the AG spent hours harrassing the NM, so >therefore the SM2 was completely within its rights to break all maritime >laws, approach & overtake from the port quarter of a vessel without >proper communication of its intent, then turn hard to starboard onto, & >cause a collision which endangered her crew, & sank said vessel? >Threatening the lives of all crew onboard in completing the afore >mentioned manouver...

Nope.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Nisshin Maru butchers

LOL. Back to those colorful names again. They aren't "butchers" they are whalers.

& they will have to limp all the way back to Japan, because there is not >a single country in the Southern Hemisphere that will let them pull into >port for repairs!

I'm pretty certain there are more countries in the southern hemisphere than just Australia and New Zealand.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, let me refresh your memory, as it seems short, this from just a few comments ago;"They were harassing the whalers thruogh obtruction, lasers and attempting to entagle their props. When the SS ships are there for that declared purpose, rules of navigation hardly apply."

Sorry did you not just state in the above comment,"rules of navigation hardly apply." But you just stated before if hunting the rules of hunting always apply & you have no right to shoot another person, even if they act irresponsibly & do not abide by laws?!? Well the same applies at sea, even if you do not agree with anothers actions this does NOT give you the right to act outside the law, as the J-whalers are/have been documented doing since 1999, if not before. If another hunter/person/group, was acting this way for over 10 years, but hiding behind a government organisation do you not think eventually these actions will catch up with them?

Now the YM3 is limping home damaged through its own actions, unable to pull into any port in the Southern Hemisphere, because all countries have barred them! If they were acting within the law why would all these neighboring countries bar these vessels from entering their waters?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry did you not just state in the above comment,"rules of navigation >hardly apply." But you just stated before if hunting the rules of >hunting always apply & you have no right to shoot another person, even >if they act irresponsibly & do not abide by laws?!?

hobby- let me spell it out for you. If I am out hunting and I see someone doing something that I do not agree with, even if I know it is illegal, I do NOT have the right to shoot him. If, on the other hand, that someone is trying to harm me, then YES I have the right to shoot him. THAT is the situation wuith the SS vessels deliberately harassing the whalers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica;the SSCS vessel BB was 'standing to', at a safe distance, that is not putting another vessel at risk, nor was it attempting to entangle props, that is why it is called "standing to", simily the AG was also dead in the water, 'standing to', & with right of way may I add, not harassing another vessel, yet both vessels were rammed. Once again if you want to comment on the rules of the sea, get some experience, do your masters tickets, then somebody may actually take your comments with some credability, as for now you are a hunter commenting on the rules of the sea! Of which you obviously have no understanding of...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Back to those colorful names again. They aren't "butchers" they are whalers.

butcher: a person who slaughters and cuts up animals for food

That's exactly what the people on the factory ship do. It's their job. Funny you being squeamish about using the proper name. What do you call a shovel, an earth transportation device?

If, on the other hand, that someone is trying to harm me, then YES I have the right to shoot him

If he's standing between you and the deer obstructing your aim, you don't have the right to shoot him. Even if he's calling you bad names and throwing stink bombs, you don't have the right to shoot him. If he's wrapping rope around the barrel of your gun to prevent you firing it, you don't have the right to shoot him.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, I am glad you are happy to admit you believe you have the right to shoot another because you do not like their actions, let's see that argument stand up in any court...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, yes there are more countries in the Southern Hemisphere other than Aus & NZ, Indonesia has previously rejected the Japanese request to port there, Malaysia, Phillipines, South Africa, Chile, Peru, Brazil, please refer to Indonesia. Long limp home for YM3...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica;"According to your article The crimes cimmitted by GP don't endanger the lives of people or involve acts of viloence. This is why GP won't have anything to do with your criminal heroes SS. And any person with any brains or morals, regardless of belief, wouldn't either."

You are right if you are talking about actions such as deliberately ramming vessels in the Southern Ocean as J-whalers have been documented doing since 1999. But the article is about the human rights abuses by the Japanese Government in dealing with these people. Whether they have committed a crime or not, they are entitled to human rights. Much the same as the crew on the SSCS vessels in Antarctica are entitled to human rights as set out by the UN, Japanese whalers do NOT have the right to renigg these rights, no matter of their opposing views. Therefore J-whalers do NOT have the right to deliberately ram a civilian vessel, & in doing so put the lives of all the crew members onboard at risk...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hobbsy70 at 02:09 AM JST - 9th February OssanAmerica, I am glad you are happy to admit you believe you have the >right to shoot another because you do not like their actions, let's see >that argument stand up in any court...

hobbhy- other posters have previously suggested that you are on drugs. I have dismissed such allegations, until now. Please look at what I said then look at your response above. What's wrong with this picture?

"hobby- let me spell it out for you. If I am out hunting and I see someone doing something that I do not agree with, even if I know it is illegal, I do NOT have the right to shoot him. If, on the other hand, that someone is trying to harm me, then YES I have the right to shoot him"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even if he's calling you bad names and throwing stink bombs, you don't >have the right to shoot him.

Assuming that I knew they were "stink bombs", true. If what he was throwing was unidentified and the proximity was such that it could cause me harm, and he refused my warnings to cease, then it would be questionable.

If he's wrapping rope around the barrel of your gun to prevent you >firing it, you don't have the right to shoot him.

Wrong. In order to accomplish what you describe he would have to assault me and over power me with physical contact. I assure you I could shoot him and it would stand as self defense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where is the Japanese SDF or the US Navy (under treaty obligation.) These are foreign nationals attacking Japanese nationals. Japan's navy has the right to defend her own people. The SS (funny the initials are the same as the stormtroopers of Nazi Germany) are no better than Somali pirates and Japan's government should treat them the same. This is a issue of Japan's rights as a sovereign state. The Sea (terror) Sheepheads do not have those same rights.

PS: See the tape, the Ady Gil sunk herself by cutting off the other ship.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica, once again please get some nautical experience/knowledge, "standing to", means you are not a threat, it means you are navigating at a safe distance to avoid a collision, the BB was 'standing to', by the admissions of the ICR the whaling vessels then engaged the BB. In simple terms this means the J-whaling vessels came within close proximity to the BB, while she held her course,'standing to'. Ergo though the very term "engaged" it was the J-vessels that approached the BB. The BB was not in any position to 'howser' the NM being some 800m or more to her stern, nor was she in any position to ram the NM, therefore she was no threat, she was 'standing to'.If the J-whalers do not like this that is their bad luck, she was not acting illegaly, nor putting anyone at risk. The actions of the J-whaling fleet though was something quiet the opposite, circling, coming within close proximity, then when the intimidation did not work ramming the BB. This is ILLEGAL by all maritime laws, just as shooting another hunter because you disagree to their actions, law of the ocean & also on land. So your comment;"#

on the other hand, that someone is trying to harm me, then YES I have the right to shoot him" #

does not compare or stand up here as the BB was not engaged in any illegal activity, as nor was the AG. Your own words state if ;"I see someone doing something that I do not agree with, even if I know it is illegal, I do NOT have the right to shoot him". So please be consistent in your arguments.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where is the love for whales? So this is all about hate Japan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where is the love for whales? Good question.

I'm afraid this whole "save the whales" thing has jumped the shark.

(And Watson was the Fonzie who did it.)

I'd invite anyone who disagrees to have a look back at threads on the same topic from 4 or 5 years ago and compare the numbers of posters who automatically sided against the whalers, to recent postings. Not particularly scientific, but it used to always be just that one guy defending the whalers. Things have changed, and not for the better if you happen to be a whale.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Produced by Greenpeace, but a good rundown on the "Tokyo Two" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kumi-naidoo/un-japanese-authorities-b_b_453407.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanUltra-- err... OssanAmerica (forgot you had to change your handle!): "If, on the other hand, that someone is trying to harm me, then YES I have the right to shoot him."

Wrong, because you imply that blocking a harpoon equals 'harming', whereas it only results in 'harming' the money you stand to gain from the 'research'.

"Assuming that I knew they were "stink bombs", true."

So the Japanese are idiots? They haven't learned from all the previous stink bombs that the rancid butter being thrown at them isn't different? Are they so isolated that they don't even know their own previous experiences?

Man, Cleo sure bashed you. But then again, given you are so adamantly for the scientific research and then also defend Japanese fishers who go into illegal waters off Russia, it's not hard to do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith your entire post is merely impolite, insulting and totally pointless in regard to the topic that it doesn't warrant a response. Cleo doesn't need folks below her intellectual level speaking for her.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'd invite anyone who disagrees to have a look back at threads on the same topic from 4 or 5 years ago and compare the numbers of posters who automatically sided against the whalers, to recent postings. Not particularly scientific, but it used to always be just that one guy defending the whalers. Things have changed, and not for the better if you happen to be a whale.

5 years ago I fit into that category. I was all for willy, now, I support managed whaling. Yes, the activities of SS played a role in changing my mind. But then, so did learning the actual number of whales out there, and how, the species they were targeting, were not endangered.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sea Shepherd said a small hole was torn in the hull of its ship

Good.

but it was above the water line and the vessel was not in danger of sinking.

Better luck next time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But then, so did learning the actual number of whales out there, and how, the species they were targeting, were not endangered.

I wonder from where you have learned these. There are no agreements on numbers of whales remaining in the wild. Even Minke's are known as the most plentiful are considered dangered by some.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So this is all about hate Japan?

You're right it shouldn't be all hate Japan. Love Japan, hate whalers!! I do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is something in the Antarctic that everyone is worried about. Not just the whales. Mee too, I hate killers of any living being.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone defending Japan actions must read the following before defending them further.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kumi-naidoo/un-japanese-authorities-bb453407.html

Also great article about facts of Japanese whaling programme here. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/oceans/whaling/ending-japanese-whaling/whale-meat-scandal

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You are upset with Japan and it is understood. I am not defending Japan. But if anyone is genuinely concerned about whales, they should behave decent and resolve the issue. Not cause bodily harm and act silly, breaching marine laws etc. Those people fighting with the japanese whalers are self-appointed gaurdians. The crew in the Jwhale team are only employees.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you watch the footage you can see that the BB holds its ground and you continuously see the Factory ship straight ahead until of course the Japanese ship gets too close and the camera person ( to protect themselves) looses site of the factory ship and focuses on the actual collision. The BB had no reason to attack the J ship. There goal was to stay on the back of the factory ship, and the J ship did whatever they could to try to get them off the back of the factory ship. Yes they threw bottles at the J ship but that was something that they took advantage of by them coming so close to the BB. I find it ironic that the ICR constantly denys that their ship did anything wrong. All the Japanese are doing is showing their true colors and turning world opinion more and more against them. Please do a search on the story of the " Tokyo Two". There is no research, this is nothing more then greed. Has anyone seen any reports on this so called research? and just how many whales does it take to do research? LOL I hope that most of you know that the Japanese do pay people to post in these forums to get people confused and get try to get your attention focused on something else other then what their doing. I'm mean seriously.... Terrorists? LOL

0 ( +0 / -0 )

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