picture of the day

Confrontation

119 Comments

In this photo released by the Institute of Cetacean Research of Japan, a Sea Shepherd activist aboard a small boat throws a butyric acid-containing glass bottle toward the Japanese harpoon vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 in a confrontation between the whalers and anti-whaling activists in the Antarctica Sea on Sunday.

© Japan Today

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

119 Comments
Login to comment

It's contrary to my image of Civilized World Of 21st Century.

0 ( +8 / -10 )

Get lost eco terrorists.

-5 ( +15 / -22 )

Killing whales is not civilised, neither is throwing butyric acid. Both sides are wrong but Japan will have to stop killing whales before this shameful misery will end

10 ( +23 / -13 )

I don't see any Sea Shepherd people here. I can't even see their faces. To me it just looks like a watercraft moving at high speed. We don't know what's in that bottle.

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

Does this mean that the S.S. has caught up to the main whaling fleet. or is it just an attempt to escape from the one ship that has been following S.S. and broadcasting their location... preventing them from sneaking up on the rest of the fleet?

If Net Ninja looks at the picture, there's a skull and shepherd's crook symbol on the front of the boat. That might indicate that its the S.S. I think JT is taking the word of the Japanese people on the receiving end of the thrown bottle that it was just rancid butter and not a failed Molotov cocktail.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

I don't see any Sea Shepherd people here. I can't even see their faces. To me it just looks like a watercraft moving at high speed. We don't know what's in that bottle.

With "Sea Shepherd", Jolly Roger written across the Helm.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Netninja, If you're sailing around the Southern Ocean, and you see a small boat jam packed with hippy-terrorists pull up beside you, seconds before a bottle hits you in the face, then you don't have to do much guessing to realize that it was Sea Shepherd and that you've just been hit by a bottle of butyric acid.

Only three types of criminal in the Antarctic waters, Sea Shepherds, Marine poachers, and Norwegian Adventurers. All three should be chucked in Jail.

3 ( +8 / -6 )

I bet their girlfriends are impressed.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

It is incomprehensible that an educated person with knowledge of the English language could rationalize the use of the word "terrorist" when talking about anyone on either side of this conflict. Words like "protester", "activist" or even "criminal" could be easily applied, and yet the word "terrorist" is trotted out with foolish zeal.

Every time we apply the word "terrorist" to something other than actual perpetrators of "terror", we undermine the value of that word to describe a very real and deadly reality in our world. Those who do turn to this word in such cases are illustrating the effectiveness of American propaganda to apply the world "terrorist" to anyone we disagree with. Which is, once again, proof that Orwell was right in expecting the undermining of language to serve the purposes of repression.

So give the word terrorist a rest in this case, it just does not apply beyond the state exaggerating the actions of a few activists.

11 ( +20 / -8 )

Lunchbox, let's be fair and add Japanese Commercial Whalers to that list of criminals in the south seas.

6 ( +12 / -6 )

At first I thought Iranian Navy...

3 ( +6 / -3 )

tkoind2Feb. 13, 2012 - 09:28AM JST It is incomprehensible that an educated person with knowledge of the English language could rationalize the use of >the word "terrorist" when talking about anyone on either side of this conflict. Words like "protester", "activist" or >even "criminal" could be easily applied, and yet the word "terrorist" is trotted out with foolish zeal.

The term "terrorist" as in "blow up an airplane" and "eco-terrorist" are two completely different things. The contuinuous posting of "no they aren'nt terrorits" arguments is both irrelevant and misguided.

"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."

"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. "

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

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

Damn that bottle still had beer in it!

mottainai!

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Just sink the SS and get over it. These people are a menace.

-3 ( +9 / -15 )

Ultimately I agree with the activists. If every country in the world were to follow Japan's lead we'd quickly watch many species of whale possibly go extinct. It is extremely selfish of Japan to catch whales while the remaining 98% of the world is not.

6 ( +12 / -4 )

OssanAmerica, you can call a duck a pig if you want, it's still a duck. The FBI can try to redefine any word it wants for political purposes, but it doesn't make it right, or acceptable to me. Have you read any Orwell?

7 ( +11 / -4 )

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorist

Dictionary is rather clear on the term. ;)

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Both sides are wrong

But only one side is illegal. Hint: rhymes with ski leopard.

6 ( +13 / -8 )

If the picture is recent, and is indeed taken from YM2, then I would say that SS is very much failing in tracking and preventing the whaling fleet from catching whales.

As most of us avid readers know, YM2 has been dogging the SS ship since the start, and most of the news are either coming from either of the 2 ships (except for the other SS ship which was damaged due to the "rogue wave").

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Too bad the eco terrorists don't understand that what they are doing actually has the opposite result of what they want, it pushes the japanese people to support whaling. But oh wait, they don't care..they have a show and make money off of it by lying about being shot and being a bunch of drama queens.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

OssanAmerica - "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."

Are the Japanese whalers innocent victims? Really?

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

LOLL!!!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I hope the investors supporting the journeys of these well-meaning but ultimately misguided hippies look at this photo and think, "Really? A stinkbomb?" Yeah, money well spent.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

As most of us avid readers know, YM2 has been dogging the SS ship since the start

All the time the harpoon vessels have spent dogging the SS ships is time they have not spent killing whales. True, SS has not been able to catch up with the factory ship and sit on its tail, the manoeuver that successfully brought the whaling season to an early end last year; but the whalers have been operating at no more than one-third capacity. SS are claiming that the harpoon ships have spent a total of 64 days following SS ships (as of 9th Feb); at an average of 8 whales per harpoon ship per day, that's over 500 whales that the YM, YM2 and YM3 have missed.

The factory ship meanwhile has been moving fast to try and keep out of range of the SS drones; if they're moving fast, they're not stopping much to pick up dead whales. When the whalers finally head back home and the number of whales killed is announced, and the icr is wailing once again about the obstruction of their 'perfectly legal research' we'll know how successful SS has been this season. Possibly not as well as last season, but every whale short of the 'quota' is a whale saved.

Word also has it that, as further proof that the 'research' excuse is paper-thin, the whalers have returned to last year's 'survey' area (apparently they're supposed to alternate areas in alternate years in order to get 'balanced' survey results), thus showing clearly that simply killing as many whales as possible is much more important to them than getting valid research data.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

@combinibento

I totally agree. Where's the unmanned drone SS used before? Or was that another publicity stunt as well?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Can't we all just get along?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Killing whales is not civilised, neither is throwing butyric acid. Both sides are wrong but Japan will have to stop killing whales before this shameful misery will end

Yes whales are sacred, Japanese heathens do not understand this.

-4 ( +5 / -8 )

Japanese whalers have definitely gone too far on several occasions, and their bullshit "research"-excuse is getting old. However, make no mistake about it; Sea Shepherd deserves being labelled a terrorist organization - in fact; Paul Watson himself has referred to them as terrorists on several occasions.

We're not just talking about throwing stink bombs...there have been several attempts to sink ships, and Watson has made disturbing statements regarding his biocentric world-view, for example that the world population should be reduced to fewer than 1 billion, and those who deserve to be left alive should be those dedicated to biocentrism.

If there's gonna be a peaceful resolution to the whaling issue, both sides need to settle down considerably.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Japanese whalers have definitely gone too far on several occasions, and their bullshit "research"-excuse is getting old.

Exactly! enough of this IWC pussy footing and go whaling with clear intent to make gourmet meals out of it.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

By throwing glass, the SS are clearly in breach of the Antarctic Treaty. They really are a very strange group of 'environmentalists'

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Damn that bottle still had beer in it!

That's terrorism of the worst kind - alcohol abuse. Hope they get bamboo shoved into their fingernails for that.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Before Japan gives up whaling, I think the eco-terrorists have to stop their attacks.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Each new photo or story released on this issue is an absolute goldmine for JT! The usual suspects - both pro and anti-whaling - never cease to get all hot under the collar and fired up behind their PCs - and the hits and comments go through the roof! Good work JT!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

These weirdos are on drugs, what can they really acheive, seriously? throwing acid etc is barbaric and uncivilized, they really should be put on trial..

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Heda_Madness

By throwing glass, the SS are clearly in breach of the Antarctic Treaty. They really are a very strange group of 'environmentalists'

Seriously the funniest thing l have read all day. You say throwing a bottle is a violation of the Antarctic treaty, thats so funny, yes it may be but it pales into insignificance compared to Japans breaches of the treaty.....

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Cletus,

Before you finish laughing perhaps you should read what you're commenting on. All glass should be shredded and removed from the area. Dumping at sea is prohibited.

Do you support these actions?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Heda_Madness

Before you finish laughing perhaps you should read what you're commenting on. All glass should be shredded and removed from the area. Dumping at sea is prohibited.

Indeed it should. As l said in my post l didnt claim it was allowed. However you make out like this throwing of a bottle is a major breach of the treaty. Lets see in past years Japan has refueled in the treaty zone in violation, it dumps the waste from the carcasses in the treaty zone, its factory ship is still using heavy oil in the treaty zone. All of which are breaches of the treaty. So you want to claim throwing a bottle as a major breach by all means, however lets put in perspective throwing a bottle compared to Japanese breaches and see whose actions are worse...

Do you support these actions?

Sure do and a whole lot more there buddy. Goto make sure my money is well spent....

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Wurthington,

But if every country in the world were to follow Japan's lead, Japan would not need to continue it's research program as it is. If other nations wish also to conduct serious research they should funnel their resources together with Japan.

What is selfish is for nations who don't eat whales to tell Japanese people and others that do that they should stop. Minority cultures should not be forced to do as the majority does, this is common sense for anyone who understands human rights.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Cletus, there is no breach of any treaty by Japan. SS says many things, you should learn to spot which parts are lies. If you assume it is all lies, you will be pretty close to correct understanding.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Every time we apply the word "terrorist" to something other than actual perpetrators of "terror", we undermine the value of that word to describe a very real and deadly reality in our world.

So what would YOU call the feeling as a glass bottle is thrown at your head from a high-speed boat? "Serenity"?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

These anti-whaling morons would be a joke EXCEPT for the fact that Japan has to take the far more clownish position that they are conducting whale research. "Institute of Cetacean Research of Japan" LOL. Just call it hunting, stop the bribing and the denials and maybe these psychos won't have such as easy job painting Japan as a the proverbial bad guy.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

" SS says many things, you should learn to spot which parts are lies. if you assume it is all lies, you will be pretty close to correct understanding."..........I think this statement pretty much perfectly describes the Japanese side`s "whaling for research argument ". Just substitude " J-whalers for SS " and voila ! :)

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@iHop: Each year the Japanese quota includes 935 minke, 50 fin and 50 humpback per season. If Japan were actually catching whales for research.... why would they need so many Minke whales. What about poachers killing lions, tigers, leopards and such... all endangered... they don't eat them but it might as well be the same. They sell them for money in order to buy food to eat. So you also believe that all endangered species are fair game to hunt until extinction. All because its putting food in people's mouths. Grow a fig tree.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

marcelito, anyone who believes Japan is not whaling for research has either failed to check the facts or is living in denial.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

I would like to offer a more clear definition of the word(s)

terrorist/terrorism

and some perspective.

terrorism noun the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

ecoterrorism (also eco-terrorism) noun violence carried out to further environmentalist ends. • the action of causing deliberate environmental damage in order to further political ends.

While government position in Canada, The USA, Belize, Norway, Togo, and The UK have revoked Sea Shepherd vessels registration to enter their ports due to the fact that they define their actions as "Single Issue Terrorism" there has been wide press and position from a variety of other political positions that support their agenda, i.e. The Dalai Lama and a variety the Australian Government and other governments who believe that the Japanese Government has overstepped International Waters Laws.

Special interest terrorism, also called single-issue terrorism,[1] is a category of terrorism. It differs from traditional right-wing terrorism and left-wing terrorism in that extremist special interest groups seek to resolve specific issues, rather than effect widespread political change.[2] - Canadian Security Intelligence Service

I find it interesting that so many people are not in favor of Sea Shepherd's quest to protect our wildlife at the risk of their lives and for the freedom of species to have the chance to thrive in the future.

I wonder what Michael Sandel from Harvard University might say on the matter?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Wurthington, 935 minke whales each year is not many. Minke whales are not endangered, and Japan is catching them legally. See the international convention for the regulation of whaling. If you read it carefully, I'm sure you can see that Japan's research is legal, and in the spirit of whaling like the convention defines.

So you also believe that all endangered species are fair game to hunt until extinction.

I did not say such a thing. My idea is that species that would go extinct if they were hunted, should not be hunted. We can agree this is simple common sense. But minke whales are not one of these species.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

@tkoind2

It is incomprehensible that an educated person with knowledge of the English language could rationalize the use of the word "terrorist" when talking about anyone on either side of this conflict.

I understand what you're saying here. It is maybe surprising to those who do not know the details that this word is used. But, I think it is not "incomprehensible." You see, the susbstance being thrown at the fishermen is a chemical weapon. I don't think it's a stretch to call people firing chemical weapons at a fishing vessel terrorists. They certainly are not pirates. Their actions are having twofold intention: 1) To kill or maim fishermen, 2) To deny Japan of a food source. This fits the definition of terrorism.

-6 ( +3 / -8 )

ihope2eatwhales -"anyone who believes Japan is not whaling for research has failed to check the facts or is living in denial " - haha a good one mate...love your sense of humour ...Could you please point me to the respected scientific journals where the highly valuable results of this vitally important "research" were published, I would just love to educate myself.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@marcelito The Cetacean Research Institute has published all the research. You can easily find it online if you search. Of course it's easier if you know the local language.

-6 ( +3 / -8 )

the whalers should fire the harpoons at them.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

As they say - One mans terrorist is another mans ( or mammal`s :) freedom fighter... keep at it boys..international negotiations, requests, representations, petitions etc etc.. have proven useless in the past ..Watson is keeping the issue in the spotlight if nothing else..

1 ( +5 / -4 )

@iHop: Estimates are that there are around 100,000 minke whales in Northern waters and around 600,000 in Southern. 600,000 is a lot... so hunting 1,000 per year is, and I agree, sustainable. Now, suppose, South Affrica, New Zealand, Australia, Indonesia, Korea, China, and say another 20 or 30 nations want to hunt minke whale too. Its not like whale meat tastes bad right... its actually good. So lets say we open the floodgates. Now you might have 20,000 to even 50,000 minke whales being caught a year. In 20 to 30 years.... all gone. You think its OK for Japan... I say Japan is being selfish.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

ihope2eatwhales

Cletus, there is no breach of any treaty by Japan. SS says many things, you should learn to spot which parts are lies. If you assume it is all lies, you will be pretty close to correct understanding.

Ah so your one of these people that swallow the JWA stories. By the way l am not quoting SS stories, you may want to check out the facts for yourself independent of SS and JWA. You may be surprised, but given you username l doubt you would like to see the truth and rather swallow your JWA supplied propaganda.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

j4p4 - I said " respected journals" ,,independent...not a Cetacean "Research" Institute linked propaganda websites ...it,s almost like telling me to look for truth about Daiichi in Tepco,s media releases...c,mon buddy. Of course there are no respected & independent scientific journals publishing support for this whaling "research".

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Ossan: "The term "terrorist" as in "blow up an airplane" and "eco-terrorist" are two completely different things. The contuinuous posting of "no they aren'nt terrorits" arguments is both irrelevant and misguided."

Sorry, my friend, but pointing out the fact that under your FBI definition the whalers could also be deemed 'eco-terrorists' is not 'irrelevant' any more than your saying they are eco-terrorists is irrelevant. We all know the terms 'terrorist' and 'eco-terrorist' have been used and abused to the point that some governments will simply label anyone who disagrees with them as such. Same with how GWB destroyed the meaning of the words 'democracy' and 'freedom'.

As to the pic of the day, I love the euphemism employed here: "In this photo released by the Institute of Cetacean Research of Japan, a Sea Shepherd activist aboard a small boat throws a butyric acid-containing glass bottle..."

A much better explanation of the pic would be: "Pro-whalers release a picture of SS throwing some rotten butter". But hey, gotta put some lip-stick on that pig, eh?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Another interesting statistic: It was estimated that in the 1930's the annual whale catch was 50,000 a year. This is back when world human population was around 2 billion and back when distribution channels to a countries' interior was almost non-existant. In addition, refridgeration back then was overall still scarce. If we opened up whaling to all countries they'd be caught to extinction in about 10 years. Whale meat tastes good.... so why shouldn't the rest of the world enjoy it just like Japan. Selfish.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Throwing a glass bottle is more dangerous than the contents of rotten butter. It could kill a person if it hit them on the head. While I don't support whaling I can't support this action or the throwing of ropes to foul the ships screws. It's just plain wrong to endanger others.

Whaling isn't legal or illegal since there are no international laws, just agreements.

When it comes to whaling, Japan puts itself above other countries. Whaling does not even make commercial sense since it would cost less to pay the whalers to stay in port. There's no shortage of meat or fish in the country, and at least to me, whale flesh don't seem that popular, with more than 6,000 tons in cold storage.

I believe Japan will never give up whaling while the SS continues with its anti whaling campaign.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Now that the whole world can see the evidence, the whole world should do something about those terrorists.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Wurthington, No no no, you see when other nations wish to hunt whales also, they should cooperate with nations that hunt whales already. Together, they can keep the number sustainable. That is why the IWC exists, to enable such cooperation for sustainable whaling. Japan is not the only member of the IWC, many nations have agreed to it. I guess the sustainable number is around 5,000 ~ 10,000 each year at least. But to understand the number well, research is required constantly, since whales are difficult to count precisely.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

@zichi,

I believe Japan will never give up whaling while the SS continues with its anti whaling campaign.

This is correct. There is no way we will stop when the pressure is coming from a foreign group. We have to stand strong and defend our rights and our tradiational way of life. The fact is no prime minister would last if they are perceived as being bossed around by foreigner. This is a highly political issue in that sense. Imagine Dutch telling Obama to close Guantanamo and then he did! The Republicans would tear him to pieces over listening to foreigner. The same principle holds here.

-7 ( +4 / -10 )

a Sea Shepherd activist aboard a small boat throws a butyric acid-containing glass bottle toward the Japanese harpoon vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 in a confrontation between the whalers and anti-whaling activists

The eco-terrorists have to get some exciting footage done for the next "Whale Wars" series. They're gonna be stars!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@iHop: While the IWC permits whaling... Japan issues its own quotas and the IWC also has banned catching whales where Japan catches them:

From Wiki: While commercial whaling is prohibited in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, Japan's Institute of Cetacean Research has continued to hunt whales inside the Sanctuary in accordance with a provision in the IWC charter permitting whaling for the purposes of scientific research.[3] Conservation groups such as the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society argue Japan's whaling operations are conducted in violation of the IWC charter, claiming the research is not really scientific activity but rather a veil to cover commercial fishing operations, since whale meat ends up being sold in Japanese markets - and, inevitably, making its way to Japanese restaurants and dinner plates. [4] However, the by-product of any such research is required by law to be "utilised".

In an open letter to the Japanese government, published in 2002 in the New York Times and sponsored by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), 21 scientists declared that they "believe Japan's whale 'research' program fails to meet minimum standards for credible science". They were "concerned that Japan's whaling program is not designed to answer scientific questions relevant to the management of whales; that Japan refuses to make the information it collects available for independent review; and that its research program lacks a testable hypothesis or other performance indicators consistent with accepted scientific standards". They accused Japan of "using the pretense of scientific research to evade its commitments to the world community".

The Australian delegation to the IWC has argued to repeal the provision that allows nations to harvest whales for scientific research, to no effect.

Japan, meanwhile, lodged a formal objection to the sanctuary with regard to minke whales, alleging that under IWC rules, the terms of the sanctuary do not apply to Japan. Claiming the Japanese whaling fleet's actions to be illegal, groups such as Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society harass Japanese whaling ships while engaged in yearly hunts, attempting to interrupt or cut short its whaling activities by force. The ICR maintains such enforcement activity - and conservationists' methods of enforcement including forcefully boarding Japanese vessels without permission, propeller fouling of whaling ships, launching concussion grenades against whaling fleet crew, launching butyric acid projectiles designed to foul the taste of whale meat, and launching meat-fouling paint - amount to piracy, terrorism, and illegal harassment of the ICR fleet. [9] Critics of the ICR point out that recent scientific advances allow for the use of non-lethal techniques in cetacean research, such as biopsies or determination of cetatean dietary intake through analysis of DNA samples from whale feces.

Ultimately if every nation in the world were as selfish as Japan.... whales would go extince in a short period of time. The IWC wishes Japan would stop but they is little they can do.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Japan is not selfish, Japan is the best member of the IWC, doing the only serious research for whale management. Anti-whalers should not belong to the IWC. It is selfish for them to belong to the IWC if they don't like whaling.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

ihope2eatwhales

Japan is not selfish, Japan is the best member of the IWC, doing the only serious research for whale management.

Yes Japans bribes (of which they have been caught out at) has indeed brought many new members to the IWC so if you base the best member on who brings the most new members then yes Japan is great.

Anti-whalers should not belong to the IWC. It is selfish for them to belong to the IWC if they don't like whaling.

You do realise the anti whaling nations where actually whaling nations and founding members of the IWC long before Japan joined. You do realise that dont you, the only difference is they grew up and stopped whaling maybe one day Japan will catch up to the rest of the modern world.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

They're just whales.... why get so upset? Properly harvested, they could be a renewable source of protein. I dont advocate hunting them to extinction, but if there is a market for their meat, it should be exploited.

I'd respect SS more if they directed their efforts to helping people rather than animals. Perhaps provide education/training programmes for whalers so that they can make a living away from the hunt. But that would be less glamorous, and not as good for attracting funding.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

These weirdos are on drugs, what can they really acheive, seriously? throwing acid etc is barbaric and uncivilized, they really should be put on trial.

Let's understand what we are talking about here: it was a stink bomb. Using the word "acid" may be chemically correct, but it is very misleading.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

This is not confrontation. Everybody can see this is a friendly cross cultural event. The SSCS crew presents fine Australian beer, they just delivering the gift, in return the Japanese crew generously presents them with iron grappling hooks and bamboo poles. Gift exchange. Later the Japanese crew carefully cleans them with high pressure water cannons, in return SSCS helps them to clean their propeller with steel wires.

Nothing serious. Friends are playfully bantering. Sometimes the Japanese host their Australian guests on-board. They exchange experiences, and give language courses to each others, they stroke each other hair, give a kiss to each other and depart on a special ship, specially assigned for this long lasting cultural event to deepen the friendship between Japan and Australia as well as between Japan and the whole international community.

Heartwarming scene.

Very nice people all of them, I just want to know when will they stop this craziness.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

zichi: "I believe Japan will never give up whaling while the SS continues with its anti whaling campaign."

I agree with you, but there's no way they'll give it up if SS stopped what they are doing, either. They won't stop because they get massive subsidies from the government, regardless of whether their product is consumed or not. They'll keep doing it under the guise of science, and when confronted about it under the idea that it's some cultural thing from ancient times. As long as money is changing hands it will keep going. Now, if the government actually wanted to cut this wasteful spending, THEN it would stop because the whalers would make no money for lack of demand.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

When I see this picture I see Mad Max on the High Seas. Mel Gibson could play the guy driving the boat.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I believe Japan will never give up whaling while the SS continues with its anti whaling campaign.

Yep, that's true. The more the SS continues to do this, the more determined Japan will be to continue its whaling. It's unfortunate so many people are too shortsighted to recognise this. The SS are better off learning Japanese, going to Japanese towns and cities and trying to start a grass roots movements there among the POPULACE.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

DisillusionedFeb. 13, 2012 - 11:18AM JST OssanAmerica - "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."> Are the Japanese whalers innocent victims? Really?

Yes really, I'm afraid they are, as much as the anti-whaling crowd would like to believe otherwise. It is clear that they are conducting research whaling as sanctioned by Article VIII of the IWC Regulations, which permits them to take whales in "sanctuaries" and REQUIRES them to to consume the whales taken. It is also clear that the waters where they are conducting acvtivities are NOT AUSTRALIAN TERRITORIAL WATERS, iotherwise theywould have been stopped and escported out years ago. If you want to substantiate your position that they "are not innocent" you will, like everyone else, have to wait for the outcome of Australia's ICJ action. Until then, the whalers are most certainly "innocent" of breaking any agreements, treaties or laws, Hence, Sea Shephers are eco-terrorists.,

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

smithinjapanFeb. 13, 2012 - 02:27PM JST Sorry, my friend, but pointing out the fact that under your FBI definition the whalers could also be deemed 'eco->terrorists' is not 'irrelevant' any more than your saying they are eco-terrorists is irrelevant. We all know the >terms 'terrorist' and 'eco-terrorist' have been used and abused to the point that some governments will simply label >anyone who disagrees with them as such. Same with how GWB destroyed the meaning of the words 'democracy' >and 'freedom'.

Sorryn my friend but I can not ber held responsible for anyone's lacl of education, reading comprehension or direct experiemnce with law enforcement agencies and judicial systems. Your comment that the Federal Bureau of Investigation'sa definition of eco-terrrism is "irrelevant" takes the cake.

As to the pic of the day, I love the euphemism employed here: "In this photo released by the Institute of Cetacean >Research of Japan, a Sea Shepherd activist aboard a small boat throws a butyric acid-containing glass bottle..." A much better explanation of the pic would be: "Pro-whalers release a picture of SS throwing some rotten butter". >But hey, gotta put some lip-stick on that pig, eh?

Going back to education, the facts that the eco-terrorists are throwing "butyric acid in a glass bottle" and "butryric acid is found IN ROTTEN BUTTER" does not equal "Butric acid is rotten butter".

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

japan_cynicFeb. 13, 2012 - 10:23AM JST OssanAmerica, you can call a duck a pig if you want, it's still a duck. The FBI can try to redefine any word it wants for >political purposes, but it doesn't make it right, or acceptable to me. Have you read any Orwell?

Have you ever been detained at any international airport because you disagreed with the definitions being used by the local immigration and law enforcement authorrties?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

StopKillingWhalesAndDolphinsFeb. 13, 2012 - 07:32AM JST Killing whales is not civilised, neither is throwing butyric acid. Both sides are wrong but Japan will have to stop >killing whales before this shameful misery will

I think you are very wrong. Killing whales is no more or less civilized gthan killing any other animal. And Japan, will stop only if an agreement is reached at the IWC. The efforts by the IWC to accomplish this were desoroyed by Australia's unwillingness to negotiate, something that the United States and New Zealand were willing to do. Publicity ahd oney seeking eco-terrorists acts of violence simply harden Japan's position and work against the efforts of organizations like Greenpeace.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

I can't see the difference between eating a cow and a whale... or are all those nothing-better-to-do retards radical vegans?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

The food served on the SS ships is vegan, btw.

"Watson’s love for marine life doesn’t stop him from eating fish. “Paul, who likes hamburgers and grilled cheese sandwiches equally, interprets veganism as a form of philosophical lunacy,” David Morris writes in Earth Warrior. Morris’s book details often-hilarious disputes between Watson and the vegan crewmembers. One standoff ensued when Watson ordered the vegans to retrieve a driftnet left by an escaped fishing vessel. The crew took an agonizingly long time, trying to free every squid caught in the net, about which Watson couldn’t care less. He didn’t even mind profiting from the work of the ship he threatened -- Morris reports that he later sent his chef over to the net to “requisition a few squid for dinner.”

http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/o/347-sea-shepherd-conservation-society

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Perhaps provide education/training programmes for whalers so that they can make a living away from the hunt.

The 'hunt' aka commercial whaling has been no-go for over a quarter of a century. Whalers who after all this time still haven't realised they're in a dead industry, and especially those who trained after 1986, are probably far too dumb to be trained for anything else.

Have you ever been detained at any international airport because you disagreed with the definitions being used by the local immigration and law enforcement authorrties?

Lots of people have, including Cat Stevens. FBI (the people who hounded John Lennon for being 'anti-war', remember) definitions are a joke.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@iHop: Another reason not to trust information regarding the IWC and Japan's benevolence:

On June 13, London newspaper The Sunday Times published a watershed investigation exposing Japanese officials bribing members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in order to maintain its whaling industry. The undercover exposé proves that government members offered money and prostitutes to a handful of small nations to buy their votes, and six countries—St. Kitts and Nevis, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Grenada, Republic of Guinea, and Ivory Coast—agreed to the bribes. The report is causing a global stir, but according to Sea Shepherd Conservation Society president Paul Watson, it’s old news. Watson says that he’s preached against Japan’s aggressive, unlawful tactics for years.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

cleoFeb. 14, 2012 - 08:42AM JST The 'hunt' aka commercial whaling has been no-go for over a quarter of a century. Whalers who after all this time >still haven't realised they're in a dead industry, and especially those who trained after 1986, are probably far too >dumb to be trained for anything else.

I would hardl;y consider anyone simply working a high risk job to make a living a feed their family to be "dumb". At least nowhere near as much as people who who value animal life more than human.

"have you ever been detained at any international airport because you disagreed with the definitions being used by the local immigration and law enforcement authorrties?"

Lotts of people have, including Cat Stevens.

And did they ever win? Good why don' you try that line of defense next time you find yourself on the defendants side of a criminal charge and see how far that gets you..

FBI (the people who hounded John Lennon for being 'anti-war', remember) definitions are a joke.

No the FBI are not a joke. Most law enforcement agencies on a national level are not a joke. Most of us outgrew this kind of attitude.

Good why don' you try that line of defense next time you find yourself on the derfendants side opf acriminal charge.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

I would hardl;y consider anyone simply working a high risk job to make a living a feed their family to be "dumb".

Training to work in a dead industry is dumb. Or do you also admire people who demand public subsidies to work as chariot grease jockeys, entrail readers and henge builders? That it's high-risk as well as dead-end only makes them dumber.

Good why don' you try that line of defense next time you find yourself on the derfendants side opf acriminal charge.

And what criminal charge was thrown at Cat Stevens or John Lennon? Pacifism? Peace-lovin' song lyrics? (Never been on the defendant's side of any criminal charge, but if the charge is being anti-war and/or anti-mindless cruelty, I plead guilty.)

the FBI are not a joke.

The FBI as an organisation is not a joke. With the weight of the US government behind it, it can do a lot of damage and upset people's lives. It's 'definitions' of what makes a terrorist (♪give peace a chaaance~♫) are a joke.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

This is correct. There is no way we will stop when the pressure is coming from a foreign group. We have to stand strong and defend our rights and our tradiational way of life. The fact is no prime minister would last if they are perceived as being bossed around by foreigner. This is a highly political issue in that sense. Imagine Dutch telling Obama to close Guantanamo and then he did! The Republicans would tear him to pieces over listening to foreigner. The same principle holds here.

So, j4p4nFTW, Japan takes the steps of ensuring that it's not being bossed around? It did a good job of removing the troops from Okinawa, eh? And let's not even get into the case of the captured Chinese fishermen...

Japan won't give in to sea shepherd as long as it can get money from the Tohoku funds.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

cleoFeb. 14, 2012 - 12:31PM JST

"I would hardl;y consider anyone simply working a high risk job to make a living a feed their family to be "dumb".

Training to work in a dead industry is dumb. Or do you also admire people who demand public subsidies to work >as chariot grease jockeys, entrail readers and henge builders? That it's high-risk as well as dead-end only makes >them dumber.

Whether an industry is "dead" or not depends entirely on economic factors, The UK, US et al. did not stop commercial whaling (AFTER they decimated the global population) because some people got emotiomally bent out of shape over whales. Petroleum simply replaced whale oil. Training as a mariner has a wide range of employment possibiltites and has been and will continue to be with us for a very long time. All maritime occupations are high risk whether they be fisheries, energy production, transportation or even leisure. Your uneducated and insulting comments about the mariners is offensive and uncalled for. References to presently nonexisting occupations are utterly irrelevant.

"Good why don' you try that line of defense next time you find yourself on the derfendants side opf acriminal charge."

And what criminal charge was thrown at Cat Stevens or John Lennon? Pacifism? Peace-lovin' song lyrics? (Never >been on the defendant's side of any criminal charge, but if the charge is being anti-war and/or anti-mindless cruelty, >I plead guilty.)

I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about you, how far would YOU get with such a defense argument. Hope for your sake you never do. (end up as a defendant)

"the FBI are not a joke."

"The FBI as an organisation is not a joke. With the weight of the US government behind it, it can do a lot of damage >and upset people's lives. It's 'definitions' of what makes a terrorist (♪give peace a chaaance~♫) are a joke.

The FBI's position towards John Lennon is also irrelvant to their position on eco-terrorists. Eco-terrorism is a real crime which is actually prosecuted. Would you disagree with the FBI's definition of "serial murderer" and "kidnapper" because you disagree with their views on John Lennon?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

yes good point, many nations who are now anti whaling use to hunt them long before the Japanese ever did, only difference is they were smart enough to see the error of there ways, Japanese have not.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

They never "saw the error of their ways". They stopped whaling because crude oIl replaced whale oil as the world's main primary energy source. The anti-whaling movement didn't have an effect until the 1970s. Australia's last whaling station closed in 1978.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

You do realise the anti whaling nations where actually whaling nations and founding members of the IWC long before Japan joined. You do realise that dont you, the only difference is they grew up and stopped whaling maybe one day Japan will catch up to the rest of the modern world.

You make it sound like these dumb anti-whaling nations stopped whaling for "moral" reasons. They simply stopped because it wasn't profitable (oil). Maybe these so-called founding members act like adults and leave the IWC altogether since they no longer support "orderly development of the whaling industry" which is the spirit of the said organization.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Whether an industry is "dead" or not depends entirely on economic factors, The UK, US et al. did not stop commercial whaling (AFTER they decimated the global population) because some people got emotiomally bent out of shape over whales.

When an industry is shut down whatever the reason, it's ipso facto dead. The moratorium means there can be no legitimate commercial market for whalemeat; economically it's dead. It's only our taxes and lies about 'research' that keep it afloat.

Training as a mariner has a wide range of employment possibiltites

We're not talking about training as a mariner. We're talking about training as a whaler. DS wanted SS to provide 'education/training programmes for whalers so that they can make a living'. It seems you agree with me, for different reasons, that there is no need for any such training, and certainly no need for SS to provide it.

Your uneducated and insulting comments about the mariners is offensive

I've made no comments about 'mariners'. My comments were about people who are stupid enough to train for professions and industries that no longer exist.

I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about you

I thought we were talking about the FBI and how good they are at defining terrorists (not very).

1 ( +3 / -2 )

When an industry is shut down whatever the reason, it's ipso facto dead. The moratorium means there can be no legitimate commercial market for whalemeat; economically it's dead. It's only our taxes and lies about 'research' that keep it afloat.

Good. Then remove the moratorium since you claim it's "dead" anyways. Stop the government subsidies and resume the whaling industry.

I'm all for it.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

cleoFeb. 15, 2012 - 02:37AM JST "Whether an industry is "dead" or not depends entirely on economic factors, The UK, US et al. did not stop commercial whaling (AFTER they decimated the global population) because some people got emotiomally bent out of shape over whales". When an industry is shut down whatever the reason, it's ipso facto dead. The moratorium means there can be no >legitimate commercial market for whalemeat; economically it's dead. It's only our taxes and lies about 'research' >that keep it afloat.

Not true at all. Firstly, "moratorium: means a TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF ACTIVITY. In fact the IWC 1986 Moratorium was suppose to have been reviewed but has not due to the biased actions of the anti-whaling faction in the IWC. SEcoindly, the 1986 IWC Moratorium makes no reference whatsoever as to whether a legitimate commercial market for whalemewat may or may not exist. In fact, IWC Aricle VIII REQUIRES that whales taken under Scientific Permits be CONSUMED. I repeat, an industry does not shut down because a bunch of aged hippies want to play eco-terrorits, or a large crowd of uneducated weakminded souls believe that whales are somehow any more "magnificent" than cows.

"Training as a mariner has a wide range of employment possibiltites"

We're not talking about training as a mariner. We're talking about training as a whaler. DS wanted SS to >provide 'education/training programmes for whalers so that they can make a living'. It seems you agree with me, for >different reasons, that there is no need for any such training, and certainly no need for SS to provide it.

Training as a whaler, short of personally manning a harpoon, is not as distinct an occupation from other fisheries occupations as you seek to think. In fact even my argument is debatable if you consider Mediterranean swordfishermen. The Whalers are currently making a a perfectly legal (in Japan and other whaling nations) living and again, only economic reasons will change that. That you don't like what they are doing on an emotional level is utterly irrelevant.

"Your uneducated and insulting comments about the mariners is offensive"

I've made no comments about 'mariners'. My comments were about people who are stupid enough to train for >professions and industries that no longer exist.

Many peopke in the fisheries field, not just in Japan but the world over, learn their craft from their fathers who learned from theirs. Entire villages are often based on a tradition handed down over centuries, Nobody is going out and training for professions that "no longer exist". You are the one trying to make a profession that has existed for centuries, cease to exist because you "Don;t Like It"..

"I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about you"

I thought we were talking about the FBI and how good they are at defining terrorists (not very). The FBI has done a good job of defining terrorists as we have had no succesful attacks on US soil since 911. Furthermlore, the US Courts have had no problem with the FBI's definition of Eco-Terrorists either as evidenced by their succesful prosecuition of ALF.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

NessieFEB. 13, 2012 - 10:41AM JST Both sides are wrong > But only one side is illegal. Hint: rhymes with ski leopard.

Interesting viewpoint.... I've heard the Japanese are allowed limited whaling for research purposes and those whales end up eaten. I'm not sure that falls under the meaning of 'legal' either. Maybe it's taste testing research they're doing.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Ossan

In fact the IWC 1986 Moratorium was suppose to have been reviewed but has not due to the biased actions of the anti-whaling faction in the IWC.

That's not correct. They are constantly reviewing whale stocks and the possibility of resuming commercial whaling - they have just decided against it at this point. Partly due, as you probably know, to the fact that the science of several countries has been rejected as being too flimsy. ('Hey...where are the samples we took? You didn't EAT them, did you?')

Many peopke in the fisheries field, not just in Japan but the world over, learn their craft from their fathers who learned from theirs. Entire villages are often based on a tradition handed down over centuries, Nobody is going out and training for professions that "no longer exist". You are the one trying to make a profession that has existed for centuries, cease to exist because you "Don;t Like It"..

Funny how the anti-whaling perspective is labelled 'emotive' and 'hippy' when pro-whalers pull out gold nuggets like this. This is true in ALL ex-whaling countries, including my own. The last town to lower the whaling flag in my country bemoaned the 'death of a town' in 1978 - it's livelihood, traditions, culture. Now, 34 years later, it is a thriving, prosperous town that is recognised as one of the best places in the state to live and has the best eco-tourism industry in the state, largely based on....the whales that inhabit surrounding waters.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

learn their craft from their fathers who learned from theirs

Are you telling us the harpoonists have no proper professional training, only what they learned at their daddies' knees? And their daddies before them? No wonder you're so forgiving of the abysmal time-to-death-rates in the whaling industry.

Tamarama - very good point about the hippy emotions.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

All readers back on topic please. The subject is the confrontation that you see in the photo.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo and Tamarama talk like they are President and Vice-President of the world. In reality, just leftists. Calling people stupid if they don't share your views is what is stupid. (I enjoyed whale sashimi twice these past two weeks thanks to the dead business of whales, or was I just dreaming?)

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

@MasterBape,

So, j4p4nFTW, Japan takes the steps of ensuring that it's not being bossed around? It did a good job of removing the troops from Okinawa, eh?

You seem confused. The powers that be want the troops in Okinawa. The only people who want them out are radical leftists from Okinawa. Mainland Japanese with the proper opinions know that we need the troops there, and we don't want them on real Japanese soil, so Okinawa is the place.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

That's not correct. They are constantly reviewing whale stocks and the possibility of resuming commercial whaling - >they have just decided against it at this point. Partly due, as you probably know, to the fact that the science of several >countries has been rejected as being too flimsy. ('Hey...where are the samples we took? You didn't EAT them, did >you?')

That's totally incorrect. The 1986 Moratorium was subject to review and reassesement in 1990. In 1991 the IWC Scientific Committee suibmitted it's findings to the commission that under the RMP, that 2000 Minkes could be harvested per year as the population had risen to 873,000 worldwide (761,000 in Antarctic waters). The anti-whaling faction vote to continue the Moratorium. The Moratorium itself is in contradiction to the IWC's charter and CAnada even left the IWC because of it.

('Hey...where are the samples we took? You didn't EAT them, did >you?')

This "would" be funny if IWC Article VIII didn't REQUIRE that whales taken under Scientific Permits be CONSUMED. That means "eaten", if you're not clear,

Funny how the anti-whaling perspective is labelled 'emotive' and 'hippy' when pro-whalers pull out gold nuggets like >this. This is true in ALL ex-whaling countries, including my own. The last town to lower the whaling flag in my >country bemoaned the 'death of a town' in 1978 - it's livelihood, traditions, culture. Now, 34 years later, it is a thriving, >prosperous town that is recognised as one of the best places in the state to live and has the best eco-tourism >industry in the state, largely based on....the whales that inhabit surrounding waters.

How YOUR country Australia has handled the end of whaling is irrelevant. Australia never had a practice of whaling for food, they merely killed every whale, mother whale and calf they could find, skin it onboard to boil the blubber, and toss the tons of wasted flesh overboard to feed the White Pointers.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

cleoFeb. 15, 2012 - 09:00AM JST Are you telling us the harpoonists have no proper professional training, only what they learned at their daddies' >knees? And their daddies before them? No wonder you're so forgiving of the abysmal time-to-death-rates in the >whaling industry.

And are YOU telling us that they went to a Harpoonists Academy and got their certification papers? Hate to break this to you but yes, for the most part, maritime and fisheries occupations vare very much handed down in families. Even in England and Scotland. The time-to-death-rate is a non-issue. Unless of course the entire basis of your position is merely emotional.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Ossan

The 1986 Moratorium was subject to review and reassesement in 1990. In 1991 the IWC Scientific Committee suibmitted it's findings to the commission that under the RMP, that 2000 Minkes could be harvested per year as the population had risen to 873,000 worldwide (761,000 in Antarctic waters). The anti-whaling faction vote to continue the Moratorium

Right. So what you are saying is that the Moratorium HAS been reviewed since 1986? Which is it Ossan, because your previous post says this:

Moratorium was suppose to have been reviewed but has not due to the biased actions of the anti-whaling faction in the IWC

Consistency in your position would be nice.

The Moratorium itself is in contradiction to the IWC's charter and CAnada even left the IWC because of it.

No it's not. It's a part of the conservation required to maintain whale stocks - the other part of the charter. Check it out from the IWC site:

The purpose of the Convention is to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry. And then you said this;

How YOUR country Australia has handled the end of whaling is irrelevant

. Again, consistency would be nice, Ossan, because I responded to what you said in your previous post;

Many peopke in the fisheries field, not just in Japan but the world over, learn their craft from their fathers who learned from theirs.

So, which is it?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

OssanAmerica

How YOUR country Australia has handled the end of whaling is irrelevant. Australia never had a practice of whaling for food, they merely killed every whale, mother whale and calf they could find, skin it onboard to boil the blubber, and toss the tons of wasted flesh overboard to feed the White Pointers.

So Japan whales for food do they? If thats the case and whale meat is sooo popular here then why is there such a massive stockpile of frozen whale meat? Maybe just maybe you should worry about eating through your stockpile before you worry about going and killing anymore whales. You cite your whaling as a food supply yet your stockpile is if anything getting bigger which would suggest one of two things, either you are taking to many whales compared to your consumption or your consumption is less than you would like to admit. Maybe one should address this prior to conducting any more "research" wouldnt you agree?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

TamaramaFeb. 16, 2012 - 08:15AM JST

The Moratorium was to be reviewed in 1991 and LIFTED if the Scientific Committee recommended it which it did. The Anti-Whaling faction ignored this and the head of IWC Scientific Committe resigned in disgust. The Anti-Whaling faction, which started the vote bribing in the first place, have no business being in the IWC because their agenda is contrary to the purpose and charter of the IWC itself.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

So Japan whales for food do they? If thats the case and whale meat is sooo popular here then why is there such a >massive stockpile of frozen whale meat? Maybe just maybe you should worry about eating through your stockpile >before you worry about going and killing anymore whales. You cite your whaling as a food supply yet your stockpile >is if anything getting bigger which would suggest one of two things, either you are taking to many whales compared >to your consumption or your consumption is less than you would like to admit. Maybe one should address this prior >to conducting any more "research" wouldnt you agree?

All countries stockpile beef, pork. chicken and many other foods.. That doesnb't mean they don't eat it or that their industries should cease to exist. .

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Since the law limits the time food for human consumption can be stockpiled, more than 50% of whale flesh ends up being sold on for cat food, miaow!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cletus, all foods are stockpiled in every country. It doesn't mean there's no demand for it or that the industry shouldn't exist.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Ossan

The Anti-Whaling faction, which started the vote bribing in the first place, have no business being in the IWC because their agenda is contrary to the purpose and charter of the IWC itself.

Well that's only your opinion and an assertion you keep making. I showed you that the IWC charter is about exploitation of whale resources AND the conservation of them. You can't have one without another. You can't farm something that isn't there to farm Ossan. So perhaps calling those countries 'anti-whaling' is disingenuous - perhaps, for the time being, it's fairer to call them 'pro-conservation' nations -nations that want to see most of the whale stocks properly replenish before they pull the trigger on commercial whaling again. That makes perfect sense to me. What's the big hurry?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

So Japan whales for food do they? If thats the case and whale meat is sooo popular here then why is there such a massive stockpile of frozen whale meat? Maybe just maybe you should worry about eating through your stockpile before you worry about going and killing anymore whales. You cite your whaling as a food supply yet your stockpile is if anything getting bigger which would suggest one of two things, either you are taking to many whales compared to your consumption or your consumption is less than you would like to admit. Maybe one should address this prior to conducting any more "research" wouldnt you agree?

Puzzling response, indeed. If you believe that consumption is so weak in Japan that it cannot maintain the market, then you should be all for removing the moratorium thereby eliminating the government subsidies.

it's fairer to call them 'pro-conservation' nations

LOL Tamarama. If they are "pro-conservation" nations, then they have no problem ACCEPTING the removal of the moratorium with limited quotas on species.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

TamaramaFeb. 17, 2012 - 09:01AM JST

"The Anti-Whaling faction, which started the vote bribing in the first place, have no business being in the IWC because their agenda is contrary to the purpose and charter of the IWC itself."

Well that's only your opinion and an assertion you keep making. I showed you that the IWC charter is about exploitation of whale resources AND the conservation of them.

No it's not just my opionion. The anti-whaling nations are against all whaling. Want proof? In 2010 the IWC suggested a compromise that would allow Japan et al, to whale in reduced numbers and eliminate the Scientific Permit system. Against the posuron of the United States and New Zealand, Australia practically sigle handedly destroyed the deal because they refused to accept any term other than "no whales to be killed at all". Even in 1991 the IWC Scientific Committee said that Minke stocks were up to 873,000 and a 2000 per year harvest would have no effect. Why then did the anti-whaling faction fail to allow the Moratorium to be lifted? Where is this "conservation" part you claim? The IWC SCientific Committee has made it clear that there is something there to Farm. We aren't talking endangered here. No, they aren't "Pro-Conservation" nations as you claim, because they are working againswt the very charter of the IWC. THey have no interest in mainrafining healthy wehale stocks for the purpose of a well regulated whakling industry. They want all whaling stopped, period. Tey are against Japan';s Research Whaling under Article VIII because that data is being given to the IWC Scientific Committee and the fats support a lifting of the Moratorium, at least on certain abundant species. The only thing disingeniousd is heir continued presense in the IWC as members for the sole purpose of sabotaging it' very purpose. Let them be honest and start their own Anti-Whaling organization.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Currently, whaling is practiced by Canada, the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland, Indonesia, Japan, Norway, Russia, St Vincents & Grenadine Islands, and The United States of America.

Canada, the Faeroes, Greenland, Indonesia, St Vincents and the USA each have a very small quota of a specific whale species that is hunted by indigenous groups for cultural reasons.

Iceland and Norway have commercial whaling fleets.

Russia and Japan have fleets for scientific purposes.

Iceland only has shore-based whaling, and has an annual quota of nine fin whales and 30 minke whales. The fin whales are caught for export to Japan, whilst the minkes are caught for domestic consumption.

Norway has a deepwater fleet that operates in the North Atlantic, and since resuming commercial whaling in 1993 has only pursued the minke whale. Their maximum catch in any year was 646 whales, and they have never met their annual quota.

Russia's Chutoka Autonomous Okrug has an annual quota of up to 140 Gray Whales in the NE Pacific.

And Japan maintains a deepwater whaling fleet that is at least as large as that of the commercial whaling nations' individual fleets, and which catches more whales per year than both Norway and Iceland combined. Unlike the commercial whaling fleet, Japan's scientific whaling fleet also regularly intrudes into other nations' Exclusive Economic Zones during the course of their annual hunt.

One could, if one was so inclined, argue that Japan ought to allow China, Taiwan, North Korea and South Korea free reign to sail and fish unhindered and unmolested within Japan's Exclusive Economic Zone -- as long as those nations paint "RESEARCH" on the hulls of their fishing fleets.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"Japan's scientific whaling fleet also regularly intrudes into other nations' Exclusive Economic Zones during the course of their annual hunt."

"Intrudes" as in passes through? Yes, ships of all nations are free to pass through EEZs at any time. Foreign ships may not ebgage in fisheries or other actrivities wihin that EEZ. Obviously the Japanese Research Whaling fleet are NOT operating in anyone's EEZ.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

nigelboy

LOL Tamarama. If they are "pro-conservation" nations, then they have no problem ACCEPTING the removal of the moratorium with limited quotas on species.

LOL...I love that. No, perhaps they wouldn't if they thought the stocks were ready to sustain it. But that sounds like a question you can direct to them?

Ossan Like LOL Nigel, you sound like you have questions you need to direct elsewhere. But, if, at present, the majority of voting countries continue to vote against lifting the moratorium I can only deduce that current popular sentiment is leaning towards the conservation side of the leger, and that you and LOL Nigel are out of step with that. Which is cool. But I have faith in their ability to make an informed, logical decision that represent the general feelings of their domestic populace. I can't help but wonder if the rather stubborn resistance to the idea of lifting the moratorium, besides being based on science (the IWC science committee being just one organization to pay attention to such matters) isn't somewhat of a reaction to the likes of Japan flaunting the spirit of the moratorium, whilst technically following the letter of the law? What do you think? Kind of a karmaric political backlash.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can't help but wonder if the rather stubborn resistance to the idea of lifting the moratorium, besides being based >on science (the IWC science committee being just one organization to pay attention to such matters)

The IWC Scientific Committee is the ONLY organization that has the authority to influence and in fact dicate IWC policy. The IWC charter makes it clear that issues such as moratopriums, sancutaries, catch limits etc are all to be guided bu the recommendations of the IWC SCientific Committee. Yet the Anti-Whaling members have actd like 6th graders ignoring the rules and doing as they please.

isn't >somewhat of a reaction to the likes of Japan flaunting the spirit of the moratorium, whilst technically following >the >letter of the law? What do you think? Kind of a karmaric political backlash.

So ou admit that Japan is "following the letter of the law". Fine. Then what is the "spirit of the law"? The IWC established a Moratorium on commercial whaling, but allows Research Whaling and requires that the whales be consumed. Please tell us what is the "spirit of the law"? That no whales be killed at all for any purpose regardless of the findings and recommendations of the IWC Scientific Committee?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The IWC Scientific Committee is the ONLY organization that has the authority to influence and in fact dicate IWC policy

But they aren't the ONLY organization to monitor and make estimates of the size of whale populations, are they? And those government representatives that attend IWC meetings would be fully aware of other data and estimates pertaining to whale populations before going in and considering matters relating to the moratorium. You would be naive to think otherwise, and whilst they may not directly cite that in discussion, they would be aware of it.

Yet the Anti-Whaling members have actd like 6th graders ignoring the rules and doing as they please

Why, because they vote in favour of maintaining the moratorium and hence allowing whale stocks to further replenish? What's childish about that? Perhaps if the 'science' were more compelling, they'd move on it.

Please tell us what is the "spirit of the law"? That no whales be killed at all for any purpose regardless of the findings and recommendations of the IWC Scientific Committee?

Ossan, why do you think the world is so vehemently opposed to the 'scientific' whaling sham that is currently undertaken every year? Why do you think these kinds of discussions light up chat boards like this one world wide? Well, you know already, but since you posed the question, I'll answer. Because the Japanese whaling is clearly counter to the spirit of the whaling moratorium. Namely, that we will all suspend commercial whaling until the whale populations around the world have recovered, are stable and we decide, as a group, democratically, to resume whaling. Exploiting loopholes for the sake of purely selfish means is unbecoming of a magnificent and well-respected country like Japan - and that's a very nice way of putting it. The world doesn't like it, there is a big backlash against it, and you have idiot splinter groups like the Sea Shepherd spring up and launch into action because of it. Because it is counter to the spirit of the moratorium.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

TamaramaFeb. 19, 2012 - 08:49AM JST "The IWC Scientific Committee is the ONLY organization that has the authority to influence and in fact dicate IWC policy" But they aren't the ONLY organization to monitor and make estimates of the size of whale populations, are they

But they are the ONLY organization that the IWC charter that the IWC charter recognizes as thesurce of data and information upon which thge IWC is to make decisions on Moratoriums, Sanctuaries, catch limits, etc. For he purposes of the IWC, other oreganizationsdo not have theauthority and are not recognized to influence IWC decision making. That's simply a fact. "Yet the Anti-Whaling members have actd like 6th graders ignoring the rules and doing as they please"

Why, because they vote in favour of maintaining the moratorium and hence allowing whale stocks to further >replenish? What's childish about that? Perhaps if the 'science' were more compelling, they'd move on it.

That the anti-whaling faction uses data from other sources with an agenda to negate the IWC's own Scientific committee findings is disingenious. Why do you think the head of hte Scientific Committee quit ion disgust? Why do you think Canada walked out of the IWC?

"Please tell us what is the "spirit of the law"? That no whales be killed at all for any purpose regardless of the findings and recommendations of the IWC Scientific Committee?"

Well, you know already, but since you posed the question, I'll answer. Because the Japanese whaling is clearly >counter to the spirit of the whaling moratorium. Namely, that we will all suspend commercial whaling until the whale >populations around the world have recovered, are stable and we decide, as a group, democratically, to resume >whaling.

Nonsense. The IWC Scientific Committe, the sole authority on IWC decision making on the matter already made it clear that for certain species the Moratorium could be lifted back in 1991. To make it simple, they HAVE RECOVERED. A "moratorium" means a temporary suspension of activity, not a cesssation. It is thge anti-whaling faction that has violated IWC rules that has broken the "spriti of the law".

Exploiting loopholes for the sake of purely selfish means

Your biased personal allegation which to date is unproven. Cant wait for the ICJ outcome?

The world doesn't like it, there is a big backlash against it, and you have idiot splinter groups like the Sea Shepherd >spring up and launch into action because of it.

No, the anti-whaling nations hardly constitute "the world". The backlash is from the hardcore anti-whakling nations, the supporters who somehow think that whales are more magnificent than cows, and idiots like SSCS are playing people, especially the Australian public, like a fiddle.

Because it is counter to the spirit of the moratorium.

No, I've proven you wrong on that. You keep repeating it because you don't know the difference between moratorium and cessation.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Sea Shepard and Whaling Ship both need a drink

0 ( +1 / -1 )

OssanAmerica: "Sorryn my friend but I can not ber held responsible for anyone's lacl of education, reading comprehension or direct experiemnce with law enforcement agencies and judicial systems. Your comment that the Federal Bureau of Investigation'sa definition of eco-terrrism is "irrelevant" takes the cake."

I know you get flustered when trying to reply to me, and I know that computers and smart phones will once in a while auto-correct, but seriously, my friend, this is so riddled with mistakes it's hard to take seriously, especially given that you are trying to counter my point that the FBI's definition of something is completely subjective and try to make it sound otherwise but bungle it up so badly (never mind you try to talk about lack of education but misspell every other word!).

Yes, the whalers are, by the FBI definition, eco-terrorists. Deal with it. You can't twist something the way you want it and then claim others are incorrect in twisting something otherwise. The "Japanese Center for Cretacean Research" or whatever it's called is just a joke term for a meat-packing plant -- from which the meat is not at all in demand. And I laughed my butt off when you fell into the 'Australia doesn't have a culture of whaling for food' trap that is the fall-back when it's pointed out the expeditions are obviously not for science.

Nicely done,

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Cretacean....ROFLMAO

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Big deal, the Japanese will always enjoy their kujira.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Ossan, Debating with you is akin to stepping onto a merry-go-round that won't stop and goes nowhere. First, I am perfectly aware of what moratorium means - if you read my posts properly you would see that. What you fail to acknowledge is that the IWC Charter has 2 objectives in regards to whale stocks. Exploitation and CONSERVATION. The current moratorium is in place due to the latter. Can you acknowledge this?

To make it simple, they HAVE RECOVERED

My guess is that the main species of whale you are referring to here is the Minke whale because you have mentioned it before. Here is what Wiki has to say about them:

Final circumpolar estimates from the International Whaling Commission (IWC) IDCR/SOWER population surveys (1978/79-2003/04) were 338,000 — only 39% of the 1985/86-1990/91 surveys.[12] As of January, 2010, The IWC states it is "unable to provide reliable estimates at the present time" and that a "major review is underway by the Scientific Committee."[13]

As of 2008, one estimate submitted to the IWC Scientific Committee by the Japanese government researchers suggested that for Southern Hemisphere (CPIII with common Northern Boundaries) is 665,074.[14] In the early 1990s, the IWC Scientific Committee agreed minkes in the Southern Hemisphere numbered 760,000 (CPII), which the Japanese whaling industry currently uses as the (2005) estimate.[citation needed] In 2000, however, the Committee withdrew this advice in light of new survey data suggesting 50% lower population than in the 1980s.[15]

Sounds like it isn't really a very exact science to me. What about you? This is your beloved IWC Scientific Committee after all.

And whilst you ROFLYAO at other people's grammar mistakes, can I point out to you that the word you are looking for is DISINGENUOUS, not disingenius.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Tamara, the IWC Scientific Committee made a recommerndation. The IWC charter makes ot clear the the Committees position is to guide all ddcisions on Moratoriums, Sanctuaries, etc. The fact is that the Anti-whaling action has violated this procedure. You keep throwing up "data from other sources". Well they are irrevelant to the IWC's decion making process. BTW no one cares what wiki has to say about anything since we all write the contents including yours truly. As for spelling errors, in the case of that particular poster, that was no spelling error. Your positioin has been indefensible; you simply want no whales killed at all. Be honest and just say it.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Ossan, So you won't acknowledge that part of the IWC Charter is conservation? That doesn't surprise me, because, as smithinjapan has already pointed out, you simply cherry-pick bits of information that suit you and entirely ignore others that weaken your argument. If you don't care about Wiki's information, then why do you bother contributing to it? Are you suggesting that what you write is mostly nonsense? I think I have defended my position quite well. I have quoted you directly from the IWC site several times, as well as other sources. You, conveniently, just ignore all that. You tend to resort to emotive outbursts that just compromise the quality of what you are trying to say. I'm not really anti-whaling, but at this time, I am very pro-moratorium. I wonder if you can see the subtle difference?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Tamarama: Ossan doesn't know what he's talking about at the best of times. I mean, look at this sentence, from a post of his to me earlier: "Sorryn my friend but I can not ber held responsible for anyone's lacl of education, reading comprehension or direct experiemnce with law enforcement agencies and judicial systems". Forget about cherry-picking, which he does all the time -- you can't even understand what he's ranting about on a basic level. You did indeed make VERY good points, and it does not surprise me there was no answer to your post of 1:49 p.m. from Ossan.

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