Ah, excellent, I hadn't seen that one. Yes, now I can see what you are saying. I am still a little unsure, as I would expect to see some roiling water off the port bow, but there is no doubt that something made the captain rev the engine.
This is why I would like to see the view from the NM when this happened - the view from the Simon blocks any view of bow thruster wash.
One small point, I doubt if Hammerstedt is a licensed Captain - we all know Watson isn`t :
A ship's captain must have a master's license or certificate, issued by the ship's flag state, or a state licensing authority if operating within "non-federal" waters. Various types of licenses exist, specifying the maximum vessel size indicated in gross tonnage and in what geographic areas the captain can operate.
The Bob Barker is Flagged in the Cook Islands currently
SSCS boats are usually classified / flagged as private yachts by SSCS so they should actually be named MY "whatever" to be factually correct. I can call my cocker spaniel Captain on my 9m fibre glass yacht - it doesn`t make my dog a licensed Captain though ..
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
I`m Referring to this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6zdl4bOY2c
The Maru is pushing the Barker to port - the bow thruster stack is idling till around 0:14 or so then you see the smoke increase considerably as the barker is slightly pushed over.( Incidentally, the Barker was nowhere near capsizing, far from it, Hammerstedts ridiculous claim that they were 15 seconds away from rolling over is just the usual dramatisation.)
It certainly looks like hes using the Port side bow thruster to keep the Barkers bow into the Laurel, even when hes being pushed by the Maru, which in terms of seamanship is truly terrifying ( Im listing to one side so Ill help list the ship even more with the thrusters )
It will all come out in the Marine inquiries by Oz and Nz anyway
For the people on the ships, whaling is very profitable; they can take home up to two tons of prime meat from under the table
That`s not important in the discussion - the discussion is about whaling by Japan, not the crew, otherwise we could argue about Paul Watsons $121,000 salary from SSCS in 2010 and how many houses and cars he has :)
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
Another thing about the videos regarding the listing / rolling of the Barker to port - if you look closely at the foremast of the Barker, youll see the smoke pouring from the stack as the person on the bridge slams the throttle on the bow thrusters - I wouldnt be in the least surprised that Hammerstedt was operating the PORT side bow thruster to keep the bow of the barker at the hull of the Laurel even as hes being pushed to port by the N Maru & Id like to see video looking down on the Barker from the N Maru to see if this what actually happened. Also note the Yokohama fender on the portside deck of the Laurel - I wouldnt be surprised if it was pushed onto deck by the Barker Will be interesting to read about the contempt of court proceedings in the US shortly - SSCS are up Sh** creek without the proverbial paddle with that one.
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
Damn. missed this bit ..
Brown, the founder of Australia’s Greens party, praised Canberra for raising the incursion with Tokyo. “This vessel has armed personnel aboard,” he said.
Huh? how does he know? Did they shoot at him? perhaps in the same way that "watson got shot" ? ;o)
If there were weapons on board, I sincerely hope they would be used in the event of some animal rights idiot trying to board the ship..
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
The case of Australia's claim to the Australian Antarctic Territory is one in which one nation (Australia) unilaterally has staked a claim over territory on the only continent without a native human population which a very large number of nations have agreed should remain non-national in order to prevent its militarization and to ensure freedom of scientific investigation. The question here is should any territorial claims be permitted on Antarctica. You don't see a glaring difference between the two?
The macquarie island sovereignty isnt in question, it belongs to Australia and does not come under Ozs Australian Antarctic claim at all.
Regarding the australian comment of
“The government strongly objects to whaling vessels passing through Australian territorial seas or our exclusive economic zone,” Environment Minister Tony Burke said.
He can go take a hike, or better still, read Article 45 of UNCLOS and understand what that means. No, I´m afraid all we have here is yet another australian politician grandstanding for the voters
-6 ( +0 / -6 )
not some distant acquittance or colleague of Paul Watson.
Which part of Watson's right hand man did you have trouble comprehending regarding Coronado? According to Watson, it was him and coronado that sank the whaling ships in Iceland - at least, that was until he was arrested in Iceland and then he denied all knowledge - par for Watson of course.
In addition, Vlasek was a DIRECTOR OF SEA SHEPHERD and also their treasurer - a distant aquaintance?
Biggest LOL I've had all night
3 ( +6 / -3 )
Do some research instead of just spouting sensationalist over-exaggerations. They are not calculating, mindless professionally thugs. Just a group of pretty ordinary people. Watch Whale Wars.
Indeed, do some research - look up Rodney Coronado - Watsons ex - right hand man - was on the FBI's most wanted list and served time for fire bombing animal labs.
Look up Jerry Vlasek, ex director of Sea Shepherd who advocated assasination of animal lab scientists ... Quote
I think there is a use for violence in our movement. And I think it can be an effective strategy. Not only is it morally acceptable, I think that there are places where it could be used quite effectively from a pragmatic standpoint. For instance, if vivisectors were routinely being killed, I think it would give other vivisectors pause in what they were doing in their work — and if these vivisectors were being targeted for assassination ... — and I wouldn't pick some guy way down the totem pole, but if there were prominent vivisectors being assassinated, I think that there would be a trickle-down effect and many, many people who are lower on that totem pole would say, "I'm not going to get into this business because it's a very dangerous business ...
Just a group of ordinary people huh? These are the kind guys Watson associated with - the sooner he faces the charges against him the better - if it's all BS as the sea shepherd goons claim then he has nothing to fear.
1 ( +5 / -4 )
arrestpaul, Japan made a deal with Germany to send him directly to Japan. Think all of that bailout money for the European Union. It is not being a "coward" to flee from an unjust legal process. About his "authority" it is just as good as any private citizen.
No deal is / was made. Japan presented evidence to Germany and asked for extradition based on that evidence. Nothing more, nothing less, this is how extradition works. If Germany thought the evidence was enough to justify extraditing Watson, they would have - if they didn't, they would have refused the extradition. Any suggestions of a " Deal" is simply yet another conspiracy theory. What deal? Japan will buy a few million Volkwagens? Oh pulease...
2 ( +6 / -4 )
I haven't seen any mention of which passport is currently held by the Germans. I presumed it would be the one with which he entered Germany but I haven't seen any reference as to which one.
From the German magazine Spiegel
Am Montag erschien der gebürtige Kanadier mit amerikanischem Pass nicht, wie er sollte, auf der Wache. ;o)
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
Dual Nationality - so seeing as he left his american passport in Germany, he's possibly travelling around on his Canadian one if he has one. If he doesn't, entering an ISPS port would be a tad problematic :O)
0 ( +3 / -3 )
As for the "neutral country " suggestion, why should a neutral country get involved? I commit a crime in Japan or against a japanese vessel, I get tried in Japan or in the country who's waters I commit the alledged crime. Same with Costa Rica. As the incidents happened in International waters against japanese vessels - he gets tried in Japan. The only ones suggesting he wouldn't get a fair trial in either Japan or Costa Rica are guess who? Yes, Watson and the sea shepherd goons. I must remember that next time I get a speeding ticket - no judge, I won't get a fair trial here - I want to get tried in neutral tibuktoo thanks. When Watson was convicted in Canada, it was for offences commited in Canadian waters.
0 ( +4 / -4 )
Point being, Watson's not going to know which countries will detain him or not - at least until he enters such countries. Basically, he's up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
Costa Rica has now issued an Interpol " Red notice" for Paul Watson .. oops...
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
more importantly we have frustrated their illegal profiteering from the killing of whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
Once again, the JARPA whaling program has never EVER made a profit - it's heavily subsidised - so how can they be profiteering? The whaling is LEGAL - Watson and sea shepherd say it's illegal - the International Whaling commission specifically allows it.. Read the ICRW and stop making a fool of yourself.
0 ( +5 / -5 )
I don't particularly support whaling - However, I think Watson and sea shepherd have done ( and continue to do ) more damage to any anti whaling / Fishing / hunting causes than any other group on the face of the planet. Watson and his clowns use lies, deceit, misinformation and play on the almost total gullibility of their supporters. He's wanted in four countries and not welcome in more - every time the law gets going, there's a mass of BS about death threats and bounties on his head and how he'll never get a fair trial blah blah blah as well as claims of conspiracy from guess who? Watson and Sea shepherd - nobody else.
The sooner Watson gets hauled into court to answer for any alledged crimes the better - if he's innocent, then he has nothing to fear. Of course, if the opposite is true, then he certainly has something he's scared of - quite possibly some years in the pokey. If he has the courage of his beliefs, that shouldn't be a problem - by going on the run however, it rather indicates that he has no moral courage whatsoever.
3 ( +7 / -4 )
Paul Watson is wanted in three countries. Norway, Costa Rica and Japan. I was actually trying to make the point that he pretty much travels freely.
Wrong .. 4 countries, you forgot Germany :O)
He's also Persona Non Grata in Iceland so he can't go there either
1 ( +5 / -4 )
Another couple of interesting factoids from the Pete Bethune Vs Sea shepherd court case :
Sea Shepherd, which has tried numerous times to delay this case, has left open the possibility that Paul Watson will be a witness in court despite him having just skipped bail from Germany where he was being held following an extradition order issued by the Costa Rican authorities. SSCS is arguing in the arbitration that Bethune failed to adhere to maritime Law and in so doing allowed his vessel to be rammed, risking both the vessel and crew.
Will be interesting to see if Watson turns up ;O)
-3 ( +4 / -7 )
Interesting stuff - Sea shepherd and Watson regarding Norways attempt to extradite him from Holland in 1994
DO NOT MISTAKE IT:- IF PAUL WATSON IS EXTRADITED TO NORWAY HE WILL DIE IN PRISON. ( Lisa Distefano ) 1994
This year regarding the Costa Rica attempt to extradite Paul Watson :
Hammarstedt also said that the shark fin mafia has placed a bounty of $25,000 on Paul Watson’s head. ( 2012 )
Also this year when Watson ran :
Germany was proceeding with Captain Watson’s extradition to Costa Rica and, once there, there is no doubt he would have been delivered into Japanese custody,” said Susan Hartland, Administrative Director for Sea Shepherd. “Upon being extradited to Japan, he would not have received a fair trial and would never have seen the outside of a prison again,” she added.
Anybody notice a pattern? :O)
-1 ( +4 / -5 )
How is it that such a "terrorist" has up until now been free to travel wherever he wants? Was given documentation by the US, Canadian and Norwegian governments exonerating him of acts of violence.
Paul Watson still has an outstanding arrest warrant in Norway - he can't go anywhere near the place. Where do you read such garbage?
1 ( +6 / -5 )
That's why SS goes up against the Faroe Islanders, the Costa Ricans, the Norwegians, the Libyans, the Canadians....because it's all about racial slurs against the Japanese. Riiight.
Watson hasn't been near Norway for 16 years after he had his rear handed to him on a plate by the Norwegian Navy in 1994 :O) He was sentenced to 120 days which he ended up serving most of in Holland. As far as I can remember, there's still a warrant outstanding for him in Norway too, so that makes Japan, Costa Rica, Germany, Norway and he's Persona non grata in Iceland - if he keeps it up, he'll run out if countries to hide in eventually ;O)
-2 ( +5 / -7 )
Any of these true?
"In 30 years, we've never injured anybody, we've never broken a law." - Paul Watson on "Larry King Live", June 2009
“The fact is – never been convicted of a crime.” - Paul Watson, Worldfest 2006
“I’ve got no criminal record.” - Paul Watson Interview, September 2008
Nope, none of these are true - all false, all lies
-2 ( +4 / -6 )
You made the baseless claim that it was unsafe and used illegally
Typical watson waffle - Landing a helicopter on an untried and uncertified platform is a safety hazard.
Perhaps the helicopter pilot had himself transferred to the ship before it was used, perhaps they had it certificated afterward or even had someone flown in?
Did you watch the video at all? He flew the helicopter onto it - certifying afterwards means nothing - it was uncertified when he landed on it - Had someone flown in? To what? an uncertified helideck? An ice floe?
dear oh dear ...
-1 ( +4 / -5 )
and since the SSCS pilot was part of the construction team he has excellent knowledge of the build.
Nope, the pilot was not on the ship - the first he saw of the construction was after he'd landed on it. Frank, stick to your supposed area of expertise - I shoot video to earn my daily bread - the video at 0:45 is shot wide angle with the heli leass than 100m from the ship and less than 20m above the water
-2 ( +2 / -4 )
I said it was a build at sea and so impossible to to get certification. I did ask if they had the platform certified upon return to port indicating I hadn't ignored anything. As for the small matter of safety, I'm sure they risk assessed it at the same and concluded it was a safe platform to use if built by competent people.
Still ignoring the point that it was not xertified by a competent authority before use - a competent authority "might" be the helicopter pilot himself , but seeing as he had to land on it before inspecting it, it rather knocks a large hole in your arguement. Which competent authority risk assessed it? the amateurs who built it? Are you seriously claiming they are a competent authority?
Safety is not a small matter when flying a helicopter as Frank above will tell you, in fact, it's paramount - It shows just how Watson's mentality permeates the thinking of his amateurs.
1 ( +5 / -4 )
When I see someone wriggling through the rules, manuafcturing doubt and fallaing back on insults in their arguments to support an immoral industry, I conclude that that person does themselves no credit. It's unavoidable.
Well done, you've described Paul Watson perfectly ;O)
0 ( +5 / -5 )
From what I can see its a build at sea where there would be no competent authority other than the builder. Have you any evidence to say it wasn't certified on return to their home port?
Rather ignoring the point that a licensed helicopter pilot should not land on a non certified helipad aren't we.... it's a small matter of safety but as we all know, that's never been Watson's strong point has it? ...
Your choice fella.
Fella? not last time I looked in the mirror
2 ( +6 / -4 )
@ swistoni again...
Nice try. Though I'm you reviewed long and hard, did you manage to come up with any footage of the SS helicopter 'buzzing' the whalers?
Sure, first video on youtube at 0:40 - 0:41 ( search string -sea shepherd helicopter flights) Also at 0:45.
Another 2 minutes of my life wasted
So back to Watson, he's sure the chubbiest supposed Vegan I've ever seen, perhaps life on the run will slim him down a bit ;O)
0 ( +5 / -5 )
The last counrty visited ( ie Australia ) probably a company such as this : < http://www.flightsafetyhelideckcertification.com.au/CompanyProfile.html>
How's that for landing on a non approved ICAO helideck Frank btw :O)
2 ( +5 / -3 )
But to be fair, I will back off the captain being guilty if you can provide any video from any source (the ICR or the SSCS or Animal Planet, any ones video) that shows the helicopter violated any aviation laws
Here you go Frank, the SS helicopter landing on a helideck built at sea and not inspected or certified by any competent authority before use :o)
PS.. watson's still not a Captain ;O)
It will be interesting to see if Watson eventually makes it back to one of the SS boats and what happens when that boat docks in Australia. Will australia fulfill it's international obligations and arrest watson if his international arrest warrant is still valid? Time will tell
0 ( +5 / -5 )
Watson has the legal right to stop commercial whaling and inforce the IWC order in the southern sea
Wrong on all counts. Watson is not empowered by the IWC to do diddlysquat Japan is not commercial whaling There is no "IWC order"
JARPA has never made a profit - ever - it runs at a loss.
Here are some PEER Reviewed Japanese research papers
There is no " non whaling order ", whatever that is when it's at home.
The Japanese Scientific whaling permit is legal and complies with their international obligations and agreements
Sea shepherd however, are a bunch of numpties ( watch any episode of whale wars to see ) led by a wanted fugitive from justice who regularlly lies through his teeth.
Here is part of the waiver sea shepherd volunteers must sign when they go onboard any sea shepherd boat.
*"I agree for myself, my heirs, executors, and administrators, to release, hold harmless, and forever discharge SEA SHEPHERD, its Board members, supporters, vessels, officers and personnel from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, in law, admiralty or equity, on account of my death, or on account of any injury to me or my property, which may occur from any cause whether on land or at sea, in port, ashore, or enroute to or from any location or vessel."
"I further acknowledge that most of the people on the ship will be volunteers who are not professional mariners and who can be expected to make mistakes which may result in injury to me and I will take full responsibility for any injury."
"I also understand that I am aboard a vessel that possibly carries no insurance policy of any kind."*
So sea shepherd acknowledge that most of the crew are numpties.
THAT is scary...... especially in view of that sea shepherd expects every "volunteer" to sign this crap
-2 ( +6 / -8 )