Frank Vaughn comments

Madonna, I can take her or leave her. But today I greatly respect her for putting it on the line and standing up for the values many of us in the rest of the world take for granted. The freedom of speech, opinion and conscience, the very thing that got Pussy Riot into so much trouble there in Russia. They could have easily treated her the same for expressing support for the girls and the gay community. And who cares if she made a few bucks (Rubles) doing it, that money would have been forfeit if they had went after her.

Love her or hate her, this time she did good!

I would also like to add that since this is becoming such an international incident that it needs to be placed into a court in as neutral a country as possible for trial and yes Captain Watson needs to face the charges. But again some place neutral so there is a fair hearing and or trial.

I have a question: Costa Rico has specified their charges against Captain Watson, but so far all I have read is that Japan wants him for "illegal activities". Come on what are the specific "illegal activities? Please I know what all of you think they are, but has the Japanese government published an actual list of charges that can be accessed?

Good for NASA, the most efficient government agency in the U.S.

where staff and customers will yell at each other in loud voices.

Welcome to Eastern Europe, I'm in a country not to far from Romania and that is SOP here. Except for the new and upcoming supermarkets customer service is catch-as-catch-can and no such thing as a set price, my native wife can always score 10-20% lower than I can when I'm alone. Shopping in Japan sounds live heaven compared to here.

“In my opinion, they should put on television a study about religions because most people don’t even know the difference,”

Sadly on TV won't help as 99.999% would rather watch American Idol or Dancing With the Stars, etc. It needs to be done in school, but then there is that super strict thing about NO religion in U.S. schools.

The ignorance in the U.S. regarding different religions and ethnic groups is astounding and seems to be getting worse by the day. My humble opinion on a cure, somehow get people of different religions to attend a service of another religon and meet your neighbors and learn that they truly are not that different from yourself. Sadly never going to happen.

sandiegoluv You are correct. Given that none of my opposition has produced video or audio of their allegations about the helicopter being used to make an attack or direct an attack I will leave this thread knowing I am correct that I proved that the captain of the whaler is guilty of unlawful interference of an aircraft in flight. Nothing they say can justify the attack on the helicopter.

The Japan Coast Guard is not military. It is Law Enforcement.

Thanks for making my argument for me. If they are Law Enforcement and there is a warrant for Captain Watson, then why did the not apprehend him when they had a chance? Also why did they not detain and possibly arrest the crew of the Steve Irwin for the alleged attacks against themselves? If they were indeed being attacked why did the captain not use his superior speed to escape the attack to keep his ship and crew safe?

Duh!

eyeonwarson I pass your question back to you. Did you pay attention when you watched the video. It clearly shows the Pilot as a member of the build team and he gave the interview as well. He had more than sufficient knowledge of the deck before he used it. As the pilot he used the discretion granted him by the laws to land there. Plus back to my Medical helicopter analogy, those pilots don't exactly get out and physically inspect a site before landing. Take your own advice and stick to what you know which you have proven is not aviation. BTW I too am a published photographer so I stick by what I said about the distance effects of different lenses.

Badge213 I'd like to say that NWA 85 had to be an exception for communications. Transoceanic aircraft operating to and from the U.S. are required to have an old fashioned, but reliable, Short Wave transceiver, two actually. They operate each one on a different wave length to provide uninterrupted communications. But as with any electrical device severe solar activity can disrupt it. I will speculate that since NWA85 had severe rudder damage, that the short-wave antennas may have been damaged.

To me it is irresponsible that the Pilot in Command was not notified as soon as possible. As for the other stuff, yes too many unknowns in the article.

eyeonwarson

They very same laws I've been hitting you over the head with make the licensed pilot the certifying authority. The PIC (pilot in command) has the authority to make the decision on whether a landing site is safe and usable. And since the SSCS pilot was part of the construction team he has excellent knowledge of the build. So if the pilot says it's safe that is all that is needed. If every helicopter landing site had to be certified by an outside authority then medical helicopters would be impossible to use as they would only be allowed to use airports and hospital helipads.

As for the complainer who said the videos show the helicopter too close to the ship, talk to your friends at one of the major camera manufactures there, you will learn that camera (video) lenses tend to shorten distances and make things look much closer than they are.

Anyway, why do the captains of the whaling ships continue to put the lives of their crews in danger by staying there and allowing the Sea Shepherds to "attack" them. A captain has the mandate to keep his ship and crew safe, and the whalers all have superior speed. Must be that supposed "attacks" are not as dangerous as claimed, otherwise your captains are violating the law by endangering their ships and crews.

I do not know what is written in an Australian passport, but in my U.S. passport there are two strong warnings. Item 6) obey the laws of the country you are visiting (paraphrased for length) 7) avoid all illegal drugs (paraphrased for length)

I'll take two with everything :-)

Well, Well

Obama kept his promise to get the U.S. out of Iraq. He is working on the same promise for Afghanistan.

So what does he do, he replaces those with Syria and threats of Iran.

This American is sick and tired of seeing the young of my country being sacrificed for people who for the most part hate us and will always hate us.

I'm not trying to make this about political parties, in Obama's case he got us out of Republican messes, and Nixon got us out of a Democrat mess, it goes back and forth. Charity begins at home and both parties are good at forgetting that. $billion$ that could have been better spent on police, fire and roads to name three things. And the lives that would not have been wasted.

I hope the PIC (pilot in command) is hopping mad, it was his aircraft and the safety of everyone on board falls upon him(her). If he had been notified right away that aircraft would have been in the air for at least three hours less. And why all the way back to Tokyo? A B777 doesn't require a super large airport, surely you have ones on the north end of your country that would be acceptable.

But all of your are correct, the perpetrator of this needs to be locked away for a very long time, if he has any resources they now belong to JAL as this stunt will have cost about $100K.

And the passengers must be told the truth for the return and delay.

marcelitoAug. 02, 2012 - 10:39AM JST

eyeonwarson - "Once again, if a helicopter feels that it is endangered by an LRAD or anything else, any helicopter pilot worth his licence leaves the area or gets out of range of any danger . It's not rocket science" By the same token if the J -whaler eco terrorists ( to use the pro whalers favorite term here ) feel so" endangered" by SS activities they can leave the area as well . That's not rocket science either.

marcelito Thanks, I was so busy defending the helicopter I completely missed that. It is a known fact the the whalers all superior speed, so why do they stay there and "take it?" That means as all of you claim, that the captain of the whaler is putting his crews life's at risk just the same as the Sea Shepherds.

eyeonwarson

That is an UNARMED CIVILLIAN helicopter and it only observes what is happening. The LRAD attack was illegal as the helicopter NEVER participated in the attack which by the way would also be illegal under the laws I quoted you. The pilot has never violated any aviation law in his flights and has never done more than observe the confrontations between the ships and boats. The captain of the whaler is guilty of a crime, stop the double standard, just because a rubber boat is throwing a stink bomb it does NOT give the captain of the target "cart Blanche" to attack anything in range.

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. Since that will be impossible, that means you are applying the good old double standard of "do as I say, not as I do!"

BoredToTearsAug. 02, 2012 - 10:39AM JST

Frank Vaughn - You claim to be former U.S. Coast Guard. Tell us what the U.S. Coast Guard would do if some nutbob "activist" tried fouling thier props, threw jars of chemicals, buzzed them with helos, or flew UAVs at them? I didn't ask what they would do if a ship made to ram them, because we know damn well what the result would be, don't we?

My posts answer your question, if it is a crime then they will stop and arrest the offending captain and probably the whole crew. There are two good reasons the Government of Japan vessel didn't do this 1) there is no real crime 2) they didn't want the world to see the are breaking the Antarctic Zone Treaty by taking military arms there.

Forgot to say that luckily the pilot was able to respond in a timely and correct manner and remove his ship, passenger and himself from harms way. However the physiology of no two humans is the same, and a pilot with different physiology, still medically legal to fly, might not have been so lucky. At best your looking at the loss of the aircraft and photo gear with two wet and cold people to be rescued, at worst the loss of control that might have happened may have caused the aircraft to crash into the attacking ship.

There is excellent reasons why the laws for unlawful interference of an aircraft and it's flight crew are so strongly accepted and enforced by the international community. In addition to pointing a LRAD device at an aircraft, it is equally illegal to use a laser pointer, or to fly a radio controlled aircraft within 500ft vertical and more than a mile horizontal, to release helium (lighter than air) balloons into the path of an aircraft, etc.

Respond in kind to the Steve Irwin and the rubber boats, but keep your weapons and a LRAD is a weapon designed to interfere with a person's physical abilities, a laser with a person's sight, etc. Keep all your weapons off unarmed press/journalism and civilian aircraft.

Back to my original statement, the captain of the whaler and his crew are just as guilty of a crime as claim Captain Watson is. And doubly so since you say that there are no military weapons allowed in the Antarctic Treaty Zone.

Shame on me I made a typo :-) The IWC.

www.icao.int for the info. Also go to www.faa.gov/atpubs and look in the FARs which your government also supposedly follows.

You argument for attacking the helicopter has no weight, since he has NEVER attacked anything, the whaler was illegal in attacking no matter where the helicopter lands and takes off from. The weapon may be non-lethal on the ground, but again to a pilot of an aircraft it is considered deadly force and or since it can interfere with a persons ability to function it can also be considered "unlawful interference" of an aircraft. The helicopter was also performing a mission for the press, so he had every right to be there photographing what the crew was doing. Plus the SSCS has been using that helicopter for how many years to observe the whalers? The whalers knew that it was of no threat but chose to disregard international law and attack anyway.

I reverse the challenge sir. You show me in chapter and verse where the unprovoked attack on a civilian aircraft is authorized by ANY international law. The whaler's captain is guilty! But thanks for the argument on this subject, you've encouraged me to take up this issue of attacking an unarmed aircraft with my friends and contacts in the U.S. Aviation industry, pretty much what the J government has done in the fishing industry.

I believe in just about every court case Captain Watson has faced in Canada the courts have sided with him and good public opinion too.

With his escape, Mr. Watson forfeits both his passport — which is in the custody of German authorities — and a

$300,000 bond that was put up in May by an unidentified donor.

Just read the Passport Canada site:

Seized or surrendered passport

Travel documents that have been seized by law enforcement agencies or ordered surrendered by a court of law are

generally returned to Passport Canada. If you have any questions in regards to this process or believe you are still

entitled to this document, you may contact Passport Canada ...

Since his government generally supports him, he probably already has a new passport.

Once again, if a helicopter feels that it is endangered by an LRAD or anything else, any helicopter pilot worth his

licence leaves the area or gets out of range of any danger

Quite luckily he was able to evade an illegal attack, an attack that is prohibited by the laws and regulations Japan says it agrees to. Sorry but the Helicopter has never attacked any whaler, the whalers have no right to attack.

arrestpaul

Say what you will about the ships and the personnel aboard them.

ATTACKING an unarmed helicopter that is only observing is forbidden by international law PERIOD!

The captain of the whaling ship and the crewman who made the attack are guilty of a crime, no double standards, they did it.

Japan belongs to ICAO the same as they belong to the IWF, but apparently they pick and choose which laws they will follow to suite their own best interest. BY you name you want Captain Watson arrested, well know that this retired aviation person wants that ships captain arrested for what he ordered (or allowed) to be done to that unarmed civilian helicopter.

Once again, go read the Antarctic treaty regarding coastguard and or military presence in the Antarctic treaty are

There were ample opportunities OUTSIDE of the treaty zone.

But lets not forget that the whalers take a military LRAD into this zone and use it against an unarmed helicopter in clear violation of ICAO laws which Japan is a member.

eyeonwarson

Sorry you defense doesn't hold water, the video from the last 6 episodes show that the Government of Japan had plenty of confrontations with the Steve Irwin in totally international waters away from any EEZs and the protected Antarctic zone. If he or his crew were guilty of a crime against said J-ship that ship had the right to stop and arrest the alleged guilty parties. Since they they made no attempt to do so means that the Sea Shepherds are guilty of misdemeanors at worst. The J government is trying to do this without getting it's hands dirty for the actual arrest, let another nation take the heat so to speak. And again if the alleged crimes of the Sea Shepherds are so horrendous why are not other nations with powerful navies stepping in to protect the whaling fleet, especially the U.S. since they provide a lot of defense for Japan?

Good| Bad

eyeonwarsonAug. 01, 2012 - 11:05PM JST

@ frank vaughn

Why didn't they just have an armed SDF squad board the Steve Irwin when the were out in international waters and arrest him there?

Because boarding ships without permission in International waters is illegal .. dear oh dear

So you are saying that both the U.S. Navy and the Russian Navy committed illegal acts by boarding the pirate ships off the coast of Africa? As a former U.S. Coastguard, I know your statement is opinion not fact. If he were guilty of a true crime Japan or any country would have the right to stop his ship and arrest him. If Captain Watson and his crew have done something truly illegal then the Japanese forces have the same right as those of other nations, that is board his ship under force and arrest him or the whole crew.

Not that anything excuses sexual harassment, I'm just thinking as many of you are that the accusations are easily made

by those not scared to use the system for false accusation for personal gain.

Not only are there girls and women in the U.S. doing this it is double tragic because the man ends up on their registration lists for 25-to-life.

Good for China, at least some one is keeping the dream alive.

It's all politics. I would like to know why the J government had to involve the governments of Costa Rico and Germany if they want him so bad. Why didn't they just have an armed SDF squad board the Steve Irwin when the were out in international waters and arrest him there? If he is committing such horrendous crimes why doesn't the Japanese government ask the Navies of the U.S. , Russia and UK to go after him and his ship the way they go after other criminals on the high sea for the benefit of every one?