Has anyone been watching this show? It airs on Animal Planet and follows the group known as Sea Shepherd as they try and stop Japanese whalers in the Southern Antarctic ocean.
I have to admit though I support their cause it seems like some of the crew are total dip shits when it comes to sailing.
The first mate named Peter Brown has been with Sea Shepherd since 1982 yet he doesn't understand Port from Starboard, when helping lower the Delta he caused the ship to flip over and almost the crew members could have frozen to death. During the second season he has already steered the ship into ice, whose hull isn't isn't ice proof, as well as missed the opening into open water because he refuses to look at ice charts and believes that judging by his eye, at night, is better.
Then there is the Captain, Paul Watson, who was one of the founders of Greenpeace but was kicked out due to his views in confrontation and his belief that protesting did nothing. In the first season he came up with the idea to have 2 members of the crew board a Japanese whaling ship under the guise to deliver a letter. The two members who held by the Japanese while Watson alerted the authorities and the world press that they were taken hostage, his plan worked. The 2 crew members were released all the while the plight of the whales became international news. But besides that he never really, IMO, does anything. He is almost always asleep, and runs the ship like a Jamestown scenario. When he isn't on watch or around, the first mate Peter Brown is.
This season they rammed a Japanese whaling ship in order to prevent the ship from pulling a whale on to the deck. All the while they hurl stink bombs, citric acid on to the decks. Last season's finale Paul Watson was supposedly shot but I have my suspicions.
On June 25 2009 15:42 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The first mate named Peter Brown has been with Sea Shepherd since 1982 yet he doesn't understand Port from Starboard, when helping lower the Delta he caused the ship to flip over and almost the crew members could have frozen to death. During the second season he has already steered the ship into ice, whose hull isn't isn't ice proof, as well as missed the opening into open water because he refuses to look at ice charts and believes that judging by his eye, at night, is better.
He's clearly a ninja hired by the japanese to infiltrate and sabotage their ship.
edit- you dont have to quote everything, and 5 youtube videos, to make a point. mod.
I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
On June 25 2009 16:09 Bond(i2) wrote: i thought they were only attacking whalers in areas where it was illegal to hunt whales.
Yeah they attempt to intercept the Whalers in order to remind as well as uphold the 1982 UN World Charter for Nature. The Japanese claim they are doing research but since they can't waste any part of the whale they sell the meat etc. According to Sea Shepherd.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
Totally agree. I watched a couple episodes and was disgusted that this kind of crap even exists. The "Sea Shepards" are nothing more than petty pirates and deserve punishment of the law. I hate their self-righteousness and arrogance. Know it can't happen, but wish a whale would fucking just rape them.
This is the wrong way to go about things entirely. There has been a sustained campaign against hunting sharks, but it isn't done through piracy and a bunch of morons acting like terrorists. Since many sharks are hunted because of the enormous demand for their fins by the newly wealthy Chinese, the campaign works by educating the Chinese and encouraging them not to eat sharks' fin. And it works.
If you really want to stop whaling, then mount a PR and education campaign in Japan to try to bring people round to your point of view. These Sea Shephard dumbasses don't get my vote for sure.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
Totally agree. I watched a couple episodes and was disgusted that this kind of crap even exists. The "Sea Shepards" are nothing more than petty pirates and deserve punishment of the law. I hate their self-righteousness and arrogance. Know it can't happen, but wish a whale would fucking just rape them.
On June 17th, the case was dropped and all charges revoked. Captain Watson will not have to appear in a Canadian Court in July.
In 2006, while the Canadian registered Farley Mowat was in Antarctic waters, the Canadian Registry of Shipping through the Canadian Department of Transport changed the status of the Farley Mowat from yacht to commercial vessel. When the ship reached the next port of call in Cape Town, South Africa in early March, Captain Watson was informed by the South African Marine Safety Authority (SAMSA) that he was in violation of Canadian Department of Transportation regulations for operating a commercial vessel without the proper papers.
But here is the real kicker
Three weeks later, the Farley Mowat arrived in Fremantle, Western Australia to a heroes welcome. A few months later, the ship acquired a Belize flag and left for Antarctica to hunt the whalers. Under Japanese pressure, Belize pulled the flag but not before the Farley Mowat and her crew were well on their way to the Ross Sea where for the next two months they opposed the Japanese fleet without a flag becoming in effect, a genuine pirate vessel.
Gotta give it to Watson he sure as hell knows how to play the law and tests it's limits.
I got about half way through and couldnt finish it. One of the good things about being human is having the ability to take care of others. He says we are better than animals but enforces stooping to their level by eating/killing them. How is it being better than them if you encourage doing exactly what they do?
I'm not a vegetarian or anything, I just think this guys whole angle is very confusing.
Edit: I just noticed this video has very few views and not a high rating, so I guess there is still hope
Those terrorists should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They have no right to vandalize other people's boats because they disagree ethically with what they're doing. If I happened to be a japanese whaler trying to make a living and those assholes tried to board my boat I would straight up kill them.
2 Guys from this group came to my school and did a presentation. They pretty much just showed graphic images of what whalers do and then asked for donations. =/
On June 26 2009 17:30 Meta wrote: Those terrorists should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They have no right to vandalize other people's boats because they disagree ethically with what they're doing. If I happened to be a japanese whaler trying to make a living and those assholes tried to board my boat I would straight up kill them.
its a hell of thing, killin' a man...
take away all hes got, and all hes gonna have
I got about half way through and couldnt finish it. One of the good things about being human is having the ability to take care of others. He says we are better than animals but enforces stooping to their level by eating/killing them. How is it being better than them if you encourage doing exactly what they do?
I'm not a vegetarian or anything, I just think this guys whole angle is very confusing.
Edit: I just noticed this video has very few views and not a high rating, so I guess there is still hope
um, are you just trolling me or do you honestly believe he is encouraging people to kill animals.
I got about half way through and couldnt finish it. One of the good things about being human is having the ability to take care of others. He says we are better than animals but enforces stooping to their level by eating/killing them. How is it being better than them if you encourage doing exactly what they do?
I'm not a vegetarian or anything, I just think this guys whole angle is very confusing.
Edit: I just noticed this video has very few views and not a high rating, so I guess there is still hope
He certainly doesn't present a philosophic account of human rights vs animal rights. He even envokes moral claims (ie., "Intrinsic value") that animal rights advocates use!
I still don't buy the concept animal rights and that is part of what makes -some- parts of the video funny.
On June 26 2009 20:31 Manit0u wrote: What an idiots... I freaking hate everything that's greenpeace'ish in nature. And I certainly do not care the slightest bit about whales...
Damn, I'm a terrible, terrible person. (ecology sucks!)
Why do you say you are so terrible? I don't get it!
haha tonight's episode Peter Brown is leaving the ship for the remainder of the Campaign and Paul Watson was handed an envelope with white powder inside.
They should be arrested for their stupid actions since they are not only endangering themselves, but also the whalers. Sure they may save a whale, but at what price?
Wow I ended up watching that whole thing. It was really good, thanks for posting it.
You're both complete idiots if you enjoyed even a moment of that garbage. That's Brad Stine, perhaps the least talented comedian around. He endlessly complains about how Christians are persecuted in the United States, even though they're the massive majority. He seems to think being a conservative Christian is what has kept him from fame, when in fact it's simply that the liberal atheists are far more clever and funny.
This entire video is him arguing against a straw man. Very few people claim that animals are equal to humans and deserve to be treated as such. That view is of a tiny, insignificant minority. However, there are many who believe we should treat animals with kindness instead of viewing them as entities solely for our use. He speaks of how a lion or a whale would devour a human if given the chance, he somehow thinks that's an actual argument for how we should treat them. Shouldn't we be held to a slightly higher standard than that? I don't derive my sense of justice and morality from lions, but clearly this fool does. It's comical how he goes on and on about how much more logical and intelligent we are than animals but fails to see that we should think differently for that very reason.
There's another video of this ignorant moron exhibiting his stupidity. Firstly, he seems to take great pride from the fact that "we" invented basketball. "We" didn't, a Canadian did while in the United States. Then he falsely claims that the world plays American football, which couldn't be less true. No other country accepted American football, it has been a complete disaster internationally. The NFL pumped a large sum of money into the development of the sport in Europe, Europe said "No thanks, we'll keep our football". He acts as if soccer has been a failure when it's the most massively popular sport of all time. Go to almost any country and football will be played there by everyone, you'll be lucky if you even see an American football. Like any far right wing fool, he attacks France with ridiculous cliches. He panders to hicks, no one should take him seriously. You should never quote this person on any issue, especially animal rights.
If you want to see a comedian with sharp, insightful commentary then watch Bill Hicks, George Carlin or Bill Maher. Not this nobody.
I think the show is fairly entertaining. A couple things annoy me:
1) The fat ass captain. I remember one time they lost a bunch of people in the middle of the night because they decided to go "harassing" and loss communications and had to decide whether they should set up a search and rescue or pursue the whalers. The communications officer almost started a mutiny against the first mate saying "This is ridiculous, we are going to find our men." Someone tries to go wake up the fat slob but he is sleeping and he was literally like "go away im sleeping."
2) They're terrible at what they do and they risk human lives to do it. These peopel are just awful. Every single episode is the same. They send some people in a small boat to throw stink bombs at the Japanese whalers. The boat goes way off course, and loses communications. They spend the rest of the episode worrying about whether the people are dead or what the heck happened to them. Eventually the people come back and they were like "What happened? We were calling you on the radio non-stop and nobody responded." And they were like "we got lost and it was too loud to use the radio" or some nonsense like that. They literally send people out in terrible weather conditions on a tiny little boat in the middle of the ocean for the hope of throwing a stink bomb onto a giant Japanese whaling ship. Yeah, that'll show them!
3) Their funding could be sent to better causes. The Red Hot chili peppers are huge supporters of these guys. It literally costs hundreds of thousands of dollars for fuel, ship maintenance, supplies, just so these morons could throw stink bombs at people. Meanwhile people in other parts of the world starve to death. Anybody that thinks that this is a "worthwhile cause" is a moron.
The initial reference to the comedian was much more off topic than my post. I responded to what he said and provided further evidence for his stupidity.
I knew someone would post that clip of Carlin, I should have called it beforehand. Unfortunately, it's totally irrelevant to this issue. He is speaking of animals which became extinct naturally, whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
The company I work for, DIRTT, actually supports Sea Sheppard. We just held a fund raiser for them last winter, and there will be another event coming up soon as well.
I completely disagree with this show, Sure i think that Whales shouldn't be hunted and ect but ruining other peoples careers and potentially endangering their lives just because of their profession isn't called for. If they really wanted to stop this hunting there are many other ways to go about it logically.
On June 28 2009 01:37 Hypnotikdel wrote: I completely disagree with this show, Sure i think that Whales shouldn't be hunted and ect but ruining other peoples careers and potentially endangering their lives just because of their profession isn't called for. If they really wanted to stop this hunting there are many other ways to go about it logically.
ok. now let's replace all references of whale hunting with drug dealing.
On June 28 2009 01:37 Hypnotikdel wrote: I completely disagree with the prosecution of drug dealers, Sure i think that cocaine shouldn't be dealt and ect but ruining drug dealers' careers and potentially endangering their lives just because of their profession isn't called for. If they really wanted to stop this drug dealing there are many other ways to go about it logically.
stupid DEA and their stupid raids.
btw i especially love the whole "ruining other peoples careers" part. it was logically sound.
Half a mile is nothing on the ocean. They knew the rules before they got to the hunt, and disobeyed them anyway. They got what they deserved.
Another gem from the founder:
Watson was responding to the deaths of three sealers, who died Saturday when their trawler capsized as it was being towed by an icebreaker. A fourth fisherman is believed to have died.
Watson described sealers as "sadistic baby killers" and "vicious killers who are now pleading for sympathy because some of their own died while engaged in a viciously brutal activity."
On June 26 2009 17:26 ArvickHero wrote: I thought the thread heading was going to be a clever name about a show that stars a bunch of fat people fighting each other
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
LOL. Yes, why should you care. If you have that attitude, you can really just ask that question about anything not directly influencing you.
About the topic, I think that's a pretty retarded way of going about it.. but then again I also think whalers are pretty retarded, so it evens out I guess? -_-;;
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
Lots of people go "whale watching." I'd love to go whale watching. Whales are the largest animals that have ever existed on this planet.
I don't understand why whales are being put up on a higher pedestal than other animals. There are smarter, cuter and more useful animals out there if we really want to be cynical about it.
Not that I endorse whaling, but I don't see the issue with hunting whales when we are hunting other animals as long as they aren't endangered. The sort of whale those Japanese whalers seem to hunt isn't endangered though.
Captain Paul Watson was kicked out of Greenpeace for being an arrogant eco-terrorist and he's continued his sludge of stupidity and unbridled war against whatever he hates for over 20 years now. If you watch the show you'll notice he routinely puts his volunteers live's at risk for the sake of nothing, for example: pushing the ship through the heavy arctic ice pack when the ship has a ice hull rating of 0 (it basically cannot handle ANY form of ice).
His turnover rate is probably 99% except for 2 or 3 mainstays, because the volunteers go out for one mission and come back fearing they could of died out there. Most of the time, they argue about petty navigational problems or technical issues. The time they actual spend engaged with a whaling vessel is probably less than 1% of their total time--going by the TV show. People get hurt constantly because the captain could give a care less about the safety of his crew.
And about the whales: The only comfortable way to combat whaling by those Japanese ships is to politically fight it (I can guarantee fighting it politically is a lot more wholesome than spending 99% of your time hurting your crew and endangering lives).
To Mr. Philosophical "I don't need whales, why should I care?" well you're exactly right. Given that your attitude is basically "I want what I want and everything else doesn't matter." Exactly fits your idea on the whales.
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
Lots of people go "whale watching." I'd love to go whale watching. Whales are the largest animals that have ever existed on this planet.
I don't understand why whales are being put up on a higher pedestal than other animals. There are smarter, cuter and more useful animals out there if we really want to be cynical about it.
Not that I endorse whaling, but I don't see the issue with hunting whales when we are hunting other animals as long as they aren't endangered. The sort of whale those Japanese whalers seem to hunt isn't endangered though.
Pretty much all sea animals that are fished for food are protected to make sure they don't become endangered. Tuna, Salmon, Crab, Lobster, etc. In this instance, whales are not on a higher pedestal.
On July 01 2009 00:56 starcraftomatic wrote: To Mr. Philosophical "I don't need whales, why should I care?" well you're exactly right. Given that your attitude is basically "I want what I want and everything else doesn't matter." Exactly fits your idea on the whales.
It is a valid question, found even in the books about ecology. Is it really worthwile (not even counting costs) protecting/saving something most people don't care about/don't even know it exists (like the last tree of wild coffe - which until recently was thought extinct, until one student in Australia I think, said that his grandma has one in her backyard, or some single palm tree left)?
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
There's a whole thing called an ecosystem you fucking nitwit.
That being said, these people are fucking jerkoffs on both sides of the argument. The Japanese are going to make certain species go extinct with overfishing, and these assholes are going about this defense of the whales in an absolutely horrible way.
I'm going to critique your reply, because it's wrong. First a "valid question" would pertain to validity, that is; well grounded in logic or truth. Your support is that it is found in nameless books about ecology. Firstly, ecology is: the environment as it relates to living organisms, so an ecology book would bring questions like "is it worthwhile to care about x, y and z" as a starting point to their arguments. They are not simply stating "it is or isn't worthwhile" they are making a case for their own biases found within said book. Secondly, are those claims well grounded in logic or truth: the answer is, no they are not. Being opinionated about either liking the world around you or not giving a shit does not make you into a great philosopher. Now your claim should be, "is it really worth it to give a damn about things I don't care about?" sounds like a much more VALID claim, concerning that it relates to your personal feelings and is logically grounded from your own information, see?
The simple facts (that is information outside of the stupidity of this all) is that we are organisms part of an ecosystem (a system formed by the interaction of a community of organisms with their physical environment), living and breathing in the same place as others. It is an ethical or moral question whether to "give a damn." Some people though are so blinded by their own selfish ambition that nothing else takes any precedence over it.
I'm not hiding that I'm biased. But it's not that I don't give a damn about everything (I even give money for shelters for homeless dogs, lol), there's just stuff that's more important than others and that should be focused on in the first place.
By the way, really good book for those into this stuff (not very scientific but still great):
On June 25 2009 17:23 The Storyteller wrote: This is the wrong way to go about things entirely. There has been a sustained campaign against hunting sharks, but it isn't done through piracy and a bunch of morons acting like terrorists. Since many sharks are hunted because of the enormous demand for their fins by the newly wealthy Chinese, the campaign works by educating the Chinese and encouraging them not to eat sharks' fin. And it works.
Great point, I think that there is no way that the Sea Shepard has nearly enough resources to battle with the Japanese whaling fleet, no matter how many donations they receive. All that the Sea Shepard can do is stop the Japanese for a little while, but they aren't changing the culture that drives the whaling industry.
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
Lots of people go "whale watching." I'd love to go whale watching. Whales are the largest animals that have ever existed on this planet.
I don't understand why whales are being put up on a higher pedestal than other animals. There are smarter, cuter and more useful animals out there if we really want to be cynical about it.
Not that I endorse whaling, but I don't see the issue with hunting whales when we are hunting other animals as long as they aren't endangered. The sort of whale those Japanese whalers seem to hunt isn't endangered though.
Pretty much all sea animals that are fished for food are protected to make sure they don't become endangered. Tuna, Salmon, Crab, Lobster, etc. In this instance, whales are not on a higher pedestal.
Over fishing is a big issue but I don't see that being the issue here. The Japanese are killing 800 per year of a particular whale that have a population over 500 000.
Wow I ended up watching that whole thing. It was really good, thanks for posting it.
You're both complete idiots if you enjoyed even a moment of that garbage. That's Brad Stine, perhaps the least talented comedian around. He endlessly complains about how Christians are persecuted in the United States, even though they're the massive majority. He seems to think being a conservative Christian is what has kept him from fame, when in fact it's simply that the liberal atheists are far more clever and funny.
This entire video is him arguing against a straw man. Very few people claim that animals are equal to humans and deserve to be treated as such. That view is of a tiny, insignificant minority. However, there are many who believe we should treat animals with kindness instead of viewing them as entities solely for our use. He speaks of how a lion or a whale would devour a human if given the chance, he somehow thinks that's an actual argument for how we should treat them. Shouldn't we be held to a slightly higher standard than that? I don't derive my sense of justice and morality from lions, but clearly this fool does. It's comical how he goes on and on about how much more logical and intelligent we are than animals but fails to see that we should think differently for that very reason.
There's another video of this ignorant moron exhibiting his stupidity. Firstly, he seems to take great pride from the fact that "we" invented basketball. "We" didn't, a Canadian did while in the United States. Then he falsely claims that the world plays American football, which couldn't be less true. No other country accepted American football, it has been a complete disaster internationally. The NFL pumped a large sum of money into the development of the sport in Europe, Europe said "No thanks, we'll keep our football". He acts as if soccer has been a failure when it's the most massively popular sport of all time. Go to almost any country and football will be played there by everyone, you'll be lucky if you even see an American football. Like any far right wing fool, he attacks France with ridiculous cliches. He panders to hicks, no one should take him seriously. You should never quote this person on any issue, especially animal rights.
If you want to see a comedian with sharp, insightful commentary then watch Bill Hicks, George Carlin or Bill Maher. Not this nobody.
Amen! Even though I didn't know this Brad Stine before I 100% agree, the guy's reasoning is so freaking bad. I wish Bill Hicks was still alive to kick this guy's ass
On July 01 2009 01:45 Hawk wrote: There's a whole thing called an ecosystem you fucking nitwit.
That's a bit overstated; would ecosystems suffer? Sure. Would it collapse? Probably not. Does it mean we can overfish as we wish? No. Does it mean the problem at hand is overestimated? Yes.
I don't think anyone would argue that Whales are indeed part of an ecosystem that balances out are oceans and if they went extinct the oceans and ultimately all of us would feel the affects.
Every human being has a biological need that must be constantly met - oxygen. And 70% of the oxygen added to the atmosphere each year comes from plankton in the sea. Serious damage to the world ocean therefore could endanger the entire atmosphere of the earth. During the last two decades (1950's and 60's) man has killed so many of the large whales that four species of whale have been reduced from a total of several million to just a few thousand.
Every one of these vanished millions of whales used to consume several hundred tons of a large species of zooplankton a year. That plankton now is undergoing a classic population explosion for want of a predator. What will be the effect on the oxygen-producing smaller plankton of the world ocean? What will be the effect on the colour and reflectivity of the oceans? What will be the effect on the average water temperature of the oceans, on its dissolved oxygen content and subsequently on the earth's atmosphere? No one knows.
Climatologists know any significant change in ocean temperature can have profound effects on the earth's climates. By killing off the whales of the world man is playing Russian roulette with the earth's primary support system. Source(s): www.whales.org.au
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
That must be quite some university.
That is not a serious question, it's totally ridiculous. By the same logic I could kill a stranger. I don't know the person, I don't ever see them, I will never see them again. Their existence makes no difference to my life at all so why should I care if they die?
Unlike you I understand that living organisms shouldn't be judged on the basis of whether or not they provide any entertainment or use for myself. That is a terribly arrogant and selfish view to take. A whale that I will never see or even know of has value, as does a stranger who is unknown to me.
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
Lots of people go "whale watching." I'd love to go whale watching. Whales are the largest animals that have ever existed on this planet.
I don't understand why whales are being put up on a higher pedestal than other animals. There are smarter, cuter and more useful animals out there if we really want to be cynical about it.
Not that I endorse whaling, but I don't see the issue with hunting whales when we are hunting other animals as long as they aren't endangered. The sort of whale those Japanese whalers seem to hunt isn't endangered though.
Pretty much all sea animals that are fished for food are protected to make sure they don't become endangered. Tuna, Salmon, Crab, Lobster, etc. In this instance, whales are not on a higher pedestal.
Over fishing is a big issue but I don't see that being the issue here. The Japanese are killing 800 per year of a particular whale that have a population over 500 000.
True, however commercial whaling is also illegal. If whaling was allowed, I'm sure it may be a bigger issue considering how many species we've already made endangered. It's probably a lot harder to regulate if you excuse the behavior of the Japanese by saying 'well a few hundred whales isn't going to make a difference.' Then everyone is going to want in on the industry.
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
Lots of people go "whale watching." I'd love to go whale watching. Whales are the largest animals that have ever existed on this planet.
I don't understand why whales are being put up on a higher pedestal than other animals. There are smarter, cuter and more useful animals out there if we really want to be cynical about it.
Not that I endorse whaling, but I don't see the issue with hunting whales when we are hunting other animals as long as they aren't endangered. The sort of whale those Japanese whalers seem to hunt isn't endangered though.
Pretty much all sea animals that are fished for food are protected to make sure they don't become endangered. Tuna, Salmon, Crab, Lobster, etc. In this instance, whales are not on a higher pedestal.
Over fishing is a big issue but I don't see that being the issue here. The Japanese are killing 800 per year of a particular whale that have a population over 500 000.
True, however commercial whaling is also illegal. If whaling was allowed, I'm sure it may be a bigger issue considering how many species we've already made endangered. It's probably a lot harder to regulate if you excuse the behavior of the Japanese by saying 'well a few hundred whales isn't going to make a difference.' Then everyone is going to want in on the industry.
Well, International Whaling Commission have made commercial whaling illegal, but if some country doesn't agree with that they can just leave the commission. Japan is still a member though but they are using a loophole that says you can whale for research. In other words what the Japanese are doing isn't illegal even though everyone pretty much know that they are whaling for commercial reasons and not scientific ones.
I think Norway and Iceland have left IWC, and they haven't put up any kind of self imposed quota for their whaling at all, unlike the Japanese.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out, I wonder where they can port without a national register. If indeed it comes to that.
Japan Attempts Amendment of Dutch Statutes
It appears as though Japan may have finally succeeded in gaining enough influence in the Netherlands to attempt to dictate Dutch law.
Because the Steve Irwin, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s flagship (used to obstruct activities by Japanese whalers in violation of international laws and in an internationally recognized Whale Sanctuary), is registered in the Netherlands, the Japanese authorities have lodged an official complaint regarding the conduct and behavior of the Steve Irwin.
In recent years, a number of incidents have taken place between the vessels of the Japanese whaling fleet and Sea Shepherd in the waters of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. According to the Dutch Transport and Water Management Inspectorate, both parties have been guilty of breaking international regulations concerning good seamanship and the safety at sea.
While it appears that this will not have any serious consequences for Japanese state-supported and illegal operations, it may carry serious consequences for Sea Shepherd.
On request of the Dutch Transport and Water Management Inspectorate, the Dutch Public Ministry investigated and determined it is not feasible to start a legal prosecution. The Dutch cabinet is now considering a ban against Sea Shepherd vessels sailing under the Dutch flag. Public Works State Secretary Tineke Huizinga said she wants to amend the law quickly to make this possible.
Japan has repeatedly complained to the Netherlands about Sea Shepherd. Current law makes it difficult to take action against ships already registered with the Dutch government, so the cabinet wants to speedily extend its legal options for withdrawing certificates of registry, according to Huizinga.
Unfortunately, the Dutch authorities would be closing their eyes to the fact that all the incidents between the illegal Japanese whalers and Sea Shepherd have taken place in the waters of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and/or in others areas protected by international and Australian Federal law.
The Japanese whaling fleet is engaged in illegal activities, but lack of enforcement allows them to operate largely unopposed. Sea Shepherd is the only organization actively enforcing conservation law to stop these Antarctic poachers, and operates under the UN World Charter for Nature to that end.
For years now the Netherlands have stated they are against whaling, but have not taken any action to back up this statement. Now, given the opportunity to stand up to Japan, they intend to persecute the only organization worldwide actively striving to enforce international laws and protect whales.
Why does the Dutch government not show its independence and acknowledge the violations of the law committed by the Japanese whalers? Why is Japan apparently placed above international law?
Japan has placed itself above the law because it assumes no government in the world would show the will to actively accuse and legally prosecute Japan for their many violations of international conservation laws. The only entity that has dared to stand up and act is Sea Shepherd. The Netherlands now has an opportunity to join the legal and ethical side in this battle.
Will the Dutch government narrow-mindedly support illegal whaling operations, or will they support the only organization actively seeking to uphold those same laws by not pandering to Japanese objections?
It seems that Japan is attempting to amend Dutch law. We hope we are wrong. Regardless, we will continue to defend the defenseless against illegal activities in the Antarctic and elsewhere.
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: He is speaking of animals which became extinct naturally, whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
I wonder though, if we all (humans, bugs, animals) evolved simply through random mutation of the same starting genes, how is it "natural" for a species to go extinct due to "animals" but not natural if it goes extinct because of "human animals"?
Seems like regardless of how you view the world (secularly or religiously), it should lead you to the same conclusion that it is ok for us to "use" or kill animals.
Religious view: We are children of God, he made the earth for us and put animals here for our use. He gave us teeth that could be used on both plants AND animals and gave us weak skin that requires the skins of other animals to keep us warm, etc.
Secular view: All life derived from random mutation and when a mutation tends to propagate the species, that mutant allele becomes more dominant. Thus, all life after billions of years of selfish evolution to propagate its own offspring, animals (including humans), and plants naturally use every resource possible to propagate itself. Whales are useful to humans just like plankton are useful to whales.
Either way, you are left with the conclusion that there is nothing wrong with humans eating/using animals.
BTW, there certain IS something wrong with humans trying to destroy other humans' livelihood and even putting their lives at risk because of a disagreement. Religiously or secularly, it is obviously wrong.
About the topic, I think that's a pretty retarded way of going about it.. but then again I also think whalers are pretty retarded, so it evens out I guess? -_-;;
That is a crass statement. Suppose I had said, "Killing abortionist George Tiller was wrong, but his killing of babies was wrong so that evens it out". You would then obviously see how wrong that sentiment is.
Even if you think someone is doing something wrong, attacking them in unlawful and dangerous ways (a "bad" undoing a "bad") does not work, and it is NEVER an excuse.
If we want to stop people from whaling, then we have to figure out a lawful way to do so. Just like if we want to stop people from killing unborn babies, it has to be done in a legal way that does not endanger the lives of people who we disagree with.
1980: The IWC at its meeting in Brighton, United Kingdom, assigns high-level protection to two Canadian Government delegates after Watson threatened to kill them for voting against a moratorium on sperm whales. Delegates given Royal Canadian Mounted Police protection until their return home to Canada.
1986: Sea Shepherd attempts to stop Faroe Islands pilot whale harvest. Using rifles, Sea Shepherd activists shoot at Faroe Islands police in an attempt to sink their rubber dinghies. The vessel “Sea Shepherd” was ordered to leave Faroese territorial waters. The police report of 7 October 1986 states: “One of the rubber dinghies was attacked directly by a “Speed Line” line rifle. The attack … endangered the lives of the police crewmembers ... and signal flares containing phosphorous was thrown at the police. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used “toads” (rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends) against the rubber dinghies … petrol was poured over the side of the ship and signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in an attempt to set the petrol on fire.”
1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel. Sea Shepherd crew do not carry out the order, but instead fire a shot across the bow of the Japanese vessel. The Japanese vessel does not stop. (Recorded by Yorkshire Television Documentary “Defenders of the Wild – Ocean Rider”.)
Now if these statements are true no country or organized body in the world would be able to stop said country from sending in military protection for these ships. If SS tried something they could easily be fired on worse that just a LRAD, and pressure hoses.
I got about half way through and couldnt finish it. One of the good things about being human is having the ability to take care of others. He says we are better than animals but enforces stooping to their level by eating/killing them. How is it being better than them if you encourage doing exactly what they do?
I'm not a vegetarian or anything, I just think this guys whole angle is very confusing.
Edit: I just noticed this video has very few views and not a high rating, so I guess there is still hope
The last episode I watched was hilarious. They were running low on fuel and were attempting to return to port to re-supply when they noticed one of the Japanese ships was following them. They decided to launch an "attack" right as the Japanese ship turned around. The Japanese ships were faster than the Sea Shepherd's tiny motorboats so they decided to return to base because the weather was rough. In fact the weather was so rough that someone on the tiny motorboat banged their head against the boat because they were rocking so much. Then another person on the sea shepherd slipped and fell and cut her face that needed to be stitched up. Then they had to hurry back so they didn't run out of fuel.
So the results of their attack is 2 sea shepherd members get injured and they run dangerously low on fuel before having to return to base. Job well done.
I got about half way through and couldnt finish it. One of the good things about being human is having the ability to take care of others. He says we are better than animals but enforces stooping to their level by eating/killing them. How is it being better than them if you encourage doing exactly what they do?
I'm not a vegetarian or anything, I just think this guys whole angle is very confusing.
Edit: I just noticed this video has very few views and not a high rating, so I guess there is still hope
I thought it was funny, agree with his sentiments about some people going overboard for animal rights. Especially peta members being UNABLE to use medicines that came from animal testing/whatever to save their own lives (while the bitch president of the organization does) just fucking ridiculous.
that fat white guy with the white beard i see in the promo disgusts me. He has a fat face and his look of concern makes me feel uneasy so i wouldn't dare watch it... but i hope you all enjoy it
This show is such melodramatic garbage... Yet I always find myself watching this conservation trainwreck when its on. I really have no idea why anyone would want to volunteer for this suicide mission for the sake of a whale.
Sustainable whaling is fine and these guys need to bring change through proper channels. I just hope it doesn't take someone dying off the crew for all of them to realize what a bad idea this is.
On July 16 2009 12:49 HatchetWound wrote: that fat white guy with the white beard i see in the promo disgusts me. He has a fat face and his look of concern makes me feel uneasy so i wouldn't dare watch it... but i hope you all enjoy it
it's funny when people get injured or go missing. He's completely quiet and has this look on his face knowing that it's entirely his fault because he launches "attacks" in terrible conditions.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
This is the long and short of it, folks.
This show practices something hypocritical known as...ETHNOCENTRISM.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
I don't get it.. noones doing anything about Japanese whaling except for these guys how can that be a bad thing? Something is better than nothing. I'd much rather have Japanese whalers' lives be endangered than having them kill whales against all laws with nothing being done about it. Let it be a choice that if you want to kill whales you are endangering your own life.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
I don't get it.. noones doing anything about Japanese whaling except for these guys how can that be a bad thing? Something is better than nothing. I'd much rather have Japanese whalers' lives be endangered than having them kill whales against all laws with nothing being done about it. Let it be a choice that if you want to kill whales you are endangering your own life.
p.s. I don't watch the show
Are you trying to imply that the lives of the whales are more valuable than the lives of the crews on board of the ship and the whalers? No one does anything about it is because people are not aware of such things, and even if people that are aware of such things, why should they care? this is a serious question, if the whale gone extinct how would it affect us? well, does it have any effect on us at all?
These people are the very evidence that society is going backwards, solving problems by the means of violence and threat, what are u hoping to accomplish by recklessly endangering your own lives and others to stop a few whalers doing their job? these acts curbs maybe one or two acts of whaling once in awhile, but the real way to address this issues is by tackling the root cause of the whaling industry, and solve it by the a civilized manner, through the rule of law. Performing terrorist acts makes u nothing more than a nuisance to the whole whaling industry and discredit urself.
In fact, Why the fuck are we so hard bent on saving these animals when about half of the world population doesn't even have enough food to eat? Look at Africa, i'd bet anyone that's got a tele have seen WTF its like over there, yet, the priorities of these self-righteous "Animal/green Activist" puts their effort and resources into saving Animals rather than HUMAN BEINGS? don't fucking tell me that the life of these animals are worth more than human life. We can't even take care of our own kind yet, what makes u think we can take care of others?
I'd have to agree with Mani on this. I really do think it is a good cause to put the whale issue under public attention and to actually undertake action against these whalers, however these human endangering acts are actually pretty extreme.
I'm sure there are different ways to fight these whaling crimes, while they might not be as effective on short term. It isn't hard to find people who are disgusted by animal abuse and acts of animal cruelty. I don't feel like this really solves anything, except for stimulating and creating a more violent environment.
Like.. what are we talking about here? While I do think it is our responsibility to keep animal abuse from happening, in my books Humans still are a big step up from Animals. I find it pretty fked up if you one values the lives of animal over a human one, and is ready to put other people's lives on the line to save an animal.
It's a structural problem that needs to be dealt with in different ways.
Looking forward to next couple episodes. Tonight's episode the Japanese whales catch and kill a whale in front of the sea shepherds. Next episode they try to transfer it to their main ship and the sea shepherds try to block the transfer with their boat and end up ramming the Japanese boat at full speed.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
Agreed. I'm not a fan of the Japanese whalers, but I'll never condone acts of terrorism against them.
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
I don't get it.. noones doing anything about Japanese whaling except for these guys how can that be a bad thing? Something is better than nothing. I'd much rather have Japanese whalers' lives be endangered than having them kill whales against all laws with nothing being done about it. Let it be a choice that if you want to kill whales you are endangering your own life.
On August 15 2009 06:03 Ichigo1234551 wrote: at least they do something about it i hate how people dont like something but they too scared to do shit
Wouldn't it be nice if some extremist green group decided that what you do for a living endangers the planet and they started bombing the place where you work and setting fire to your car and your house?
I'm not going to lie, when I heard the title, I was hoping it would be about whales fighting each other. You cannot imagine my disappointment when I found out what it was really about...
On August 15 2009 06:03 Ichigo1234551 wrote: at least they do something about it i hate how people dont like something but they too scared to do shit
Wouldn't it be nice if some extremist green group decided that what you do for a living endangers the planet and they started bombing the place where you work and setting fire to your car and your house?
At least they'd be doing something about it.
do you understand that the SS doesnt use weapons and only non lethal stuff?
On August 15 2009 06:03 Ichigo1234551 wrote: at least they do something about it i hate how people dont like something but they too scared to do shit
Wouldn't it be nice if some extremist green group decided that what you do for a living endangers the planet and they started bombing the place where you work and setting fire to your car and your house?
At least they'd be doing something about it.
do you understand that the SS doesnt use weapons and only non lethal stuff?
Yet they ram ships...? As well as have on the shirts they wear of ships "sunk".
On August 15 2009 06:03 Ichigo1234551 wrote: at least they do something about it i hate how people dont like something but they too scared to do shit
Wouldn't it be nice if some extremist green group decided that what you do for a living endangers the planet and they started bombing the place where you work and setting fire to your car and your house?
At least they'd be doing something about it.
do you understand that the SS doesnt use weapons and only non lethal stuff?
Ok, they'll make sure you're not in your car when they set it on fire then.
On August 15 2009 06:03 Ichigo1234551 wrote: at least they do something about it i hate how people dont like something but they too scared to do shit
Wouldn't it be nice if some extremist green group decided that what you do for a living endangers the planet and they started bombing the place where you work and setting fire to your car and your house?
At least they'd be doing something about it.
do you understand that the SS doesnt use weapons and only non lethal stuff?
Ok, they'll make sure you're not in your car when they set it on fire then.
uh, well if you were breaking the law and pissing off literally millions of people with the work you do, you would be asking for it
They are violating international law, especially ramming other people... (You know you are putting your own ship's crew and other human beings in danger)
Yes I know both parties are doing illegal shit, but you shouldn't break the law your self in order to stop something that is already illegal. In this case, two wrongs doesn't make a right.
Side note: Remember when PETA hired arsonists and bombers to bomb animal testing facilities? They also endorse such actions and most importantly, they frequently invite these "heroes" to give speeches to their members about making simple bombs to bomb more buildings. Also spraying blood on little kids wearing Mickey Mouse ears and so on and so on and so on. The dirt I know about PETA is too much to list.
but they're not breaking any laws, and it's definitely not like they are "asking for it". it's more like a bunch of whiny immature idiots who have absolutely nothing going for them decide to go on a cruise of mass terrorism, vandalism and misguided pseudo-vigilantism; and in their quest to feel like they matter to the world they target an innocent group of people who are only doing their job.
just because you piss off a bunch of people doesn't mean you deserve this crap from self-righteous idiots (talking about the sea shepherd guys, not the people in this thread )
edit: there are better, more effective ways to try and change the world instead of presuming to take the matter into their own hands
On August 15 2009 12:38 jonnyp wrote: but they're not breaking any laws, and it's definitely not like they are "asking for it". it's more like a bunch of whiny immature idiots who have absolutely nothing going for them decide to go on a cruise of mass terrorism, vandalism and misguided pseudo-vigilantism; and in their quest to feel like they matter to the world they target an innocent group of people who are only doing their job.
just because you piss off a bunch of people doesn't mean you deserve this crap from self-righteous idiots (talking about the sea shepherd guys, not the people in this thread )
They are breaking the law read the news article someone posted a few pages back. You call ramming a ship and throwing ACID at people not breaking the law?
On August 15 2009 12:38 jonnyp wrote: but they're not breaking any laws, and it's definitely not like they are "asking for it". it's more like a bunch of whiny immature idiots who have absolutely nothing going for them decide to go on a cruise of mass terrorism, vandalism and misguided pseudo-vigilantism; and in their quest to feel like they matter to the world they target an innocent group of people who are only doing their job.
just because you piss off a bunch of people doesn't mean you deserve this crap from self-righteous idiots (talking about the sea shepherd guys, not the people in this thread )
They are breaking the law read the news article someone posted a few pages back. You call ramming a ship and throwing ACID at people not breaking the law?
On August 15 2009 12:38 jonnyp wrote: but they're not breaking any laws, and it's definitely not like they are "asking for it". it's more like a bunch of whiny immature idiots who have absolutely nothing going for them decide to go on a cruise of mass terrorism, vandalism and misguided pseudo-vigilantism; and in their quest to feel like they matter to the world they target an innocent group of people who are only doing their job.
just because you piss off a bunch of people doesn't mean you deserve this crap from self-righteous idiots (talking about the sea shepherd guys, not the people in this thread )
They are breaking the law read the news article someone posted a few pages back. You call ramming a ship and throwing ACID at people not breaking the law?
i was talking about the whalers O_o
what... ur referring to 'whiny immature idiots' that go on cruise of 'mass terrorism and misguided pseudo vigalntism" -> sea shepherds not whalers..
On August 15 2009 12:38 jonnyp wrote: but they're not breaking any laws, and it's definitely not like they are "asking for it". it's more like a bunch of whiny immature idiots who have absolutely nothing going for them decide to go on a cruise of mass terrorism, vandalism and misguided pseudo-vigilantism; and in their quest to feel like they matter to the world they target an innocent group of people who are only doing their job.
just because you piss off a bunch of people doesn't mean you deserve this crap from self-righteous idiots (talking about the sea shepherd guys, not the people in this thread )
edit: there are better, more effective ways to try and change the world instead of presuming to take the matter into their own hands
Just because they are not breaking any laws that doesn't mean what they do is good, or morally correct. Japanese whalers cover their whale hunting in research programs.
Not only that, but they also go hunt whales in international waters or even in other countries maritime platforms. The times they get caught, they just release the prey, or shield behind their research center, which is supported by the japanese goverment.
Not only that, but Japan has threatened to leave the Whaling Commission several times, to just do whatever they want.
The so called research has been condoned by other nations (Australia is one example) saying that it's not needed to kill the way to do such research. Japan says that lethal sampling is the only way to go.
Also aggression goes both ways, there have been reported attacks of japanese whalers on patrol boats when they were caught hunting whales on forbidden territory.
I would also like to add that i would love for this to have a happy ending in legal terms. But i don't see it happening. Even when the US pressured Japan, all they got is to promise to not go over a quota, which they already surpass and keeps growing by the year.
If the us and most of japan's surrounding nations oppose through legal ways and japan doesn't hold back, what else can be done?
BUT I STILL THINK THAT you shouldn't have to use illegal/unethical ways to stop something else that is illegal/debatable. Look at the PETA issues I posted.
i'm not saying what the whalers are doing is correct or morally right (a tenuous argument relative to one's morals anyways), but they don't deserve to be terrorized for it. if they are caught by officials in forbidden territory then they should be arrested/charged, but there is a huge difference between being caught by officials and being caught by these "pirates".
i don't really know what the whaling commission is but shouldn't a country be allowed to make and leave agreements when they want? it's not like this is an international security issue like N Korea (among others) ignoring sanctions to stop nuclear arms research.
edit: if they signed a treaty to respect this agreement for a set period of time then all we can really do is sanction and/or otherwise pressure them. but in the end the US (or the UN) can't make everyone's decisions for them
as far as violence from whalers, if these patrol boats had the right to enforce these restrictions then yes, the whalers were at fault and once again should be arrested and charged. however, if these patrol boats were other boats such as this "sea shepherd" then return violence is to be expected
I'm sure things are way more shady than we read on the paper thought. Also, it's not like whalers are only hunting whales in their own platform, they go everywhere from them, the furthest they go, the better it is for their whale ecosystem.
So when they leave the comission and hunt whatever they want, they are not only endangering whales but the ecosystems in other countries / international waters.
but just because things might be shadier than we read doesn't justify putting their lives in danger, i dont agree with what the whalers are doing but that doesn't make them bad people.
even if the whalers break the law these pirates have no legal rights to do what they do, and they endanger the lives of other human beings.
I don't support what the whalers do, i think it's wrong in fact
however, I definitely don't support the pirates. they are terrorists and should be treated as such. iirc they've actually sunk 10 ships along with causing millions of dollars in damages.
On June 27 2009 12:31 Lefnui wrote: whales on the other hand are being wiped out by humans alone.
And?
I don't need whales (and I'll probably never see one live). Why should I care?
(this is a serious question, we've even asked such at our philosphy classes at the univ)
So is your attitude that we should only save species that have a direct effect on our lives? Because it's true that whales don't have a HUGE effect on the ecosystem that humans live in. But it's extremely ignorant to have that kind of attitude if you are not aware of the fact that there are countless, countless species that make this Earth habitable and provide us certain comforts that you would probably be unhappy without. A philosophical debate over it with no knowledge of the actual empirical facts is useless.
Hi i'm new here and just created my account, though i've been reading the forums for like...almost a whole WEEK. crazyino....
anyway the first time i watched whale wars i had to turn it off, it was absolutely sickening. I don't know about any of the rest of you but i've been sailing for nearly my whole life and I can tell you from personal experience that the oceans can be a scary ass place. The fact that these maniacs are crazy enough to ram other boats and boast that they've sunk x amount is ridiculous. Don't tell me that that's non-lethal. The lengths of unseamanship like behavior that these people go to is absolutely ridiculous. It not only endangers all people involved but also sends a message to the people that watch the show: "if you believe someone is doing something morally wrong then you should take them out at all costs". such a philosophy will only lead to anarchy.
And no, the japanese are not breaking international law. They have been given a quota of whales that they are allowed to hunt. It was basically set as a compromise so that they are under a (perhaps limited) amount of control when it comes to whaling.
Wherever you stand on the topic of whaling you shouldn't think that it's right to do such things as they do.
Additionally, it's all good and fine to say that the japanese are at fault and deserve to be punished while we're here, but seriously...killing them? come on now. How would it be any different if you were a fisherman and i decided that what you were doing was "wrong" so i tipped over your boat in the middle of the ocean. pretty flippin nonsensical if you ask me.
Sorry I'm all in a craze and I don't even know if what i wrote will be coherent to you guys, but the show is positively frightening to me although that may just be a side effect of my knowing the terrible might of the ruthless sea (corney, way corny but whateva it's true).
I highly doubt they have killed anyone, intend to kill anyone, or would even let that happen. I am pretty sure almost all of the action is just flare to make the show more dramatic (not to say they don't harrass the whalers).
But what I do know for sure is that whaling is horribly wrong, as wrong as killing any other highly intelligent innocent animal.
And, there is an international ban on whaling. So in international waters, whaling is illegal. So yes... unless I am missing out on something here.... the japanese whalers do break the law.
On August 15 2009 14:24 sRapers_ValkS wrote: Hi i'm new here and just created my account, though i've been reading the forums for like...almost a whole WEEK. crazyino....
anyway the first time i watched whale wars i had to turn it off, it was absolutely sickening. I don't know about any of the rest of you but i've been sailing for nearly my whole life and I can tell you from personal experience that the oceans can be a scary ass place. The fact that these maniacs are crazy enough to ram other boats and boast that they've sunk x amount is ridiculous. Don't tell me that that's non-lethal. The lengths of unseamanship like behavior that these people go to is absolutely ridiculous. It not only endangers all people involved but also sends a message to the people that watch the show: "if you believe someone is doing something morally wrong then you should take them out at all costs". such a philosophy will only lead to anarchy.
And no, the japanese are not breaking international law. They have been given a quota of whales that they are allowed to hunt. It was basically set as a compromise so that they are under a (perhaps limited) amount of control when it comes to whaling.
Wherever you stand on the topic of whaling you shouldn't think that it's right to do such things as they do.
Additionally, it's all good and fine to say that the japanese are at fault and deserve to be punished while we're here, but seriously...killing them? come on now. How would it be any different if you were a fisherman and i decided that what you were doing was "wrong" so i tipped over your boat in the middle of the ocean. pretty flippin nonsensical if you ask me.
Sorry I'm all in a craze and I don't even know if what i wrote will be coherent to you guys, but the show is positively frightening to me although that may just be a side effect of my knowing the terrible might of the ruthless sea (corney, way corny but whateva it's true).
The quota is not in whales, but in tons of whales. The official numbers already exceed the quota. I'm guessing the real numbers go over it by a big margin.
edit: I don't think the ramming is the best course of action. But all i'm saying is I don't see a way to stop Japan from doing this that doesn't escalate into a big internation conflict. Of course most countries don't want to take it that far, specially against a country like Japan, which is why i think that nothing will be done to stop them for a long time.
Besides this attacks, who else is watching them or what else is stopping them? even if they get caught the "researchers" are released, and nothing changes. You need something that impacts the media, the japanese people, or someone so they react and take the matter into consideration....
On August 15 2009 13:01 IntoTheWow wrote: I would also like to add that i would love for this to have a happy ending in legal terms. But i don't see it happening. Even when the US pressured Japan, all they got is to promise to not go over a quota, which they already surpass and keeps growing by the year.
If the us and most of japan's surrounding nations oppose through legal ways and japan doesn't hold back, what else can be done?
Nuke them one more time. LOL. Well, it is the US. We've done it before. LMAO. Nah, I kid, I kid. I really don't know, get more people involved? But would the Japanese people really change their traditions and lifestyle for these "animals no one cares about?" I doubt it.
I think this episode shows that the sea shepherds aren't really effective in what they are doing. The Japanese caught and killed several whales all while being trailed by the sea shepherds 200 meters behind them. They haven't had a successful "attack" at all. They are lucky to even land a bottle of acid onto the ship. Almost every episode someone from their ship gets injured. Are there really no better causes to donate money to? Because this one seems to be inefficient
Just watched the season finale that aired on Friday night. There isn't a doubt in my mind Paul Watson rammed the whaling ship. Which was fucking insane, dangerous, as well as criminal. He states that they attempted a maneuver and collided yet after the incident he talks about them just not being fast enough, so in other words he couldn't get between them. Also there is no logic in ramming another ship, the whalers have friends, thus help in case of a rescue is needed. The SS doesn't. Let alone the Steve Irwin is already an aged ship, so what does the dumb ass do why collide with another ship which did nothing except fuck up the already problem laden ship's hull. Also they only fixed what they could see, who the hell knows how weak the hull is now.
I am anti-whaling but god damn this helps nothing, especially the Whales.
the last episode made me realize how awesome of a show they could make if they had the other side of the story. Like the japanese's side story of whaling and stuff. Yeahh!
Funny how a limited hunt of whales is such a hot issue, but the legal trawlers that drag the ocean floor bare and cause 100x the damage are sanctioned by all governments. If the Sea Shepard people really cared, they would talk to the fishing industries about that. I guess whales garner more press though.
Whalefishing and the fuzz it makes is sort of like the big discussion about plastic bags when it comes to enviroment and the protection of it.
Everybody was pointing out the big disaster of all the plastic bags being a major force when it comes to destroying our nature, when in reallity it is not a significant source -its just a very visible one.
Same with all the whales. The ships that are trawling the oceanfloor are doing far more dmg to the enviorment and fauna, but showing a suffering dolphin or a puppy on tv is more dramatic then some random oceanfloor thats been ruined.
A Hollywood production-house owner, Mr Gil bought the former globe-girdling record-setter Earthrace for seven figures from its New Zealand skipper Pete Bethune and, repainted and renamed, donated its use to Sea Shepherd to fight whaling.
''I believe the cause has to be attacked from a variety of angles,'' Mr Gil said. '' [Sea Shepherd leader] Paul Watson is the firing arm.''
Mr Gil said he had never been to sea before, and he came ashore shaky. For the Tasman crossing, Mr Bethune kept the speed down in rough seas. Nevertheless, Mr Gil said the ride was a physical ordeal inside the cramped central cabin.
He left the ship to Mr Bethune and a crew of five to go south into ice-strewn whaling waters.
Captain Watson said from Fremantle, where he is readying his main ship, Steve Irwin, that the Ady Gil would be used to intercept the whaling fleet's chaser boats. ''What I think we can do is latch onto at least one of the three harpoon vessels and keep them out of the picture.''
Am I going to have to be the cold bastard but world population of whales are fine, but the way endager species act is pretty much always written is that whales that live in certain sectors are not fine in population.
which never quite made sense to me to say the whales that don't like the warm waters but just so happen to choose to live there are not okay thus we must protect their asses for species diversity while the population world wide is more then fine, which is an arguable thing to hold on to in the world
but i rather dislike the idea on how these groups are usually are just spoting mantra instead of telling why they really do it.
whaling is out of fashion because oil from crude is cheaper, except for japan who likes to eat whales or something. Whales probably didn't need much protection as most of the industry died before protections where put in place.
it's propaganda i mean people think whaling is only killing blue whales and blue whales are in severe danger but their population is only critically low in Antarctica fine in the rest of the world a low risk animal.
in short the show is shit for premise and fuck the endangered species act. :D Also i'll take this time to say fuck peta they bitch and moan about putting down animals at the pound lots but they themselves put down animals at their headquarters when they can't find a home for them.
Also the founder of peta does not want you to have pets http://www.ingridnewkirk.com/ "Ingrid and PETA believe that animals deserve the most basic rights—in particular, consideration of their own best interests regardless of whether they are useful to humans. Like humans, they are capable of suffering and have interests in living their own lives. Therefore, they are not ours to use—for food, clothing, entertainment, experimentation, or for any other reason." she got really ragged on for it so now she dances around it with vague words.
they also ban zoo, circuses and dogs that are cater to the blind etc. oh yeah the swine flu vac which are usually cultivated in eggs could not be possible :D
If any thing the crazier party wins :D haha man this is a huge tangent
again show is crap because the thing they do is crap basis.
haha, I didn't even know about Whale Wars until I saw that episode of South Park where they bashed them. It seems like a stupid show anyway. I don't approve of whaling but these people seem like they're just looking out for attention, rather than actually caring about whales being hunted.
Motherfuckers are lucky they never ran up on Captain Ahab.
Seriously though those dudes are whiny ass, passive aggressive bitches, like all animal rights activists. First of all, fuck you because this planet has about a three billion year history of creatures eating creatures, you don't get a vote in that shit. The only reason you exist is because of the untold millenia of murder and predation that preceded you. Your brain is the size it is because some asshole primates on the veldt started eating innocent little furry creatures a few million years ago, although I'm pretty sure if they could see what we've done with those brains they wouldn't have bothered at all and just keeled over and died of shame.
And second of all fuck this planet, too. You can't make me give a shit about anything. You can only whine and moralize and bump your ship into a bunch of fishermen trying to do their god damn job.
On December 01 2009 16:06 tinman wrote: Motherfuckers are lucky they never ran up on Captain Ahab.
Seriously though those dudes are whiny ass, passive aggressive bitches, like all animal rights activists. First of all, fuck you because this planet has about a three billion year history of creatures eating creatures, you don't get a vote in that shit. The only reason you exist is because of the untold millenia of murder and predation that preceded you. Your brain is the size it is because some asshole primates on the veldt started eating innocent little furry creatures a few million years ago, although I'm pretty sure if they could see what we've done with those brains they wouldn't have bothered at all and just keeled over and died of shame.
And second of all fuck this planet, too. You can't make me give a shit about anything. You can only whine and moralize and bump your ship into a bunch of fishermen trying to do their god damn job.
SYDNEY - A conservation group's boat had its bow sheared off and was taking on water Wednesday after it collided with a Japanese whaling ship in the frigid waters of Antarctica, the group said.
The boat's six crew members were safely transferred to another of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's vessels, the newly commissioned Bob Barker. The boat is named for the American game show host who donated $5 million to buy it.
The clash was the most serious in the past several years, during which the Sea Shepherd has sent vessels into far-southern waters to try to harass the Japanese fleet into ceasing its annual whale hunt.
I don't really care what they do as long as they succeed in stopping those people from whaling while not injuring anyone. But these people do seem kind of stupid and silly.
Maybe it's just me but does it looks like the SS Boat starts to move closer to the ship I mean they could not have been dead in the water as it looks like the propellers start to move behind it.
Yeah it looks like they idled in front of the ship in an effort to get hit, then realized that the japanese ship was going to be able to miss them, then moved right in front of it.
I'm a member of the Sea Sheppard society. I get why people can think they're idiots or watever. My issue though is that the japanese are killing whales in australian waters and our government just does nothing to oppose it even though virtually everyone I've ever spoken to finds it morally wrong. Large parts of the tourism industry in this country rely on whale watching to generate revenue so its complete bullshit to just stand there and do nothing. At least the sea sheppard tries to oppose the japanese and stop them from getting their quota.
Life in this entire planet is a series of webs. We need a million connections between insects, birds, reptiles and mammals just to produce basic food stuffs. If honey bees disappear off this planet, we'll all die of scurvy because we can't hand-pollinate fruit plant. Every animal species that gets wiped out pushes us closer to extinction. So, it's in our interests to save as many as we can. Large animals like whales have a disproportionate impact on the environment. Decapitating the ocean food chain which accounts for the majority of life on earth will not take long to show it's effect on land. Educate yourself. Just because you don't agree with the buffoons on whale wars doesn't mean that those rat-bastard Japanese whalers are in the right. I'd dance on their graves if they die as soon as they hit the sea.
On January 07 2010 14:19 Megalisk wrote: Why do people care so much about stupid whales and polar bears and stuff? They would kill you too if they had the chance.
Because they don't understand how an ecosystem works, but we do.
Not saying I support the pricks this thread is about, but eradicating one species affects a lot more than just that species.
Bye-bye bluefin tuna. Very soon there won't be any whale left either at this rate. They haven't rebounded as much as the Japanese whalers would like us to think.
On January 07 2010 14:36 WWJDD wrote: Bye-bye bluefin tuna. Very soon there won't be any whale left either at this rate. They haven't rebounded as much as the Japanese whalers would like us to think.
Well in one corner you've got scientists telling people to eat more fish and in the other corner scientists saying 'Stop fishing , we are running out of fish'
The problem of course is overpopulation but no-one ever seems to want to address this , even China was criticized for it's 1 child policy.
On January 07 2010 14:36 WWJDD wrote: Bye-bye bluefin tuna. Very soon there won't be any whale left either at this rate. They haven't rebounded as much as the Japanese whalers would like us to think.
Well in one corner you've got scientists telling people to eat more fish and in the other corner scientists saying 'Stop fishing , we are running out of fish'
The problem of course is overpopulation but no-one ever seems to want to address this , even China was criticized for it's 1 child policy.
No
We got scientists saying don't eat these fishes, they're gonna die out. We got scientists saying eat more fish.
It's not contrary to each other, we just tend to like a few fishes more than others and therefore these become overfished and endangered. Eating more fish in general would be no problem at all.
The "overpopulation" card gets pulled way to often... Certain places on the world are overpopulated, but europe and north america which probably take a huge part in the overfishing problem are far from overpopulated.
On January 07 2010 14:36 WWJDD wrote: Bye-bye bluefin tuna. Very soon there won't be any whale left either at this rate. They haven't rebounded as much as the Japanese whalers would like us to think.
Well in one corner you've got scientists telling people to eat more fish and in the other corner scientists saying 'Stop fishing , we are running out of fish'
The problem of course is overpopulation but no-one ever seems to want to address this , even China was criticized for it's 1 child policy.
This is so true and changes are needed because the world simply can't sustain anymore people ravishing every natural resource and beauty the world has left. But to change this you have to understand something about how the world works at the moment.
The world is overpopulated and still politicians in the western world constantly panick if the population of their country isn't growing. This is logical because their is a certain amount of growth needed to maintain the pensions and benefits in the way they work now. This generation is paying for the previous generation so if the population wouldn't grow the system would collapse and plummet the country in question into chaos. Still the poluticians won't take any steps to try to solve this because that would make them unpopular with the generation before us who are still largely in power. In an ideal world you would save for your own pension but in reality all your money is used to pay your parents. Since it normally isn't possible for 1 child to take care of 2 parents the population is in a vicious circle to keep growing or stay at an equilibrium at the bare minimum.
You also see this (in a slightly different form) in most of the African countries where a lot of children are dying very young resulting in the parents getting more and more children to make sure some of them live long enough to take care of them when they grow old. As a result however there are a lot more people living in those countries then the land can sustain, resulting in food shortages (that will keep getting worse because a lot of the farm land is destroyed due to measures that cause the land to yield a bigger harvest on the short term but that deplete the land of all the nutrients etc. on the long term) and more deaths thus starting the circle over again. Combine this with the strict religious beliefs most people in Africa practise and that forbid them to use birthcontrol (being it either Christian or Muslim, both don't really differ on this point). If everybody in those areas this plays a role had only 1 or 2 children the land would have a chance to bounce back and provide a much better living for everbody.
Think about it. Instead of having a starving family of 10 who contantly need to worry where their next meal is coming from you would have a family of 4 who are well fed because the available food doesn't have to be stretched so thinly. This results in having more time to develop the country and the world.
But alas all of this probably is a utopia since it needs many harsh and drastic changes I'm afraid the world is not willing to make.
and as for the Japanese involvement, i literally lost the little respect i had left for their government, they would go so far as to feed their own children mercury poisoned dolphin meat they slaughtered in the most despicably horrifying way simply to improve revenue.
On January 07 2010 15:55 alffla wrote: woah wtf the COVE looks so intense O_O
Trust me. It is
It's probably the best environmental documentary ever made. Especially that it doesn't focus on the usual "leave nature alone" and other bullshit like that. It is a truly moving and terrifying at the same time story about modern day ethics.
Awesome documentary, I love it! I can't believe the Japanese Government would let people do such things to an intelligent species! It's heartbreaking watching the pool of blood near the end of the video. I mean these fishermen are heartless...all in the name of money.
On January 07 2010 18:46 Golden Ghost wrote: The world is overpopulated and still politicians in the western world constantly panick if the population of their country isn't growing. This is logical because their is a certain amount of growth needed to maintain the pensions and benefits in the way they work now. This generation is paying for the previous generation so if the population wouldn't grow the system would collapse and plummet the country in question into chaos. Still the poluticians won't take any steps to try to solve this because that would make them unpopular with the generation before us who are still largely in power. In an ideal world you would save for your own pension but in reality all your money is used to pay your parents. Since it normally isn't possible for 1 child to take care of 2 parents the population is in a vicious circle to keep growing or stay at an equilibrium at the bare minimum.
Isn't this one of the main arguments for superannuation schemes? I don't know about the netherlands (which I'm guessing has a high tax rate and large pension scheme) but in australia they're slowly phasing out government pensions with mandatory superannuation.
SYDNEY (AFP) – An anti-whaling activist has boarded a Japanese security ship to make a citizen's arrest of its captain over last month's sinking of a high-tech boat, an animal rights group said on Monday.
New Zealand's Pete Bethune, captain of the futuristic Ady Gil powerboat which was smashed in two on January 6, jumped aboard the Japanese ship from a jetski under the cover of darkness, the Sea Shepherd group said.
LOL, if they were serious about delivering a letter of arrest and a $3 million dollar invoice surely they could afford to get them translated into Japanese first?
Instead they post them up publically on their website, in English of course. It's all just a retarded publicity stunt.
Mr Bethune, who was skipper of the conservation boat the Ady Gil, which sank after colliding with a Japanese whaling ship in January, jumped onboard the Shonan Maru 2 and attempted to present its skipper with a $3-million damages bill.
Wow I missed this ... illegally boarding a ship in international waters ... he's lucky they didn't shoot him - which I believe they are totally within their rights under the law to do.
And now our PM John Key has cowered down to Japan leaving Kevin Rudd the Australian PM alone in the claim of taking Japan to world court over whaling...
Which is definitely not in line with the general Kiwi persona of green, environmental friendly, etc etc. We are probably the only nation to refuse American warships to dock due to their nuclear reactors. NZ has no tolerance towards anything non-green...we even left ANZUS (Military alliance between USA/Aus/NZ) because of it. Also if you wish to know about the general view over here I suggest you google up "Rainbow Warrior" incident.
Personally, I disagree with whaling for commercial purposes under the false pretense of scientific research. However, Sea Shepherd's methods are retarded and can't be justified in any way. I'm just glad the Japanese were somewhat rational in the situation and didn't shoot a harpoon at them.
On March 13 2010 08:29 sMi.MeOw wrote: And now our PM John Key has cowered down to Japan leaving Kevin Rudd the Australian PM alone in the claim of taking Japan to world court over whaling...
Which is definitely not in line with the general Kiwi persona of green, environmental friendly, etc etc. We are probably the only nation to refuse American warships to dock due to their nuclear reactors. NZ has no tolerance towards anything non-green...we even left ANZAC (Military alliance between USA/Aus/NZ) because of it. Also if you wish to know about the general view over here I suggest you google up "Rainbow Warrior" incident.
Personally, I disagree with whaling for commercial purposes under the false pretense of scientific research. However, Sea Shepherd's methods are retarded and can't be justified in any way. I'm just glad the Japanese were somewhat rational in the situation and didn't shoot a harpoon at them.
In international waters, you cannot kill people, nor can you whale, retarded countries who just look the other way need to do something instead.
It is retarded how anyone can kill an endangered animal and still sleep soundly at night. The Japanese have no respect for anything and as far as I am concerned should be nuked again for their actions. User was banned for being unbelievably retarded
You have to admit Sea Shepherd knows how to use PR as a weapon. If he is indeed prosecuted , and whatever the punishment, it will galvanize the environmental movement even more so. If it is real harsh then Japan could be target of major international backlash.
Sea Shepherd founder Paul Watson reacted angrily to the arrest, calling Mr Bethune the “first prisoner of war to be taken back to Japan since World War II”.
“The Japanese vessel destroyed a $2 million-dollar boat and almost killed him [Bethune] and his crew. Then they arrest him, even though he came knocking on their door. I find that interesting.”
Japan’s Fisheries Agency, which is responsible for Japan’s whaling programme, is refusing to discuss the case with the media. Speaking anonymously, one official said he hoped Mr Bethune is prosecuted. “His group is a danger to crews on the high seas, and they continuously attack our legal hunt in the southern oceans.”
Japan has grown increasingly frustrated with the activities of Sea Shepherd, which harasses its Antarctic whaling fleet every year in a bid to stop the cull. Last month Mr Watson warned that the latest confrontation and the Ady Gil sinking had turned the annual confrontation into a “real whale war”.
On May 27 2010 14:14 Endymion wrote: it'll be funny when the Japanese order a destroyer to tail this ship to keep watch for any illegal activity, good bye interesting television!
I think it would make very interesting as it would open up a shit storm of epic proportions being that Japanese military in a conservation area.
As much as I'm all for environmental protection, these assholes are putting human lives in danger to save a bunch of animals with their antics. They should feel so lucky that they aren't fired upon with real guns for some of the crap they pull. If you want to stop something, do it through legal avenues. Just because you may not be satisfied with those legal methods doesn't give you the right to take the law into your own hands. If everyone did that, our society would descend into a state of anarchy...
Personally I hope every single one of these assholes are either caught and imprisoned or shot... The fact that they are given their own TV show is ridiculous to me.
Oh, and LOL at the whole "prisoner of war" thing they're trying to play up. The idiot illegally boarded a foreign vessel from a jet ski under the cover of darkness in international waters. What did he think would happen? These people knew exactly what they were doing from the start.
On May 28 2010 13:18 JinMaikeul wrote: As much as I'm all for environmental protection, these assholes are putting human lives in danger to save a bunch of animals with their antics. They should feel so lucky that they aren't fired upon with real guns for some of the crap they pull. If you want to stop something, do it through legal avenues. Just because you may not be satisfied with those legal methods doesn't give you the right to take the law into your own hands. If everyone did that, our society would descend into a state of anarchy...
Personally I hope every single one of these assholes are either caught and imprisoned or shot... The fact that they are given their own TV show is ridiculous to me.
your post is so ridiculous first of all you say they are putting human lives in danger to save animals? you believe humans are somehow more important than any other animal? then you say they should be imprisoned or shot, when japanese whalers are illegally hunting whales in international waters? at least they are doing something, while the australian government is too pathetic to even take legal action against japan after saying countless times they are going to.
animal rights activists are scum of the earth. i hope they get tried for piracy and terrorism. the law of the high seas are hella different than laws on land. fishing industry is one of the biggest industries in japan.whales, fish, lobster, cows, pigs, are all the same. they are food and jobs for tens/hundreds of millions of people. im an american and japan has my support 100%. i hope these idiots are arrested and tried in japan and made an example of. its be nice to see them mess up and die or be shot by the japanese whalers, but u cant "make an example" out of the dead.
...The Japanese Whalers are hunting the whales Illegally most often or not. If anything, human population explosion has been the scourge we all ignore (seeing as we are human). I have read the captain's book on seal wars, and while I do not agree with all his methods, the usual methods do NOT WORK. He has tried that and failed several times; only extreme action has ever stirred humans to do something. Whales are also highly intelligent sentient creatures. Something has got to give. The environment has recently been warning us too that what humans are doing a wrong (so many earthquakes, floods, droughts, highly likely brought on by subtle human activities.)
On May 28 2010 13:18 JinMaikeul wrote: As much as I'm all for environmental protection, these assholes are putting human lives in danger to save a bunch of animals with their antics. They should feel so lucky that they aren't fired upon with real guns for some of the crap they pull. If you want to stop something, do it through legal avenues. Just because you may not be satisfied with those legal methods doesn't give you the right to take the law into your own hands. If everyone did that, our society would descend into a state of anarchy...
Personally I hope every single one of these assholes are either caught and imprisoned or shot... The fact that they are given their own TV show is ridiculous to me.
your post is so ridiculous first of all you say they are putting human lives in danger to save animals? you believe humans are somehow more important than any other animal? then you say they should be imprisoned or shot, when japanese whalers are illegally hunting whales in international waters? at least they are doing something, while the australian government is too pathetic to even take legal action against japan after saying countless times they are going to.
That argument is quite the slippery slope. If humans are equal to any other animal, where do you stop? Are humans equal to dogs? rats? insects? trees? Is hunting ethical? Are they only equal to other mammals? In that case, why should genetic code determine the morals that you act with?
The whalers may be acting illegally, but vigilante justice is never the answer. They need to be brought down through legal avenues.
Legal avenues are often or not filled with red tape. The lesson I have gleaned is that whether it is about the whales, or simply education, when you do it legal, the opposing force will just use a loophole in the law. They play the game too easily. When they banned hunting seals, the seal hunters/politicians created a loophole in the law, citing that they couldn't hunt seals with their adult fur. The baby seals were mercilessly clubbed to death still. Politicians turn a blind eye to anything as long it gets them votes (or advocate something unworthy to get votes as vice/versa.)
As for education, I have read building schools out of stone by Greg Morteson, the bureaucratic offices bungle up giving building permits of schools so much in Kabul (in Afghanistan), that it can take months for a document to be stamped and signed. (excuses of office closed, person with key for cabinet containing file left). Out of impatience, they just built the schools while the red tape was going on. Also, a little screaming on the last day of the deadline for the permit helped tons. Voila, education for the children.
I hate PETA with a passion. These people almost make them second place, though.
People acting like idiots and assholes over animal rights only makes people less likely to feel sympathetic to the cause. They're only making things more difficult for themselves.
Emotions can sure run high for a topic like this huh. I'll say it bluntly. Every living thing is equally important for balance, you can't have too much, you can't have too little. Right now we can't even manage ourselves right (world hunger, warring countries etc.), so I'll embrace it as my duty to stay clean for the sorta round blob we live on.
On May 28 2010 13:52 Reaper9 wrote:The environment has recently been warning us too that what humans are doing a wrong (so many earthquakes, floods, droughts, highly likely brought on by subtle human activities.)
This, and by extension you, are stupid as shit. You think earthquakes are being caused by human actions?
Shit cannot reply to online comments. But I'll rephrase that then. Thank you for your most enlightening post. We still are the most destructive on the environment.
On May 28 2010 13:37 drakes1988 wrote: animal rights activists are scum of the earth. i hope they get tried for piracy and terrorism. the law of the high seas are hella different than laws on land. fishing industry is one of the biggest industries in japan.whales, fish, lobster, cows, pigs, are all the same. they are food and jobs for tens/hundreds of millions of people. im an american and japan has my support 100%. i hope these idiots are arrested and tried in japan and made an example of. its be nice to see them mess up and die or be shot by the japanese whalers, but u cant "make an example" out of the dead.
Yeah, lets just continue fishing tuna to extinction. Good idea.
On May 28 2010 13:37 drakes1988 wrote: animal rights activists are scum of the earth. i hope they get tried for piracy and terrorism. the law of the high seas are hella different than laws on land. fishing industry is one of the biggest industries in japan.whales, fish, lobster, cows, pigs, are all the same. they are food and jobs for tens/hundreds of millions of people. im an american and japan has my support 100%. i hope these idiots are arrested and tried in japan and made an example of. its be nice to see them mess up and die or be shot by the japanese whalers, but u cant "make an example" out of the dead.
Funnily enough the japanese media turned the table on us and criticised us for culling Kangaroos in Canberra, when the two are completely unrelated, they're using scientific research as a cover to simply propping up an old fashioned industry.
On May 28 2010 13:18 JinMaikeul wrote: As much as I'm all for environmental protection, these assholes are putting human lives in danger to save a bunch of animals with their antics. They should feel so lucky that they aren't fired upon with real guns for some of the crap they pull. If you want to stop something, do it through legal avenues. Just because you may not be satisfied with those legal methods doesn't give you the right to take the law into your own hands. If everyone did that, our society would descend into a state of anarchy...
Personally I hope every single one of these assholes are either caught and imprisoned or shot... The fact that they are given their own TV show is ridiculous to me.
your post is so ridiculous first of all you say they are putting human lives in danger to save animals? you believe humans are somehow more important than any other animal? then you say they should be imprisoned or shot, when japanese whalers are illegally hunting whales in international waters? at least they are doing something, while the australian government is too pathetic to even take legal action against japan after saying countless times they are going to.
That argument is quite the slippery slope. If humans are equal to any other animal, where do you stop? Are humans equal to dogs? rats? insects? trees? Is hunting ethical? Are they only equal to other mammals? In that case, why should genetic code determine the morals that you act with?
The whalers may be acting illegally, but vigilante justice is never the answer. They need to be brought down through legal avenues.
All I meant by that phrase is I disagree with "putting human lives in danger to save a bunch of animals with their antics." It doesn't mean you can't eat animals because that would be fucking stupid, we have evolved to eat animals. Hunting is ethical as long as it is quick and as painless as possible. Whaling is not. That's besides the point, what they are doing is illegal, and as well as this unsustainable.
They need to be brought down through legal avenues.
Do you know how many times Kevin Rudd (prime minister of Australia) has insisted to take legal action against Japan on whaling? It was one of his promises that got him voted into government. Yet he has still done nothing... but can you really expect legal action against our greatest export market?
On May 28 2010 13:52 Reaper9 wrote:The environment has recently been warning us too that what humans are doing a wrong (so many earthquakes, floods, droughts, highly likely brought on by subtle human activities.)
This, and by extension you, are stupid as shit. You think earthquakes are being caused by human actions?
But yea i really dont know what they're thinking, what's ramming their ship going to achieve, not only are the Japanese ships bigger, they also have more ships AND an army.
I have friends who ate whale before while visiting Japan, not because it's tasty, but they just want to see what the fuss is all about. Later they described how awful it tasted, basically it's just like eating a blob of fat.
They also asked their Japanese friends, apparently their grandparents used to get them at school for lunch while they were little, and they hated them. It seems that no one knows anyone that consume whale meat in regular basis or at all. Maybe they are whaling because is on tourism's menu? :p
Im a vegan, pretty damn militant. But Seashepard doesnt do ANYTHING. They just sit around and talk about how badass they are. Total bullshit. If they really cared about animals they wouldnt waste thousands of dollars on bullshit they wont use to save any animals.
On May 28 2010 20:52 furymonkey wrote: I have friends who ate whale before while visiting Japan, not because it's tasty, but they just want to see what the fuss is all about. Later they described how awful it tasted, basically it's just like eating a blob of fat.
They also asked their Japanese friends, apparently their grandparents used to get them at school for lunch while they were little, and they hated them. It seems that no one knows anyone that consume whale meat in regular basis or at all. Maybe they are whaling because is on tourism's menu? :p
It's all locked up in tradition seeing as you're from NZ just turn on the news and there's a ton of crap about how eating whale is a part of japanese tradition and this is the west trying to erode japanese values. I even heard one guy draw the parallel that it's just the same as Westerners eating beef and chicken - it's a part of the western tradition (completely ignoring the fact they are hunting an animal to extinction).
For any idiot who wants to argue about humanity being the scourge of the earth, do the earth a favor by killing yourself and getting rid of a part of the problem if that's what you truly believe. So long as I'm a human being, I will hold another human life higher than an animal's. That's just reality. Despite any smartass remarks you might have about genetics or arbitrary values, if you had the choice between saving one human child and a family of birds, would you seriously even stop to think about saving the child? And I stand by my opinion that things need to be done through legal avenues regardless of red tape. It's the only way we function as a civilized society. If my neighbor is doing something I don't like (even if it's illegal) and the government can't/won't help me, it doesn't give me the right to burn his house down or even throw things at his property. The "at least they're doing something" thing doesn't excuse anarchy and vigilanteism (is that the right word?)
Say what you want about the Japanese whalers, but they're people too. They have families to feed with their catches and I doubt any of them have some sort of malicious desire to wipe the species from the face of the earth. Do they deserve to be harassed and endangered just because you don't happen to like their occupation? Maybe we should start disrupting operations at coal mines while we're at it to save the earth from global warming (a much bigger actual threat). While we're out being vigilante planeteers and making dangerous jobs more dangerous for the sake of our quest, why don't we start hijacking oil tankers while we're at it?
Say what you want about the Japanese whalers, but they're people too. They have families to feed with their catches and I doubt any of them have some sort of malicious desire to wipe the species from the face of the earth. Do they deserve to be harassed and endangered just because you don't happen to like their occupation?
How does this argument even make any sense? Any criminal will have a family. That's no reason to approve of whatever they do to support it.
Maybe we should start disrupting operations at coal mines while we're at it to save the earth from global warming (a much bigger actual threat). While we're out being vigilante planeteers and making dangerous jobs more dangerous for the sake of our quest, why don't we start hijacking oil tankers while we're at it?
If we make oil illegal and governments fail to enforce this I'm sure people do start hijacking illegal oil tankers.
Say what you want about the Japanese whalers, but they're people too. They have families to feed with their catches and I doubt any of them have some sort of malicious desire to wipe the species from the face of the earth. Do they deserve to be harassed and endangered just because you don't happen to like their occupation?
How does this argument even make any sense? Any criminal will have a family. That's no reason to approve of whatever they do to support it.
Maybe we should start disrupting operations at coal mines while we're at it to save the earth from global warming (a much bigger actual threat). While we're out being vigilante planeteers and making dangerous jobs more dangerous for the sake of our quest, why don't we start hijacking oil tankers while we're at it?
If we make oil illegal and governments fail to enforce this I'm sure people do start hijacking illegal oil tankers.
So the whalers are the crminals here? It's funny since the only criminals I see are these terrorists harassing them and illegally boarding their ships.
Action reaction you can't expect to do illegal stuff (if so) and not expect people to take matters into their own hands after police and governments fail to do something about it.
You live by rules of society where police protects you but in other countries where this fails people need to protect themselves. I think this is more comparable to a society where all juridical control is gone than it is to your own.
On May 31 2010 19:15 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: You sure? I dunno much about it to be honest. I always thought they said they caught them for medical research which isn't a loophole but just a lie.
The problem stems pretty much from this and yes, it essentially amounts to a loophole in the laws. It's not the issue that they're doing something illegally. It's that they've found a legal way to do it. The solution then is not to terrorize a legal operation, but to close the loophole.
On May 31 2010 19:19 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Action reaction you can't expect to do illegal stuff (if so) and not expect people to take matters into their own hands after police and governments fail to do something about it.
You live by rules of society where police protects you but in other countries where this fails people need to protect themselves. I think this is more comparable to a society where all juridical control is gone than it is to your own.
So if these whalers got fed up and decided to arm themselves and use deadly force against these people nobody is doing anything about, you would consider this reasonable or permissable despite a lack of imminent bodily harm? It seems like a pretty slippery slope to go down once you tolerate any instance of people taking the law into their own hands, especially when the cause has little to do with them.
So if these whalers got fed up and decided to arm themselves and use deadly force against these people nobody is doing anything about, you would consider this reasonable or permissable despite a lack of imminent bodily harm?
I think if you solely look at what whalers are doing, and ignore the repercussions, that they are in the wrong. They lie about what they are doing in order to do something that is prohibited by law. I also think calling this a loophole is a wrong choice of words. You make it sound as if lying about what you're doing is some sort of legal way to get things done. If you lie about stealing something and therefor not get caught that doesn't mean the law needs to be changed. That's just too easy. They are doing something against the law and are lying about it.
It seems like a pretty slippery slope to go down once you tolerate any instance of people taking the law into their own hands, especially when the cause has little to do with them.
It is a slippery slope but have you ever been to a third world country? Should people there not stand up for their rights and just wait till the police shows up? Your posts are so extremely black-white. The world isn't like law=everything. It might be pretty close to this in your society and mine but we gotta be able to think outside of the boxes we live in.
There's people who care a lot about animals which is their right completely. We can't tell people to like or dislike animals. If you care about something a lot and people are harming it and nothing gets done about it by the law then a natural reaction would be to step up to protect it yourself. Compare it to your children being threatened in a country where police has no power. Would you just sit and wait till the police shows up with a good chance of your children being dead a while later? I'm sure you would step beyond this "can't take things into your own hands" attitude. You would do it for your children, others would do it for protected animal species.
whaling should be stopped but it pains me what these idiots do and the public support they garner. Over here they're portrayed almost as heroes by the media and the government turns a blind eye to their blatantly illegal behavior because they don't have the nads to confront the japanese.
Tonight is the premier of the new season. Also Bethune trial:
On the first day of the trial, Captain Bethune’s lawyers and the prosecutor read their opening statements, and one crewmember from the Shonan Maru 2 testified regarding what he had seen. On the second day of the trial, a crewmember from the Shonan Maru 2 testified regarding a minor three-day skin rash on about a one-inch patch of skin he attributes to rancid butter used by Captain Bethune. A doctor who never actually saw this crewmember (because his injury did not even warrant an in-person visit) testified that the injury could have been caused by rancid butter. Sea Shepherd has a strict policy against violence, and in its more than thirty years of operation, has never injured anyone.
Captain Bethune testified all day on the third day of trial as to why he had done what he did. He talked about his anger at the Japanese whalers killing whales in international waters. As Captain Bethune put it, “They are coming into my backyard and killing what belongs to all of us.”
-They spot a Japanese whaling sheep and send a crew on the Zodiac to stink bomb it. The crew gets lost and they don't respond to radio, and everyone sits around and waits until they return.
-The Steve Irwin encounters a research vessel but they have to give up pursuit because the Sea Shepherd is too slow to catch up.
-They secretly buy another ship callled the Bob Barker which they intend to use for recon/other purposes but there cover is blown as the Japanese spot them before they even leave port. They also couldn't repair the engine so the ship wouldn't even start.
-One of the Andy Gil crew members starts to get sea sick. The Radar on the Andy Gil malfunctions and they have to turn back to have it repaired.
-They send the helicopter to recon but it has to turn back because of the LRAD. Now the Japanese ship is charging at the Steve Irwin with water cannons aimed at the exposed helicopter.
On May 31 2010 19:15 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: You sure? I dunno much about it to be honest. I always thought they said they caught them for medical research which isn't a loophole but just a lie.
I realized I was in the same boat as you, Nazgul. I didn't know enough about the applicable law to say anything for sure, but I am strongly opposed to whaling. So I decided to do a little international law research. What I found disturbed me a bit...
- First, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
This Convention creates international law relating to a variety of issues including but not limited to, territorial water, piracy, and fishing rights. On the matter of Cetacians, however, it is fairly weak. Article 65 "Marine mammals" reads in part:
"States shall cooperate with a view to the conservation of marine mammals and in the case of cetaceans shall in particular work through the appropriate international organizations for their conservation, management and study."
There are several other relevant provisions, but none specify anything more stringent than the above. (I have to admit I didn't read each Annex, but prior research led me to believe there was nothing there. If anyone knows of something I missed, please let me know.)
- The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling
Among other things, this Convention from 1946 recognized that "the whale stocks are susceptible of natural increases if whaling is properly regulated, and that increases in the size of whale stocks will permit increases in the number of whales which may be captured without endangering these natural resources".
This Convention originally involved whaling nations that wanted to prevent depletion of the whale stock. The Convention created the International Whaling Committee (IWC). Each Contracting Government, had an interest in preventing depletion of the different species. Each Contracting Government had one vote and it took a 3/4ths vote of the IWC to modify the Schedule (the disgusting feature which sets the limitations on harvesting). Over time, non-whaling Govs joined and eventually became the majority.
In 1982, the IWC voted affirmatively to impose a moratorium on whaling. In 1994, the IWC voted to create the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
Unfortunately, there are a few problems...
First, this is a voluntary agreement. Contracting Governments can leave upon short written notice. Second, the agreement has "opt-out" options. Contracting Governments can opt-out of any proposed provision upon written notice (which Japan did as relates to the moratorium.) Third, the agreement does not create international law. It is merely a voluntary agreement to implement certain standards. The closest to a "law-creating" provision I could find was Article IX which states in part: "Each Contracting Government shall take appropriate measures to ensure the application of the provisions of this Convention and the punishment of infractions against the said provisions in operations carried out by persons or by vessels under its jurisdiction." Basically, there is no obligation to create law. If you witness an activity you believe is prohibited by the Convention, you are to report it to Gov. under which the offending ship is flagged. That Gov. is encouraged to take "appropriate measures."
The "Loophole"
Article VIII states in part: "Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as the Contracting Government thinks fit, and the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention."
The phrase "Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention," exempts a Contracting Government from all other provisions of the agreement including those related to the moratorium and sanctuary.
There are no definitions on what qualifies as research either.
Based on the above, it appears as though the Japanese whalers are operating legally unless the laws of Japan state otherwise.
Sorry for the double post, but I wrote the above for my own interests. It is not intended as a legal opinion. If anyone finds flaws in the analysis, please let me know. If it's really harsh, send it in a pm. Don't worry about offending me.
I hope the diplomatic and economic pressure will eventually force Japan and others to drastically reduce their catch. But once again, there doesn't seem to be stringent enough international law that applies here.
I support ending whaling and I think the Sea Shepard crew is right to have taken actions into their own hands. However, I strong disagree with some of their actions. Multiple times have they come extremely close to colliding with one of the Japanese vessels, including a actual collision in season 2 (correct me if i'm wrong). It is one thing for them to risk their own lives protecting whales, and they should have every right to do so. But, it is unacceptable for them to risk the lives of the Japanese crews threw reckless and frankly stupid actions (mainly the captains decisions). If one of the ships were to sink crew members in the water would die in minutes.
Additionally, while I think its good that the show draws lots of attention to whaling. As a show it is horrible. It is 45 minutes of over-dramatic nothing. It has the same amount of content as an American Idol results show.
I'm starting to think that the hardest working people of the Ship(s) of Sea Shepherd is the Engineering crew, can't be easy trying to keep both bucket of bolts working.
(June 14) -- Japanese officials bribed six small nations with offers of cash and call girls in return for their votes in favor of slaughtering whales, according to a newspaper investigation.
Japan denies the accusations, but The Sunday Times reported that two of its journalists filmed government officials from six countries admitting they were bribed by Japan to vote with the pro-whalers.
(June 14) -- Japanese officials bribed six small nations with offers of cash and call girls in return for their votes in favor of slaughtering whales, according to a newspaper investigation.
Japan denies the accusations, but The Sunday Times reported that two of its journalists filmed government officials from six countries admitting they were bribed by Japan to vote with the pro-whalers.
Auckland anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune, 45, has been sentenced to two years in prison, suspended for five years, for obstructing the activities of a Japanese whaling fleet in the Antarctic Ocean, the Kyodo news agency reported.
Auckland anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune, 45, has been sentenced to two years in prison, suspended for five years, for obstructing the activities of a Japanese whaling fleet in the Antarctic Ocean, the Kyodo news agency reported.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X.
If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
1. Agreed.
2. There are already international bans on whaling aside from research purposes. Japan whales to sell the meat and claims it is for research, while ignoring quotas.
The delta boat is stuck on the rocks and what do they do, they REV the engine. Do they not also have some sort of schedule for Deck watch.
It's kind of unfortunate because the entire season has just been fail after fail. The Japanese have just been too fast and too good at evading that the only drama that the show can create is their own screw ups.
Auckland anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune, 45, has been sentenced to two years in prison, suspended for five years, for obstructing the activities of a Japanese whaling fleet in the Antarctic Ocean, the Kyodo news agency reported.
Love the programme, but I dont think I can get it in England, despite having sky i've never seen it? Watched it all online (illegally) but now the website has been taken down and im left without whale wars, Inspirational programme, love what they're doing.
On August 13 2010 22:23 ProFail wrote: Love the programme, but I dont think I can get it in England, despite having sky i've never seen it? Watched it all online (illegally) but now the website has been taken down and im left without whale wars, Inspirational programme, love what they're doing.
tvunderground org ru
I watched 3 episodes and didn't like it. It's funny how they're so unorganized that the biggest threat against them is their own incompetence.
But some people here got it all wrong. The most harmful thing they do is throwing stink bombs. They're not endangering anyone's life. Labeling them as "terrorists" is completely ignorant. They're not trying to cause terror neither are they inflicting any direct damage. They're main and most powerful weapons are the cameras and they're main goal is to move the public opinion.
On August 13 2010 22:23 ProFail wrote: Love the programme, but I dont think I can get it in England, despite having sky i've never seen it? Watched it all online (illegally) but now the website has been taken down and im left without whale wars, Inspirational programme, love what they're doing.
tvunderground org ru
I watched 3 episodes and didn't like it. It's funny how they're so unorganized that the biggest threat against them is their own incompetence.
But some people here got it all wrong. The most harmful thing they do is throwing stink bombs. They're not endangering anyone's life. Labeling them as "terrorists" is completely ignorant. They're not trying to cause terror neither are they inflicting any direct damage. They're main and most powerful weapons are the cameras and they're main goal is to move the public opinion.
Did you miss the part where they rammed into one of the whaling ships? That's a very interesting definition of "direct damage" you have.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements. The practice of creating huge profits from (manufactured) scarcity is objectionable. It would be a lot more sensible to not incentivize illegal whaling by killing the market for it. Making the sale of all whale products illegal may not immediately kill the culture that drives the consumption, but it does have the potential to kickstart a process that could lead to a cultural change. When luxury becomes harmful it's time to start questioning the legality of it. The free market can go cry itself to sleep, for all I care. We've got some level of democracy for a reason. Unfortunately the majority of the Japanese public isn't too interested in this sort of stuff yet..
On August 13 2010 22:23 ProFail wrote: Love the programme, but I dont think I can get it in England, despite having sky i've never seen it? Watched it all online (illegally) but now the website has been taken down and im left without whale wars, Inspirational programme, love what they're doing.
tvunderground org ru
I watched 3 episodes and didn't like it. It's funny how they're so unorganized that the biggest threat against them is their own incompetence.
But some people here got it all wrong. The most harmful thing they do is throwing stink bombs. They're not endangering anyone's life. Labeling them as "terrorists" is completely ignorant. They're not trying to cause terror neither are they inflicting any direct damage. They're main and most powerful weapons are the cameras and they're main goal is to move the public opinion.
Did you miss the part where they rammed into one of the whaling ships? That's a very interesting definition of "direct damage" you have.
Errr.... their boat who "rammed" them was stopped :S Just... floating still.. and they rammed the other ship? There's video evidence everywhere. Among the world's media there's reports blaming one side, reports blaming another and reports blaming both. You're just blindly quoting the whaler's version of the story. While I didn't watch those episodes I did read about it and saw the collision videos on youtube.
On August 13 2010 22:23 ProFail wrote: Love the programme, but I dont think I can get it in England, despite having sky i've never seen it? Watched it all online (illegally) but now the website has been taken down and im left without whale wars, Inspirational programme, love what they're doing.
tvunderground org ru
I watched 3 episodes and didn't like it. It's funny how they're so unorganized that the biggest threat against them is their own incompetence.
But some people here got it all wrong. The most harmful thing they do is throwing stink bombs. They're not endangering anyone's life. Labeling them as "terrorists" is completely ignorant. They're not trying to cause terror neither are they inflicting any direct damage. They're main and most powerful weapons are the cameras and they're main goal is to move the public opinion.
Did you miss the part where they rammed into one of the whaling ships? That's a very interesting definition of "direct damage" you have.
Errr.... their boat who "rammed" them was stopped :S Just... floating still.. and they rammed the other ship? There's video evidence everywhere. Among the world's media there's reports blaming one side, reports blaming another and reports blaming both. You're just blindly quoting the whaler's version of the story. While I didn't watch those episodes I did read about it and saw the collision videos on youtube.
A quick google search came up with this:
It kinda looks to be in motion, but then again I'm just blindly quoting the whaler's version of the story.
On August 13 2010 22:23 ProFail wrote: Love the programme, but I dont think I can get it in England, despite having sky i've never seen it? Watched it all online (illegally) but now the website has been taken down and im left without whale wars, Inspirational programme, love what they're doing.
tvunderground org ru
I watched 3 episodes and didn't like it. It's funny how they're so unorganized that the biggest threat against them is their own incompetence.
But some people here got it all wrong. The most harmful thing they do is throwing stink bombs. They're not endangering anyone's life. Labeling them as "terrorists" is completely ignorant. They're not trying to cause terror neither are they inflicting any direct damage. They're main and most powerful weapons are the cameras and they're main goal is to move the public opinion.
Did you miss the part where they rammed into one of the whaling ships? That's a very interesting definition of "direct damage" you have.
Errr.... their boat who "rammed" them was stopped :S Just... floating still.. and they rammed the other ship? There's video evidence everywhere. Among the world's media there's reports blaming one side, reports blaming another and reports blaming both. You're just blindly quoting the whaler's version of the story. While I didn't watch those episodes I did read about it and saw the collision videos on youtube.
It kinda looks to be in motion, but then again I'm just blindly quoting the whaler's version of the story.
Oh sorry, I thought you were talking about when they crashed that little speed boat the Earthrace. Even though I see no damage done on that video. I don't know nothing about the crash that you just showed so I'll shut my mouth up.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
Someone forwarded one of Sea Sheppards' emails to a department wide address a couple years ago. Its so full of overwrought hyperbole I found it hilarious.
>In December we will sail into history and into harm's way on a >journey of mercy and intervention in an effort to remove the violent >human stain that so befouls the Southern Oceans with the murderous >massacre of the harmless Leviathans
>---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 05:53:11 -0800 >From: Paul Watson <paulwatson@earthlink.net> >To: Paul Watson <paul@seashepherd.org> >Subject: Sea Shepherd - Preparations for Departure for Antarctica - > Message from Captain Paul Watson > > >Project Leviathan >Sea Shepherd Conservation Society >Preparations for Departure > > > >To all Sea Shepherd Crew and loyal supporters. > >I just want to encourage all of you to be positive, strong and >supportive as we struggle to move two ships, a helicopter and two >different crews into position to tackle the greatest whale killing >monsters on this planet. > >Success is taking each obstacle and dealing with it and moving on to >the next one. Success is never surrendering and always keeping an >eye on the target, never wavering, never flinching, never being >discouraged or distracted. > >We have international bureaucrats and politicians working against >us, from South Africa to Canada, from Australia to Japan, from >Antigua to Norway. We have other supposendly allied organizations >undermining us. We even have the Japanese Yakuza supporting the >whalers. We have technical problems to overcome, not to mention we >are 1.1 million dollars in debt and that we have barely enough funds >to cover the fuel for this most ambitious, most dangerous and most >expensive expedition we have ever undertaken. > >But am I stressed out? No. I know we will do the very best we can >with the resources we have to defend and protect as many whales as >we possibly can from the horrendous thundering hellpoons of the >damned imperial Japanese pirate whaling fleet. > >We have the time to do this campaign right. The hurdles are awesome >and we don't have the money that Greenpeace, IFAW and others have. >But we have something better, and that is a steadfast determination >to stop thsse whale killers. We have a band of sixty men and women >from over a dozen nations united in determination to make a >difference and driven by an iron will to save lives. > >We don't have expensive direct mail programs or paid television >advertising to solicit funds for support. But we do have a 12 year >old Australian boy who walked the beach with a can and delivered >over $250 last sunday. If only we had a thousand more like him. > >We have hurdles to overcome with moving both ships into position but >WE WILL get both these ships down to the Southern Ocean and this >year and WE WILL confront those lethal obscene exploding harpoons >and electric lances. > >If need be we will return to New Zealand to refuel. We will not fail >this year because we have invested to much money, gone heavily into >debt and invested to much energy to fail. Most importantly we cannot >and must not fail because our clients are depending on us. > >Our clients are the defenseless Piked, Fin and Humpback whales these >vicious whale molesting thugs are stalking and killing. > >We don't sail into the path of lethal harpoons and giant steel ships >through kidney jarring hellish seas and the gut wrenching storms of >the Roaring Forties, the Furious Fifties and the Sea Sickening >Sixties because we want to hang some silly little protest banners >before laughing sadistic whale serial killers. We don't go down to >the Southern Oceans to be polite, to be proper and to be politically >correct. > >We go down there as Samurai. The word means To Serve and we serve >the cause of the whales and their right to life and freedom from >lethal molestation. We serve in the spirit of Miyamoto Musashi, >Japan's greatest hero and philosopher who truly understood what the >word meant, unlike these greed merchants who now run the nation of >Japan like some brutal feudalistic corporation devoid of compassion >and respect for nature. > >The only hope these whales have is us. They won't be saved by the >passive chit chat of posturing politicians. They won't be saved by >the snuff flick producing ocean posers. They won't be saved by all >those direct-mail-species-of-the-month-club-feel-good-organizations >with their petitions and admonishments to us that we are extremists >because we seek to stop such wholesale cruelty and slaughter. > >In my heart there burns an emotional extremism ideed, and it boils >like quaking magma with a fiery indignant wrath at the senseless >cruel stupidity of humanity. For three decades I have harnessed this >wrath and tamed it to allow me to intervene effectively without >lashing out violently and personally at those who inflict the most >horrific of deaths upon gentle sentient beings. > >But real extremism is the hot blood that flows in scarlet steaming >streams into the frigid Antarctic waters. It is the heart breaking >screams of harpooned whales as they cry out and struggle to live >while their organs are shattered with the slashing hellish shrapnel >of the exposive harpoon heads. It is the perversely diabolical sight >of whales convulsing in agony at the tip of electric lances, and it >is the smirking sneer of human conceit on the faces of the hardened >killers who actually take pride in their monstrous bloody depravity. > >We are the only defense for these armless large brained Buddha >beings, and we will overcome any and all obstacles from bureaucrats >to heavy seas and foul weather to the ruthless attitude of the >Japanese killers in our quest to protect them. > >We must give this campaign everything we have and we must sail with >an audacious attitude into harm's way to deliver the message that no >longer will the world tolerate the wholesale destruction of the >great whales. We want the whale wars to be ended and whaling >abolished and the industry relugated to the the foul dust bin of >history with other evil embarassments of human enterprises like >slavery, death camps and the inquisition. > >We must send the message that the murderous extermination of the >whales will not be tolerated in the 21st Century and that the forces >of ruthless greed and merciless profiteering can be defeated by the >forces of passionate compassion. > >So let's tackle the obstacles, count down the miles and deliver >ourselves from the opposite ends of this magnificent planet towards >a point of confrontation where we will deliver a dramatic deserving >showdown that will echo down the gilded corridors of the elitist >Emperor's palace to pour onto the neon embalzoned strip of the >Ginza. Lets make them sit up and notice! > >We will spend the holidays at sea on this great quest and we will >herald in the New Year dwarfed by the magnificent tabletop icebergs >off the Antarctic coast. We will scour the ice edge and outward with >two ships and an aerial search, looking for the fleet of blubber >stripping pirates whose ships literally drip with the hottest of >blood and whose decks are sicky slick with the shattered brains and >foul intestinal gore of the most intelligent, gentle and socially >complex creatures on this planet. > >In December we will sail into history and into harm's way on a >journey of mercy and intervention in an effort to remove the violent >human stain that so befouls the Southern Oceans with the murderous >massacre of the harmless Leviathans > >I beseech you for your support because your encouragagement for this >campaign gives us the means and the motivation to send so many >volunteers on a marathon quest to defend the lives of non-human >species. This is a leap in the human evolution for the exercise of >selfless acts of kindness. > >For the whales, the Oceans and the future. > >Thank-you > > > >Captain Paul Watson >Founder and President of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (1977- >Co-Founder - The Greenpeace Foundation (1972) >Co-Founder - Greenpeace International (1979) >Director of the Sierra Club USA (2003-2006) >Director - The Farley Mowat Institute >Director - www.harpseals.org > > >www.Seashepherd.org >Tel: 360-370-5650 >Fax: 360-370-5651 > >Address: P.O. Box 2616 >Friday Harbor, Wa 98250 USA > >"Sail forth - steer for the deep waters only, >Reckless O soul, exploring, I with thee and thou with me, >For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go, >And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all." > - Walt Whitman
this video comes to my mind... a norwegian politician in a televised discussion about an incident in the 90s I think, where greenpeace activists boarded a whaling vessel and the whaling ship crew beat the shit out of them. it's in norwegian, but it's subtitled... this guy is hilarious
If we didnt have morons like the people on that ship, think about all the crap the rest of the morons on this planet would get away with.
I wont defend there actions directly but i do believe in fighting for what you think is right. Whalers are morons for killing endangered animals. THESE activist are morons for how they are going about there cause.
To anyone who says fuck the whales i dont care if they die, i say the same to you sir.
Whalers are morons for killing endangered animals.
Not all whales are endangered, also the "pirates" defend them because they think they are cute from what I've seen on that program.
I, for one comprehend the situation as thus: On one side you have people who do a job for a living and on the other you have people who go out of their way to annoy before-mentioned people since it hurts their cute little vegan feelings. Same as the Koreans can't eat dog meat since we think so charade. Well tough luck, there are people with different views on things than yours and and they don't give a shit what you think as they should. So I am sticking to the people who have a job over the ones who try to save whales by spending lots of cash to go to the southern oceans and throw rotten eggs on whaling ships and fail to save any whales. While they could use that money to help people starving somewhere or something.
Just hope they go annoy less polite people then the Japanese and get beaten the crap out of again, going to watch that Norwegian politician now, should make my day...
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
Your rebuttal (of a statement I made in response to someone other than you) is deeply flawed. First of all, you disregard the fact that a ban on whaling is not exclusively a "western" issue. Maybe it's primarily Western nations that have taken the lead on this issue, but Japan is among the few nations who insist on killing whales as a luxury or cultural affairt. Their position is quite simple : we kill whales because we think whales are good eating. Now, I'm not suggesting that they (their government) aren't willing to compromise to a degree, when under pressure, but the really big issue I have with the Japanese people is that these issues of sustainability and animal rights are not compatible with their current mainstream cultural framework. This is troubling, especially where sustainability is concerned, precisely because they 1.don't have exclusive ownership of the world or the creatures that live in/on it. and 2. because the extinction, or the overfishing of a species of whale has serious consequences for entire ecosystems. It's really important to stress that they 1. do NOT depend on whale meat for food.. it's not a major market and 2. as I previously mentioned, they do not own the whales they kill. If everything on this earth belongs to someone, then the whales in international waters (for instance around Antrctica) belong to me as much as they belong to a random Japanese person. Do you understand that their actions can reasonably be equated to theft? I hope that you can at least see some truth in this. I am not necessairily interested in battling freely adopted modes of living. It only becomes an issue when the behaviour infringes on my rights/interests and arguably those of the vast majority of the world. In a way I couldn't care less about what they believe to be just. On the other hand, their attitude betrays something which simply isn't healthy for a society interested in enduring. Maybe the issue of whaling is just an isolated case, but this attitude of complete disinterest with regard to the issue at hand isn't sane. A society that is so focussed inwards that it doesn't see that its nature/culture is precisely the thing which will (if not curtailed) destroy that very way of life, is borderline insane. Japan is a fishing nation. It really does depend on the ocean for sustenance. Why are issues like the ones we're talking about not on the front burner there?
I share your opinion about our meat industries. We share an insanity with them and my position is not against the Japanese way of life per se. My position is one that rages against a deep seeded insanity. People keep pretending that global warming is controversial, however, the far less controversial issue of ocean acidification is hardly even discussed. The high level of CO2 is driving the acidification of the oceans and the only way we can mitigate the effects (until the situation becomes reversed) is by reducing the pressures on affected ecosystems. I can understand the economic drivers behind the unwillingness to take into account the science, but what we don't need is some silly dogmatic position to make battling the very real problems even more problematic. This isn't about double standards. Dogmatism should never be allowed to get in the way of survival. Many civilisations no longer exist because they refused to adapt to changing conditions.
I'm not interested in defending everything about these activists. I have my own reasons for being somewhat sympathetic to their struggle. I am not just a Westerner. I am a human and I would like the way humans organise my world to not unnecessairily damage me, my family, my community, my nation, or my world.. It's not impossible if we keep our eyes open.
(Pigs lack emotional characteristics we share with the whales, by the way. It's not too important, but we can't take the position that simply because drawing lines seems arbitrary, that we then have to proceed to draw the line where the least compassionate/idealistic people want the line to be drawn. I was merely expressing an observation. I was not attempting to construct a logic that inevitably leads to one particular conclusion.) Peace
Whalers are morons for killing endangered animals.
Not all whales are endangered, also the "pirates" defend them because they think they are cute from what I've seen on that program.
I, for one comprehend the situation as thus: On one side you have people who do a job for a living and on the other you have people who go out of their way to annoy before-mentioned people since it hurts their cute little vegan feelings. Same as the Koreans can't eat dog meat since we think so charade. Well tough luck, there are people with different views on things than yours and and they don't give a shit what you think as they should. So I am sticking to the people who have a job over the ones who try to save whales by spending lots of cash to go to the southern oceans and throw rotten eggs on whaling ships and fail to save any whales. While they could use that money to help people starving somewhere or something.
Just hope they go annoy less polite people then the Japanese and get beaten the crap out of again, going to watch that Norwegian politician now, should make my day...
[EDIT] Oh wow, brought a tear to my eye
lol so : indifferent greed > passionate activism sigh
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
[snip]
(Pigs lack emotional characteristics we share with the whales, by the way.
Certain studies say otherwise, give it a google / new scientist search.
There's also the issue that it's hard to kill a whale humanely. The one that they showed being killed on the show they just harpooned it and brought it to the surface and then they started firing a high powered rifle at it's head. 20 minutes and a dozen shots later and it finally died probably from bleeding out or drowning.
There was also a lot of meat eaters that wouldn't eat veal because of the way they were treated. So it wasn't all about animals being more cute or majestic because I don't think a calf is any more special than a cow.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
[snip]
(Pigs lack emotional characteristics we share with the whales, by the way.
Certain studies say otherwise, give it a google / new scientist search.
Alrighty then, My understanding may be outdated. I'll look into it. Good thing I put it in braquets, I guess.
Whalers are morons for killing endangered animals.
Not all whales are endangered, also the "pirates" defend them because they think they are cute from what I've seen on that program.
I, for one comprehend the situation as thus: On one side you have people who do a job for a living and on the other you have people who go out of their way to annoy before-mentioned people since it hurts their cute little vegan feelings. Same as the Koreans can't eat dog meat since we think so charade. Well tough luck, there are people with different views on things than yours and and they don't give a shit what you think as they should. So I am sticking to the people who have a job over the ones who try to save whales by spending lots of cash to go to the southern oceans and throw rotten eggs on whaling ships and fail to save any whales. While they could use that money to help people starving somewhere or something.
Just hope they go annoy less polite people then the Japanese and get beaten the crap out of again, going to watch that Norwegian politician now, should make my day...
[EDIT] Oh wow, brought a tear to my eye
lol so : indifferent greed > passionate activism sigh
sure, retarded activism seems more suitable in this case though. That is if they really want to save some whales, if all they want is to make a good show it's greedvgreed mirror match up- boring as hell.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
Your rebuttal (of a statement I made in response to someone other than you) is deeply flawed. First of all, you disregard the fact that a ban on whaling is not exclusively a "western" issue. Maybe it's primarily Western nations that have taken the lead on this issue, but Japan is among the few nations who insist on killing whales as a luxury or cultural affairt. Their position is quite simple : we kill whales because we think whales are good eating. Now, I'm not suggesting that they (their government) aren't willing to compromise to a degree, when under pressure, but the really big issue I have with the Japanese people is that these issues of sustainability and animal rights are not compatible with their current mainstream cultural framework. This is troubling, especially where sustainability is concerned, precisely because they 1.don't have exclusive ownership of the world or the creatures that live in/on it. and 2. because the extinction, or the overfishing of a species of whale has serious consequences for entire ecosystems. It's really important to stress that they 1. do NOT depend on whale meat for food.. it's not a major market and 2. as I previously mentioned, they do not own the whales they kill. If everything on this earth belongs to someone, then the whales in international waters (for instance around Antrctica) belong to me as much as they belong to a random Japanese person. Do you understand that their actions can reasonably be equated to theft? I hope that you can at least see some truth in this. I am not necessairily interested in battling freely adopted modes of living. It only becomes an issue when the behaviour infringes on my rights/interests and arguably those of the vast majority of the world. In a way I couldn't care less about what they believe to be just. On the other hand, their attitude betrays something which simply isn't healthy for a society interested in enduring. Maybe the issue of whaling is just an isolated case, but this attitude of complete disinterest with regard to the issue at hand isn't sane. A society that is so focussed inwards that it doesn't see that its nature/culture is precisely the thing which will (if not curtailed) destroy that very way of life, is borderline insane. Japan is a fishing nation. It really does depend on the ocean for sustenance. Why are issues like the ones we're talking about not on the front burner there?
I share your opinion about our meat industries. We share an insanity with them and my position is not against the Japanese way of life per se. My position is one that rages against a deep seeded insanity. People keep pretending that global warming is controversial, however, the far less controversial issue of ocean acidification is hardly even discussed. The high level of CO2 is driving the acidification of the oceans and the only way we can mitigate the effects (until the situation becomes reversed) is by reducing the pressures on affected ecosystems. I can understand the economic drivers behind the unwillingness to take into account the science, but what we don't need is some silly dogmatic position to make battling the very real problems even more problematic. This isn't about double standards. Dogmatism should never be allowed to get in the way of survival. Many civilisations no longer exist because they refused to adapt to changing conditions.
I'm not interested in defending everything about these activists. I have my own reasons for being somewhat sympathetic to their struggle. I am not just a Westerner. I am a human and I would like the way humans organise my world to not unnecessairily damage me, my family, my community, my nation, or my world.. It's not impossible if we keep our eyes open.
(Pigs lack emotional characteristics we share with the whales, by the way. It's not too important, but we can't take the position that simply because drawing lines seems arbitrary, that we then have to proceed to draw the line where the least compassionate/idealistic people want the line to be drawn. I was merely expressing an observation. I was not attempting to construct a logic that inevitably leads to one particular conclusion.) Peace
The problem is that many whale species are not really endangered. The entire premise of your argument is based on a fallacy. Your argument is based on your mistaken assumption that the Japanese do not care about the environment at all and would just destroy everything.
Whales can be harvested sustainably. Stop thinking that the killing of even one whale will destroy entire ecosystems. There are enough whale species that are not endangered in the ocean that whaling that can be allowed with strict quotas. The problem the Japanese have is that many countries refuse to even consider a quota and would just like to completely ban whaling at all because of their cuteness. It's really not just the Japanese. I believe Finland also pulled out of the organization. Canada is having similar problems with regards to seals, another "cute" sea creature.
If you look at it holistically, the animals you eat are also important to their ecosystem. It's not just the cute animals that are important to their ecosystem, but the ugly ones as well. However, many Westerners seem to have no problem with sustainably eating the ugly animals. Hey, if it's sustainable, does it matter how cute the animal is?
Your last paragraph displays the "cuteness" bias perfectly. You believe there is something special about whales because they are cuter than pigs. At least you were willing to admit you're wrong, but that's precisely my problem with these types of discussion in the Western world. There is too much pseudo-scientific garbage floating around about the animals Westerners don't like to eat. The stuff about dogs, cats, horses and the like are just as scientific as the Hindu belief that cows are sacred, which is to say, not at all. The entire argument about whaling is just completely tainted by Western cultural bias.
You have the wrong impression about Japanese attitude towards the environment. They are one of the cleanest, greenest countries in the world with the lowest emissions of greenhouse gases. If you've ever heard the warnings about undercooked pork and poultry, understand that that's just because of the disgusting way these animals are raised in the U.S. and many other Western countries. It's perfectly fine to eat raw chicken in Japan. There's no salmonella at all.
On August 16 2010 09:57 RedTerror wrote: Commercial whaling is banned. What Japan is doing currently is a giant slap in the face.
This man knows what he is talking about ^^
Whaling is illegal in international waters. It blows my mind how the world can just let this happen. What Japan is doing is "avoiding" the law. The law states that you can capture a whale for research hence why they have "RESEARCH" painted on their boats. Which is wrong of Japan to do such a thing. This is the 21st century, Japan isn't just "some crazy country" they are very important to the world as far as economy goes but what they are going is wrong. Some thing with shark fin.
-As far as the Sea Shepard goes, I think they are doing a good job at what they are doing. Incase any of you didn't notice, the reason why they have a show - Whale wars is to show what the whalers are doing and to promote the cause aswell as fund their organization.
In no way do I think that the Sea Shepard is "crazy" or "going to extreme" They are simply fighting fire with fire seeing as many countries are just looking the other way.
Honestly the amount of effort for the extreme actions they do on the show could probably better be spent persuading the people who eat whale meat to eat other kinds, probably maybe even help pay for it. I don't know, this show seems extremely inefficient with the way they're going about things.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
Your rebuttal (of a statement I made in response to someone other than you) is deeply flawed. First of all, you disregard the fact that a ban on whaling is not exclusively a "western" issue. Maybe it's primarily Western nations that have taken the lead on this issue, but Japan is among the few nations who insist on killing whales as a luxury or cultural affairt. Their position is quite simple : we kill whales because we think whales are good eating. Now, I'm not suggesting that they (their government) aren't willing to compromise to a degree, when under pressure, but the really big issue I have with the Japanese people is that these issues of sustainability and animal rights are not compatible with their current mainstream cultural framework. This is troubling, especially where sustainability is concerned, precisely because they 1.don't have exclusive ownership of the world or the creatures that live in/on it. and 2. because the extinction, or the overfishing of a species of whale has serious consequences for entire ecosystems. It's really important to stress that they 1. do NOT depend on whale meat for food.. it's not a major market and 2. as I previously mentioned, they do not own the whales they kill. If everything on this earth belongs to someone, then the whales in international waters (for instance around Antrctica) belong to me as much as they belong to a random Japanese person. Do you understand that their actions can reasonably be equated to theft? I hope that you can at least see some truth in this. I am not necessairily interested in battling freely adopted modes of living. It only becomes an issue when the behaviour infringes on my rights/interests and arguably those of the vast majority of the world. In a way I couldn't care less about what they believe to be just. On the other hand, their attitude betrays something which simply isn't healthy for a society interested in enduring. Maybe the issue of whaling is just an isolated case, but this attitude of complete disinterest with regard to the issue at hand isn't sane. A society that is so focussed inwards that it doesn't see that its nature/culture is precisely the thing which will (if not curtailed) destroy that very way of life, is borderline insane. Japan is a fishing nation. It really does depend on the ocean for sustenance. Why are issues like the ones we're talking about not on the front burner there?
I share your opinion about our meat industries. We share an insanity with them and my position is not against the Japanese way of life per se. My position is one that rages against a deep seeded insanity. People keep pretending that global warming is controversial, however, the far less controversial issue of ocean acidification is hardly even discussed. The high level of CO2 is driving the acidification of the oceans and the only way we can mitigate the effects (until the situation becomes reversed) is by reducing the pressures on affected ecosystems. I can understand the economic drivers behind the unwillingness to take into account the science, but what we don't need is some silly dogmatic position to make battling the very real problems even more problematic. This isn't about double standards. Dogmatism should never be allowed to get in the way of survival. Many civilisations no longer exist because they refused to adapt to changing conditions.
I'm not interested in defending everything about these activists. I have my own reasons for being somewhat sympathetic to their struggle. I am not just a Westerner. I am a human and I would like the way humans organise my world to not unnecessairily damage me, my family, my community, my nation, or my world.. It's not impossible if we keep our eyes open.
(Pigs lack emotional characteristics we share with the whales, by the way. It's not too important, but we can't take the position that simply because drawing lines seems arbitrary, that we then have to proceed to draw the line where the least compassionate/idealistic people want the line to be drawn. I was merely expressing an observation. I was not attempting to construct a logic that inevitably leads to one particular conclusion.) Peace
The problem is that many whale species are not really endangered. The entire premise of your argument is based on a fallacy. Your argument is based on your mistaken assumption that the Japanese do not care about the environment at all and would just destroy everything.
Whales can be harvested sustainably. Stop thinking that the killing of even one whale will destroy entire ecosystems. There are enough whale species that are not endangered in the ocean that whaling that can be allowed with strict quotas. The problem the Japanese have is that many countries refuse to even consider a quota and would just like to completely ban whaling at all because of their cuteness. It's really not just the Japanese. I believe Finland also pulled out of the organization. Canada is having similar problems with regards to seals, another "cute" sea creature.
If you look at it holistically, the animals you eat are also important to their ecosystem. It's not just the cute animals that are important to their ecosystem, but the ugly ones as well. However, many Westerners seem to have no problem with sustainably eating the ugly animals. Hey, if it's sustainable, does it matter how cute the animal is?
Your last paragraph displays the "cuteness" bias perfectly. You believe there is something special about whales because they are cuter than pigs. At least you were willing to admit you're wrong, but that's precisely my problem with these types of discussion in the Western world. There is too much pseudo-scientific garbage floating around about the animals Westerners don't like to eat. The stuff about dogs, cats, horses and the like are just as scientific as the Hindu belief that cows are sacred, which is to say, not at all. The entire argument about whaling is just completely tainted by Western cultural bias.
You have the wrong impression about Japanese attitude towards the environment. They are one of the cleanest, greenest countries in the world with the lowest emissions of greenhouse gases. If you've ever heard the warnings about undercooked pork and poultry, understand that that's just because of the disgusting way these animals are raised in the U.S. and many other Western countries. It's perfectly fine to eat raw chicken in Japan. There's no salmonella at all.
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. You're mostly just expressing your opinions, which is fine, but don't pretend that it's entirely or exactly an antithesis to what I claimed. By the way, whales usually aren't "cute". The larger ones are incredibly impressive creatures. The smaller ones are indeed "cute", though that's not their only 'selling point'.. I favor policies that emphasize playing it safe. Not policies that bring species to the brink of extinction, before possibly making a course correction. It's poor long-term economic policy and it's poor policy from a biodiversity standpoint as well. There's nothing pseudeo-scientific or hypocritical about that. A few years ago I heard about plans to market insect burgers in the West. It's a pity that nothing of the sort has yet materialized. I love eating tuna, but I stopped buying it when I learned that the so-very-rational Japanese consumption, and Western fishing/export culture has resulted in an 80 percent decrease in the bluefin tuna population since the 60s. If it weren't for "Western" international regulation, the prospects for the species wouldn't be very bright. And it's not just about extinction. It's entirely sensible to fish at sustainible levels. Do you think the European fishing sector likes the European or global fishing quota? No, they hate them. Feel free to slam organisations like Greenpeace for supposed dogmatism, but don't attack regulation aimed at constraining those who are only interested in short-to-midterm financial gain, based on notions of Western hypocrisy. Government will obviously try to protect the current economic interests of their major industries and wave their nationalist dicks at eachother. So what? And no, the quality of Japanese pork betrays close to nothing about their overall attitude towards the enviromnent. I'm not going to try to find faults in climate change policies of Japan, because I'm not interested in claiming complete environmental superiority over the Japanese. Besides, the major problem in this field is the unwillingness of rich, fully industialized nations to reach a fair global compromise with regards to the contributions of emerging economies. Dramatic population growth, dedication to a model based on never ending economic growth and disproportionate subsidies for coal, gas and oil extraction are other pieces of the disaster puzzle.
whale wars definitely highlights a good cause, but the sea shepherd are seriously incompetent. The bring in media and public attention, but greenpeace does the real work (political lobbying).
On August 23 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote: whale wars definitely highlights a good cause, but the sea shepherd are seriously incompetent. The bring in media and public attention, but greenpeace does the real work (political lobbying).
i agree, those sea shepherd people should take an example from their counterparts from South Park.
Good end to the season I think, I have to say in comparison to the others of Sea Shepherd the captain of the Bob Barker seemed to be the most competent. Also it seems that the Japanese were caught unprepared this season with facing two ships, makes me wonder how the Japanese will change for next season and if there will be three ships with Sea Shepherd next season.
On July 07 2010 15:27 kzn wrote: Its stupid as fuck.
I don't have any issue with arguments along the lines of "whaling at X level is unsustainable", but when Greenpeace starts saying "whaling is unsustainable at any level" you know you're dealing with fanatic douchebags.
It is quite simple. There exists a population, lets call it X, at which whales can grow their population by Y each year. This is a sustainable population. The fact that such a population exists is a necessary mathematical truth.
If you have problems with sustainability, fine - push for laws that put a quota on whaling takes every year, or whatever makes sure that whale populations don't fall below X. But there is nothing special about whales that makes them any different from deer or bison or any other fish, for that matter. If people want to eat whale, and they're willing to pay what it costs to get whale at a given level of scarcity, there is no reason they should not be allowed to do so.
Every time the fat fuck starts saying shit like "we want to put the fear into them that they put into whales" I rage.
Whales aren't fish. Moreover, the argument that there's nothing special about them is ludicrous. They're highly intelligent mammals, comparable in many ways, including emotionally, to humans. Whales, like other animals with which we have much in common, should arguably be treated in a manner distinct from the way we treat biological drones like bees plankton, (most) fish... There's also the fact that whales perform a vital function in their ecosystem. I'm no expert on marine ecosystems so I won't pretend to know to what degree it is defensible to interfere from that point of view. Point being that there is more than one factor to be considered. This is something you'd better pound into that head of yours before making blanket statements.
Who the fuck are Westerners to decide which animal is defensible to eat or not? Where do you draw the line between which animal is smart enough not to be eaten or not? The pig is one of the smartest mammals in the planet, up there with apes and dolphins. Just admit that it's really the "cuteness" factor to Westerners that drives these decisions, not anything scientific.
I'm all for protecting endangered species, but it is questionable whether the whales the Japanese hunt are even endangered anymore. The International Whaling Commission was actually established to set sustainable limits on whaling. The guy got it right that they became fanatic douchebags who want an all out ban no matter what.
If you want to be environmentally friendly, raising beef is the most environmentally destructive of them all.
Your rebuttal (of a statement I made in response to someone other than you) is deeply flawed. First of all, you disregard the fact that a ban on whaling is not exclusively a "western" issue. Maybe it's primarily Western nations that have taken the lead on this issue, but Japan is among the few nations who insist on killing whales as a luxury or cultural affairt. Their position is quite simple : we kill whales because we think whales are good eating. Now, I'm not suggesting that they (their government) aren't willing to compromise to a degree, when under pressure, but the really big issue I have with the Japanese people is that these issues of sustainability and animal rights are not compatible with their current mainstream cultural framework. This is troubling, especially where sustainability is concerned, precisely because they 1.don't have exclusive ownership of the world or the creatures that live in/on it. and 2. because the extinction, or the overfishing of a species of whale has serious consequences for entire ecosystems. It's really important to stress that they 1. do NOT depend on whale meat for food.. it's not a major market and 2. as I previously mentioned, they do not own the whales they kill. If everything on this earth belongs to someone, then the whales in international waters (for instance around Antrctica) belong to me as much as they belong to a random Japanese person. Do you understand that their actions can reasonably be equated to theft? I hope that you can at least see some truth in this. I am not necessairily interested in battling freely adopted modes of living. It only becomes an issue when the behaviour infringes on my rights/interests and arguably those of the vast majority of the world. In a way I couldn't care less about what they believe to be just. On the other hand, their attitude betrays something which simply isn't healthy for a society interested in enduring. Maybe the issue of whaling is just an isolated case, but this attitude of complete disinterest with regard to the issue at hand isn't sane. A society that is so focussed inwards that it doesn't see that its nature/culture is precisely the thing which will (if not curtailed) destroy that very way of life, is borderline insane. Japan is a fishing nation. It really does depend on the ocean for sustenance. Why are issues like the ones we're talking about not on the front burner there?
I share your opinion about our meat industries. We share an insanity with them and my position is not against the Japanese way of life per se. My position is one that rages against a deep seeded insanity. People keep pretending that global warming is controversial, however, the far less controversial issue of ocean acidification is hardly even discussed. The high level of CO2 is driving the acidification of the oceans and the only way we can mitigate the effects (until the situation becomes reversed) is by reducing the pressures on affected ecosystems. I can understand the economic drivers behind the unwillingness to take into account the science, but what we don't need is some silly dogmatic position to make battling the very real problems even more problematic. This isn't about double standards. Dogmatism should never be allowed to get in the way of survival. Many civilisations no longer exist because they refused to adapt to changing conditions.
I'm not interested in defending everything about these activists. I have my own reasons for being somewhat sympathetic to their struggle. I am not just a Westerner. I am a human and I would like the way humans organise my world to not unnecessairily damage me, my family, my community, my nation, or my world.. It's not impossible if we keep our eyes open.
(Pigs lack emotional characteristics we share with the whales, by the way. It's not too important, but we can't take the position that simply because drawing lines seems arbitrary, that we then have to proceed to draw the line where the least compassionate/idealistic people want the line to be drawn. I was merely expressing an observation. I was not attempting to construct a logic that inevitably leads to one particular conclusion.) Peace
The problem is that many whale species are not really endangered. The entire premise of your argument is based on a fallacy. Your argument is based on your mistaken assumption that the Japanese do not care about the environment at all and would just destroy everything.
Whales can be harvested sustainably. Stop thinking that the killing of even one whale will destroy entire ecosystems. There are enough whale species that are not endangered in the ocean that whaling that can be allowed with strict quotas. The problem the Japanese have is that many countries refuse to even consider a quota and would just like to completely ban whaling at all because of their cuteness. It's really not just the Japanese. I believe Finland also pulled out of the organization. Canada is having similar problems with regards to seals, another "cute" sea creature.
If you look at it holistically, the animals you eat are also important to their ecosystem. It's not just the cute animals that are important to their ecosystem, but the ugly ones as well. However, many Westerners seem to have no problem with sustainably eating the ugly animals. Hey, if it's sustainable, does it matter how cute the animal is?
Your last paragraph displays the "cuteness" bias perfectly. You believe there is something special about whales because they are cuter than pigs. At least you were willing to admit you're wrong, but that's precisely my problem with these types of discussion in the Western world. There is too much pseudo-scientific garbage floating around about the animals Westerners don't like to eat. The stuff about dogs, cats, horses and the like are just as scientific as the Hindu belief that cows are sacred, which is to say, not at all. The entire argument about whaling is just completely tainted by Western cultural bias.
You have the wrong impression about Japanese attitude towards the environment. They are one of the cleanest, greenest countries in the world with the lowest emissions of greenhouse gases. If you've ever heard the warnings about undercooked pork and poultry, understand that that's just because of the disgusting way these animals are raised in the U.S. and many other Western countries. It's perfectly fine to eat raw chicken in Japan. There's no salmonella at all.
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. You're mostly just expressing your opinions, which is fine, but don't pretend that it's entirely or exactly an antithesis to what I claimed. By the way, whales usually aren't "cute". The larger ones are incredibly impressive creatures. The smaller ones are indeed "cute", though that's not their only 'selling point'..
.
So is this all you can do to respond to this, is say "I'm sorry, but you're wrong" and give no explaination? Since you have givin no explanation i assume there is none.
Also when you say "You're mostly just expressing your opinions" you are wrong. Not all andrewlt wrote is an opinion for example he/she/it said "many whale species are not really endangered.", Maby not "many" are not endangered but some are, like
At least according to wikipedia, but if anyone can find any scientific source to debunk these be my guest
On August 13 2010 23:06 wadadde wrote: I favor policies that emphasize playing it safe. Not policies that bring species to the brink of extinction, before possibly making a course correction. It's poor long-term economic policy and it's poor policy from a biodiversity standpoint as well. There's nothing pseudeo-scientific or hypocritical about that. A few years ago I heard about plans to market insect burgers in the West. It's a pity that nothing of the sort has yet materialized.
Of course hunting a species is a bad idea for all parties involved, but hunting a species sustainably can work.
On August 13 2010 23:06 wadadde wrote: I love eating tuna, but I stopped buying it when I learned that the so-very-rational Japanese consumption, and Western fishing/export culture has resulted in an 80 percent decrease in the bluefin tuna population since the 60s. If it weren't for "Western" international regulation, the prospects for the species wouldn't be very bright. And it's not just about extinction. It's entirely sensible to fish at sustainible levels. Do you think the European fishing sector likes the European or global fishing quota? No, they hate them. Feel free to slam organisations like Greenpeace for supposed dogmatism, but don't attack regulation aimed at constraining those who are only interested in short-to-midterm financial gain, based on notions of Western hypocrisy. Government will obviously try to protect the current economic interests of their major industries and wave their nationalist dicks at eachother. So what? And no, the quality of Japanese pork betrays close to nothing about their overall attitude towards the enviromnent. I'm not going to try to find faults in climate change policies of Japan, because I'm not interested in claiming complete environmental superiority over the Japanese. Besides, the major problem in this field is the unwillingness of rich, fully industialized nations to reach a fair global compromise with regards to the contributions of emerging economies. Dramatic population growth, dedication to a model based on never ending economic growth and disproportionate subsidies for coal, gas and oil extraction are other pieces of the disaster puzzle
This has to do with whales how??
And can you please use page breaks, this wall of text hurts
Has nothing to do with Sea Shepherd but Whale Hunting in general, but the Greenpeace, Tokyo Two, were given a suspended sentence.
Greenpeace
RT @gpjen T2 given suspended sentence – wholly disproportionate result given they acted in the public interest #whaletrial about 2 hours ago via HootSuite
WELLINGTON, New Zealand – Sea Shepherd deliberately sank its own high-tech protest boat after a January collision with a Japanese whaling ship to gain sympathy, the former skipper alleged Thursday in a public spat with the conservation group's founder.
New Zealander Peter Bethune said the futuristic trimaran Ady Gil was salvagable after the crash, but that he was ordered by Sea Shepherd head Paul Watson to scuttle it. Watson denied the claim, saying the decision was Bethune's.
TOKYO (AP) -- Japan has temporarily suspended its annual Antarctic whaling after repeated harassment by a conservationist group, a government official said Wednesday.
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society ships have been chasing the Japanese whaling fleet for weeks in the icy seas off Antarctica, trying to block Japan's annual whale hunt, planned for up to 945 whales.
Japan has halted the hunt since Feb. 10 after persistent "violent" disruptions by the anti-whaling protesters, said fisheries agency official Tatsuya Nakaoku.
So far, the attacks have not caused any injuries or major damage to the vessels, he said, but the protesters are throwing rancid butter in bottles and once the protesters got a rope entangled in the propeller on a harpoon vessel, causing it to slow down.
TOKYO (AP) -- Japan has temporarily suspended its annual Antarctic whaling after repeated harassment by a conservationist group, a government official said Wednesday.
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society ships have been chasing the Japanese whaling fleet for weeks in the icy seas off Antarctica, trying to block Japan's annual whale hunt, planned for up to 945 whales.
Japan has halted the hunt since Feb. 10 after persistent "violent" disruptions by the anti-whaling protesters, said fisheries agency official Tatsuya Nakaoku.
So far, the attacks have not caused any injuries or major damage to the vessels, he said, but the protesters are throwing rancid butter in bottles and once the protesters got a rope entangled in the propeller on a harpoon vessel, causing it to slow down.
Throwing butter at the Japanese really? I would suggest that the japs would use some tear gas in return, but it probably because there's enough drama tears on that ship already.
On February 17 2011 05:21 bonifaceviii wrote: Sea Shepherd are an excellent PR machine. Even when they use questionably violent and destructive tactics they still seem like the freedom fighters.
I think it is the Japanese that are more violent in their backlashes. Either way you look at it I always send about 1500$ a year to the sea Shepherd, I think it is an awesome organization who are actually making a noticeable difference, sea shepherd and greenpeace are the only charities I donate to.
On February 17 2011 05:21 bonifaceviii wrote: Sea Shepherd are an excellent PR machine. Even when they use questionably violent and destructive tactics they still seem like the freedom fighters.
They are out right pirates or eco terrorists no matter how you spin it. While I agree with their cause, their tactics should be landing them in prison. The only reason it doesn't is because they are "politically convenient". The amount of support for them makes me utterly sick. They are no better than Peta or Greenpeace.
Right cause, wrong approach. I have completely ceased supporting animal planet since they started airing this crap.
On February 17 2011 05:21 bonifaceviii wrote: Sea Shepherd are an excellent PR machine. Even when they use questionably violent and destructive tactics they still seem like the freedom fighters.
They are out right pirates or eco terrorists no matter how you spin it. While I agree with their cause, their tactics should be landing them in prison. The only reason it doesn't is because they are "politically convenient". The amount of support for them makes me utterly sick. They are no better than Peta or Greenpeace.
Right cause, wrong approach. I have completely ceased supporting animal planet since they started airing this crap.
Tbh there is no right approach. Corporations have such tremendous power in this world that ecological/environmental issues will never be given the attention they deserve or require. You can scream and shout all you want, it'll have no effect on the policy makers when there are lobbies with ridiculous funds pushing against anything that'll result in a short term loss of profit.
On February 17 2011 06:56 MrRicewife wrote: Is it true that the whaling doesn't really generate that large of a profit? Even after the government chips in some money?
Yeah it's true. That's why they classify it as "scientific research".
are they hunting endangered whales knowing they're endangered? as long as they don't touch endangered ones i dont see the problem. why are whales so important compared to say, children dying of starvation in poor countries.
They do kill endangered species on occasion. Also their daily quota is over 50 whales a day as a group.. You dont need 50 wales a day for "research", also the specific area they are hunting has been deemed a sanctuary by the UN, problem is that there is nobody in these areas to uphold the law. Since that is the case, the Seashepards are doing the best they can in non-violent ways.
Also, if you watched the shows, it was obvious that the fisherman acted much more aggressively than the seashepards..
On February 17 2011 07:07 LaLLsc2 wrote: I've watched every episode for the past seasons! This suspension is great news, hopefully it is indefinitely.. research my ass
This is terrible news. It means there won't be new seasons because they have nothing to film now..
Nature exists as an unclaimed pool of resources. Mankind exists and thrives only because of our conquering of nature. Our taking of natural resources from nature and changing them to fit our will. That is how the world is improved. What humanity (or other sentient life) doesn't alter in the universe exists arbitrarily, meaninglessly, and to no purpose whatsoever.
That being said, you do not have a claim on nature, or a right to it, until you actually go out there and make your claim on it. You do not have the rights to the coal that rests in the earth unless it's you who puts a stake in the land above it, and subsequently extracts it and puts it to use. The same applies to a whale. It is not a sentient being. It has no claim to itself. If you haven't put your sentience to work in claiming the whale, by your actions and not just by your words, it is up for grabs.
If it's in international waters, if it's the subject of no relavent treaty, you don't have the right either to harass other sentient beings who are acting within their rights. This goes against the premises on which civilization was built, the better those premises were understood, the more civilized we became.
On February 17 2011 07:49 zobz wrote: Nature exists as an unclaimed pool of resources. Mankind exists and thrives only because of our conquering of nature. Our taking of natural resources from nature and changing them to fit our will. That is how the world is improved. What humanity (or other sentient life) doesn't alter in the universe exists arbitrarily, meaninglessly, and to no purpose whatsoever.
That being said, you do not have a claim on nature, or a right to it, until you actually go out there and make your claim on it. You do not have the rights to the coal that rests in the earth unless it's you who puts a stake in the land above it, and subsequently extracts it and puts it to use. The same applies to a whale. It is not a sentient being. It has no claim to itself. If you haven't put your sentience to work in claiming the whale, by your actions and not just by your words, it is up for grabs.
If it's in international waters, if it's the subject of no relavent treaty, you don't have the right either to harass other sentient beings who are acting within their rights. This goes against the premises on which civilization was built, the better those premises were understood, the more civilized we became.
You are right in all you said, except the "international waters" that these whalers are doing "scientific research" in are protected under international law for commercial whaling. They are killing these whales in a protected whale sanctuary because it is easier for them since there are greater numbers of whales which reside there.
They could go into real international waters and whale to their heart's content and the Sea Shepherds would have no legal right to harass them. But since that is not the case, I am glad they have had to cut their whaling season short. They shouldn't be down there in the first place, they payoff small island nations with bribe money to vote in their favor in international commitees, and they do it just because there is huge black market for whale meat.
This show and it's viewers annoy me so much... "save the 50 whales a day! Ignore the millions of other animals and humans that are killed everyday" Paraphrased of course.
On February 17 2011 09:07 Kazzabiss wrote: This show and it's viewers annoy me so much... "save the 50 whales a day! Ignore the millions of other animals and humans that are killed everyday" Paraphrased of course.
I don't watch the show since the first season but.. I never really understood this reasoning. Why criticize people for getting off their asses and doing something for whatever cause they consider worthwhile? They know they can't save the fucking world, no one can. At least they're doing something, so what do you do?
I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
On August 17 2010 00:22 Celestial wrote: Honestly the amount of effort for the extreme actions they do on the show could probably better be spent persuading the people who eat whale meat to eat other kinds, probably maybe even help pay for it. I don't know, this show seems extremely inefficient with the way they're going about things.
I've dated a girl from Japan for three years. In those three years, I've learned that it's easier to move Mt. Fuji, then it is to convince the Japanese that they should reconsider some part of their traditional culture.
It doesn't help that anyone doing so is labelled a racist.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
Freedom doesn't imply that you can do whatever you want to do.
Not that I agree with the methods those groups use.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
The same argument can be made of cows.
I see your point, but no.
Even if we abstract away that cows are not endangered species, at least in most (every?) modern country there are laws/standards for slaughtering that prevent torturing the animals. I don't see how that is the case for whales.
To Yttrasil: What is when I want the freedom to watch whales? With killing/hunting a endangerd species you take that freedom away from me. There is always two sides of the same coin.
On August 17 2010 00:22 Celestial wrote: Honestly the amount of effort for the extreme actions they do on the show could probably better be spent persuading the people who eat whale meat to eat other kinds, probably maybe even help pay for it. I don't know, this show seems extremely inefficient with the way they're going about things.
I've dated a girl from Japan for three years. In those three years, I've learned that it's easier to move Mt. Fuji, then it is to convince the Japanese that they should reconsider some part of their traditional culture.
It doesn't help that anyone doing so is labelled a racist.
Rrrrrrright. Cause clearly japanese historically were terrible at discarding/adopting cultural practices when it suited them... o wait.
You fuck one japanese girl and think you know them all. I wonder why they label you a racist. Hmm...
On August 17 2010 00:22 Celestial wrote: Honestly the amount of effort for the extreme actions they do on the show could probably better be spent persuading the people who eat whale meat to eat other kinds, probably maybe even help pay for it. I don't know, this show seems extremely inefficient with the way they're going about things.
I've dated a girl from Japan for three years. In those three years, I've learned that it's easier to move Mt. Fuji, then it is to convince the Japanese that they should reconsider some part of their traditional culture.
It doesn't help that anyone doing so is labelled a racist.
Rrrrrrright. Cause clearly japanese historically were terrible at discarding/adopting cultural practices when it suited them... o wait.
You fuck one japanese girl and think you know them all. I wonder why they label you a racist. Hmm...
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
The same argument can be made of cows.
Generally to Keniji and Stavarius Yep, I don't see why they should be treated differently than lets say cows. They are not even endangered especially not the one being mainly hunted so that arguement of not being able to watch them is for naught. It's like saying we should not kill cows because in the future we might not be able to see them, the same goes for whales.
Using that argument that whales are free, then why should whales be treated differently from again the cows? They certainly don't want to be eaten either. :D What if a whale wants to be eaten, should it be allowed then?
So let me then try this argument, if we can catch and kill whales in a humane way, should it then be allowed? If you say no then you argue against yourself... if you say yes well then all your other arguments fall.
On August 17 2010 00:22 Celestial wrote: Honestly the amount of effort for the extreme actions they do on the show could probably better be spent persuading the people who eat whale meat to eat other kinds, probably maybe even help pay for it. I don't know, this show seems extremely inefficient with the way they're going about things.
I've dated a girl from Japan for three years. In those three years, I've learned that it's easier to move Mt. Fuji, then it is to convince the Japanese that they should reconsider some part of their traditional culture.
It doesn't help that anyone doing so is labelled a racist.
Rrrrrrright. Cause clearly japanese historically were terrible at discarding/adopting cultural practices when it suited them... o wait.
You fuck one japanese girl and think you know them all. I wonder why they label you a racist. Hmm...
Bunch of fat ignorant hippies with no real decent knowledge behind their projects nor proper solutions. Same goes for most of Greenpeace ideas/treats. It's fun to watch it, but only because Paul Watson is a really, really ignorant hippie, and his fellow companions are complete tools.
Man, I wish I had that many tools to command. It's just like Starcraft. He's got a ship full of SCVs.
Also that quote "We're not ...something something, we're pirates". If they were the real pirates, It'd be a lot safer sailing around near Somali.
But it's not really their shiny rainbow causes I hate, it's more the way they promote themselves whilst being complete pussies when it comes down to it. If they actually did more than the mainstream activist bulls*** you can find everywhere already, It'd be much more funny.
There's a South Park episode somewhere that shows it pretty well. Also throwing paint and stink bombs doesn't help. And if they somehow ruin the whale after it's captivity (and probably death) they just make the meat useless, and the Japanese will go out and hunt one more instead, I believe.
Nah, if they want to solve this they have to go political and not run around like a fat bunch of tools.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
Yeah, because us humans can travel freely wherever we want without ever worrying about being attacked by other animals.
On February 17 2011 07:07 jinorazi wrote: are they hunting endangered whales knowing they're endangered? as long as they don't touch endangered ones i dont see the problem. why are whales so important compared to say, children dying of starvation in poor countries.
They're not. Not even close. Saving whales (endangered or not), bringing back the Dodo, re-animating wooly mammoth remains - whatever - should take a backseat to dealing with the multitude of human beings whose quality of life is atrocious.
It's sad that retards who don't seem to understand that are afforded TV platforms to spout (sorry, I had to) their nonsense.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
The same argument can be made of cows.
Generally to Keniji and Stavarius Yep, I don't see why they should be treated differently than lets say cows. They are not even endangered especially not the one being mainly hunted so that arguement of not being able to watch them is for naught. It's like saying we should not kill cows because in the future we might not be able to see them, the same goes for whales.
Using that argument that whales are free, then why should whales be treated differently from again the cows? They certainly don't want to be eaten either. :D What if a whale wants to be eaten, should it be allowed then?
So let me then try this argument, if we can catch and kill whales in a humane way, should it then be allowed? If you say no then you argue against yourself... if you say yes well then all your other arguments fall.
That is generally how most Asian people think about the situation. Buddhist teachings encourage the idea of equality amongst all living beings. Hence a whale is no different to a cow, it's all food. Western sentiments of a whale being more "beautiful", "majestic" and deserving of life than a cow doesn't compute.
On the topic of whaling for 'research' purposes, people don't seem to realise that the Japanese, as a member of the global community, have joined the International Whaling Commission (IWC) of their own free will. Under IWC rules (rules, not laws), whaling for 'research' is allowed. If you could get away with having an invisible friend by calling him God, wouldn't you?
The reason why the Japanese have resorted to whaling under the guise of 'research' is due to the following reasons:
1. Japan joined the IWC in the belief that rational argument would dictate policy.
2. In the late 1980s, the data for minke whales showed that they were probably not endangered. (Probably because obtaining exact numbers of whales is impossible).
3. Greenpeace, seeing that they were losing the argument, resorts to propaganda to win the war. (read: whales are cute, the Japanese whaling vessel rammed us (outright lie), hostages, racial slurs [read from one of these two books: Kalland, A & Moeran, B 1992, Japanese Whaling: End of an Era?, Curzon Press Ltd, London, Ellis, R 1991, Men and Whales, Random House Inc., New York]).
4. Governments pressured by a now misled public, propose and implement a complete ban on whaling. Japan views this move as irrational. BBC News
5. Japanese resentment at having all the blame of whale depopulation laid at their feet, despite the fact that the majority of depopulation was caused by other nations.
6. Japan had actually agreed to cease all whaling by 1988 in return for fishing rights in US waters. Who do you think screwed that deal up?
In a bid to develop their own industry, US fishermen were pushing for the removal of foreign access to US waters. They were aided by a coalition of 14 NGOs led by Greenpeace who went to court against Japan, claiming its fishing methods harmed porpoises, seals and birds.
The Japanese, being a nation which values saving face, having being cheated like that are deeply angered and humiliated.
7. Good morning world!
8. Japanese whaling is a significant part of their heritage and culture dating back to the 13th or 14th century (not too sure about about the centuries).
In short, I don't agree with whaling, but only due to the inhumane forms of capture. If they improved on that and managed to keep whaling at a sustainable level, I would have no problem with it. All other arguments are basically null and void.
I agree with most of your points, however, I'd like to highlight a certain one: The Japanese, being a nation which values saving face, having being cheated like that are deeply angered and humiliated.
The Japanese, in quite recent history have cheated millions of Asians out of their lives, and even more out of their dignity. I'm not one to live in the past, but Japan has hardly earned the position of the ethical arbiter because it has refrained from committing horrific crimes against humanity in the past sixty years.
Most awesome show ever. Amazing how corrupt people can be, and care more about their own status and comforts more than they care about other animals being alive.
On February 17 2011 13:05 s_side wrote: I agree with most of your points, however, I'd like to highlight a certain one: The Japanese, being a nation which values saving face, having being cheated like that are deeply angered and humiliated.
The Japanese, in quite recent history have cheated millions of Asians out of their lives, and even more out of their dignity. I'm not one to live in the past, but Japan has hardly earned the position of the ethical arbiter because it has refrained from committing horrific crimes against humanity in the past sixty years.
Atrocities committed almost 3 generations ago. Japan has come a long way since then, and if you really are one not to live in the past, you should be able to see.
Now, I don't believe anyone is capable of passing judgment on a whole nation, so I'm finding it hard to believe that you can justify your statement that Japan has yet earned the position of an ethical arbiter. I'm not saying that they have though.
On February 17 2011 13:05 s_side wrote: I agree with most of your points, however, I'd like to highlight a certain one: The Japanese, being a nation which values saving face, having being cheated like that are deeply angered and humiliated.
The Japanese, in quite recent history have cheated millions of Asians out of their lives, and even more out of their dignity. I'm not one to live in the past, but Japan has hardly earned the position of the ethical arbiter because it has refrained from committing horrific crimes against humanity in the past sixty years.
Atrocities committed almost 3 generations ago. Japan has come a long way since then, and if you really are one not to live in the past, you should be able to see.
Err, not really, they still haven't owned up to any of their shit, Japan ought to learn from Germany.
Personally, as long as the whales hunted aren't endangered, I don't see a problem with whaling.
On August 17 2010 00:22 Celestial wrote: Honestly the amount of effort for the extreme actions they do on the show could probably better be spent persuading the people who eat whale meat to eat other kinds, probably maybe even help pay for it. I don't know, this show seems extremely inefficient with the way they're going about things.
I've dated a girl from Japan for three years. In those three years, I've learned that it's easier to move Mt. Fuji, then it is to convince the Japanese that they should reconsider some part of their traditional culture.
It doesn't help that anyone doing so is labelled a racist.
Rrrrrrright. Cause clearly japanese historically were terrible at discarding/adopting cultural practices when it suited them... o wait.
You fuck one japanese girl and think you know them all. I wonder why they label you a racist. Hmm...
There's a difference between refusing to discard cultural practices, and refusing to apply introspection to your culture. Mind you, that's not uniquely a Japanese trait. Immediately playing the racism card, on the other hand, seems to be.
Well, the status of the global whale population shouldn't really be included here. It should be if these guys are actually doing what they say (being effective), or just endangering people and the environment needlessly, and wasting a ton of money that would be much more effective for their goals if used elsewhere.
Then again, they wouldn't get all this money if they didn't show them actually doing action, no matter how retarded. Politics and international law is boring, no oen gives money to boring things.
I would say that some of the people that join them have genuinely good intentions; but for Peter Brown, Paul Watson and others, it's just a crusade for personal glory (clusterfuck of retarded decisions), with which they do not care who they step on to get their names and faces on a page of history.
When I say it shouldn't be included, I'm trying to get across that, no matter what your main goal is, bad/good/useless, if you can't achieve it, or if you do it unethically, then you're a failure.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
Food chain. Do you know it? Also think about your post the next time you're greasing yourself in a nice, spicy kebab. I bet that lamb had a pretty sweet life, before it got shot in the head.
I'm not against breeding, killing and eating - nor hunting the non endangered species, but finding the most efficient way to kill the animal in the least painful way is a must.
On February 17 2011 09:13 Yttrasil wrote: I hate the suspension, I love whale meat especially on sushi and I find it just as stupid to stop hunting whales as stopping to eat normal conventional meat. Don't want to give up on it just cause some stupid organizations use whatever weapons they can find to stop whaling.
Let people make their own choise what to do, if demand ceases then it obviously will stop same as with any other thing. God I hate groups like this and Greenpeace, making life hard for us people who wants to live our lives free.
You think whales want to be eaten? Why can't they swim free like we can traverse the earth free? They're mammals like us. I sure as hell don't want to be harpooned and dragged onto a ship dying, why should a whale?
If you want to acknowledge this idea of freedom, you have to acknowledge the deprivation of freedom caused by the actions of those who have the freedom.
The same argument can be made of cows.
Generally to Keniji and Stavarius Yep, I don't see why they should be treated differently than lets say cows. They are not even endangered especially not the one being mainly hunted so that arguement of not being able to watch them is for naught. It's like saying we should not kill cows because in the future we might not be able to see them, the same goes for whales.
Using that argument that whales are free, then why should whales be treated differently from again the cows? They certainly don't want to be eaten either. :D What if a whale wants to be eaten, should it be allowed then?
So let me then try this argument, if we can catch and kill whales in a humane way, should it then be allowed? If you say no then you argue against yourself... if you say yes well then all your other arguments fall.
I can totally live with that. If we can catch them in a humane way. I don't say whale hunting is bad in general (hell, I love meat).
I don't really know which whales are endangered and which not, so yeah, I just wanted to show that "freedom" is not always that easy to define.
rofl sea shephard, been a while since i heard about them.
I think they come to my school every year and try and recruit new members from the year 12 (at least they did for my year) with some fancy ass presentation.
was cool and everything with life on the sea etc. However they quickly got torn down by the smartasses of the school ahahaha.
My High school is the only selective school in the state. So pretty much the smartasses of smartasses owned these pirates on stage xD
On February 17 2011 23:46 Roeder wrote: Food chain. Do you know it?
By that line of thought, dogs and cats are fair game too. What prevents us (well, in the Western world) from eating our pets?
There's nothing wrong with eating dogs and cats. That's a social thing. There are plenty of countries where dog and cat are good to eat.
(edited out bad example)
I wasn't questioning whether it was right or wrong. I had intended to show that simply arguing "Food chain!" and supposed human supremacy isn't the best argument when determining what can be hunted.
On February 17 2011 23:46 Roeder wrote: Food chain. Do you know it?
By that line of thought, dogs and cats are fair game too. What prevents us (well, in the Western world) from eating our pets?
There's nothing wrong with eating dogs and cats. That's a social thing. There are plenty of countries where dog and cat are good to eat.
(edited out bad example)
I wasn't questioning whether it was right or wrong. I had intended to show that simply arguing "Food chain!" and supposed human supremacy isn't the best argument when determining what can be hunted.
I see.
You're right, food chain is a pretty silly argument as to what can and can't be hunted.
On February 17 2011 23:46 Roeder wrote: Food chain. Do you know it?
By that line of thought, dogs and cats are fair game too. What prevents us (well, in the Western world) from eating our pets?
At first dogs and cats were used for a purpose of work and not as house pets. Cats kept rats and mice away - and dogs had a lot of jobs - so maybe they 'evolved' into becoming a companions instead of dinner.
But yeah, what does exactly prevent us (except law in some countries)?
I've heard dogmeat tastes great, but I'm not going to eat my lovely golden retriever because of that.
On June 26 2009 17:30 Meta wrote: Those terrorists should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They have no right to vandalize other people's boats because they disagree ethically with what they're doing. If I happened to be a japanese whaler trying to make a living and those assholes tried to board my boat I would straight up kill them.
I second.
In international waters, its perfectly within your rights to kill someone who attacks your vessel. If its a nation's military attacking you then its considered an act of war and there are other implications.... but its still within your rights. There are no international laws or agreements which would make it unacceptable to kill this guys and sink their pirate ship disguised as eco-friendly bullshit. I'm sure they refuse all the money they make on this show right? Right?
I watched a few of these episodes and I personally believe these guys are ridiculous and although I'm not a huge fan of whales or anything, but if they're going to be protesting something, they should at least do it so they don't make everyone else who believes in the same thing look like retards as well.
also:
On February 18 2011 00:32 BasilPesto wrote: By that line of thought, dogs and cats are fair game too. What prevents us (well, in the Western world) from eating our pets?
There is nothing at all stopping you except for your morals or whatever. Last year, there was this guy on the news who killed his dog and had it going on a spit roast in his back yard and his neighbor called the SPCA and shit, but it turns out, as long as the animal didn't suffer (it didn't) then it's perfectly legal to kill and eat any of your pets. And the guy was all like "Is there something wrong with what I'm doing?"
On June 25 2009 15:49 Manifesto7 wrote: I can't stand this group. They exploit peoples fond sentiments about whales and furry animals to engage in criminal behavior. They deserve no better than the pirates off the coast of Somalia for their reckless endangerment of human life.
This show is akin to terrorist funding. Part of the reason they act so outlandishly is to get the show, get money, and go out again to stir up their shit. The Sea Shepard (with Japanese whaling) and the Farley Mowat (crashing into Canadian coast guard vessels during the seal hunt) should be dealt with in the same manner they treat others.
I agree with Manifesto. They're using environmentalism as an excuse to act like terrorists. They do a lot of bad things that they don't show on this show, like throwing nets in ship props, and throwing acid on the whalers.
On February 17 2011 23:46 Roeder wrote: Food chain. Do you know it?
By that line of thought, dogs and cats are fair game too. What prevents us (well, in the Western world) from eating our pets?
At first dogs and cats were used for a purpose of work and not as house pets. Cats kept rats and mice away - and dogs had a lot of jobs - so maybe they 'evolved' into becoming a companions instead of dinner.
But yeah, what does exactly prevent us (except law in some countries)?
I've heard dogmeat tastes great, but I'm not going to eat my lovely golden retriever because of that.
That's pretty much what I was trying to lead into, stuff like morals, ethics, etc.
On February 18 2011 05:03 Lorken wrote: I watched a few of these episodes and I personally believe these guys are ridiculous and although I'm not a huge fan of whales or anything, but if they're going to be protesting something, they should at least do it so they don't make everyone else who believes in the same thing look like retards as well.
On February 18 2011 00:32 BasilPesto wrote: By that line of thought, dogs and cats are fair game too. What prevents us (well, in the Western world) from eating our pets?
There is nothing at all stopping you except for your morals or whatever. Last year, there was this guy on the news who killed his dog and had it going on a spit roast in his back yard and his neighbor called the SPCA and shit, but it turns out, as long as the animal didn't suffer (it didn't) then it's perfectly legal to kill and eat any of your pets. And the guy was all like "Is there something wrong with what I'm doing?"
I believe different locations will have different laws on whether dogs can be eaten or not. A quick check revealed my state has such legislation preventing the eating of dog meat.
Japan urges international action against Sea Shepherd Japan has called on Australia, New Zealand and the Netherlands to take "effective measures" against the anti-whaling group, Sea Shepherd.
Japan stopped its whale hunt on Friday, saying "harassment" by the US-based Sea Shepherd activists had made it impossible to continue. The hunt had been halted temporarily last week, after Sea Shepherd boats blocked the stern of Japan's mother ship, preventing any harpooned whales from being loaded on. Sea Shepherd has been chasing the Japanese fleet for weeks in the icy seas of Antarctica. Japan's fisheries minister said the group's actions made it "difficult to ensure the safety of the crew". Japan's foreign minister said it was "extremely regrettable" that Sea Shepherd was not stopped.
It sounds like the upcoming season (and possibly last season) of whale wars should be quite interesting. All to past seasons were just face palm worthy of how the Sea Shepherds failed time and time again and accomplished nothing. From sending people out on Zodiack boats and getting lost, to their boats breaking down, running out of fresh water, destroying their own Zodiack boat, having their prop fowlers sheared through, getting pelted by water cannons, having their hugely expensive boat sunken, etc. etc. I'm ready for some grade A drama this season.
Their hearts are in the right place... If you don't care about whales, maybe watch "The Grove". It's about thousands of dolphins being tortured and slaughtered in Japan and how the locals try to cover it up... Amazing movie...
I DO agree however that the SeaDudes methods are pretty amateur.
LOVED that sleek boat that got sunk, in my eyes that was attempted murder by the Japanese and anybody who saw it would be hard pressed to disagree with my statement...
On February 18 2011 23:13 mcbrite wrote: Their hearts are in the right place... If you don't care about whales, maybe watch "The Grove". It's about thousands of dolphins being tortured and slaughtered in Japan and how the locals try to cover it up... Amazing movie...
I DO agree however that the SeaDudes methods are pretty amateur.
LOVED that sleek boat that got sunk, in my eyes that was attempted murder by the Japanese and anybody who saw it would be hard pressed to disagree with my statement...
They don't tell you in the show what these eco-terrorists actually do to whaling vessels. The Japanese whalers aren't going to know that this is some film crew. Typical anti-whaling eco-terrorists take it as far as throwing acid on crew members of whaling vessels. If I were captain, I would avoid letting them get anywhere near my ship.
On June 26 2009 17:30 Meta wrote: Those terrorists should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They have no right to vandalize other people's boats because they disagree ethically with what they're doing. If I happened to be a japanese whaler trying to make a living and those assholes tried to board my boat I would straight up kill them.
I second.
In international waters, its perfectly within your rights to kill someone who attacks your vessel. If its a nation's military attacking you then its considered an act of war and there are other implications.... but its still within your rights. There are no international laws or agreements which would make it unacceptable to kill this guys and sink their pirate ship disguised as eco-friendly bullshit. I'm sure they refuse all the money they make on this show right? Right?
I'm no expert on international or marine law, but I'm pretty sure you're not "within your rights to kill someone" just because you're in international waters. In self-defense maybe, but with everything else, some form of universal law will apply, and if it's only that of the countries whose flags the ships are sailing under.
On June 26 2009 17:30 Meta wrote: Those terrorists should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They have no right to vandalize other people's boats because they disagree ethically with what they're doing. If I happened to be a japanese whaler trying to make a living and those assholes tried to board my boat I would straight up kill them.
I second.
In international waters, its perfectly within your rights to kill someone who attacks your vessel. If its a nation's military attacking you then its considered an act of war and there are other implications.... but its still within your rights. There are no international laws or agreements which would make it unacceptable to kill this guys and sink their pirate ship disguised as eco-friendly bullshit. I'm sure they refuse all the money they make on this show right? Right?
I'm no expert on international or marine law, but I'm pretty sure you're not "within your rights to kill someone" just because you're in international waters. In self-defense maybe, but with everything else, some form of universal law will apply, and if it's only that of the countries whose flags the ships are sailing under.
He didn't say you could kill someone because you're in international waters... Did you read his post? =/ He said you can kill someone who attacks your vessel, which you can.
He didn't talk about self-defense, he didnt specify the nature of the "attack" and he talked about there "being no laws or agreements which would make it unacceptable to kill them and sink their ship".
I'm pretty sure he didn't have "killing" in mind just as a last measure of self-defense, with all other options exhausted.
On February 18 2011 23:35 Shockk wrote: He didn't talk about self-defense, he didnt specify the nature of the "attack" and he talked about there "being no laws or agreements which would make it unacceptable to kill them and sink their ship".
I'm pretty sure he didn't have "killing" in mind just as a last measure of self-defense, with all other options exhausted.
If someone attacks your vessel, and you kill them, it is self defense by default. I don't really understand what you're getting at, because now your argument is really beginning to sound convoluted....
On February 18 2011 23:13 mcbrite wrote: Their hearts are in the right place... If you don't care about whales, maybe watch "The Grove". It's about thousands of dolphins being tortured and slaughtered in Japan and how the locals try to cover it up... Amazing movie...
That's The Cove, The Grove is a retail and entertainment complex in Los Angeles. That would be highly suspicious if the Japanese shipped a bunch of dolphins into downtown LA and started culling them just off 3rd street.
On June 04 2011 10:05 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Third season premiere is tonight.
Watched the trailer and got hyped as f* - yet again these tools are at sea! I've intentionally avoided spoiling myself by not keeping track on their progress as i imagine this season will be the most starved for content yet. Last season you knew those morons would let their million dollar speedboat be a stationary target for the whalers to ram after reading about it in the papers, this time around i'm mainly hoping for more rivalry in leadership and general bickering (in lieu of action this usually becomes the case).
Also - thing to note: Peter 'the Hammer' Hammarstedt, if he played Starcraft, would be Orb. Orb, should he ever turn activist, he'd be Peter the Hammer. True story!
After 5 dreadfully boring episodes, the season is starting to pick up. Episode 6 was amazing. The Sea Shepherd abandoned their search for the Japanese whalers to participate in a search and rescue for some crazy Norwegian thrill seekers that went to the South Pole in a 50 ft yacht. Pretty intense episode. It looks like next episode they find the factory ship so maybe there will be some more action finally.
The Berserk crew isn't crazy, they've got experience. Why three crewmembers decided to leave the safety of the anchor area when a polar windstorm set in is strange though.
Major bump, haven't got to watch Viking Shores and missed the Tuna episode where they wer ein Libya, BUT Paul Watson has been arrested:
FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) — An environmental activist group known for its confrontations with whalers and fishermen says its founder has been arrested in Germany for extradition to Costa Rica for allegedly interfering with a shark fishing boat.
Paul Watson of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society was arrested Saturday in Frankfurt, the U.S.-based group said in a statement Sunday.
Sea Shepherd said Watson is accused of violating of ships traffic during filming of a documentary in 2002. The group said the incident took place in Guatemalan waters, when Sea Shepherd encountered an illegal shark finning operation run by a Costa Rican ship, the Varadero.
Sea Shepherd said it told the Varadero's crew to stop and head to port to be prosecuted. The crew accused Sea Shepherd of trying to kill them.
I'm surprised it took this long for someone to book him. He seems to have made it abundantly clear that hes willing to walk on the edge of law, I dont think many people would be surprised to hear that he crossed it on occasion. Very serious accusation though, I wonder if it will stick. I know nothing of the laws of the country.
(Sorry if I'm inappropriately necro-ing. The last post is technically not "Old Post"-ed, and the show's still running on its 5th season.)
Always thought these guys were pretty... er,..."fishy." Lol. (I know, whales are mammals, not fish...)
The response should be obvious, one way or the other. Either the Japanese are legally permitted to hunt for whales, or they aren't. Which side is actually right, on the other hand, sounds debateable. Apparently, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) created a whale sanctuary, which conveniently surrounds the entirety of Antarctica, and what looks like pretty much everywhere else whales would be when they head South. (source) I'm not sure if this organization should be passed off as unofficial, or if it's actually backed by the representative countries' governments, like a UN for whales. If it's unofficial and the waters are internationally free, then Japan does no legal wrong. If the IWC's sanctuary is to be internationally enforced, then Japan's undoubtedly in trouble, but the Sea Shepherds are going about this in a terribly hypocritcal and unsuitable manner.
Sooooo, anyone watching Season 5? I try to glance at the last 10 or so minutes, when stuff actually happens. X-D
All this is the reason I stopped eating meat, how can one blissfully eat cow, pig or chicken and they pretend to be mad about killing whales, dolphins or even dogs??
The Japanese whalers have the legal right to do what they are doing and are strictly monitored by an external international organisation, I know this because one my of students is a fisherman and the reason he is studying English is because of the need to communicate with said organisation.
One thing I will add is that whaling to the Japanese is seen as a traditional activity and no more right or wrong than killing any other animal for food.
On July 15 2012 14:01 robjapan wrote: The Japanese whalers have the legal right to do what they are doing and are strictly monitored by an external international organisation, I know this because one my of students is a fisherman and the reason he is studying English is because of the need to communicate with said organisation.
Personally, I hope you're right. I believe Japan should have the right to hunt if they so choose, and if they've got a maximum quota to not go over, that's adequately enforced by the international community, then they're doin' it right.
Curious, though: you've stopped consuming all meat, but support Japan's practices. (I'm one who's fine with any meat, by the way) Is it to support treating all animals equally, livestock or not? Sorry, I'm merely confused. O_o
On July 15 2012 13:48 logikly wrote: Been watching this show since season 1. I do not find myself a green person but this cause i do support. wish I could be their medic
This has as much to do with .. "green sentiments" as throwing red paint on people wearing fur has to do with saving furry animals.
The biggest tipoff is it's televised. I'm a staunch believer that no form of continual protest can be so exciting as to merit a seasons worth of footage.
Glad to hear the knuckleheads were charged for criminal actions. They're not as embarrassing as PETA but not for lack of trying.
I am very much in favor of conservation, and the killing of whales is abhorrent and should be stopped.
But the Sea Shepard society are idiots. They take violent measures, and do nothing on their show except show off that they are hippies and want to save whales. I would not want to be associated with them and honestly think that they do deserve a classification of terrorist.
I call throwing objects at another ship with the intent to harm, and doing so repeatedly and with deliberate intent, terrorism.
On July 15 2012 23:32 robjapan wrote: I think it's wrong to kill animals and eat them but I'm not going to go around telling people what they can and can't do.
It's just my choice and I firmly believe that all people are free to do the same.
Ah, mmkay. Thanks for clearing that up. :-)
Thought this was a good laugh, if it hasn't been shown yet, that is: + Show Spoiler +
Well, shoot. Can't embed it. Just watch it on YouTube, then. :-D
On July 15 2012 23:48 Praetorial wrote: I am very much in favor of conservation, and the killing of whales is abhorrent and should be stopped.
I'm in favor of conservation too; I don't support the reckless killing of any animal that is threatened to extinction, or close to threatened or whatever. However, with discretion, I don't have a problem with hunting whales for food. I don't see killing any other animal is less abhorrent than killing a whale, except just on a proportionally much larger scale. Good stewardship, in my opinion, says, "Do use, don't abuse."
I think most people are in agreement that Paul Watson is a few drones short of full saturation, but some of what they are trying to do is legit. Whales aren't like cows or chickens that can be farmed, they are more like elephants. I live in an area of the US that has "whale watching" as part of our tourism and my gf performs research on the effect of toxins on whale tissues (BP oil spill stuff). Whales aren't rapid breeders nor do they grow to mating age fast in most cases. Simply put, they aren't a sustainable food and shouldn't be treated as such.
The taking of these whales isn't for research because to get the information you need you shouldn't have to kill any whales, let alone the numbers they set. The fact that it is often called a quota kinda tells the story of how some people feel. Fishermen have quotas, scientists have goals. If we can capture and release great whites to get the scientific information we need are whales really that much more difficult they have to die?
The IWC generally opposes the Japanese whaling system for the main reason that it is making a profit off the killing of a practice supposedly under a moratorium. With South Korea possibly following the Japanese example of bending the rules, hopefully the IWC will grow some testes and make black and white rules and limitations so that the whaling done will truly be for the benefit of scientific research and the preservation of these species.
The Sea Shepherd Fleet has located all five vessels of the Japanese whale poaching fleet, including the Japanese factory ship, the Nisshin Maru, inside the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
The Steve Irwin, The Bob Barker and The Sam Simon are now in pursuit of the whaling fleet, driving them away from their intended poaching grounds, disrupting their illegal hunt, and preparing to shut down their whale-killing operations.
The Steve Irwin’s helicopter first located the Nisshin Maru at 64°44' S, 162°34' W, in New Zealand’s sovereign waters in the Ross Dependency Antarctic region, and inside the internationally recognised Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
Sea Shepherd has obtained compelling footage and images of three dead protected Minke Whales on the deck of the Nisshin Maru, taken at the time the factory ship was first located. A fourth whale, believed to be a Minke, was being butchered on the bloodstained deck.
I gave up on this effort when I realized that all I was left thinking after watching the show/learning about the cause was 'that they should just buy some torpedoes and see what happens because what their doing now isn't working'.
On January 06 2014 22:03 xM(Z wrote: 'cause they're allowed to kill a specific nr/and type of whales for scientific purposes.
The "scientific purposes" are basically a loophole in the international contracts prohibiting the hunting of whales. Japan never made a secret out of the whales ending up in restaurants.
The Sea Shepherd Fleet has located all five vessels of the Japanese whale poaching fleet, including the Japanese factory ship, the Nisshin Maru, inside the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
The Steve Irwin, The Bob Barker and The Sam Simon are now in pursuit of the whaling fleet, driving them away from their intended poaching grounds, disrupting their illegal hunt, and preparing to shut down their whale-killing operations.
The Steve Irwin’s helicopter first located the Nisshin Maru at 64°44' S, 162°34' W, in New Zealand’s sovereign waters in the Ross Dependency Antarctic region, and inside the internationally recognised Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
Sea Shepherd has obtained compelling footage and images of three dead protected Minke Whales on the deck of the Nisshin Maru, taken at the time the factory ship was first located. A fourth whale, believed to be a Minke, was being butchered on the bloodstained deck.
In (partial) defense of the Japanese, I really don't see why it's a big deal that they fish for Minke whales. There are tons of those guys, they are not of conservation concern, and I don't see what differentiates them from other animals that we consider ethical to harvest in a sustainable fashion. They're basically just big cows.
It's fucked up that they take whales from species that are endangered, but that's because they're endangered. As long as the Minke population being harvested is healthy/not endangered, if someone wants to take a sustainable number to eat, who am I to criticize?
Also messed up is the fact that they were fishing in a protected zone, there's no excuse for that.
EPT
)
![[image loading]](http://images.theage.com.au/2009/12/01/934958/AndyGil-420x0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.japantimes.co.jp/images/photos2010/nn20100313a2a.jpg)
