Paul Watson (Sea Shepherd) needs to man up!!!!

[Sas]

Firstly I can't understand why you would knowingly contribute to the farming pollution by buying and eating meat yet not think that the Japanese and other whaling nations should be able to do the same?

I'm well aware of the damage that farming does to the environment. Well... I say well aware, I believe the figure is something huge like 70% of carbon emissions. I guess I enjoy eating meat and am therefore too stubborn to change. Perhaps some day I'll sit down to one of these documentaries about animal farming as it seems to put people off. My brother had to pull off a chicken's head and cook it on a course he did in the Army, and that's put him off chicken for the past two years!

Why do you think Japan should listen to people like you? Given the fact that you too damage the environment with the types of foods you like to eat?

Why should Japan give up whales but you shouldn't have to give up eating other forms of meat?

Those are not rhetorical questions, I am quite interested to hear your answers.

I have to admit though, I can't understand how you are arguing in favour of sustainably harvested sea food one minute, and then arguing in favour of the Japanese hunting in a protected area the next!

Sustainable harvesting of seafood is not mutually exclusive with harvesting in a protected area. It may not have been protected for any other reason besides politics.

 

[RikRaeder]

I thought this thread was about how lame the Seahuggers are.

 

[ACT651755]

Firstly I can't understand why you would knowingly contribute to the farming pollution by buying and eating meat yet not think that the Japanese and other whaling nations should be able to do the same?

Of course they can do the same, I am more than happy for them to continue to eat beef, pork and chicken as long as it's supply is regulated.

Why do you think Japan should listen to people like you? Given the fact that you too damage the environment with the types of foods you like to eat?

Because I am not actively wiping species from the face of the earth like they are. I am consuming the meat from animals which are farmed. Their supply is regulated. Sure, it doesn't mean much to the individual cow which is being killed, but it's species isn't going to be wiped out by my appetite. This is not true of the whaling situation.

Why should Japan give up whales but you shouldn't have to give up eating other forms of meat?

The same answer as the other two questions. I'm not demanding they cease eating meat, I'm demanding they cease eating endangered species, and from doing it in one of the few places that they're protected. It wouldn't be so down-right crazy if they hadn't signed up to the IWC themselves! This makes it even more ridiculous.

[/quote]Sustainable harvesting of seafood is not mutually exclusive with harvesting in a protected area. It may not have been protected for any other reason besides politics.[/QUOTE]

It was protected because the populations of various species of whales had become dangerously low. Japan signed up to the IWC and in doing so, accepted this. Whether it could be proven at the time is therefore irrelevant. Until it is scientifically proven (and that means more than a Japanese minister announcing a random figure) that the populations have become stable, and until the moratorium is lifted, Japan should cease killing in the SOWS.

I really feel like I've been over this before!

I thought this thread was about how lame the Seahuggers are.

It was, but everytime somebody criticised them, one guy gave SS $50!!

 

[D_B]

what it boils down to is this ..... Terrorists, and their tactics are OK


... if they are doing something you want

 

[RikRaeder]

It was, but everytime somebody criticised them, one guy gave SS $50!!

Oooh oooh oooh. Everyone start criticising me!

PM me for info to pay into my PayPal account

 

[deepwater]

I thought this thread was about how lame the Seahuggers are.

That's what I thought.

This should be about the coward Paul Watson, a captain who hands off the hard decisions to his crew and is quick to assign tasks to people when he's to affraid to do them himself. The man is a good seaman but a crap leader.

dw

 

[Sas]

Of course they can do the same, I am more than happy for them to continue to eat beef, pork and chicken as long as it's supply is regulated.

So it is ok for you to screw up the environment and eat animals farmed in cruel manners but not the Japanese? Why?

Because I am not actively wiping species from the face of the earth like they are. I am consuming the meat from animals which are farmed. Their supply is regulated. Sure, it doesn't mean much to the individual cow which is being killed, but it's species isn't going to be wiped out by my appetite. This is not true of the whaling situation.

Not all whale species are endangered. Whaling can be done sustainably.

The same answer as the other two questions. I'm not demanding they cease eating meat, I'm demanding they cease eating endangered species, and from doing it in one of the few places that they're protected. It wouldn't be so down-right crazy if they hadn't signed up to the IWC themselves! This makes it even more ridiculous.

Well sure ask them to stop eating endangered species... but many of the whales they catch are not endangered.

Why should Japan leave just because they have a different opinion? It is an organisation about whaling and they have an interest in whaling...

It was protected because the populations of various species of whales had become dangerously low.

Some species, not all. And the reasons for a sanctuary have been labeled political by some people...

Japan signed up to the IWC and in doing so, accepted this.

No. Japan opposed the creation of this Sanctuary and has continually tried to remove it. It has argued for it being in contravention of the ICRW actually. They have never accepted the sanctuary.

Whether it could be proven at the time is therefore irrelevant. Until it is scientifically proven (and that means more than a Japanese minister announcing a random figure) that the populations have become stable, and until the moratorium is lifted, Japan should cease killing in the SOWS.

How are they going to get any details about population without any whaling research done? You know that some research can only be done with samples that will result in the death of the whale?

I really feel like I've been over this before!

As do I....

 

[ACT651755]

what it boils down to is this ..... Terrorists, and their tactics are OK


... if they are doing something you want

Neither Paul Watson nor Sea Shepherd have ever been convicted of ANY crime. You are therefore as much a terrorist as Paul Watson.

Somebody earlier used the term eco-terrorist. Amusing, as the term doesn't exist in any national judicial system. The Japanese made the term up because 'terrorist' is a word that Americans love to throw at anybody who rocks the boat.

This should be about the coward Paul Watson, a captain who hands off the hard decisions to his crew and is quick to assign tasks to people when he's to affraid to do them himself. The man is a good seaman but a crap leader.

dw

That is debatable. Whether you agree with the way he leads, his missions are continually successful, his crew members rarely come to harm and he attracts thousands of supporters and millions of dollars annually from his public speaking and various publicity events.

In fact, those are all the hallmarks of a superb leader!!

As do I....

No more running around in circles from me then. I will cease arguing with you about whales, Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd herein.

 

[Al Mialkovsky]

Funny how intolerant many of you are. If we don't support your opinion then pages and pages get written about how horrible Paul Watson is and just as many get written about the rights of those japanese *****s.

I don't care what your opinion of Paul Watson is in the least. I like what he's doing. You can't fight extremism with loving hands ever. It takes an extremist to fight an extremist. Until someone more effective comes along Watson is my man.

 

[Big John]

Neither Paul Watson nor Sea Shepherd have ever been convicted of ANY crime. You are therefore as much a terrorist as Paul Watson.

I guess that means Bin Laden is not a terrorist either, since he has not been convicted of any crime?