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

[Sas]

Good thing you're not willing to stand up for what you belive in!

Err, what's your problem?

I don't believe that I should be able to determine the diets of everyone else in the world based on my own preferences.

 

[irishsquid]

...What we're really seeing is something more like fanaticism.

I'm torn; part of me dislikes the Sea Sheppard's tactics, but a bigger part of me hates the whaler's and anyone that supports that industry. When it comes down to it, all is fair in WAR.
...

I see you're an avid fisherman and run a charter. So, since all is fair in WAR, some group of fanatics doesn't like any fishing for "sea kittens", they can harass your boat, customers, throw chemicals at you, foul your props, etc. and that is OK?

Err, what's your problem?

I don't believe that I should be able to determine the diets of everyone else in the world based on my own preferences.

 

[Al Mialkovsky]

We going off track as usual here?

I like the show but it's a TV show so don't think that what you see on the tube is how it really is. This is just a reality show that as far as I'm concerned is entertaining.

Paul Watson has done what he believes in for his entire life. He has given up a lot to protect those creatures that he loves.

Personally I wish they'd sink the entire Japanese whaling fleet.

 

[Walter]

The man is incompetent. The crew is actually better off when he's in his cabin. Of course the crew isn't competent either.

 

[Ayisha]

When is this show on? Is it on any Canadian channels or any available to Cdn cable?

 

[Hockeynut]

When is this show on? Is it on any Canadian channels or any available to Cdn cable?

It starts Friday. on Discovery.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

"Although they are bringing attention to a despicable act by the Japanese, they are essentially vegetarian pirates. They certainly have little training. I don't think that hippies can really be "organized" like a military unit...too many individuals and nobody wants to work as a team. What we're really seeing is something more like fanaticism."

It is not "more like fanaticism". It IS fanaticism.

In my opinion Paul Watson is a douche bag. So he stands up for what he believes in. So do the Somali pirates. And they're at least arguably more effective than Watson is. Notice how freqently Watson leads the various "charges" his erstwhile 'radical environmentalists' make...

I don't support what the Japanese whalers are doing either, but for the moment it is legal.

If I were a captain of a vessel on the high seas engaged in lawful activity and some group of raving lunatics endangered my crew and vessel, they would become a chum slick. Watson is the leader of a sub-state fanatical group with a political agenda who is engaging a sovereign nation's resources at the risk of lives. The same definition could be applied to Al Queda, except that they're better organized, more intelligent, more capable, and also arguably more effective. Watson is a poser terrorist and not a terribly good one, and in my opinion the Japanese captains have demonstrated remarkable restraint.

IMHO of course. YMMV.

 

[D_B]

Like all fanatical groups ... they are not interested in anything anyone else has to say, they want what they want, wont stop until they get it , and do not care about how they go about accomplishing that.
In their minds, the ends justify the means

 

[Al Mialkovsky]

So he stands up for what he believes in. So do the Somali pirates. And they're at least arguably more effective than Watson is.

I don't support what the Japanese whalers are doing either, but for the moment it is legal.

First of all the Somali pirates are attacking innocent people, Watson is not.

The whalers are obviously breaking the law, this is well documented. The problem is that only recently has Australia grown some nads.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

"First of all the Somali pirates are attacking innocent people, Watson is not."

I beg to differ, Al. The Japanese crewmen aboard Japanese vessels have wives and children. They are doing their jobs and supporting their families.

While you may consider their activities immoral, this does not make them criminal. They do not deserve to lose their lives in an incident or accident caused by a fanatic.

"The whalers are obviously breaking the law, this is well documented. The problem is that only recently has Australia grown some nads."

If it is that well documented, then you should have no difficulty in producing citations that provide evidence stating that whaling in general is illegal. I believe your statement may be mistaken.

from C. George Muller's website, no friend (as you may know) to whalers anywhere -
"Japan exploits a loophole in IWC legislation, and has never stopped killing whales despite the Moratorium. They simply assign themselves a permit to undertake ‘scientific whaling’ (ie. killing whales for the purpose of scientific research) and continue hunting whales as before.

At the 2006 IWC meeting Japan managed to (buy enough support to) win the vote declaring that the Moratorium on Commercial Whaling is unnecessary and blaming whales for depleting the world's fish stocks."
Summary of Current Whaling Situation

Exploitation of loopholes in legislation is not illegal, nor is buying support to win votes. If they were, half the US Senate and House could be convicted of doing the same.

With regard to the matter of Australia's nads -
from the New York Times: "Australia announced Friday that it will take Japan to the International Court of Justice to argue that the country’s annual killing of whales in the Antarctic Ocean violates international obligations, in a major escalation of its campaign against the hunt. The decision to take legal action against an important trading partner underlines Australia’s “commitment to bring to an end Japan’s program of so-called scientific whaling” in the southern seas"
World Briefing - Australia - Legal Action Against Japanese Whaling - NYTimes.com

Note this legal action is not targeted at all whaling conducted by Japan - merely that conducted "in the Antarctic Ocean". Moreover, Australia's nads do not proclaim that the activity is illegal, but that it "violates international obligations". International law can be difficult.

Some political arm-twisting background - (e.g. "you're not the boss of me")
"When the commercial whaling moratorium was introduced by the IWC in 1982, Japan lodged an official objection. However, in response to US threats to cut Japan's fishing quota in US territorial waters under the terms of the Packwood-Magnuson Amendment, Japan withdrew its objection in 1987. However, according to the BBC, America went back on this promise, effectively destroying the deal.[15] Since Japan could not resume commercial whaling, it began whaling on a scientific-research basis"..."Japan's scientific whaling program is controversial in anti-whaling countries. Countries opposed to whaling have passed non-binding resolutions in the IWC urging Japan to stop the program."
Whaling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Let me be clear - I don't support whaling by anyone. Whaling sucks. The issue is whether it is currently legal under international law. Ignoring "non-binding resolutions" is also not illegal, or else the UN could not exist - member states of the UN ignore non-binding resolutions on a routine basis.

Whaling may be many things including immoral, unethical, and un-necessarily destructive, but it is not illegal under international law. Japan won the vote in the IWC (regardless of how). At best, other countries may only be said to have "urged Japan to stop". Therefore, the whalers are not "obviously breaking the law". (On the contrary, there are international laws against "interfering with commercial shipping on the high seas", which Watson clearly is doing. If either of these parties may be said to be acting in contravention of current international law, it is Watson.)

If you have documentation to the contrary, please feel free to provide citations.

Thanks,

Doc