Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 3 votes

SSS Bob Barker Battles Japanese Fleet


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#31    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM

I have no problem with South Park's episode and just like you should have watched the entire 52 minutes of Watson's speech you should watch the entire South Park episode.  The part of humanity that would rather sit on its hands and think that by doing nothing they'll change the world doesn't change the issue one way or the other so those useless voices are impotent to change my mind.

Psyche 101, the topic of this thread is the SSS Bob Barker battling the Japanese whaling fleet.  This doesn't mean that I don't care about Norway or Iceland.  Since I've never given any sign that's the case, that's wishful thinking on your part.  Calling me hypocritical was baselessly insulting.   Why don't you ask before putting thoughts in my head.  You are talking out of turn about things you don't know.   I donate to Sea Shepherd so my money is where my mouth is.   Where's your money?   Where your mouth is?   Donate to the Japanese whalers?   Please.

Whales have everything to do with the topic of discussion at hand.  Migaloo is a Humpback whale, one of the whales on Japan's illegal menu.

What "bonafide biologist" am I to talk to?   I don't compare whales with pigs, when there are billions of pigs in the world hardly suffering from the threat of extinction, and whale species that number in the thousands at terrible risk.
I don't know what a Biologist has to tell me not to care about that, but it would be a biologist working for the whaling industry I'm sure.  Politicized science is best to be avoided anywhere it may be found.  The estimates of whale populations are what they are and you will accept the figures as well as the rest of us.   The whales have enough factors in the oceans right now putting their survival at risk, they don't need nor can they withstand the kind of slaughter that bankrupt Japanese poachers and their government enablers are too proud to stop

Japan has no right to whale in Australian waters, to whale in a whale sanctuary, to countermand the global moratorium or sell whale meat commercially in a commercial whaling operation they deny is commercial. When you meet the definition of something it's ridiculous to try to deny it.  It's even more ridiculous when people actually believe it.  You have no command of the relevant facts that formulate my position, such as Japan's hauls in the period after the moratorium but before Sea Shepherd ever met them in the Southern Ocean.   Worse than that, you offer no alternatives.   Baseless claims like "whaling has been stopped" is as ridiculous as "water isn't wet".  The proof is self evident.  The Japanese never stopped whaling.  They snuck in after the moratorium and their kill numbers rose exponentially until they were killing over 1000 whales a year until Sea Shepherd stepped in and put them down.   The evidence that you're looking for is the proof right before your eyes.   Either the Japanese whalers are extremely incompetent at meeting their quotas or else Sea Shepherd is capable of stopping them. When they're running and shadowing Sea Shepherd vessels, they're not whaling.   Put a frigate-sized vessel on every Japanese ship in the fleet and this illegal charade can be shut down 100%.   We hope that Sea Shepherd's growth continues along with its success, and we will have them returning to the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary with as many vessels as is necessary to stop the Japanese in the future.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#32    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,078 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:20 AM

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

I have no problem with South Park's episode and just like you should have watched the entire 52 minutes of Watson's speech you should watch the entire South Park episode.  The part of humanity that would rather sit on its hands and think that by doing nothing they'll change the world doesn't change the issue one way or the other so those useless voices are impotent to change my mind.

I did watch it, how else do you figure I knew it was at the very end where the show Watson as a liar and cheat?

Nobody said do nothing, I said the Sea Shepherd aggravates the current situation, and to be frank, I think one has to be pretty blind not to see that.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Psyche 101, the topic of this thread is the SSS Bob Barker battling the Japanese whaling fleet.  This doesn't mean that I don't care about Norway or Iceland.  Since I've never given any sign that's the case, that's wishful thinking on your part.  Calling me hypocritical was baselessly insulting.   Why don't you ask before putting thoughts in my head.  You are talking out of turn about things you don't know.   I donate to Sea Shepherd so my money is where my mouth is.   Where's your money?   Where your mouth is?   Donate to the Japanese whalers?   Please.

You told me that Watson was probably the greatest conservationist that ever lived, yet he does not worry about conservation when he might upset a supporter like Australia, so he leaves us alone. These issues are every bit as important as the whaling situation  and require exposure too, but you do not even know these issues exist because your hero Watson does not speak about them. He is a hypocrite, not a conservationist, he is not fit to wipe the bottom of a real conservationist.

Yes I do know, I used to bang the same drum, but learned it was wrong. Watson does not cover these issues so most people do not relise they exist, - be honest, did you know that Australia keeps Dolphins captive while New Zealand does not?

My money? Being wisely spent on things like Greenseas Tuna (which another poster informed me of) that use lines to catch Tuna, not damaging nets. You know, research and supporting those who follow the rules and try to keep resources sustainable and the environment intact. Clever investment all year round, not dumping a bankroll to terrorists to feel good about myself.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Whales have everything to do with the topic of discussion at hand.  Migaloo is a Humpback whale, one of the whales on Japan's illegal menu.

Please show me the menu with Migaloo on it. This is pure rhetoric, as is the entire reference, very Paul Watson of you.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

What "bonafide biologist" am I to talk to?   I don't compare whales with pigs, when there are billions of pigs in the world hardly suffering from the threat of extinction, and whale species that number in the thousands at terrible risk.
I don't know what a Biologist has to tell me not to care about that, but it would be a biologist working for the whaling industry I'm sure.  Politicized science is best to be avoided anywhere it may be found.  The estimates of whale populations are what they are and you will accept the figures as well as the rest of us.   The whales have enough factors in the oceans right now putting their survival at risk, they don't need nor can they withstand the kind of slaughter that bankrupt Japanese poachers and their government enablers are too proud to stop

Any local University, or even most High Schools would have someone more than willing to talk to you. I can even ask the people who were kind enough to help me fully understand the situation if you like. They are not politically geared, the people I spoke to are English, they have no dog in this race.

What are the species you insist are endangered? Do you know or are you about to consult Mr Google? What has Watson actually taught you about these creatures? Only that Japanese are bad?

No, the Whales do not need the poachers, they need them gone, but you do not seem to understand that after 35+ years, Watsons terrorist actions are not helping. Whales still get taken every year.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Japan has no right to whale in Australian waters, to whale in a whale sanctuary,

They do not. You keep saying they whale in Australian waters, but that is a lie. I even gave you a map. And no Sanctuary legally exists. It's a voluntary commitment.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

to countermand the global moratorium

The moratorium too is voluntary, and no country has to sign nor recognise it. It;s more of a goodwill gesture, and when the US took the Goodwill ut of the moratorium, Japan refused to recognise it.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

or sell whale meat commercially in a commercial whaling operation they deny is commercial.

Yes, thank you GREENPEACE.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

When you meet the definition of something it's ridiculous to try to deny it.  It's even more ridiculous when people actually believe it.  You have no command of the relevant facts that formulate my position, such as Japan's hauls in the period after the moratorium but before Sea Shepherd ever met them in the Southern Ocean.  

I seem to have a far greater command of the actual facts than you do. You keep saying Japanese whale in Australian waters, they do not, you keep insisting on some global sanctuary, it does not exist, it is a proposal to be adopted, I do nnot know why you keep repeating these items, repetition will not make them law.

Japans haul after the moratorium, but before they met the Sea Shepherd? What? The moratorium was penned in 1986 to take effect in 1988. Watson put the Sea Shepherd Society together in 1977. That is 9 years before the moratorium was even penned, and 11 years before it was to take effect!

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

Worse than that, you offer no alternatives.   Baseless claims like "whaling has been stopped" is as ridiculous as "water isn't wet".  The proof is self evident.  The Japanese never stopped whaling.  

No alternatives? Yes I did, ground the Sea Shepherd and ask Japan back to the negotiating tabel. Whaling was stopped, you tell me how many whales were taken in 1987. And then tell me why, because you answer will not have the Sea Shepherd in it.

I also suggested Watson put his money where his mouth is and Challenge the Japanese to go back to traditional whaling from long boats only if he disables his fleet. But you can bet your bottom dollar Watson would never agree to something like that.

View PostYamato, on 05 March 2013 - 02:22 AM, said:

They snuck in after the moratorium and their kill numbers rose exponentially until they were killing over 1000 whales a year until Sea Shepherd stepped in and put them down.   The evidence that you're looking for is the proof right before your eyes.   Either the Japanese whalers are extremely incompetent at meeting their quotas or else Sea Shepherd is capable of stopping them. When they're running and shadowing Sea Shepherd vessels, they're not whaling.   Put a frigate-sized vessel on every Japanese ship in the fleet and this illegal charade can be shut down 100%.   We hope that Sea Shepherd's growth continues along with its success, and we will have them returning to the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary with as many vessels as is necessary to stop the Japanese in the future.

They did not sneak into any place. They officially objected to the Moratorium and brazenly touted the law with some ridiculous loophole.

You know why they keep taking whales? Because they can - legally. If they can take whales legally, we need to stop them legally. Watsons terrorist tactics only allow them further excuses to continue whaling.

Metting quotas? I suppose you did not hear about them having so much whale meat the years before last that they threw a lot away, and were giving it away in school lunches? Does not sound like the Sea Shepherd stopped much to me.

A frigate sized vessel has to be funded by a Government, so that means war. And that's the bottom line, if you want to stop them with violence, then stop nanyshagging around with the p***y little sea shepherd. Get a mercenary group onside and start a full blown war, because that is the alternative to legally removing illegal activity isn't it?

Edited by psyche101, 06 March 2013 - 09:23 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#33    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 06 March 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

I did watch it, how else do you figure I knew it was at the very end where the show Watson as a liar and cheat?

Nobody said do nothing, I said the Sea Shepherd aggravates the current situation, and to be frank, I think one has to be pretty blind not to see that.



You told me that Watson was probably the greatest conservationist that ever lived, yet he does not worry about conservation when he might upset a supporter like Australia, so he leaves us alone. These issues are every bit as important as the whaling situation  and require exposure too, but you do not even know these issues exist because your hero Watson does not speak about them. He is a hypocrite, not a conservationist, he is not fit to wipe the bottom of a real conservationist.

Yes I do know, I used to bang the same drum, but learned it was wrong. Watson does not cover these issues so most people do not relise they exist, - be honest, did you know that Australia keeps Dolphins captive while New Zealand does not?

My money? Being wisely spent on things like Greenseas Tuna (which another poster informed me of) that use lines to catch Tuna, not damaging nets. You know, research and supporting those who follow the rules and try to keep resources sustainable and the environment intact. Clever investment all year round, not dumping a bankroll to terrorists to feel good about myself.



Please show me the menu with Migaloo on it. This is pure rhetoric, as is the entire reference, very Paul Watson of you.



Any local University, or even most High Schools would have someone more than willing to talk to you. I can even ask the people who were kind enough to help me fully understand the situation if you like. They are not politically geared, the people I spoke to are English, they have no dog in this race.

What are the species you insist are endangered? Do you know or are you about to consult Mr Google? What has Watson actually taught you about these creatures? Only that Japanese are bad?

No, the Whales do not need the poachers, they need them gone, but you do not seem to understand that after 35+ years, Watsons terrorist actions are not helping. Whales still get taken every year.



They do not. You keep saying they whale in Australian waters, but that is a lie. I even gave you a map. And no Sanctuary legally exists. It's a voluntary commitment.



The moratorium too is voluntary, and no country has to sign nor recognise it. It;s more of a goodwill gesture, and when the US took the Goodwill ut of the moratorium, Japan refused to recognise it.



Yes, thank you GREENPEACE.



I seem to have a far greater command of the actual facts than you do. You keep saying Japanese whale in Australian waters, they do not, you keep insisting on some global sanctuary, it does not exist, it is a proposal to be adopted, I do nnot know why you keep repeating these items, repetition will not make them law.

Japans haul after the moratorium, but before they met the Sea Shepherd? What? The moratorium was penned in 1986 to take effect in 1988. Watson put the Sea Shepherd Society together in 1977. That is 9 years before the moratorium was even penned, and 11 years before it was to take effect!



No alternatives? Yes I did, ground the Sea Shepherd and ask Japan back to the negotiating tabel. Whaling was stopped, you tell me how many whales were taken in 1987. And then tell me why, because you answer will not have the Sea Shepherd in it.

I also suggested Watson put his money where his mouth is and Challenge the Japanese to go back to traditional whaling from long boats only if he disables his fleet. But you can bet your bottom dollar Watson would never agree to something like that.



They did not sneak into any place. They officially objected to the Moratorium and brazenly touted the law with some ridiculous loophole.

You know why they keep taking whales? Because they can - legally. If they can take whales legally, we need to stop them legally. Watsons terrorist tactics only allow them further excuses to continue whaling.

Metting quotas? I suppose you did not hear about them having so much whale meat the years before last that they threw a lot away, and were giving it away in school lunches? Does not sound like the Sea Shepherd stopped much to me.

A frigate sized vessel has to be funded by a Government, so that means war. And that's the bottom line, if you want to stop them with violence, then stop nanyshagging around with the p***y little sea shepherd. Get a mercenary group onside and start a full blown war, because that is the alternative to legally removing illegal activity isn't it?

I did watch it, how else do you figure I knew it was at the very end where the show Watson as a liar and cheat?
Because it's not at the end, and now I know for sure you didn't watch it.  

What are the species you insist are endangered? Do you know or are you about to consult Mr Google? What has Watson actually taught you about these creatures? Only that Japanese are bad?
It's not about me and what I "insist".    Do your homework.   I don't need to consult Google.   Why does Watson have to teach me?    Whalers are illegal poachers.  If they were poor black Africans, they might end up with bullets in their heads and nobody like you would show up to cry about it.   You are more than capable to can carry your own water and do your own homework and learn the facts, and find out what species are 'endangered'.

Nobody said do nothing, I said the Sea Shepherd aggravates the current situation, and to be frank, I think one has to be pretty blind not to see that.
I don't care what nobody said.  I care what nobody did:  Nothing.   You said they "aggravate the current situation" whatever the hell that means.   You're blind to reality and the explosive growth of Sea Shepherd vs. the financial and moral bankruptcy of the illegal Japanese whalers.

You told me that Watson was probably the greatest conservationist that ever lived, yet he does not worry about conservation when he might upset a supporter like Australia, so he leaves us alone. These issues are every bit as important as the whaling situation  and require exposure too, but you do not even know these issues exist because your hero Watson does not speak about them. He is a hypocrite, not a conservationist, he is not fit to wipe the bottom of a real conservationist.
He is arguably one of the greatest who ever lived and in my opinion the greatest alive today.  He's going to go down in history as actually doing something, not sitting on his hands and feeling good about himself.  He will die happy, knowing that he did all he could.  You seem to be blind to the explosive growth of support Sea Shepherd has enjoyed thanks to the exposure.   They're not just stopping Japanese in the Southern Ocean.  They're protecting sharks in the Galapagos, Bluefin in the Mediterranean, dolphins in Taiji, pilot whales in the Faroes, they're cleaning up beaches after man-made disasters, they're cutting long lines all over the world, turtles, seals.  Your disagreements are ignorant of ecology and purely political.  Maybe your real special interest is the Japanese government because you're highly motivated to make a stink.

Yes I do know, I used to bang the same drum, but learned it was wrong. Watson does not cover these issues so most people do not relise they exist, - be honest, did you know that Australia keeps Dolphins captive while New Zealand does not?
Why don't you go find another drum  to bang and actually do something then instead of wasting all your energy blathering about someone else's tactics?   Differences between Australia and New Zealand are irrelevant to me because I don't need perfection in the help we get.   Sea Shepherd doesn't need to be the 2nd coming of Christ for us to support them.  What standards for perfection to you reserve for the things you care about, for the things that you support?   This pre-requisite that someone's farts mustn't stink before we can support them is reserved solely for Sea Shepherd in your wasteful diatribes   To restore your own credibility here, start a comprehensive discussion critical of the illegal Japanese whale poachers and outline a plan that you think can shut them down, put your money where your mouth is, and hold yourself to the same standards you're flippantly applying to others.

My money? Being wisely spent on things like Greenseas Tuna (which another poster informed me of) that use lines to catch Tuna, not damaging nets. You know, research and supporting those who follow the rules and try to keep resources sustainable and the environment intact. Clever investment all year round, not dumping a bankroll to terrorists to feel good about myself.
That's not getting rid of the nets.  That's not going to bring back the tuna from the brink of extinction.  We're talking about a million dollar fish, and in Japan a few years ago, one already fetched close to a half a million dollars.  Eating a tuna that isn't caught in a net doesn't make the world go away.   That's the ostrich defense.  Sticking one's head in the sand and ignoring the greater abuses in the world.  So long as you sever yourself from it, and keep your own little habitat clean, you rationalize that's all it takes to solve the problem and you can live at peace with yourself.  Well sorry, that's not good enough for some people, like Paul Watson.  

Please show me the menu with Migaloo on it. This is pure rhetoric, as is the entire reference, very Paul Watson of you.
BS. You don't need everything spoon fed to you.   "Mr. Google" can show you that the Japanese kill Humpbacks.  

Any local University, or even most High Schools would have someone more than willing to talk to you. I can even ask the people who were kind enough to help me fully understand the situation if you like. They are not politically geared, the people I spoke to are English, they have no dog in this race.
Okay then, here's the internet.  Find someone.  Find whatever you think is relevant to tell me that history doesn't matter, populations of Great Whale species being run into the ground one after the other until their populations number in the tens of thousands or even less is somehow not a concern or endangerment to their future survival.   Find these brilliant high school teachers who can assure me it's not an issue.  Find these objective voices who aren't deluded by politics.  

No, the Whales do not need the poachers, they need them gone, but you do not seem to understand that after 35+ years, Watsons terrorist actions are not helping. Whales still get taken every year.
No, you're just blind to reality.  After 35+ years, a global moratorium has been enacted, many nations that were whaling stopped completely, whale sanctuaries have been created, whalers have had their equipment destroyed, whalers have been taken to court, whalers have gone bankrupt, whales have been saved, whale populations have rebounded when they're not being slaughtered unsustainably, and Sea Shepherd is larger, more popular and more powerful than ever.  Instead of sinking half a whaling fleet, the entire fleet should be sunk and sunk again if its rebuilt.    The only regrettable thing about Sea Shepherd is their uniqueness.  That's what's so remarkable about them, but it shouldn't be.  There should be many organizations of free civil society, made up of the finest and bravest citizens from around the globe, coming together in solidarity and compassion like the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

They do not. You keep saying they whale in Australian waters, but that is a lie. I even gave you a map. And no Sanctuary legally exists. It's a voluntary commitment.
BS, you didn't give me a map of where Japanese don't whale.  And here we also find out that you don't even respect the sanctuary!   You offer nothing to protect whales, you're a whale meater.  From a political standpoint, you might even be worse than the people who actually eat it.    You don't respect any of the laws that have been enacted to protect whales, you just make asinine statements that they "don't legally exist".  That is denial of reality, and it's become your trademark.

The moratorium too is voluntary, and no country has to sign nor recognise it. It;s more of a goodwill gesture, and when the US took the Goodwill ut of the moratorium, Japan refused to recognise it.
All laws are voluntary by virtue of whether we respect their authority to obey them, which is a function of how enthusiastically they're enforced and the chances of getting caught.  I voluntarily drive the speed limit every day, except on Sundays.  Japan refused to recognize it and now they're facing someone who is not failing to do so.   If we can't enforce the rules and regulations we already have on the books, they're impotent.  That makes Sea Shepherd even more important for you and I to support financially.

Yes, thank you GREENPEACE.
Greenpeace's tactics of documenting and begging fails to save lives.  The Japanese whale right under their noses anyway.   Japanese hauls have been impacted severely by direct confrontation and physical force, not hippie rainbows and drum circles.

I seem to have a far greater command of the actual facts than you do. You keep saying Japanese whale in Australian waters, they do not, you keep insisting on some global sanctuary, it does not exist, it is a proposal to be adopted, I do nnot know why you keep repeating these items, repetition will not make them law.
You have a greater command of your own opinion than I do perhaps.  You don't have any command of the relevant facts to my position, you deny those facts and then prune yourself.   Again, it's not what I insist.   It's the facts that I accept that you cannot.
http://en.wikipedia....Whale_Sanctuary

Japans haul after the moratorium, but before they met the Sea Shepherd? What? The moratorium was penned in 1986 to take effect in 1988. Watson put the Sea Shepherd Society together in 1977. That is 9 years before the moratorium was even penned, and 11 years before it was to take effect!
Yes, Japan's haul after the moratorium but before they ever met Sea Shepherd.  How is that statement hard to understand?    Sea Shepherd has been meeting the Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean for the past nine seasons.  If you're good at math you will calculate correctly that it didn't start until the 21st century.    When he founded Sea Shepherd is irrelevant.

No alternatives? Yes I did, ground the Sea Shepherd and ask Japan back to the negotiating tabel. Whaling was stopped, you tell me how many whales were taken in 1987. And then tell me why, because you answer will not have the Sea Shepherd in it.
They've already been asked back to the negotiating table.  They were outvoted unanimously at the table when the moratorium was created.   Japan crawled back into whaling after the moratorium as I said. building up their whaling operation more and more every year, and was up to hauling in 1000 whales per year until Sea Shepherd came in and ruined their killing machine.   You offer no alternatives.   "Ask them back to the table" wow like that's going to work.  Poachers need to be shut down.  Cannon fire across their bows and an escort half way home would be more appropriate than sitting down and talking which they already do every year.   If sitting down and talking were effective it would already have been so.  You don't offer anything there at all, just imagination, rhetoric, and more denial of reality.

I also suggested Watson put his money where his mouth is and Challenge the Japanese to go back to traditional whaling from long boats only if he disables his fleet. But you can bet your bottom dollar Watson would never agree to something like that.
Why don't you do that?  They might listen to you, not Paul Watson.  Paul Watson's mission is to run the Japanese whaling fleet into the ground and it that means that Japan is going to bilk their taxpayers to keep a morally and financially bankrupt poaching operation above water then so be it.   Paul Watson might be somewhere near Japan instead, directing dolphins away from the Japanese home islands before they're caught up in another Japanese slaughter trap.  Paul Watson might be near Iceland, or the Faroes, or Ecuador, or the Pacific islands or the Mediterranean.   Whoever the biggest poachers are should receive a proportional amount of fist in their face to shut them down.  As whaling is concerned, the vast majority of Sea Shepherd's small budget should be allocated to stopping them.

They did not sneak into any place. They officially objected to the Moratorium and brazenly touted the law with some ridiculous loophole.
And the numbers increased exponentially from 1988 til they were hitting their self-imposed quota (it was not the IWC's quota as you claimed) until Sea Shepherd met them in the Southern Ocean to the point we're at today where their kill numbers have declined significantly.

You know why they keep taking whales? Because they can - legally. If they can take whales legally, we need to stop them legally. Watsons terrorist tactics only allow them further excuses to continue whaling.
Paul Watson is stopping them legally.  Why don't you arrest Peter Bethune if he's such a terrorist?  He's home with his wife and kids right now.   If he was a terrorist he'd be rotting in a prison cell somewhere.  Obviously the laws you spend your time petting and pruning, whatever they are, are voluntary too.   Whatever excuse Watson "allows" for them to continue whaling is just an excuse.  Japan is whaling for a reason.  They're proud of their poaching, they're industrious resourceful people and they don't like being told what not to do.   Historical precedence has shown, only by confrontation and force can the Japanese be made to heel.

Metting quotas? I suppose you did not hear about them having so much whale meat the years before last that they threw a lot away, and were giving it away in school lunches? Does not sound like the Sea Shepherd stopped much to me.
Meeting quotas.  And if demand is so low, then why do they have such a ridiculously high self-imposed quota?  Why don't you ever put the burden on the illegal Japanese whalers or their government enablers?

A frigate sized vessel has to be funded by a Government, so that means war.
What are you talking about?  No, a frigate sized vessel doesn't have to be funded by a government.  Absurd.

And that's the bottom line, if you want to stop them with violence, then stop nanyshagging around with the p***y little sea shepherd. Get a mercenary group onside and start a full blown war, because that is the alternative to legally removing illegal activity isn't it?
Sea Shepherd is not a violent organization in the least.  They haven't killed one person in over 35 years of operation.   The violent organization is the illegal Japanese whaling fleet when they fire a spear through the back of the head of a whale and then tow it on a line, shooting it repeatedly with rifles, while it slowly drowns in its own blood for 20 minutes in a torturous and horrifying death.  That's the only "violence" in this whole issue, and you're blind to that reality too.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#34    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,078 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:57 AM

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

I did watch it, how else do you figure I knew it was at the very end where the show Watson as a liar and cheat?

Because it's not at the end, and now I know for sure you didn't watch it.  

Well I am pleased to say for once I have to say your right about something :D It is about half way through, thanks for prompting me to watch again, even though my wife had a whine about me watching it again.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

What are the species you insist are endangered? Do you know or are you about to consult Mr Google? What has Watson actually taught you about these creatures? Only that Japanese are bad?

It's not about me and what I "insist".    Do your homework.   I don't need to consult Google.   Why does Watson have to teach me?    Whalers are illegal poachers.  If they were poor black Africans, they might end up with bullets in their heads and nobody like you would show up to cry about it.   You are more than capable to can carry your own water and do your own homework and learn the facts, and find out what species are 'endangered'.

So you do not even know if the species being whaled is endangered? I do my homework, I have left you a mountain of information which you simply dismiss.

I would not cry about it if the Japanese were legally dealt with. That way the problem would be resolved once and for all. Humpbacks and Grey's are the lergest components, what is their status? I already know, I just want you to show us how close the the brink of extinction we are talking.

No I wont be upset about African Poachers, they are removed legally by official sources, not vigilantes.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Nobody said do nothing, I said the Sea Shepherd aggravates the current situation, and to be frank, I think one has to be pretty blind not to see that.

I don't care what nobody said.  I care what nobody did:  Nothing.   You said they "aggravate the current situation" whatever the hell that means.   You're blind to reality and the explosive growth of Sea Shepherd vs. the financial and moral bankruptcy of the illegal Japanese whalers.

What do you mean Whatever the hell that means? Ot means the Japanese are p***ed and are not going to be rolling back operations based on the silly illegal antics of a vigilante group.

Your blind to Japans commercial might and the amount of International trade. If you think a bunch of vigilantes are capable of keeping up with them, your only kidding yourself.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

You told me that Watson was probably the greatest conservationist that ever lived, yet he does not worry about conservation when he might upset a supporter like Australia, so he leaves us alone. These issues are every bit as important as the whaling situation  and require exposure too, but you do not even know these issues exist because your hero Watson does not speak about them. He is a hypocrite, not a conservationist, he is not fit to wipe the bottom of a real conservationist.


He is arguably one of the greatest who ever lived and in my opinion the greatest alive today.  He's going to go down in history as actually doing something, not sitting on his hands and feeling good about himself.  He will die happy, knowing that he did all he could.  You seem to be blind to the explosive growth of support Sea Shepherd has enjoyed thanks to the exposure.   They're not just stopping Japanese in the Southern Ocean.  They're protecting sharks in the Galapagos, Bluefin in the Mediterranean, dolphins in Taiji, pilot whales in the Faroes, they're cleaning up beaches after man-made disasters, they're cutting long lines all over the world, turtles, seals.  Your disagreements are ignorant of ecology and purely political.  Maybe your real special interest is the Japanese government because you're highly motivated to make a stink.

All I agree with is "arguably" It most certainly is arguable as he is not even a conservationist. He is going to go down in history as the pirate who kept whaling alive in it's death throes. And he will die happy on a big pile of money knowing he fleeced all he could.

You do not seem to get it. Look at the countries he is attacking, i many cases he is even attacking indigenous rites, which is nothing short of ridiculous. He will not tackle major countries who keep Dolphins and Whales in captivity, which makes Watson the political tool.

I already told you about his "work" in the Faroes:


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 crew members ... 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.”



Is that what you call noble is it?


LOL, my arguments are the only ones that actually adress the current environmental situation! All you have done is lie about territory, make up laws, sympathise with Watson and post Migaloo clips. I bet you did not even know New Zealand has better environmental Cetacean policies than Australia does did you?

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Yes I do know, I used to bang the same drum, but learned it was wrong. Watson does not cover these issues so most people do not relise they exist, - be honest, did you know that Australia keeps Dolphins captive while New Zealand does not?
Why don't you go find another drum  to bang and actually do something then instead of wasting all your energy blathering about someone else's tactics?  


Differences between Australia and New Zealand are irrelevant to me because I don't need perfection in the help we get.   Sea Shepherd doesn't need to be the 2nd coming of Christ for us to support them.  What standards for perfection to you reserve for the things you care about, for the things that you support?   This pre-requisite that someone's farts mustn't stink before we can support them is reserved solely for Sea Shepherd in your wasteful diatribes   To restore your own credibility here, start a comprehensive discussion critical of the illegal Japanese whale poachers and outline a plan that you think can shut them down, put your money where your mouth is, and hold yourself to the same standards you're flippantly applying to others.

You mean why don't I stop proving the Sea Shepherd Society is just a terrorist group of pirates? I have given you no other reason for the animosity you show.

Actually being serious about conservation does not mean one has to be a second messiah. It's what real conservationists do. They take the entire problem on, not just the bits that look good on TV and make the papers. As Mentioned, people like David Fleay are actual conservationists, and there is a world of difference between what he did and what Watson does. Watson is a media whore. Not a conservationist.

My own credibility? With regards to what? I have given you links and proven your claims 100% wrong, you just seem to think if you keep repeating them, they will be accepted. Not the case. You are the one making up stuff about territory and INternational law, and everything you have said on those subjects has been wrong. As such, it seems to be your credibility that is in question, all you can do is say give money to Watson and things will ber better. It actually is starting to sound a bit like a cult.

I have already said, nothing can be done with the Japanese with the Sea Shepherd in the way. I have shown you Japan was stopped in 1987. We need to go back there, and fix the huge mistake the US made and get the Japanese back on the moratorium, voluntarily. Japan is a proud country, remember the Kamikaze? Hell will freeze over, and whales will evolve back onto land before such a proud nation bows to a small  group of pirate terrosists. The US is having a whole war over terrorism. Japan is not going to just say OK, Paul Watson you win. Think about it, do you honestly think that is going to ever happen?

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

My money? Being wisely spent on things like Greenseas Tuna (which another poster informed me of) that use lines to catch Tuna, not damaging nets. You know, research and supporting those who follow the rules and try to keep resources sustainable and the environment intact. Clever investment all year round, not dumping a bankroll to terrorists to feel good about myself.


That's not getting rid of the nets.  That's not going to bring back the tuna from the brink of extinction.  We're talking about a million dollar fish, and in Japan a few years ago, one already fetched close to a half a million dollars.  Eating a tuna that isn't caught in a net doesn't make the world go away.   That's the ostrich defense.  Sticking one's head in the sand and ignoring the greater abuses in the world.  So long as you sever yourself from it, and keep your own little habitat clean, you rationalize that's all it takes to solve the problem and you can live at peace with yourself.  Well sorry, that's not good enough for some people, like Paul Watson.  

I believe it is helping. If we all took the advice of real conservationists, the people in the market would have no choice but to conform would they? Do you buy line caught Tuna? Or do you just give money to Watson and hope the problem will go away?
Bluefin and Bigeye Tuna are a concern, that is true, not other species is. What goes into cans Yamato? Don't tell, me you will ask me to answer that one for you too. You do not seem to know much about the Ocean for one so concerned about it, and you think I am the Ostrich? I seem to understand the entire situation a great deal better than yourself, and have shown this from the start of the thread. All of your claims have been wrong, your support of Watson has been shown to be based on incorrect assumptions, and you refuse to accept that legally, they are terrorists. And you are trying to tell me you do not have your head in the sand but I do? Pull the other one, it plays another tune.
You have no facts, you have no laws, you have much passion and that is about it. Maybe you could do another Migaloo clip to further your non-existent "point".

No, it would not be good enough for Paul Watson, no TV cameras to be seen.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Please show me the menu with Migaloo on it. This is pure rhetoric, as is the entire reference, very Paul Watson of you.

BS. You don't need everything spoon fed to you.   "Mr. Google" can show you that the Japanese kill Humpbacks.  

And Japanese tradition will tell you they hold reverence to unusual instances like this. White Crows in particular hold considerable significance. Mr Google also tells me that Humpbacks are not endangered.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Any local University, or even most High Schools would have someone more than willing to talk to you. I can even ask the people who were kind enough to help me fully understand the situation if you like. They are not politically geared, the people I spoke to are English, they have no dog in this race.

Okay then, here's the internet.  Find someone.  Find whatever you think is relevant to tell me that history doesn't matter, populations of Great Whale species being run into the ground one after the other until their populations number in the tens of thousands or even less is somehow not a concern or endangerment to their future survival.   Find these brilliant high school teachers who can assure me it's not an issue.  Find these objective voices who aren't deluded by politics.  

So you want me to do this for you as well? OK, I'll send out two invitations, with some luck, we might get some good people in here to confirm that what Watson calls conservation, and what is conservation are two different things.

I cannot find these High School biologists for you, I do not even know where you live. Globally, there are quite a few schools. Unlike yourself, I do not hide the origin of my country. Marine Biologists do not care about polotics, they are marine biologists not politicians. But if you are too lazy to make the effort, I will do it for you.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

No, the Whales do not need the poachers, they need them gone, but you do not seem to understand that after 35+ years, Watsons terrorist actions are not helping. Whales still get taken every year.

No, you're just blind to reality.  After 35+ years, a global moratorium has been enacted, many nations that were whaling stopped completely, whale sanctuaries have been created, whalers have had their equipment destroyed, whalers have been taken to court, whalers have gone bankrupt, whales have been saved, whale populations have rebounded when they're not being slaughtered unsustainably, and Sea Shepherd is larger, more popular and more powerful than ever.  Instead of sinking half a whaling fleet, the entire fleet should be sunk and sunk again if its rebuilt.    The only regrettable thing about Sea Shepherd is their uniqueness.  That's what's so remarkable about them, but it shouldn't be.  There should be many organizations of free civil society, made up of the finest and bravest citizens from around the globe, coming together in solidarity and compassion like the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

There is nothing fine nor brave about being an eco-terrorist. The Sea Shepherd had absolutely nothing to do with the IWC's 1986 moratorium. You are again just making lies up to support you position to justify personally funding pirates.
Sanctuaries have been proposed, they are not globally recognised. You seem to keep missing this point. Neither you, nor Paul Watson have the right to tell the rest of the world what they can do and where they can go, no matter how passionate you become about your personal causes.
The Sea Shepherd has more television coverage than normal. Whale Wars is a TV reality show, like Big Brother, that is the mentality you are stooping to, and thinking it is actually helping.
No, there should ne be vigilante groups all over the place doing what they want. Lawlessness is not going to help anyone. Stupid to suggest the entire world go backwards to the mentality of the Wild Wild West. Brabaric useless and ineffective. I do not know why you think fighting barbarism with barbarism is a good idea.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

They do not. You keep saying they whale in Australian waters, but that is a lie. I even gave you a map. And no Sanctuary legally exists. It's a voluntary commitment.

BS, you didn't give me a map of where Japanese don't whale.  And here we also find out that you don't even respect the sanctuary!   You offer nothing to protect whales, you're a whale meater.  From a political standpoint, you might even be worse than the people who actually eat it.    You don't respect any of the laws that have been enacted to protect whales, you just make asinine statements that they "don't legally exist".  That is denial of reality, and it's become your trademark.

I never said that, look up and read again, I gave you a map if Australian territorial waters, show me where a whale has been caught in those boundaries. It seems you did not even look closely enough at the map to even realise that basic.

And it proves the fictional boundaries you keep blathering on about from your soapbox only exist in yours' and Watson's heads. If my trademark is pointing out lies people say, then I am OK with that.

Whale meater? LOL, Now your really off the deep end. I seem to want whaling to end more than you do, because I am trying to have a think about the actual situation, and not throwing a knee jerk reaction at it. When you start resorting to childish antics like this, and obtusely not recognising actual territorial boundaries, I can only assume you are desperate with such antics, which is good, because I am getting tired of refuting your lies. And lies are all your territorial claims have been proven to be. I thought it was just ignorance to begin with, but your repetition insists that you are deliberately lying now.



Japanese whaling within Australian waters in Antarctica is illegal and should be stopped, a court ruled on Tuesday.

It is now up to the Australian government to decide whether to enforce the injunction. And even then it is unclear whether the ruling could be enforced as unless the whaling vessels enter Australia, "there is no practical mechanism by which orders of this court can be enforced" conceded Federal Court judge Jim Allsop.

LINK



View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

The moratorium too is voluntary, and no country has to sign nor recognise it. It;s more of a goodwill gesture, and when the US took the Goodwill ut of the moratorium, Japan refused to recognise it.

All laws are voluntary by virtue of whether we respect their authority to obey them, which is a function of how enthusiastically they're enforced and the chances of getting caught.  I voluntarily drive the speed limit every day, except on Sundays.  Japan refused to recognize it and now they're facing someone who is not failing to do so.   If we can't enforce the rules and regulations we already have on the books, they're impotent.  That makes Sea Shepherd even more important for you and I to support financially.

That is the biggest load of Horse Hockey I have heard so far in this thread. All laws are voluntary are they? Right, I just might go kick Mr Packer out if his mansion, and claim it my own.
I drive the speed limit all the time. On long stretches when it is hard to maintain a low speed, I use cruise control. If you want to put your foot down, at least do it where you can only hurt yourself would you? I sure hope wherever it is that you live, that they invest heavily in speed cameras. I like to drive fast, most boys do, but I do not put other lives at risk. I used to go to a drag strip here called Willowbank, and get it out of my system there. My wife got a ticket for being 12K over the limit, that is the law, and it is enforced  and now I have to pay her way. But you might suggest I just tell them no way huh? I'll just let them know I do not choose to obey this one?

No, a moratorium is not law, not in any way shape or fashion. It's an authorisation. Do you understand this difference? Yes, the moratorium is impotent, that is why it is Voluntary!! Crikey Moses! But at least on this front I hope we made some progress!

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Yes, thank you GREENPEACE.

Greenpeace's tactics of documenting and begging fails to save lives.  The Japanese whale right under their noses anyway.   Japanese hauls have been impacted severely by direct confrontation and physical force, not hippie rainbows and drum circles.

Japanese have been whaling right under everyone's noses, because they are not breaking the law.

This impact that you thin is so effective makes people angry, and those people are going to come back next year, even angrier. The people form Greenpeace will have the actual information to prove Japan lies about whaling, and remember  we are talking national pride. Japan does not want to be seen as a nation of liars, again, pride can be used effectively, not stupidly.

The Sea Shepherd tactics ensure whaling will be here next year, and the years after that and as many as the insist in staying on the water for their TV show 0 by the way, in it's 8th season now! Watson must be raking it in.

All that money, and just how much is going toward conservation? Do you know what Whale Wars contributes to conservation each year? I think it's about $0.00. What were you saying earlier?


Such tactics are not only dangerous to the whalers, they are dangerous to the cause of stopping Japanese whaling. Our political analysis is unequivocal: if Japanese whaling is to be stopped, it will be stopped by a domestic decision within the Japanese government to do so.   That's why we have invested heavily in a Greenpeace office in Japan and efforts to speak directly to the Japanese public -- 70 percent of whom are unaware that whaling takes place in the Southern Ocean at all.  A majority of those who are aware of the whaling program, oppose it.   Support for whaling in Japan has been steadily falling for the last decade. Consumption of whale meat is in decline, the cost of the program to taxpayers is being questioned by the business community, and the political costs of the program have created opposition in the Foreign Affairs department in Japan.  All of this progress could be undone by a nationalist backlash.  By making it easy to paint anti-whaling forces as dangerous, piratical terrorists, Sea Shepherd could undermine the forces within Japan which could actually bring whaling to an end.

LINK


And according to the Japanese, this is indeed exactly what ishappening. The Sea Shepherd are uniting Japan.

In February 2010, pro-whaling demonstrators gathered outside the Australian Embassy in Tokyo to protest the group. A political activist said that Sea Shepherd's actions were "absolutely racial discrimination against Japanese people.

In his 2009 book, Whaling in Japan, Jun Morikawa states that Sea Shepherd's confrontational tactics have actually strengthened Japan's resolve to continue with its whaling program. According to Morikawa, Sea Shepherd's activities against Japan's whaling ships have allowed the Japanese government to rally domestic support for the program from Japanese who were otherwise ambivalent about the practice of hunting and eating whales

Before you have a link spit, it's all from Wiki.

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

I seem to have a far greater command of the actual facts than you do. You keep saying Japanese whale in Australian waters, they do not, you keep insisting on some global sanctuary, it does not exist, it is a proposal to be adopted, I do not know why you keep repeating these items, repetition will not make them law.

You have a greater command of your own opinion than I do perhaps.  You don't have any command of the relevant facts to my position, you deny those facts and then prune yourself.   Again, it's not what I insist.   It's the facts that I accept that you cannot.
http://en.wikipedia....Whale_Sanctuary

Prune myself? did you mean preen? If you are going to try to insult, at least do it right would you?

I keep trying to explain these "Sanctuaries" and "territories" to you. Perhaps you can explain something to me, why does your link call it an alleged sanctuary?

The Sanctuary is the scene of an ongoing controversy between Australia and Japan over whaling. In 2008 the Australian Federal Court ruled it was illegal under Australian law for the Japanese whaling fleet to kill whales in the Sanctuary.[3]Yet the Japanese continue to kill Whales in the alleged sanctuary every year.

See.

You quoted the Australian Ocean Sanctuary, ever heard of the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, or the Indian Ocean Sanctuary? WIki has this to say:

Japan has argued that the establishment of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary was in contravention of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) on which the IWC is based and is therefore illegal.
This view received strong support from Professor W. T. Burke of the University of Washington in his paper circulated as IWC Document Number IWC/48/33. He refers to Article V(2) of the ICRW, which states that the creation of any sanctuary must "be based on scientific findings" and "take into consideration the interests of the consumers of whale products and the whaling industry"



View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

Japans haul after the moratorium, but before they met the Sea Shepherd? What? The moratorium was penned in 1986 to take effect in 1988. Watson put the Sea Shepherd Society together in 1977. That is 9 years before the moratorium was even penned, and 11 years before it was to take effect!

Yes, Japan's haul after the moratorium but before they ever met Sea Shepherd.  How is that statement hard to understand?    Sea Shepherd has been meeting the Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean for the past nine seasons.  If you're good at math you will calculate correctly that it didn't start until the 21st century.    When he founded Sea Shepherd is irrelevant.

I see, so you are saying the Japan was taking a great deal more before the Sea Shepherd showed up, is that is? How was the haul in 1987? Do you think that is why stocks are recovering? You really do not think it has anything to do with the US and Australia ending whaling operations at the same time??

It is funny that you recognise the specific Japanese harassment based on how long a TV Show has been on!

What exactly are you trying to say? That the Sea Shepherd ensures that a catch will be small? They also ensure the Japanese will return? How is that helping?

View PostYamato, on 07 March 2013 - 04:45 AM, said:

No alternatives? Yes I did, ground the Sea Shepherd and ask Japan back to the negotiating tabel. Whaling was stopped, you tell me how many whales were taken in 1987. And then tell me why, because you answer will not have the Sea Shepherd in it.

They've already been asked back to the negotiating table.  They were outvoted unanimously at the table when the moratorium was created.   Japan crawled back into whaling after the moratorium as I said. building up their whaling operation more and more every year, and was up to hauling in 1000 whales per year until Sea Shepherd came in and ruined their killing machine.   You offer no alternatives.   "Ask them back to the table" wow like that's going to work.  Poachers need to be shut down.  Cannon fire across their bows and an escort half way home would be more appropriate than sitting down and talking which they already do every year.   If sitting down and talking were effective it would already have been so.  You don't offer anything there at all, just imagination, rhetoric, and more denial of reality.

Yes it is going to work. No doubt about it, your kidding yourself if you think a band of pirates is going to work. You do not seem to understand that the US went back on the moratorium, and that is why Japan went back to whaling, because they were not allowed to fish! The Sea Shepherd had not ruined any industry. All it has done is put it in the spotlight, and made money from it.

It has been done! How you keep missing that is amazing. What year has the Sea Shepherd equalled the success of talks resulting in NO Japanese whalers taking to the Oceans in 1987? When has the Sea Shepherd reduced one year to a zero quota?

That you refuse to talk at the table just shows your a thug at heart, and think you can bash your way through life. Good luck with that philosophy.

Yamato said:
I also suggested Watson put his money where his mouth is and Challenge the Japanese to go back to traditional whaling from long boats only if he disables his fleet. But you can bet your bottom dollar Watson would never agree to something like that.


Why don't you do that?  They might listen to you, not Paul Watson.  Paul Watson's mission is to run the Japanese whaling fleet into the ground and it that means that Japan is going to bilk their taxpayers to keep a morally and financially bankrupt poaching operation above water then so be it.   Paul Watson might be somewhere near Japan instead, directing dolphins away from the Japanese home islands before they're caught up in another Japanese slaughter trap.  Paul Watson might be near Iceland, or the Faroes, or Ecuador, or the Pacific islands or the Mediterranean.   Whoever the biggest poachers are should receive a proportional amount of fist in their face to shut them down.  As whaling is concerned, the vast majority of Sea Shepherd's small budget should be allocated to stopping them.


I'd love to offer to scuttle Watsons fleet. But I could only do that with violence  and what would happen then? Watson would be determined to get two more boats, wouldnt he? Sinking in yet? This is what he does to the Japanese. He has as much right to harras them, as I do to sink any Sea Shepherd boat.

You do not seem to understand that the people of Japan see Watson as racist, and they will support their country, not some jumped up upstart.

Paul Watsons mission is to keep the audience glued to their screens, TV cameras back each year to gain further support from the ignorant and Whalers on the water to keep the show running. Once the law catches up with him, Paul Watson will be in jail, not out harassing indigenous peoples trying to feed tribes, where he belongs.

Yamato said:
They did not sneak into any place. They officially objected to the Moratorium and brazenly touted the law with some ridiculous loophole.

And the numbers increased exponentially from 1988 til they were hitting their self-imposed quota (it was not the IWC's quota as you claimed) until Sea Shepherd met them in the Southern Ocean to the point we're at today where their kill numbers have declined significantly.


Some numbers have been reduced, but you do not seem to realise, what they do not kill in the south, they just take from the north eventually. Watson didn't tell you that on the telly did he. All this does is ensure it will continue every year. These numbers would pale next to a zero quota that could be achieved through negotiation.

Yamato said:
You know why they keep taking whales? Because they can - legally. If they can take whales legally, we need to stop them legally. Watsons terrorist tactics only allow them further excuses to continue whaling.

Paul Watson is stopping them legally.  Why don't you arrest Peter Bethune if he's such a terrorist?  He's home with his wife and kids right now.   If he was a terrorist he'd be rotting in a prison cell somewhere.  Obviously the laws you spend your time petting and pruning, whatever they are, are voluntary too.   Whatever excuse Watson "allows" for them to continue whaling is just an excuse.  Japan is whaling for a reason.  They're proud of their poaching, they're industrious resourceful people and they don't like being told what not to do.   Historical precedence has shown, only by confrontation and force can the Japanese be made to heel.


Well, now your just out and out lying again.
Watson's actions are not legal, nor are his self imposed laws. That is why there is currently a warrant for his arrest. All the terrorist actions Listed for you the page previous are direct violations of the law.

LOL, Peter Bethune? Why would I bother the poor fellow? He has been charged for his stupid actions already, I do not think he will be setting foot on Japanese soi;d for a while, and the Sea Shepherd abandoned him for boarding the Japanese vessel. Are you serious about this guy? He hates the Sea Shepherd.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has cut its links with anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune after he carried a bow and arrows during confrontations with Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean.

"Therefore, although Sea Shepherd will continue to support Captain Bethune through his legal battle in Japan, Sea Shepherd will not select him to participate in future campaigns.

LINK

Watson can carry guns though. As I have proven to you.

But what does Peter have to say?



Pete Bethune has blasted Sea Shepherd and its leader Paul Watson, describing them as ‘dishonest’ and ‘morally bankrupt’.

Pete Bethune resigned from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in an open letter on his Facebook page today; he says he can no longer represent a group that deliberately misleads and lies.

“It's gradually dawned on me how bad they are, every month there's another big lie floating around,” he wrote.

Bethune was captain of the anti-whaling vessel Ady Gil that was rammed by Japanese whaling ship the Shonan Maru 2 earlier this year.


Bethune now says he was directed by Sea Shepherd admiral Paul Watson to deliberately sink the Ady Gil after it was hit by the Japanese ship.
“It was done for PR purposes and after the sinking I wasn't allowed to talk to anyone about it and I wasn't even allowed to visit Ady Gil,” he says.

“This is Ady Gil's boat and I've got to keep it a secret from him.”

Sea Shepherd expelled Bethune during his trial in Japan but later retracted their comments saying they had done so to help his case. Bethune says that too is lies.

“And it didn't assist my trial at all; the lawyer said it portrayed me as dishonest,” he says.

Bethune says senior Sea Shepherd personnel routinely lie and conspire over serious matters and his resignation letter points out many of these.


LINK

Poor bugger had to learn about Watson the hard way.

Yamato said:
Metting quotas? I suppose you did not hear about them having so much whale meat the years before last that they threw a lot away, and were giving it away in school lunches? Does not sound like the Sea Shepherd stopped much to me.
Meeting quotas.  

And if demand is so low, then why do they have such a ridiculously high self-imposed quota?  Why don't you ever put the burden on the illegal Japanese whalers or their government enablers?



Duhh!!! Because of the Sea Shepherd!

I canot put the burden on the Japanese because whilst both parties are dirty low down dogs, the Japanese are following the letter of the law. The law must be upheld, and the law is how the Japanese will be stopped. Legally. I cannot fathom how stupid it is to actually believe that a small group of vigilantes would stop an entire nation. I mean really, think about it!

Yamato said:
A frigate sized vessel has to be funded by a Government, so that means war.

What are you talking about?  No, a frigate sized vessel doesn't have to be funded by a government.  Absurd.


Do you know what it costs to not only buy, but run and maintain something like that? I suppose Whale Wars might come to the party, if the rating stay up for people like you, but Japans electronic Industry alone is about a million times the size of the Sea Shepherd Society.

Yamato'said:
And that's the bottom line, if you want to stop them with violence, then stop nanyshagging around with the p***y little sea shepherd. Get a mercenary group onside and start a full blown war, because that is the alternative to legally removing illegal activity isn't it?

Sea Shepherd is not a violent organization in the least.  They haven't killed one person in over 35 years of operation.   The violent organization is the illegal Japanese whaling fleet when they fire a spear through the back of the head of a whale and then tow it on a line, shooting it repeatedly with rifles, while it slowly drowns in its own blood for 20 minutes in a torturous and horrifying death.  That's the only "violence" in this whole issue, and you're blind to that reality too.


Again, you are out and out lying, I really do not think it helps you position when you just outright lie. They are indeed very violent, and that is why they get the attention they do. The Japanese Whalers have not killed one person either, and for longer than 35 years. I suppose that means the atrocities in WWII did not happen?

The one thing I am in front of you on is the issue of whaling, I do not have to keep lying to continue my debate, I have offered links to varying sources, and corrected your misinformation regarding territories and sanctuaries. I hope you learned at least something out of all this. I think I want whaling to end more than you do because I have got over the anger that allows shock value to let one think that violence is a good idea. Now I want to actually try something that works, but as long as people like you keep people like Watson on the water, I might as well consider whales extinct now. That is all Watson will eventually accomplish, a slow but sure demise of the species.

Edited by psyche101, 07 March 2013 - 07:59 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#35    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:31 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 07 March 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

Well I am pleased to say for once I have to say your right about something :D It is about half way through, thanks for prompting me to watch again, even though my wife had a whine about me watching it again.



So you do not even know if the species being whaled is endangered? I do my homework, I have left you a mountain of information which you simply dismiss.

I would not cry about it if the Japanese were legally dealt with. That way the problem would be resolved once and for all. Humpbacks and Grey's are the lergest components, what is their status? I already know, I just want you to show us how close the the brink of extinction we are talking.

No I wont be upset about African Poachers, they are removed legally by official sources, not vigilantes.



What do you mean Whatever the hell that means? Ot means the Japanese are p***ed and are not going to be rolling back operations based on the silly illegal antics of a vigilante group.

Your blind to Japans commercial might and the amount of International trade. If you think a bunch of vigilantes are capable of keeping up with them, your only kidding yourself.



All I agree with is "arguably" It most certainly is arguable as he is not even a conservationist. He is going to go down in history as the pirate who kept whaling alive in it's death throes. And he will die happy on a big pile of money knowing he fleeced all he could.

You do not seem to get it. Look at the countries he is attacking, i many cases he is even attacking indigenous rites, which is nothing short of ridiculous. He will not tackle major countries who keep Dolphins and Whales in captivity, which makes Watson the political tool.

I already told you about his "work" in the Faroes:


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 crew members ... 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.”



Is that what you call noble is it?


LOL, my arguments are the only ones that actually adress the current environmental situation! All you have done is lie about territory, make up laws, sympathise with Watson and post Migaloo clips. I bet you did not even know New Zealand has better environmental Cetacean policies than Australia does did you?



You mean why don't I stop proving the Sea Shepherd Society is just a terrorist group of pirates? I have given you no other reason for the animosity you show.

Actually being serious about conservation does not mean one has to be a second messiah. It's what real conservationists do. They take the entire problem on, not just the bits that look good on TV and make the papers. As Mentioned, people like David Fleay are actual conservationists, and there is a world of difference between what he did and what Watson does. Watson is a media whore. Not a conservationist.

My own credibility? With regards to what? I have given you links and proven your claims 100% wrong, you just seem to think if you keep repeating them, they will be accepted. Not the case. You are the one making up stuff about territory and INternational law, and everything you have said on those subjects has been wrong. As such, it seems to be your credibility that is in question, all you can do is say give money to Watson and things will ber better. It actually is starting to sound a bit like a cult.

I have already said, nothing can be done with the Japanese with the Sea Shepherd in the way. I have shown you Japan was stopped in 1987. We need to go back there, and fix the huge mistake the US made and get the Japanese back on the moratorium, voluntarily. Japan is a proud country, remember the Kamikaze? Hell will freeze over, and whales will evolve back onto land before such a proud nation bows to a small  group of pirate terrosists. The US is having a whole war over terrorism. Japan is not going to just say OK, Paul Watson you win. Think about it, do you honestly think that is going to ever happen?



I believe it is helping. If we all took the advice of real conservationists, the people in the market would have no choice but to conform would they? Do you buy line caught Tuna? Or do you just give money to Watson and hope the problem will go away?
Bluefin and Bigeye Tuna are a concern, that is true, not other species is. What goes into cans Yamato? Don't tell, me you will ask me to answer that one for you too. You do not seem to know much about the Ocean for one so concerned about it, and you think I am the Ostrich? I seem to understand the entire situation a great deal better than yourself, and have shown this from the start of the thread. All of your claims have been wrong, your support of Watson has been shown to be based on incorrect assumptions, and you refuse to accept that legally, they are terrorists. And you are trying to tell me you do not have your head in the sand but I do? Pull the other one, it plays another tune.
You have no facts, you have no laws, you have much passion and that is about it. Maybe you could do another Migaloo clip to further your non-existent "point".

No, it would not be good enough for Paul Watson, no TV cameras to be seen.



And Japanese tradition will tell you they hold reverence to unusual instances like this. White Crows in particular hold considerable significance. Mr Google also tells me that Humpbacks are not endangered.



So you want me to do this for you as well? OK, I'll send out two invitations, with some luck, we might get some good people in here to confirm that what Watson calls conservation, and what is conservation are two different things.

I cannot find these High School biologists for you, I do not even know where you live. Globally, there are quite a few schools. Unlike yourself, I do not hide the origin of my country. Marine Biologists do not care about polotics, they are marine biologists not politicians. But if you are too lazy to make the effort, I will do it for you.



There is nothing fine nor brave about being an eco-terrorist. The Sea Shepherd had absolutely nothing to do with the IWC's 1986 moratorium. You are again just making lies up to support you position to justify personally funding pirates.
Sanctuaries have been proposed, they are not globally recognised. You seem to keep missing this point. Neither you, nor Paul Watson have the right to tell the rest of the world what they can do and where they can go, no matter how passionate you become about your personal causes.
The Sea Shepherd has more television coverage than normal. Whale Wars is a TV reality show, like Big Brother, that is the mentality you are stooping to, and thinking it is actually helping.
No, there should ne be vigilante groups all over the place doing what they want. Lawlessness is not going to help anyone. Stupid to suggest the entire world go backwards to the mentality of the Wild Wild West. Brabaric useless and ineffective. I do not know why you think fighting barbarism with barbarism is a good idea.



I never said that, look up and read again, I gave you a map if Australian territorial waters, show me where a whale has been caught in those boundaries. It seems you did not even look closely enough at the map to even realise that basic.

And it proves the fictional boundaries you keep blathering on about from your soapbox only exist in yours' and Watson's heads. If my trademark is pointing out lies people say, then I am OK with that.

Whale meater? LOL, Now your really off the deep end. I seem to want whaling to end more than you do, because I am trying to have a think about the actual situation, and not throwing a knee jerk reaction at it. When you start resorting to childish antics like this, and obtusely not recognising actual territorial boundaries, I can only assume you are desperate with such antics, which is good, because I am getting tired of refuting your lies. And lies are all your territorial claims have been proven to be. I thought it was just ignorance to begin with, but your repetition insists that you are deliberately lying now.



Japanese whaling within Australian waters in Antarctica is illegal and should be stopped, a court ruled on Tuesday.

It is now up to the Australian government to decide whether to enforce the injunction. And even then it is unclear whether the ruling could be enforced as unless the whaling vessels enter Australia, "there is no practical mechanism by which orders of this court can be enforced" conceded Federal Court judge Jim Allsop.

LINK





That is the biggest load of Horse Hockey I have heard so far in this thread. All laws are voluntary are they? Right, I just might go kick Mr Packer out if his mansion, and claim it my own.
I drive the speed limit all the time. On long stretches when it is hard to maintain a low speed, I use cruise control. If you want to put your foot down, at least do it where you can only hurt yourself would you? I sure hope wherever it is that you live, that they invest heavily in speed cameras. I like to drive fast, most boys do, but I do not put other lives at risk. I used to go to a drag strip here called Willowbank, and get it out of my system there. My wife got a ticket for being 12K over the limit, that is the law, and it is enforced  and now I have to pay her way. But you might suggest I just tell them no way huh? I'll just let them know I do not choose to obey this one?

No, a moratorium is not law, not in any way shape or fashion. It's an authorisation. Do you understand this difference? Yes, the moratorium is impotent, that is why it is Voluntary!! Crikey Moses! But at least on this front I hope we made some progress!



Japanese have been whaling right under everyone's noses, because they are not breaking the law.

This impact that you thin is so effective makes people angry, and those people are going to come back next year, even angrier. The people form Greenpeace will have the actual information to prove Japan lies about whaling, and remember  we are talking national pride. Japan does not want to be seen as a nation of liars, again, pride can be used effectively, not stupidly.

The Sea Shepherd tactics ensure whaling will be here next year, and the years after that and as many as the insist in staying on the water for their TV show 0 by the way, in it's 8th season now! Watson must be raking it in.

All that money, and just how much is going toward conservation? Do you know what Whale Wars contributes to conservation each year? I think it's about $0.00. What were you saying earlier?


Such tactics are not only dangerous to the whalers, they are dangerous to the cause of stopping Japanese whaling. Our political analysis is unequivocal: if Japanese whaling is to be stopped, it will be stopped by a domestic decision within the Japanese government to do so.   That's why we have invested heavily in a Greenpeace office in Japan and efforts to speak directly to the Japanese public -- 70 percent of whom are unaware that whaling takes place in the Southern Ocean at all.  A majority of those who are aware of the whaling program, oppose it.   Support for whaling in Japan has been steadily falling for the last decade. Consumption of whale meat is in decline, the cost of the program to taxpayers is being questioned by the business community, and the political costs of the program have created opposition in the Foreign Affairs department in Japan.  All of this progress could be undone by a nationalist backlash.  By making it easy to paint anti-whaling forces as dangerous, piratical terrorists, Sea Shepherd could undermine the forces within Japan which could actually bring whaling to an end.

LINK


And according to the Japanese, this is indeed exactly what ishappening. The Sea Shepherd are uniting Japan.

In February 2010, pro-whaling demonstrators gathered outside the Australian Embassy in Tokyo to protest the group. A political activist said that Sea Shepherd's actions were "absolutely racial discrimination against Japanese people.

In his 2009 book, Whaling in Japan, Jun Morikawa states that Sea Shepherd's confrontational tactics have actually strengthened Japan's resolve to continue with its whaling program. According to Morikawa, Sea Shepherd's activities against Japan's whaling ships have allowed the Japanese government to rally domestic support for the program from Japanese who were otherwise ambivalent about the practice of hunting and eating whales

Before you have a link spit, it's all from Wiki.



Prune myself? did you mean preen? If you are going to try to insult, at least do it right would you?

I keep trying to explain these "Sanctuaries" and "territories" to you. Perhaps you can explain something to me, why does your link call it an alleged sanctuary?

The Sanctuary is the scene of an ongoing controversy between Australia and Japan over whaling. In 2008 the Australian Federal Court ruled it was illegal under Australian law for the Japanese whaling fleet to kill whales in the Sanctuary.[3]Yet the Japanese continue to kill Whales in the alleged sanctuary every year.

See.

You quoted the Australian Ocean Sanctuary, ever heard of the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, or the Indian Ocean Sanctuary? WIki has this to say:

Japan has argued that the establishment of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary was in contravention of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) on which the IWC is based and is therefore illegal.
This view received strong support from Professor W. T. Burke of the University of Washington in his paper circulated as IWC Document Number IWC/48/33. He refers to Article V(2) of the ICRW, which states that the creation of any sanctuary must "be based on scientific findings" and "take into consideration the interests of the consumers of whale products and the whaling industry"





I see, so you are saying the Japan was taking a great deal more before the Sea Shepherd showed up, is that is? How was the haul in 1987? Do you think that is why stocks are recovering? You really do not think it has anything to do with the US and Australia ending whaling operations at the same time??

It is funny that you recognise the specific Japanese harassment based on how long a TV Show has been on!

What exactly are you trying to say? That the Sea Shepherd ensures that a catch will be small? They also ensure the Japanese will return? How is that helping?



Yes it is going to work. No doubt about it, your kidding yourself if you think a band of pirates is going to work. You do not seem to understand that the US went back on the moratorium, and that is why Japan went back to whaling, because they were not allowed to fish! The Sea Shepherd had not ruined any industry. All it has done is put it in the spotlight, and made money from it.

It has been done! How you keep missing that is amazing. What year has the Sea Shepherd equalled the success of talks resulting in NO Japanese whalers taking to the Oceans in 1987? When has the Sea Shepherd reduced one year to a zero quota?

That you refuse to talk at the table just shows your a thug at heart, and think you can bash your way through life. Good luck with that philosophy.

Yamato said:
I also suggested Watson put his money where his mouth is and Challenge the Japanese to go back to traditional whaling from long boats only if he disables his fleet. But you can bet your bottom dollar Watson would never agree to something like that.


Why don't you do that?  They might listen to you, not Paul Watson.  Paul Watson's mission is to run the Japanese whaling fleet into the ground and it that means that Japan is going to bilk their taxpayers to keep a morally and financially bankrupt poaching operation above water then so be it.   Paul Watson might be somewhere near Japan instead, directing dolphins away from the Japanese home islands before they're caught up in another Japanese slaughter trap.  Paul Watson might be near Iceland, or the Faroes, or Ecuador, or the Pacific islands or the Mediterranean.   Whoever the biggest poachers are should receive a proportional amount of fist in their face to shut them down.  As whaling is concerned, the vast majority of Sea Shepherd's small budget should be allocated to stopping them.


I'd love to offer to scuttle Watsons fleet. But I could only do that with violence  and what would happen then? Watson would be determined to get two more boats, wouldnt he? Sinking in yet? This is what he does to the Japanese. He has as much right to harras them, as I do to sink any Sea Shepherd boat.

You do not seem to understand that the people of Japan see Watson as racist, and they will support their country, not some jumped up upstart.

Paul Watsons mission is to keep the audience glued to their screens, TV cameras back each year to gain further support from the ignorant and Whalers on the water to keep the show running. Once the law catches up with him, Paul Watson will be in jail, not out harassing indigenous peoples trying to feed tribes, where he belongs.

Yamato said:
They did not sneak into any place. They officially objected to the Moratorium and brazenly touted the law with some ridiculous loophole.

And the numbers increased exponentially from 1988 til they were hitting their self-imposed quota (it was not the IWC's quota as you claimed) until Sea Shepherd met them in the Southern Ocean to the point we're at today where their kill numbers have declined significantly.


Some numbers have been reduced, but you do not seem to realise, what they do not kill in the south, they just take from the north eventually. Watson didn't tell you that on the telly did he. All this does is ensure it will continue every year. These numbers would pale next to a zero quota that could be achieved through negotiation.

Yamato said:
You know why they keep taking whales? Because they can - legally. If they can take whales legally, we need to stop them legally. Watsons terrorist tactics only allow them further excuses to continue whaling.

Paul Watson is stopping them legally.  Why don't you arrest Peter Bethune if he's such a terrorist?  He's home with his wife and kids right now.   If he was a terrorist he'd be rotting in a prison cell somewhere.  Obviously the laws you spend your time petting and pruning, whatever they are, are voluntary too.   Whatever excuse Watson "allows" for them to continue whaling is just an excuse.  Japan is whaling for a reason.  They're proud of their poaching, they're industrious resourceful people and they don't like being told what not to do.   Historical precedence has shown, only by confrontation and force can the Japanese be made to heel.


Well, now your just out and out lying again.
Watson's actions are not legal, nor are his self imposed laws. That is why there is currently a warrant for his arrest. All the terrorist actions Listed for you the page previous are direct violations of the law.

LOL, Peter Bethune? Why would I bother the poor fellow? He has been charged for his stupid actions already, I do not think he will be setting foot on Japanese soi;d for a while, and the Sea Shepherd abandoned him for boarding the Japanese vessel. Are you serious about this guy? He hates the Sea Shepherd.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has cut its links with anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune after he carried a bow and arrows during confrontations with Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean.

"Therefore, although Sea Shepherd will continue to support Captain Bethune through his legal battle in Japan, Sea Shepherd will not select him to participate in future campaigns.

LINK

Watson can carry guns though. As I have proven to you.

But what does Peter have to say?



Pete Bethune has blasted Sea Shepherd and its leader Paul Watson, describing them as ‘dishonest’ and ‘morally bankrupt’.
Pete Bethune resigned from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in an open letter on his Facebook page today; he says he can no longer represent a group that deliberately misleads and lies.
“It's gradually dawned on me how bad they are, every month there's another big lie floating around,” he wrote.
Bethune was captain of the anti-whaling vessel Ady Gil that was rammed by Japanese whaling ship the Shonan Maru 2 earlier this year.

Bethune now says he was directed by Sea Shepherd admiral Paul Watson to deliberately sink the Ady Gil after it was hit by the Japanese ship.
“It was done for PR purposes and after the sinking I wasn't allowed to talk to anyone about it and I wasn't even allowed to visit Ady Gil,” he says.
“This is Ady Gil's boat and I've got to keep it a secret from him.”
Sea Shepherd expelled Bethune during his trial in Japan but later retracted their comments saying they had done so to help his case. Bethune says that too is lies.
“And it didn't assist my trial at all; the lawyer said it portrayed me as dishonest,” he says.
Bethune says senior Sea Shepherd personnel routinely lie and conspire over serious matters and his resignation letter points out many of these.

LINK

Poor bugger had to learn about Watson the hard way.

Yamato said:
Metting quotas? I suppose you did not hear about them having so much whale meat the years before last that they threw a lot away, and were giving it away in school lunches? Does not sound like the Sea Shepherd stopped much to me.
Meeting quotas.  

And if demand is so low, then why do they have such a ridiculously high self-imposed quota?  Why don't you ever put the burden on the illegal Japanese whalers or their government enablers?



Duhh!!! Because of the Sea Shepherd!

I canot put the burden on the Japanese because whilst both parties are dirty low down dogs, the Japanese are following the letter of the law. The law must be upheld, and the law is how the Japanese will be stopped. Legally. I cannot fathom how stupid it is to actually believe that a small group of vigilantes would stop an entire nation. I mean really, think about it!

Yamato said:
A frigate sized vessel has to be funded by a Government, so that means war.

What are you talking about?  No, a frigate sized vessel doesn't have to be funded by a government.  Absurd.


Do you know what it costs to not only buy, but run and maintain something like that? I suppose Whale Wars might come to the party, if the rating stay up for people like you, but Japans electronic Industry alone is about a million times the size of the Sea Shepherd Society.

Yamato'said:
And that's the bottom line, if you want to stop them with violence, then stop nanyshagging around with the p***y little sea shepherd. Get a mercenary group onside and start a full blown war, because that is the alternative to legally removing illegal activity isn't it?

Sea Shepherd is not a violent organization in the least.  They haven't killed one person in over 35 years of operation.   The violent organization is the illegal Japanese whaling fleet when they fire a spear through the back of the head of a whale and then tow it on a line, shooting it repeatedly with rifles, while it slowly drowns in its own blood for 20 minutes in a torturous and horrifying death.  That's the only "violence" in this whole issue, and you're blind to that reality too.


Again, you are out and out lying, I really do not think it helps you position when you just outright lie. They are indeed very violent, and that is why they get the attention they do. The Japanese Whalers have not killed one person either, and for longer than 35 years. I suppose that means the atrocities in WWII did not happen?

The one thing I am in front of you on is the issue of whaling, I do not have to keep lying to continue my debate, I have offered links to varying sources, and corrected your misinformation regarding territories and sanctuaries. I hope you learned at least something out of all this. I think I want whaling to end more than you do because I have got over the anger that allows shock value to let one think that violence is a good idea. Now I want to actually try something that works, but as long as people like you keep people like Watson on the water, I might as well consider whales extinct now. That is all Watson will eventually accomplish, a slow but sure demise of the species.


Well I am pleased to say for once I have to say your right about something :D It is about half way through, thanks for prompting me to watch again, even though my wife had a whine about me watching it again.
That's not the only thing immediately identifiable that you're wrong about.   That's just the first thing you're willing to admit, the first sign of honesty in this entire discourse.


So you do not even know if the species being whaled is endangered? I do my homework, I have left you a mountain of information which you simply dismiss.
It takes about five seconds to look up online.   And it's irrelevant to the discussion.   Don't profess to me what I do or don't know.  Getting personal is your own failure to keep it on the subject at hand.   What "mountain of information" are you talking about?  

I would not cry about it if the Japanese were legally dealt with. That way the problem would be resolved once and for all. Humpbacks and Grey's are the lergest components, what is their status? I already know, I just want you to show us how close the the brink of extinction we are talking.
They're legally dealt with.  The World Charter for Nature authorizes Paul Watson do stop their illegal whaling operation.   How does it get more legal than that?   Just whose authority do you even respect here, other than the Japanese whalers?    Lergest components of what?   They're not the largest components of anything.   You can quickly find the Japanese self-imposed quotas on the internet as you can also find information about each species.  I'm not talking about individual species or the differences between them.  It doesn't help the Japanese that they're poaching 0 Blue Whales, or 0 Right Whales.  It doesn't matter to me that some bureaucracy is less concerned with extinction about one species than another.   It's the principle and the rule of law that matters to me.  Don't dictate to me what hasn't been adjudicated in court.  Japan is being taken to the shed in more ways than one.  Have a seat and stay tuned.

No I wont be upset about African Poachers, they are removed legally by official sources, not vigilantes.
That confers with what I've already said.  If it's big, shiny, grey and bankrolled from the government, it's here to help.  God forbid that civil society do anything without the gubmint doing it for them "officially".

What do you mean Whatever the hell that means? Ot means the Japanese are p***ed and are not going to be rolling back operations based on the silly illegal antics of a vigilante group.
Their antics aren't illegal.   Vigilante justice isn't inherently wrong.  I can make a citizen's arrest in my own country and it's too bad if you can't do the same in yours.   These encounters would have been broken up, with one side prosecuted, jailed, and put down if the law was clear either way.  Both sides claim to have the law on their side.  The gravitas of the law being on Sea Shepherd's side is the survival of our oceans, the gravity on the other is some self entitled welfare program to eat mercury-laden whale meat.  I wonder which one is more important to the most people.

Your blind to Japans commercial might and the amount of International trade. If you think a bunch of vigilantes are capable of keeping up with them, your only kidding yourself.
Well just look at the numbers that the Japanese report and then grab a mirror.   I'm not blind, I'm accepting their own statements.  They haven't brought in half of their quota in the last three whaling seasons.    That's not me kidding myself about anything, that's you ignoring the fact.

All I agree with is "arguably" It most certainly is arguable as he is not even a conservationist. He is going to go down in history as the pirate who kept whaling alive in it's death throes. And he will die happy on a big pile of money knowing he fleeced all he could.
Going down in history for what?   Based on what?  What Statist rag are you getting this nonsense from?  You're not keeping up with reality, proven by the growth of Sea Shepherd.  Proven by the growing failure and bankruptcy of these whalers.  You're not keeping up with the legal developments.  You're not seeing the trend; you're dreaming this fantasy rhetoric based on God knows what.

You do not seem to get it. Look at the countries he is attacking, i many cases he is even attacking indigenous rites, which is nothing short of ridiculous. He will not tackle major countries who keep Dolphins and Whales in captivity, which makes Watson the political tool.
He's not "attacking" and he's not attacking "countries".   Everything that Sea Shepherd isn't doing is not a valid reason to oppose everything they do.  Nobody does everything.  The dolphins that are taken away to capitivity are captured in Taiji Japan and Sea Shepherd is there.  Give credit where it's due, if that's really what you care about.  I suppose they're "illegal" in Japan too because they once cut a net and hurt the net's feelings.

I already told you about his "work" in the Faroes:
Yeah you already told me and you didn't cite your source that you copy-pasted from.   So everything you read in opposition to Sea Shepherd is true because you want it to be?  Or is it documented, proven in court, backed up by independent sources, or is it just a politically motivated smear job that it sounds like?

Is that what you call noble is it?
I call Sea Shepherd one of the most noble organizations in existence today, yes.  

LOL, my arguments are the only ones that actually adress the current environmental situation! All you have done is lie about territory, make up laws, sympathise with Watson and post Migaloo clips. I bet you did not even know New Zealand has better environmental Cetacean policies than Australia does did you?
You're calling me a liar again and again.  Just what lie do you think you're talking about?   Comparing Australia and New Zealand, just like comparing different species of whales, does not correct or even serve to oppose anything I've discussed with you so far.   These differences are irrelevant to the point.

You mean why don't I stop proving the Sea Shepherd Society is just a terrorist group of pirates? I have given you no other reason for the animosity you show.
What proof of this do you think you have?   Peter Bethune and every other Sea Shepherd employee living free lives with their families in their respective home countries?  That's not proof of what you think, that's proof of what I claim.

Actually being serious about conservation does not mean one has to be a second messiah. It's what real conservationists do. They take the entire problem on, not just the bits that look good on TV and make the papers. As Mentioned, people like David Fleay are actual conservationists, and there is a world of difference between what he did and what Watson does. Watson is a media whore. Not a conservationist.
And when there are alternatives that are taking this problem on, and you can answer how to do that beyond "asking to sit down and talk" after kissing up and letting the poachers poach to their fill, that's just rhetoric.  There is no such thing as bad press.  If you avoid the press, you're not a good conservationist, you're a bashful one in the shadows.

My own credibility? With regards to what? I have given you links and proven your claims 100% wrong, you just seem to think if you keep repeating them, they will be accepted. Not the case. You are the one making up stuff about territory and INternational law, and everything you have said on those subjects has been wrong. As such, it seems to be your credibility that is in question, all you can do is say give money to Watson and things will ber better. It actually is starting to sound a bit like a cult.
You haven't proven anything.  You haven't cited one law Sea Shepherd breaks in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.  You haven't identified one authority with the jurisdiction to prosecute them.  I haven't made anything up, I've shown you the encyclopedia, which for our purposes here, will be the authority over both of us.  You can call me names, call me a liar, talk your rhetoric about 'cults' and 'messiah' and it really doesn't mean much but desperation to me.

I have already said, nothing can be done with the Japanese with the Sea Shepherd in the way.
You can keep saying that, but I have no reason to agree with that.  Japan could have stopped in 1986. They did not.  They began whaling immediately with the loophole and it's been all up from there until SSCS took them down.

I have shown you Japan was stopped in 1987.
You don't know what you're talking about.  You have no credibility.
http://en.wikipedia...._since_1985.svg

We need to go back there, and fix the huge mistake the US made and get the Japanese back on the moratorium, voluntarily.
Don't blame the US on Japan's whaling now.  It's just one excuse after another and really, it's getting old.

Japan is a proud country, remember the Kamikaze? Hell will freeze over, and whales will evolve back onto land before such a proud nation bows to a small  group of pirate terrosists. The US is having a whole war over terrorism. Japan is not going to just say OK, Paul Watson you win. Think about it, do you honestly think that is going to ever happen?
Japanese pride is defeatable.  Only quitters and losers can't compete with Japanese pride.

I believe it is helping. If we all took the advice of real conservationists, the people in the market would have no choice but to conform would they?
Watson controls the world and nobody can do anything with Watson in it, and even the "real" conservationists are impotent to do anything so long as Watson breathes oxygen.  Got it.  

Do you buy line caught Tuna? Or do you just give money to Watson and hope the problem will go away?
Those aren't mutually exclusive.  I don't eat tuna.  I do give money to Watson and hope the problem will go away.  Your opinion on who's "real" doesn't matter to me.

Bluefin and Bigeye Tuna are a concern, that is true, not other species is.
Okay?   So Sea Shepherd is correct to fight Bluefin fishermen fishing outside of their season and quotas.

What goes into cans Yamato?
Sometimes food. like Bluefin tuna.

You do not seem to know much about the Ocean for one so concerned about it, and you think I am the Ostrich?
You don't know anything about me, and yes I think it's the ostrich defense to think that problems will go away because you put your head in the sand and eat tuna.

I seem to understand the entire situation a great deal better than yourself, and have shown this from the start of the thread.
You seem to misunderstand, whatever the "entire situation" is.

All of your claims have been wrong, your support of Watson has been shown to be based on incorrect assumptions, and you refuse to accept that legally, they are terrorists. And you are trying to tell me you do not have your head in the sand but I do? Pull the other one, it plays another tune.
Name one claim that's "been wrong".  Looks airtight to me.  Good luck.

You have no facts, you have no laws, you have much passion and that is about it. Maybe you could do another Migaloo clip to further your non-existent "point".
Okay so the World Charter for Nature, Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, Australian EEZ, Australian Whale Sanctuary, Global Moratorium on commercial whaling are all figments of my imagination, good point.  Your Japanese heroes would have put a harpoon through Migaloo's head; that video clip should idenfity what your highly motivated word count is defending.  What part of the word "law" do you not understand?  Your own country is taking Japan to court.  If this wasn't a legal matter (look up the word legal) then the law wouldn't be relevant and your flatulence would carry some water.
Read, and learn:
http://en.wikipedia....e_economic_zone

No, it would not be good enough for Paul Watson, no TV cameras to be seen.
I think this is why you're so motivated to spit venom at me about this issue.  Because Paul Watson has personally offended you somehow and you're quick to get insulting and personal about it.  What's your problem with Paul Watson?

And Japanese tradition will tell you they hold reverence to unusual instances like this. White Crows in particular hold considerable significance. Mr Google also tells me that Humpbacks are not endangered.
Japanese tradition is the problem, not the excuse.  It's a silly tradition that has no place in the 21st century knowing the appaling state our oceans are in and the dwindling numbers of whales it contains.   It would be the end of a species if it was suddenly okay to whale them again because they're not "endangered".   If you had any facts about this issue you'd understand that they've been hunted into the ground and it takes centuries for their numbers to recover and even that is granted that hunting has ceased.

So you want me to do this for you as well? OK, I'll send out two invitations, with some luck, we might get some good people in here to confirm that what Watson calls conservation, and what is conservation are two different things.
Conservation is living in harmony with your environment, not driving any more whale species into extinction.   And don't cluelessly deny that has happened.  Do your homework.

I cannot find these High School biologists for you, I do not even know where you live. Globally, there are quite a few schools. Unlike yourself, I do not hide the origin of my country. Marine Biologists do not care about polotics, they are marine biologists not politicians. But if you are too lazy to make the effort, I will do it for you.
Can't find them huh, well that's too bad, don't bring them up if they can't speak for you.   How about using the internet instead?   Concerning "myself", this isn't about me and it isn't about you.

There is nothing fine nor brave about being an eco-terrorist. The Sea Shepherd had absolutely nothing to do with the IWC's 1986 moratorium. You are again just making lies up to support you position to justify personally funding pirates.
There's nothing true about being an "eco-terrorist" either.  Again, you can't call people terrorists that are going home to their families from all over the world without legal repercussion.  That's not an eco-terrorist, that's proof that your accusation is politicized BS.

Sanctuaries have been proposed, they are not globally recognised. You seem to keep missing this point. Neither you, nor Paul Watson have the right to tell the rest of the world what they can do and where they can go, no matter how passionate you become about your personal causes.
They're not even regionally recognized according to your opinion.   If I nor Paul Watson has the right to tell the rest of the world what they can do, then who does?   What authority and jurisdiction is relevant to this "entire situation"?

The Sea Shepherd has more television coverage than normal. Whale Wars is a TV reality show, like Big Brother, that is the mentality you are stooping to, and thinking it is actually helping.
It's put millions of fans in the wheelhouse of Sea Shepherd's flagship from around the world, whatever "mentality" you're talking about.

No, there should ne be vigilante groups all over the place doing what they want. Lawlessness is not going to help anyone. Stupid to suggest the entire world go backwards to the mentality of the Wild Wild West. Brabaric useless and ineffective. I do not know why you think fighting barbarism with barbarism is a good idea.
Vigilante groups all over the place aren't lawlessness.   You don't know the definition of the word you're using I'm afraid.

I never said that, look up and read again, I gave you a map if Australian territorial waters, show me where a whale has been caught in those boundaries. It seems you did not even look closely enough at the map to even realise that basic.
The Australian EEZ and the Australian Whale Sanctuary is not a map of Australian territorial waters.  Showing me that map in response to what I said was not relevant.   You're at odds with your own country. Maybe you should find a place in New Zealand to live?
http://www.guardian....alers-stay-away

And it proves the fictional boundaries you keep blathering on about from your soapbox only exist in yours' and Watson's heads. If my trademark is pointing out lies people say, then I am OK with that.
Again you're calling me a liar when the information is a mouseclick away.   Why don't you try using the internet to learn the difference between fiction and fact.   Because you're desperate and you have to attack me personally.

I am getting tired of refuting your lies. And lies are all your territorial claims have been proven to be. I thought it was just ignorance to begin with, but your repetition insists that you are deliberately lying now.
You don't have a prayer of finding a single lie I've said to save your credibility at this point.  This is the fifth, sixth and seventh times in one reply you've accused me of lying and you're just desperate.



Japanese whaling within Australian waters in Antarctica is illegal and should be stopped, a court ruled on Tuesday.


It is now up to the Australian government to decide whether to enforce the injunction. And even then it is unclear whether the ruling could be enforced as unless the whaling vessels enter Australia, "there is no practical mechanism by which orders of this court can be enforced" conceded Federal Court judge Jim Allsop.


Then Jim Allsop remonstrates Sea Shepherd's tactics more important than ever, because obviously, there is no legal mechanism in place to stop Sea Shepherd either.  Nine years running in the Southern Ocean.

When I speed on Sundays and commit my weekly crime, I'm not punished for it because I get away with it.  This is just a matter of enforcement.  That's the only rub.  Australia chose to confront Japan in court, and good for them.  Is that the only thing to do?  Is that even the right thing to do?  Time will tell.  But in the meantime, Japan is still getting away with a small percentage of their poaching quota.    Laws change in time due to the Color of Right changing in time but government is not reliable.  Never was, never will be.  Government is just around to cause all the problems and only take credit for solving them.  If I relied on government to make the world a better place, we'd all burn.  You need to have some faith in civil society to make the world a better place instead of thinking the world goes around on government force and welfare subsidies.   It's all just a matter of what laws you care about and which laws you don't.

Watson can carry guns though. As I have proven to you.
Proven?   You don't have any proof of that.  You didn't even cite your sources where you copy pasted from.   On most message boards I participate in, they take stuff like that very seriously and they wouldn't even let you post it in the first place.   Don't post entire pages full of information when you're either incapable or unwilling to link to the source.

Well, now your just out and out lying again.
Sea Shepherd isn't in jail.  They go home to their families and friends every year.   If they were all in jail, then they'd all be the "criminals" and "terrorists" and all these insults you claim they are after nine straight years of physical confrontation, and then YOU wouldn't be lying.   For all the whalers' loudmouths who can't stop hurling names and insults at them I have some advice:  Arrest them or shut up.  Until then, I don't care what names you call me or them.

Watson's actions are not legal, nor are his self imposed laws. That is why there is currently a warrant for his arrest. All the terrorist actions Listed for you the page previous are direct violations of the law.
That has nothing to do with what the Bob Barker is doing in the Southern Ocean right now battling the illegal Japanese fleet.   Tangents about Sharkwater from 2002 are interesting but the laws I'm discussing with you here, that you can't believe are laws, are what's relevant.  All the "terrorist" actions you listed need a link.   Don't post information from somewhere that isn't your own and then hide the source.   I should report you to the original source of that information should the authorities here not care about what you've done because that is a violation of copyright.


Duhh!!! Because of the Sea Shepherd!
You keep repeating that over and over again but you can't cite where that opinion comes from.  You can't explain with evidence why you believe it.   If you can deny reality as easily as you do I'm not surprised you actually believe that.  You think that the whalers are going to keep whaling only because they're p***ed off at Paul Watson?  Wow he's a much more titanic figure than I thought if you're right.   And if that's really what you think, then you don't appreciate nor understand the commercial marine operations Japan is engaged in.

Do you know what it costs to not only buy, but run and maintain something like that? I suppose Whale Wars might come to the party, if the rating stay up for people like you, but Japans electronic Industry alone is about a million times the size of the Sea Shepherd Society.
David and Goliath would be an understatement, and that's what makes Sea Shepherd incredibly efficient and successful granted what they're up against.  They don't even spend their entire budget on the Japanese and nowhere close.  That's just one arm of what they do, on the limited resources they have.

Again, you are out and out lying, I really do not think it helps you position when you just outright lie. They are indeed very violent, and that is why they get the attention they do. The Japanese Whalers have not killed one person either, and for longer than 35 years. I suppose that means the atrocities in WWII did not happen?
Okay you're calling me a liar for at least the 8th time in one reply.  WHAT LIE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?   Sea Shepherd has never killed anyone.  Grovel with it.  Whaling is barbaric and torturously violent.  Grovel with that.  When I refute one thing you say, you change the litmus test and now you're breaking even with me that the Japanese whalers haven't killed anyone.  Actually the "professionals" have gotten themselves killed (a fire on the Nisshin Maru in 2007) doing their bloody business which is a sign of incompetence if not malice.

The one thing I am in front of you on is the issue of whaling, I do not have to keep lying to continue my debate, I have offered links to varying sources, and corrected your misinformation regarding territories and sanctuaries. I hope you learned at least something out of all this.
That's the 9th time you've accused me of lying on one reply.  What lie are you talking about?   You can't find one statement of misinformation regarding territories or sanctuaries.

I think I want whaling to end more than you do because I have got over the anger that allows shock value to let one think that violence is a good idea. Now I want to actually try something that works, but as long as people like you keep people like Watson on the water, I might as well consider whales extinct now. That is all Watson will eventually accomplish, a slow but sure demise of the species.
There is no violence with Sea Shepherd.  They haven't seriously injured anyone in 35 years.  You'd be lying to say otherwise.  Do your homework.  Learn some facts and understand that different opinions are to be welcomed on a message board, not insulted away with abusive tirades.   You've accused me of lying at least nine times on this reply, that's nine lies of your own.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#36    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 March 2013 - 11:58 AM

Nobody talks, everybody walks.

The SSS Bob Barker's Captain Peter Hammarstedt demonstrates how to handle a police interrogation effectively.



"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#37    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,078 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:39 AM

Yamato

I am not ging to continue writing this novel, you are a rude person, and I am really not enjoying the conversation. I will not be asking Marine Biologists to attend the thread after you PM'd me and called me a deranged Kiwi. Totally unnecessary  but I guess you have a need to feel validated for supporting pirates.

I take offence to that, I am an Aussie, I told you that already. I also gave you a link to the post you said I did not link to here. 2 actually, but this does show how you digest information. I do find passion drives your posting, not knowledge, not logic.

That above long winded rant comes down to only a couple of real items, which I keep asking you to adress, but that which you refuse to, mostly because I know you have no answer because you are 100% wrong.

1  - You keep saying the the Japanese fish in Australian Territorial Waters. That is alie, please prove your statement.
2 - You say that the Sea Shepherd is not a terrorist organisation. The IWC has the Sea Shepherd listed as terrorists, and they are facing terrorist charges in several countries. The law says they are terrorists, what says they are not? Misguided passion?
3 - You say some Sanctuary is being illegally accessed and whaled. Under the regulations set forth by the IWC this is not the case, please prove why it is.

Yes, all that crap comes down to only this. The Sea Shepherd afre terrorists who will keep whaling alive, and your funding will ensure whaling will be back  next year. Can you show me one example whereby the Sea Shepherd enjoyed the level of success that that the 1986 moratorium did in 1987.

Other than that, I really am not interested in entertaining you. You need to get some manners into you.

Edited by psyche101, 18 March 2013 - 09:41 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#38    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 8,169 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 18 March 2013 - 11:11 AM

Even Greenpeace does not like Sea Shepherd. Sea Shepherd only do it for the money, they are pirates and pirates are scum


#39    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,078 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 18 March 2013 - 09:34 PM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 18 March 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Even Greenpeace does not like Sea Shepherd. Sea Shepherd only do it for the money, they are pirates and pirates are scum

Indeed, they do, they even threw Paul Watson out as he was a member early in the piece. He is about exposure, not conservation.

Edited by psyche101, 18 March 2013 - 09:35 PM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#40    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 March 2013 - 07:38 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 18 March 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Yamato

I am not ging to continue writing this novel, you are a rude person, and I am really not enjoying the conversation. I will not be asking Marine Biologists to attend the thread after you PM'd me and called me a deranged Kiwi. Totally unnecessary  but I guess you have a need to feel validated for supporting pirates.

I take offence to that, I am an Aussie, I told you that already. I also gave you a link to the post you said I did not link to here. 2 actually, but this does show how you digest information. I do find passion drives your posting, not knowledge, not logic.

That above long winded rant comes down to only a couple of real items, which I keep asking you to adress, but that which you refuse to, mostly because I know you have no answer because you are 100% wrong.

1  - You keep saying the the Japanese fish in Australian Territorial Waters. That is alie, please prove your statement.
2 - You say that the Sea Shepherd is not a terrorist organisation. The IWC has the Sea Shepherd listed as terrorists, and they are facing terrorist charges in several countries. The law says they are terrorists, what says they are not? Misguided passion?
3 - You say some Sanctuary is being illegally accessed and whaled. Under the regulations set forth by the IWC this is not the case, please prove why it is.

Yes, all that crap comes down to only this. The Sea Shepherd afre terrorists who will keep whaling alive, and your funding will ensure whaling will be back  next year. Can you show me one example whereby the Sea Shepherd enjoyed the level of success that that the 1986 moratorium did in 1987.

Other than that, I really am not interested in entertaining you. You need to get some manners into you.
You accuse me of lying 10 times in one post and then call me rude and claim I lack manners?   Really.  I think I've been more polite than you deserve after witnessing that, you hardly deserved my tolerating your accusations you can't answer for when asked.   You can't even post the link to your "information" after I ask you three times?   Why not?  Are you scared to show me where you get your alleged history of Sea Shepherd from?  You just believe everything you hear critical of Sea Shepherd without worrying about where that information comes from.  It's automatically filed away as "knowledge" and "logic" to you.   Claims made in that "history" you posted are sourceless and absurd.  I'm not going to ask you four times.   Getting your information from whaling websites doesn't grant you a monopoly of legal expertise.

1. Again, you keep asking and I already answered.   I don't keep saying that Japan is whaling in Australian waters.  Australia is saying that.   Can you understand English?  Can you use a search engine on the internet?   Can you do some homework about what Australia is taking Japan to court for?    You haven't "proven" anything but your own opinion and you're asking me for "proof"?   I already provided a link from an Australian source citing Australian authorities who I got my "knowledge" from.   The standard you're playing with is either met or exceeded.

2. "Facing terrorist charges in several countries"?   Name those countries and name those charges.  I expect to see links and a list of "several" countries hoping you know what the definition of several is.   I think your "knowledge" and your "logic" is extremely fragile so let's find out.   Again, why is a "terrorist" living with his family in New Zealand after spending time in a Japanese prison?   You're telling me that Japan released a "terrorist"?    Why would they do such a thing if your "logic" is correct?

3. "Some sanctuary"?   The Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.    50 million square kilometers.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Ocean_Whale_Sanctuary

Stop acting like all of this has been legally resolved and whatever the IWC says goes.  This issue is under a perpetual legal dispute between countries and Japan sure as hell isn't the monopoly on righteousness you're making it out to be.    Australia has taken the position that Japan is in violation of the global ban and is illegally whaling in the Southern Ocean.  Do your homework.  You shouldn't be disputing these facts if you had relevant knowledge to debate me on this issue.   You just take the side of the bureaucracy you prefer to and think the case is closed.  That is factually incorrect, and the legal dispute isn't hanging up in court because of Sea Shepherd.   Their tactics are saving whales while the courts run on geological time and plod through the bureaucratic mud.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#41    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 March 2013 - 07:59 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 18 March 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

Paul Watson is about exposure, not conservation.
In Sea Shepherd's case, exposure is about conservation, they're not mutually exclusive, exposure is a correlative factor in the success of their mission.   It's not difficult to see that the more exposure they get the more success they have.  Excusing your favorite bureaucracy, that's the far better determinant of the color of right than some welfare-laden whale poacher hiding behind his government's skirts.   You can't seem to accept the success that Sea Shepherd has achieved, proven by its growth rate these past several years as a result of that exposure.   I believe your unwillingness to accept facts and your desperate antics to attack me personally in your replies are politically motivated.  I don't care what party or what politic you subscribe to, but you echo the opinions of Japanese government bureaucrats and the most apologetic pro-whaling individuals out there.

I suppose Bob Brown is a "terrorist" now too.   :wacko:



"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#42    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 March 2013 - 08:34 AM

If there are Australian authorities that are correcting what Paul Watson's claiming on this video - about where the Japanese are whaling in particular - then let's identify who they are and let's see them do it already, otherwise all you're proving is that you're completely out of touch with your own country, psyche101.  



Japanese whalers are constantly breaking laws by their actions, but some people don't care about any of those laws.   It's too politically incorrect to oppose a trading partner that wealthy or a foreign economy that enormous.

The bottom line is that both sides claim to have the law on their side, and this issue remains to be adjudicated.   When the issue boils down to choosing between one side's claims or the other, I'll side with the whales not the whalers.   The Japanese whalers have an absolute monopoly on violence, empty rhetoric about who the "terrorists" are notwithstanding.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#43    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,438 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:24 AM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 18 March 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Even Greenpeace does not like Sea Shepherd. Sea Shepherd only do it for the money, they are pirates and pirates are scum
I don't know where you get your information from but it's a bit obtuse to claim that Sea Shepherd "does it for the money" in a reply that mentions Greenpeace by name when Sea Shepherd maintains the highest rating on Charity Navigator for getting their donations to where the action is and Greenpeace does not.   Leaving an inferior organization like Greenpeace and founding a superior organization like Sea Shepherd is an honor not a shame.  Do some homework on what Sea Shepherd's annual budget is and how many campaigns they organize around the world.   It's extraordinary how much work they do on the meager budget that they have.  And even more impressive, they pay their bills.  They're not relying on exponentially increasing debt or financing a gigantic ponzi scheme like the governments of Japan and the United States.  Though maybe the new Richard Nixon isn't as interested in balancing a budget as the old (real) Richard Nixon.

http://www.charityna...=search.results
http://www.charityna...=search.results

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#44    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,078 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 March 2013 - 02:37 AM

View PostYamato, on 19 March 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

In Sea Shepherd's case, exposure is about conservation, they're not mutually exclusive, exposure is a correlative factor in the success of their mission.   It's not difficult to see that the more exposure they get the more success they have.  Excusing your favorite bureaucracy, that's the far better determinant of the color of right than some welfare-laden whale poacher hiding behind his government's skirts.   You can't seem to accept the success that Sea Shepherd has achieved, proven by its growth rate these past several years as a result of that exposure.   I believe your unwillingness to accept facts and your desperate antics to attack me personally in your replies are politically motivated.  I don't care what party or what politic you subscribe to, but you echo the opinions of Japanese government bureaucrats and the most apologetic pro-whaling individuals out there.

I suppose Bob Brown is a "terrorist" now too.   :wacko:




Favourite Bureaucracy? Who might that be pray tell? You mean my description of the delicate balance the Australian economy sits in, and how you want to put millions of Aussies out of work so you can keep your TV show by sanctioning

Japan? Get your own country to sanction Japan over Whaling!


I do not see a continuation of whaling as a success and the Sea Shepherd will ensure that the Whaling continues each year, as does the TV show. The Sea Shepherd only seem to guarantee continued whaling.

Did you know Bob Brown quit? He is a known zealot, and is always mouthing off, did you not see that I said this is the worst Government we have ever had?

I have not attacked you, but your information you big girl. There you go, not you have something to at least complain about.


LINK - Crazed zealot … Bob Brown … the real Prime Minister of Australia

Bob Brown is an over-moneyed zealot with more 'causes' than brains.

Posted Image



Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#45    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,078 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 22 March 2013 - 02:52 AM

View PostYamato, on 19 March 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

If there are Australian authorities that are correcting what Paul Watson's claiming on this video - about where the Japanese are whaling in particular - then let's identify who they are and let's see them do it already, otherwise all you're proving is that you're completely out of touch with your own country, psyche101.  

I do not partake in Youtube if at all possible, I have said this before, so does my signature. Words please, written record.

And I do not know what the hell you are talking abut, I said that Australian Government is most likely in Watsons back pocket.

View PostYamato, on 19 March 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

Japanese whalers are constantly breaking laws by their actions, but some people don't care about any of those laws.   It's too politically incorrect to oppose a trading partner that wealthy or a foreign economy that enormous.

It's not that people do not care, it is that people are ignorant, and like Watsons manipulation with Baby Harp Seals, he makes stuff up, and because the situation is graphic, peoples heartstrings are played. No laws are being broken, and listening to Waston's BS does not change that. If laws were broken, the UN could act. None are. I am guessing that is why you cannot cite a law that has been broken, or mark a boundary that has been breached on the provided map.  

View PostYamato, on 19 March 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

The bottom line is that both sides claim to have the law on their side, and this issue remains to be adjudicated.   When the issue boils down to choosing between one side's claims or the other, I'll side with the whales not the whalers.   The Japanese whalers have an absolute monopoly on violence, empty rhetoric about who the "terrorists" are notwithstanding.

Sides? 4 out of 194 countries only recognise even the Antarctic claim!

The law only covers one, and that is the legal option. Just because Watson makes up laws does not mean they apply, but that is why the Japanese Whalers turn up year after year. They have found a loophole to access the Sanctuaries, and therefore break no laws. This is what I am saying, is to stop whaling, one needs to be as smart as the Japanese who figured out how to continue whaling in a loophole and beat them at their own game, yelling at them and making them stinky only makes the current situation worse, and that is all it ever has done. That way the UN can act, Watson makes sure they do not by taunting the Japanese, and making a mockery of the situation every year on air.

If the Anti Whaling groups were as smart as the Japanese, we would have ended Whaling a long time ago, and if the US did not do what Watson is doing right now, the situation would not even exist.

Are you a US citizen Yam? Is that why you are trying to hard to shift the blame? Here, downunder the rule is you **** it you fix it.

Edited by psyche101, 22 March 2013 - 03:09 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users