New Weapons for Sea Shepherd to Fight Whaling

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Oh that's a load of bull. You know it is. OK show me those stats that prove what you are saying then. Show me how causing the cost to harvest whales to go up has caused more whales to be taken. And put of pride? Sl links please.

[psyche101]

Two wrongs dont make a right though psyche....we are raping the seas of all her bounties...what happens when they are all dry?..

No I agree, in this case, two wrongs are making a situation much worse. But what we have to realise is that Japan has been whaling for centuries, it's part of their heritage. If some wanna be comes in and tells them they can just stop it, they are going to react, and violently. Not to mention the SS have no jurisdiction in the waters the Japanese are in, nobody does. I used to think the Sea Shepard were doing great things myself, only as little as 3 years ago, talking to some marine biologists opened my eyes big time. It's not Paul Watsons place to tell a nation what they can and cannot do. He is just a media whore. He cares more about the coverage of his antics then whales, of that I am quite sure. What needs to be done is a reintroduction of the moratorium that actually did stop whales being killed, until I am sorry to say the US created a situation that allowed Japan to take up this barbarism once again. The more we push, the harder Japan will push back. If Australia was to force Japan out of the waters nearby out international recognised limit, it would be seen as a terrorist action, and Australia would suffer greatly in a financial capacity. A great many of our factories and products are Japanese, like it or not, we need to maintain a relationship for our own good. As such, this need to be handled in an amicable way, with lengthy discussions and involving the entire world. It is like telling Russia they are not allowed to land on the moon, what do you think the very first thing they would do after that demand might be?

[psyche101]

Oh that's a load of bull. You know it is. OK show me those stats that prove what you are saying then. Show me how causing the cost to harvest whales to go up has caused more whales to be taken. And put of pride? Sl links please.

Hello ADBS

I would have to ask you also for any information that the Sea Shepard is doing a better job than the whaling moratorium did. I can prove that is not the case

LINK - Whales killed by whaling since moratorium

31,984 have been killed by whaling since the IWC moratorium

Role of the United States

The effectiveness of IWC decisions (at least on smaller whaling states) may be explained in large part by the fact that the United States was willing to act unilaterally in support of them. The pro whaling nations often see the U.S.'s propensity to act outside the IWC framework as "bullying" tactics, while the green and the conservation lobby tend to applaud the U.S.

LINK

Bear with me, I am making a point here,

Below is a link to Whale Wars trailer about the show and it is absolutely amazing for its honesty. They used video footage over twenty years old because newer confrontational video does not exists. The trailer shows Sea Shepherd engaged in terrorist activities by firing rockets at the Faroe police. Proving they are indeed terrorist.

LINK

One aspect that anti-whaling proponents need to realize is that these kinds of bans are complex political decisions. Representatives are accountable to many people and negotiations and compromises have to be made that in some way satisfy the involved stakeholders enough that they will comply. Insisting on absolute positions often leads to no agreement at all. To understand this, consider the graph at right. The graph shows that Japanese whaling has dropped by at least 60% since the moratorium was fully put in place. Pushing too hard for complete cessation could result in Japan leaving the IWC and, subsequently, their whaling returning to previous levels or higher.

LINK

Here is a follow-up on the three animal rights activists who illegally boarded a Japanese whaling ship a few days ago. The Japanese have agreed to the Australian government’s request that the men be released, but an Australian customs vessel will have to come pick them up. Attorney-General Nicola Roxon is making it clear that Sea Shepherd’s antics are going to be expensive for Australian taxpayers:

The mission to retrieve the men would cost “hundreds of thousands of dollars” and bad weather could increase the taxpayers’ tab further, Ms Roxon said.

“I would very much like these three men to consider what contribution they would make, or the Sea Shepherd (environmental group) for that matter,” Ms Roxon said.

“I’m not going to be holding my breath. The truth is the taxpayer will foot the bill for this sort of action.”

Sea Shepherd has insisted that there is no need for an Australian ship, since they can accept the direct return of the men. The Japanese are, of course, will not hand over criminals to the organization directly responsible for their illegal act (especially since the organization has a history of ramming whaling ships).

Meanwhile, even Prime Minister Julia Gillard has expressed her lack of approval for Sea Shepherd’s activities:

“People might want to make their views heard, and they should, but people need to make sure they stay on the right side of the line and engage in legal activity.”

LINK

And you reckon this is not cheesing of the Japanese pride? I beg to differ. It's not about whales or meat, it's about being Japanese, and what that means to a Japanese person.

Japanese Whaling Officials Bring U.S. Lawsuit Against Sea Shepherd

Today, Japan whaling officials announced that they are bringing a lawsuit in the United States against the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and its founder Captain Paul Watson.

According to Japan Today, ship owner Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha and the Institute for Cetacean Research (ICR) have filed the suit in an attempt to stop the organisation's anti-whaling campaign. In a statement, they said The Institute of Cetacean Research and Kyodo Senpaku are seeking a court order in the U.S. District Court in Seattle, Washington that prevents SSCS and its founder Paul Watson from engaging in activities at sea that could cause injuries to the crews and damage to the vessels. The statement also claimed their whaling program is greatly contributing to the advancement of scientific knowledge of whale resources in the Antarctic.

LINK

That is a direct response from Japan, showing they disapprove of the Sea Shepard, look at what they are saying, if the Sea Shepard can hide behind a label of conservationists then Japan will hide behind a label of scientific research.

The fishermen are pleased to receive attention from legitimate journalists, and even tell the TV crew about a hill where they can film the dolphin hunt. In the early days of the filming, SS members were also willing to be interviewed, but they later decided to sop doing so. ( It’s probably not good PR to have your people make asses of themselves on Japanese TV by talking about how “fun” it is to harass fishermen. )

They also interview Peter Bethune, a former member of Sea Shepherd who resigned after he was arrested and jailed for illegally boarding a Japanese ship. Bethune thinks that Paul Watson and other leaders of Sea Shepherd are dishonest and do more harm than good. Examples of this dishonest include scuttling a ship and claiming that the Japanese whalers “sunk” it, as well as Watson’s infamous “I’ve been shot” episode.

We are also shown activists who oppose the dolphin hunt but do not support Sea Shepherd’s tactics. One is Ady Gil, a former donor to Sea Shepherd who thinks that people should help Taiji develop and eco tourism business. And there is a Japanese woman (formerly a member of the Sea Shepherd anti-whaling crew) and a group of foreign activists who are protesting without hatred towards the people of Taiji.

LINK

His own people are leaving him after learning what he is really about.

And what sort of a caring loving guy is the whale lover Paul Watson? This sort of guy:

A few days ago, Typhoon Talas hit western Japan, inflicting serious damage. Wakayama prefecture was in the middle of the storm’s path of destruction:

In worst-hit Wakayama, rescuers recovered nine more bodies Tuesday afternoon, with 34 others still missing, according to prefectural police. That brought the nationwide death toll to 46. Japan’s Fire and Disaster Management Agency said 54 people were missing Tuesday, including those in Wakayama.

Paul Watson, head of the radical animal rights group Sea Shepherd, has written an article praising the typhoon as an example of nature’s “Divine Wind” protecting dolphins from Japanese people:

The storms are a fitting herald to Sea Shepherd’s campaign against Japanese whaling this upcoming season. This year’s campaign is titled Operation Divine Wind (kamikaze: Japanese for ‘wind of the Gods’). It was the kamikaze that destroyed the invading Mongol fleets between 1274 and 1281.

Where once the typhoons protected Japan, the Japanese fishermen have fallen from grace with the sea and now the typhoons have returned to protect the dolphins. It is now the Cove Guardians that embody the spirit of the kamikaze.

This is, of course, not the first example of such behavior. A few months ago, Watson wrote a poem about the March 11th tsunami (death toll: 22,000+), describing it as the sea god Neptune punishing Japan

LINK

He is not about the animals, he is about the publicity:

1978: Watson admits to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) programme As It Happens that his work is aimed at raising funds for his organisation, Sea Shepherd.

Watson: “You see, the seal is very easy to exploit as an image. We have posters, we have buttons; we have shirts … all of which portray the head of the baby seal with tears coming out of its eyes. Baby seals are always crying because the salt tears keep their eyes from freezing. But they have this image of ... they are baby animals; they are beautiful. And because of that, coupled with the horror of the sealer hitting them over the head with a club, it is an image which just goes right to the heart of animal lovers all over North America.”

What a caring and heartfelt guy huh

1994: Sea Shepherd loses observer status at the International Whaling Commission. IWC Secretary, Ray Gambell, declares that the IWC and all its member states ardently condemn Sea Shepherd’s acts of terrorism.

1994: US National Fisheries Institute asks for investigation into Sea Shepherd. “The recent alleged actions against Norwegian fishing vessels constitute a clear case of piracy,” it says in a letter to former US IWC Commissioner James Baker. “Acts of violence against fishermen of any nation cannot be tolerated. Their safety and livelihood could be threatened unless US officials vigorously condemn violence on the high seas.”

LINK

Now surely the International Whaling Commission can say if the Sea Shepard is doing good or not? They say not. He is just all about being in the media.

Speaking to a collision on January 6, 2010 between a Japanese whaling vessel and the Sea Shepherd vessel Ady Gil: "The Ady Gil, a Sea Shepherd vessel, it's a fast patrol boat, was sitting still in the water when the Shonan Maru #2 came by, deliberately turned into it, rammed it, cut it in half, sunk it and destroyed it." - Paul Watson in a radio interview with FSRN.

THE TRUTH:

Another whopper of a lie has recently come to light as we've learned that the Ady Gil did not sink as a result of the collision with the Shona Maru #2. As it turns out, Peter Bethune, the builder and captain of the Ady Gil, has admitted that although damaged, that after the collision, the Gil was sound and afloat, saying, "The boat was definitely salvageable. It was still rock solid...It would have stayed afloat for sure." Bethune reveals he was ordered to scuttle it "in order to gain public sympathy."

LINK - Lies of The Sea Shepard

I agree that what the Japanese are doing is rather childish, I admit that what the Japanese are doing is wrong. I hate it and want it to end myself, in fact as far as I am aware, many Japanese feel this way too. Terrorist action is not going to end it though. It is only going to heat up the situation, and make the Japanese more vengeful if anything, and who is going to pay? The whales.

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

No I agree, in this case, two wrongs are making a situation much worse. But what we have to realise is that Japan has been whaling for centuries, it's part of their heritage. If some wanna be comes in and tells them they can just stop it, they are going to react, and violently. Not to mention the SS have no jurisdiction in the waters the Japanese are in, nobody does. I used to think the Sea Shepard were doing great things myself, only as little as 3 years ago, talking to some marine biologists opened my eyes big time. It's not Paul Watsons place to tell a nation what they can and cannot do. He is just a media whore. He cares more about the coverage of his antics then whales, of that I am quite sure. What needs to be done is a reintroduction of the moratorium that actually did stop whales being killed, until I am sorry to say the US created a situation that allowed Japan to take up this barbarism once again. The more we push, the harder Japan will push back. If Australia was to force Japan out of the waters nearby out international recognised limit, it would be seen as a terrorist action, and Australia would suffer greatly in a financial capacity. A great many of our factories and products are Japanese, like it or not, we need to maintain a relationship for our own good. As such, this need to be handled in an amicable way, with lengthy discussions and involving the entire world. It is like telling Russia they are not allowed to land on the moon, what do you think the very first thing they would do after that demand might be?

Psyche..i agree that taking away a native tradition would be wrong.The problem is,Japan have the native traditions in place..the traditionalists are allowed to 'harvest' whales for whatever reason they see fit..i have no problem with that.The problem is the slaughter that they do for alleged 'scientific research'.I posted a piece earlier with a picture of a female whale and her calf being dragged upon a 'research' boat..what hope is there when that kind of thing happens to a species..?

Edited July 12, 2012 by BrianPotter

[Dougal]

If Sea Shepherd want to save the whales why do they only harass Japan? Iceland are involved in whaling as well. Interestingly they don't even bother to say it's for research, they just do it in objection to the IWC.

Last time I looked at the figures (which was a year or so ago) Japan actually take very few endangered species, they mainly take minke whales which aren't listed as an endangered species.

Taken from a thread a while ago.

"I'm not sure how accurate these numbers are as they're lifted from Wiki but apparently in 2009 Iceland took 125 Fin whales, whilst Japan took 1.

Source"

*edited to clarifty. Fin whales have an estimated population of around 100,000 and are listed as endangered

Edited July 12, 2012 by Dougal

[Coffey]

Terrorist? Oh here we go again.

The most overused word in modern society.

Just laughable, Sea shepherd uses butter... Not real missiles.

So now throwing/firing dairy products at people is terrorism... LOLOLOLOL.

This world is doomed I tell thee

[Dougal]

Terrorist? Oh here we go again.

The most overused word in modern society.

Just laughable, Sea shepherd uses butter... Not real missiles.

So now throwing/firing dairy products at people is terrorism... LOLOLOLOL.

This world is doomed I tell thee

Doesn't matter what you throw technically, it's just use of intimidation or force for a political purpose. The problem is that people too readily associate terrorism with guns and bombs.

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

Doesn't matter what you throw technically, it's just use of intimidation or force for a political purpose. The problem is that people too readily associate terrorism with guns and bombs.

Dougal..do you respect the fish that are harvested.?

[Dougal]

Dougal..do you respect the fish that are harvested.?

Not quite sure I follow what you mean so apologies if this answer isn't anything to do with what you're asking

I understand that fish stocks are depleted and that we should be trying to sustain them, I support sustainable fishing and try to buy it where possible (unfortunately quite limited by my budget ). I understand that there's a delicate balance within marine ecology and that we've messed it up pretty badly already.

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

Not quite sure I follow what you mean so apologies if this answer isn't anything to do with what you're asking

I understand that fish stocks are depleted and that we should be trying to sustain them, I support sustainable fishing and try to buy it where possible (unfortunately quite limited by my budget ). I understand that there's a delicate balance within marine ecology and that we've messed it up pretty badly already.

No probs Dougal..

[Yamato]

If Sea Shepherd want to save the whales why do they only harass Japan? Iceland are involved in whaling as well. Interestingly they don't even bother to say it's for research, they just do it in objection to the IWC.

Last time I looked at the figures (which was a year or so ago) Japan actually take very few endangered species, they mainly take minke whales which aren't listed as an endangered species.

Taken from a thread a while ago.

"I'm not sure how accurate these numbers are as they're lifted from Wiki but apparently in 2009 Iceland took 125 Fin whales, whilst Japan took 1.

Source"

*edited to clarifty. Fin whales have an estimated population of around 100,000 and are listed as endangered

It's a prevalent myth that Sea Shepherd Conservation Society only harasses Japan. They have seaborne operations in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia.

If hundreds of endangered whales are dying, isn't objecting to the law more than just interesting?

The oceans are dying. Coral reefs are dying. Large animals all over the world are going extinct. There's so much destruction to attend to, there should be a cornucopia of activism defending animal rights out there. Unfortunately for the oceans, most of the large animals being wiped out there are just "fish".

SSCS investigated abandoned whaling plants in the Faroes, one with a skull bone of a huge Fin whale inside, the flensing knives still inside their buckets seeming to still drip with petrified black blood. SSCS's campaign in the Faroes would have lasted a lot longer than it did if Japan hadn't sadly announced another whaling season in 2012, dragging Sea Shepherd back to the Antarctic. If numbers matter, Iceland exported 600 tons of that Fin whale meat to Japan.

[Yamato]

There are 100,000 Fin whales left in oceans occupying what percentage of our planet's surface area, and almost seven billion human beings. It would seem to me that every Fin whale is an individual.

How many Antarctic Minke Whales are there? Does it matter? Isn't the principle of refusing to savage whale populations more important than what flavor of whale they're hunting this year?

Whaling makes my stomach sick.

Who would believe that a single tuna brings in $75,000? Who would believe that a tuna fish could bring in close to a million dollars already?

http://news.national...panese-auction/

Like Paul Watson says, it's the economics of extinction and it must be stopped.

[media=]

Edited July 12, 2012 by Yamato

[psyche101]

Psyche..i agree that taking away a native tradition would be wrong.The problem is,Japan have the native traditions in place..the traditionalists are allowed to 'harvest' whales for whatever reason they see fit..i have no problem with that.The problem is the slaughter that they do for alleged 'scientific research'.I posted a piece earlier with a picture of a female whale and her calf being dragged upon a 'research' boat..what hope is there when that kind of thing happens to a species..?

I am totally with you on that one, and if Japan was all about tradition, they would be out in wooden boats paddling their way across seas with hand held harpoons, There is no "Honour" in a floating factory. I do believe the Japanese are pretty much saying "If Paul Watson is not a terrorist, then this is scientific research". The US got their back up with the moratorium, and I think we all need to work together to give the Japan the chance to stop whaling. I have seen that slaughter picture before, and I agree that it is a crime in my opinion, but Paul Watson is just aggravating the situation. As long as the Sea Shepard is at sea, so will be the Japanse Whalers. Japan will only be swayed by global pressure, Japan will never be swayed by some arrogant wannabe that throws rancid butter at them, in fact, I doubt anyone would respond to such tactics.

[psyche101]

Terrorist? Oh here we go again.

The most overused word in modern society.

Just laughable, Sea shepherd uses butter... Not real missiles.

So now throwing/firing dairy products at people is terrorism... LOLOLOLOL.

This world is doomed I tell thee

I see you did not read any of the links I left, yet you come to a false conclusion without providing one to support your incorrect claim.

No weapons? I would call a huge metal boat a weapon, but he has mines, and has even said guns are on board and that he will use them to intimidate.

1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaling vessel “Sierra”, causing considerable damage. “Sierra” survives attack.

1980: The IWC at its meeting in Brighton, United Kingdom, assigns high-level protection to two Canadian Government delegates after Watson threatened to kill them for voting against a moratorium on sperm whales. Delegates given Royal Canadian Mounted Police protection until

their return home to Canada.

1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility. Investigation shows limpet mines used to blow up the vessel.

1981: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga.

1983: In retaliation for Watson’s arrest by Canadian police, animal rights extremists slash car tires and spray paint slogans on walls of buildings in the inner city of Quebec. “Fisheries Murder Seals” and “Set Paul Watson Free” slogans spray painted on the Department of Fisheries and Oceans offices in Keele Street. Animal Liberation Front delivers letter to the Quebec Star newspaper admitting causing several thousand dollars worth of damage to the Department’s Keele Street offices.

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

1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to a whaling station. (This act of violence was carried out after Iceland stopped whaling in line with the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling.) Attack carried out by Sea Shepherd members Rodney A. Coronado and David Howitt. (Coronado linked to Animal Liberation Front and arrested eight years later by United States FBI for his part in an ALF attack on Michigan State University research laboratory. Charges included use of an

explosive device, theft and arson.)

1991: A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports that Sea Shepherd, some of whose crew were armed with rifles, rammed his vessel causing considerable damage.

1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing.” Outside magazine (Sept. 1991). Paul Watson admits there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” Watson tells the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel. Sea Shepherd crew do not carry out the order, but instead fire a shot across the bow of the Japanese vessel. The Japanese vessel does not stop. (Recorded by Yorkshire Television Documentary “Defenders of the Wild – Ocean Rider”.)

1994: US National Fisheries Institute asks for investigation into Sea Shepherd. “The recent alleged actions against Norwegian fishing vessels constitute a clear case of piracy,” it says in a letter to former US IWC Commissioner James Baker. “Acts of violence against fishermen of any nation cannot be tolerated. Their safety and livelihood could be threatened unless US officials vigorously condemn violence on the high seas.”

I take it you also did not read the links I left about people who have left the Sea Shepard because it is doing more harm than good? Remember the Ady Gill incident? I am suer you do, everyone does. Do you know why Ady Gill no longer supports the Sea Shepard?

Are you sure that your heart is bleeding for the right cause?

Edited July 12, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

If Sea Shepherd want to save the whales why do they only harass Japan? Iceland are involved in whaling as well. Interestingly they don't even bother to say it's for research, they just do it in objection to the IWC.

Last time I looked at the figures (which was a year or so ago) Japan actually take very few endangered species, they mainly take minke whales which aren't listed as an endangered species.

Taken from a thread a while ago.

"I'm not sure how accurate these numbers are as they're lifted from Wiki but apparently in 2009 Iceland took 125 Fin whales, whilst Japan took 1.

Source"

*edited to clarifty. Fin whales have an estimated population of around 100,000 and are listed as endangered

I believe he shows up anywhere that a camera crew can. Even if the fishing is completely legal in every respect, and a long standing tradition.

2000: Watson campaigns against the Makah people of Northwest United States. He uses intimidation to prevent the Makah from carrying out their IWC approved catch of the gray whale

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Hello ADBS

I would have to ask you also for any information that the Sea Shepard is doing a better job than the whaling moratorium did. I can prove that is not the case

LINK - Whales killed by whaling since moratorium

31,984 have been killed by whaling since the IWC moratorium

Role of the United States

The effectiveness of IWC decisions (at least on smaller whaling states) may be explained in large part by the fact that the United States was willing to act unilaterally in support of them. The pro whaling nations often see the U.S.'s propensity to act outside the IWC framework as "bullying" tactics, while the green and the conservation lobby tend to applaud the U.S.

LINK

Bear with me, I am making a point here,

Below is a link to Whale Wars trailer about the show and it is absolutely amazing for its honesty. They used video footage over twenty years old because newer confrontational video does not exists. The trailer shows Sea Shepherd engaged in terrorist activities by firing rockets at the Faroe police. Proving they are indeed terrorist.

LINK

One aspect that anti-whaling proponents need to realize is that these kinds of bans are complex political decisions. Representatives are accountable to many people and negotiations and compromises have to be made that in some way satisfy the involved stakeholders enough that they will comply. Insisting on absolute positions often leads to no agreement at all. To understand this, consider the graph at right. The graph shows that Japanese whaling has dropped by at least 60% since the moratorium was fully put in place. Pushing too hard for complete cessation could result in Japan leaving the IWC and, subsequently, their whaling returning to previous levels or higher.

LINK

Here is a follow-up on the three animal rights activists who illegally boarded a Japanese whaling ship a few days ago. The Japanese have agreed to the Australian government’s request that the men be released, but an Australian customs vessel will have to come pick them up. Attorney-General Nicola Roxon is making it clear that Sea Shepherd’s antics are going to be expensive for Australian taxpayers:

The mission to retrieve the men would cost “hundreds of thousands of dollars” and bad weather could increase the taxpayers’ tab further, Ms Roxon said.

“I would very much like these three men to consider what contribution they would make, or the Sea Shepherd (environmental group) for that matter,” Ms Roxon said.

“I’m not going to be holding my breath. The truth is the taxpayer will foot the bill for this sort of action.”

Sea Shepherd has insisted that there is no need for an Australian ship, since they can accept the direct return of the men. The Japanese are, of course, will not hand over criminals to the organization directly responsible for their illegal act (especially since the organization has a history of ramming whaling ships).

Meanwhile, even Prime Minister Julia Gillard has expressed her lack of approval for Sea Shepherd’s activities:

“People might want to make their views heard, and they should, but people need to make sure they stay on the right side of the line and engage in legal activity.”

LINK

And you reckon this is not cheesing of the Japanese pride? I beg to differ. It's not about whales or meat, it's about being Japanese, and what that means to a Japanese person.

Japanese Whaling Officials Bring U.S. Lawsuit Against Sea Shepherd

Today, Japan whaling officials announced that they are bringing a lawsuit in the United States against the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and its founder Captain Paul Watson.

According to Japan Today, ship owner Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha and the Institute for Cetacean Research (ICR) have filed the suit in an attempt to stop the organisation's anti-whaling campaign. In a statement, they said The Institute of Cetacean Research and Kyodo Senpaku are seeking a court order in the U.S. District Court in Seattle, Washington that prevents SSCS and its founder Paul Watson from engaging in activities at sea that could cause injuries to the crews and damage to the vessels. The statement also claimed their whaling program is greatly contributing to the advancement of scientific knowledge of whale resources in the Antarctic.

LINK

That is a direct response from Japan, showing they disapprove of the Sea Shepard, look at what they are saying, if the Sea Shepard can hide behind a label of conservationists then Japan will hide behind a label of scientific research.

The fishermen are pleased to receive attention from legitimate journalists, and even tell the TV crew about a hill where they can film the dolphin hunt. In the early days of the filming, SS members were also willing to be interviewed, but they later decided to sop doing so. ( It’s probably not good PR to have your people make asses of themselves on Japanese TV by talking about how “fun” it is to harass fishermen. )

They also interview Peter Bethune, a former member of Sea Shepherd who resigned after he was arrested and jailed for illegally boarding a Japanese ship. Bethune thinks that Paul Watson and other leaders of Sea Shepherd are dishonest and do more harm than good. Examples of this dishonest include scuttling a ship and claiming that the Japanese whalers “sunk” it, as well as Watson’s infamous “I’ve been shot” episode.

We are also shown activists who oppose the dolphin hunt but do not support Sea Shepherd’s tactics. One is Ady Gil, a former donor to Sea Shepherd who thinks that people should help Taiji develop and eco tourism business. And there is a Japanese woman (formerly a member of the Sea Shepherd anti-whaling crew) and a group of foreign activists who are protesting without hatred towards the people of Taiji.

LINK

His own people are leaving him after learning what he is really about.

And what sort of a caring loving guy is the whale lover Paul Watson? This sort of guy:

A few days ago, Typhoon Talas hit western Japan, inflicting serious damage. Wakayama prefecture was in the middle of the storm’s path of destruction:

In worst-hit Wakayama, rescuers recovered nine more bodies Tuesday afternoon, with 34 others still missing, according to prefectural police. That brought the nationwide death toll to 46. Japan’s Fire and Disaster Management Agency said 54 people were missing Tuesday, including those in Wakayama.

Paul Watson, head of the radical animal rights group Sea Shepherd, has written an article praising the typhoon as an example of nature’s “Divine Wind” protecting dolphins from Japanese people:

The storms are a fitting herald to Sea Shepherd’s campaign against Japanese whaling this upcoming season. This year’s campaign is titled Operation Divine Wind (kamikaze: Japanese for ‘wind of the Gods’). It was the kamikaze that destroyed the invading Mongol fleets between 1274 and 1281.

Where once the typhoons protected Japan, the Japanese fishermen have fallen from grace with the sea and now the typhoons have returned to protect the dolphins. It is now the Cove Guardians that embody the spirit of the kamikaze.

This is, of course, not the first example of such behavior. A few months ago, Watson wrote a poem about the March 11th tsunami (death toll: 22,000+), describing it as the sea god Neptune punishing Japan

LINK

He is not about the animals, he is about the publicity:

1978: Watson admits to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) programme As It Happens that his work is aimed at raising funds for his organisation, Sea Shepherd.

Watson: “You see, the seal is very easy to exploit as an image. We have posters, we have buttons; we have shirts … all of which portray the head of the baby seal with tears coming out of its eyes. Baby seals are always crying because the salt tears keep their eyes from freezing. But they have this image of ... they are baby animals; they are beautiful. And because of that, coupled with the horror of the sealer hitting them over the head with a club, it is an image which just goes right to the heart of animal lovers all over North America.”

What a caring and heartfelt guy huh

1994: Sea Shepherd loses observer status at the International Whaling Commission. IWC Secretary, Ray Gambell, declares that the IWC and all its member states ardently condemn Sea Shepherd’s acts of terrorism.

1994: US National Fisheries Institute asks for investigation into Sea Shepherd. “The recent alleged actions against Norwegian fishing vessels constitute a clear case of piracy,” it says in a letter to former US IWC Commissioner James Baker. “Acts of violence against fishermen of any nation cannot be tolerated. Their safety and livelihood could be threatened unless US officials vigorously condemn violence on the high seas.”

LINK

Now surely the International Whaling Commission can say if the Sea Shepard is doing good or not? They say not. He is just all about being in the media.

Speaking to a collision on January 6, 2010 between a Japanese whaling vessel and the Sea Shepherd vessel Ady Gil: "The Ady Gil, a Sea Shepherd vessel, it's a fast patrol boat, was sitting still in the water when the Shonan Maru #2 came by, deliberately turned into it, rammed it, cut it in half, sunk it and destroyed it." - Paul Watson in a radio interview with FSRN.

THE TRUTH:

Another whopper of a lie has recently come to light as we've learned that the Ady Gil did not sink as a result of the collision with the Shona Maru #2. As it turns out, Peter Bethune, the builder and captain of the Ady Gil, has admitted that although damaged, that after the collision, the Gil was sound and afloat, saying, "The boat was definitely salvageable. It was still rock solid...It would have stayed afloat for sure." Bethune reveals he was ordered to scuttle it "in order to gain public sympathy."

LINK - Lies of The Sea Shepard

I agree that what the Japanese are doing is rather childish, I admit that what the Japanese are doing is wrong. I hate it and want it to end myself, in fact as far as I am aware, many Japanese feel this way too. Terrorist action is not going to end it though. It is only going to heat up the situation,

and make the Japanese more vengeful if anything, and who is going to pay? The whales.

First let me thank you for the quality of your reply. To which I either agree or at least sympathize with for the most part. Watson himself is not a great spokesman for his own cause. In fact I feel his one sided view as righteous as he may feel it is, cannot justify certain actions. I will say the part about the baby seal was simply and honest statement and should not be used against him. Though, using the terrible tsunami to further his one sided righteous goal/agenda, was distasteful at the very least, and downright an insult to many people effected by the tsunami that have never participated directly or indirectly in whaling. He was wrong to do so. Sinking the adi Gill or scuttling it as the polite term is used was not a well thought out execution of publicity. It would have been more effective to show the people working hard to repair it and a triumph when it was returned to duty.

I do not agree with whaling for research. I do not agree with the entirety of the sea Shepard's methods. I do however feel the sea Shepard's actions are not to be considered terrorism.there has never been a threat of death or any intention of physically harming any of the fisherman themselves. Otherwise the tools used to prevent whaling would be much different.

To say that its part of Japan's culture is not a very strong argument either, otherwise we would have to agree to let south Pacific tribes continue in cannibalism practices on any foreign traveler unlucky enough to be caught by these tribes. I will note that most tribes have stopped this practice on their own for what can only be construed as moral reasons. Yet, if they wanted to continue should it be allowed?

On to a more progressive approach I feel we need more people out in the water trying to prevent whaling. At the same time we need to extend into the Antarctic waters a preserve for whales that would make it illegal even for research the harvesting of these important creatures. Above when I said more people on the waters to prevent whaling I mean a new organization. Not the sea Shepard. With a no boarding policy first off. Using new technology. The suggestion of audio to warn whales is a start. Also there are new technologies that emit waves that will cause a person to become ill without harm that needs to be implemented. The new group would be the whales liaisons of sorts. We meed 4 to 5 ships per every one of the whalers. Not to attack. Not to ram. But to form a wedge between the whales and the whalers. Standing strong and not leaving until the whalers give up and go back home. Slowly pushing the whalers back not through contact but through presence. Expensive? Yes. It would but this is an ideal. This is how it should be. Unfortunately, this may be unfeasible. There will not be that many ships. What would you do to compensate? You'd likely start with publicity. Then tools of deterrents. So supplement your lack of ships. Next you would begin to be seen as aggressive as possible without endangering anyone on either side in order to assert yourself as a force to be taken seriously. Why? Because this is what you have to do to protect those that cannot protect themselves with the resources available.

Do you agree this is the natural course of action?

And ask yourselves what Japan would be missing without whaling? No other country openly hunts whales EDIT: forgot iceland which should be treated with the same response as japan EDIT END like this any more. Though there are a few tribes that may. The inuits of Alaska I believe. Their reason would be survival though. Japan does not need whales to survive. Provide enough food for the tribes that use the meat to survive and they would stop. Japan has no reason and after all these years of research if they have not found the information they are searching for they will never find it. They need to stop. They need to stop giving everyone the middle finger and continuing solely because they can. Then on to shark fin soup.LOL

I digress though. Your post was very well written and well thought out. It was not an opinion I feel you just spout for the sake of spouting. You've considered it and came to a conclusion. Though in passing I will say that the sea Shepard's actions are still not causing currently more whales to be taken... that is an opinion which I will research fully after I post this message so if you have any more evidence that the sea Shepard is making whales more endangered I am open to read as much as can be provided. Ill also concede that the sea Shepard should have helped foot the bill for the return of their sailors that boarded the Japanese vessel as there costs were directly causes by an action that never should or would have happened had the sea Shepard acted accordingly.

thanks again for your reply.

EDIT: I forgot to address the whaling moratorium to which I have no arguement and agree fully.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Aus Der Box Skeptisch

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

I also feel having weapons aboard to defend yourself if the need for such action arises is completely OK. There is no reason to use that against the sea Shepard. The cannon thing. Not cool. Though as far as small Arms. I havnt seen any reports they were used specifically on people. Though shooting at rubber dingies again should never have happened. We need a new crew out there. One that will act proper and responsibly and appropriately. Watson has crossed the line a few to many times and has tainted the effort. IMO.

EDIT: so many spelling corrections

Edited July 13, 2012 by Aus Der Box Skeptisch

[Yamato]

I would not call that vigilante justice, I would call the intervention. I would be against the attacker not being reported to police and thrown in jail where the perpetrator belongs.

That is not vigilante justice, that is intervention, the authorities are still involved and the authorities will be the ones to deal out the justice. I just cannot see why authorities would refuse to arrive to a life threatening situation. Vigilante Justice is what the Sea Shepard is doing, punishing the crime in their own court of law, that's not right, and all it is doing is getting more whales killed. As long as the Sea Shepard tells Japan that they cannot take whales, Japan will take a little more each year, even if not needed because of national pride. Be that right or wrong, the Sea Shepard is making the situation worse. All that rancid butter in the past did not stop the Japanese killing so many whales that they ended up putting it in school lunches to get rid of it. What is more rancid butter going to do?

What we need to do is try and get something akin to the 1986 Whaling moratorium happening again, and do it right his time. As long as the Sea Shepard is out there, the Japanese will be too.

The 1986 moratorium that we have now is perfectly fine sir. It only needs to be enforced!

The rancid butter is of limited effectiveness if truth be told. The million dollar nets the whalers put up with the taxpayers' money (who don't even eat whale meat) put an end to most of its utility. They were ultimately limited to throwing bottles at the harpoon decks of the kill ships from their delta boats. Somewhat pointless, I thought. I think the butter gun (feeding warm liquid butter into the water cannon) would give butyric acid a relevant place in Sea Shepherd's future arsenal at least for a couple of years. Until the Japanese counter that too. This is a game of David and Goliath, of secret weapons, ambushes, and surprise.

Vigilante Justice is what the Sea Shepard is doing, punishing the crime in their own court of law, that's not right, and all it is doing is getting more whales killed.

That's just rhetoric. You haven't established what you're claiming here, but please, show me the alternative in action and I'll gladly take a look.

Be that right or wrong, the Sea Shepard is making the situation worse.

Casting an international spotlight on illegal whaling is making the situation worse? Please explain!

[Yamato]

n/t

Edited July 13, 2012 by Yamato

[Yamato]

I see you did not read any of the links I left, yet you come to a false conclusion without providing one to support your incorrect claim.

No weapons? I would call a huge metal boat a weapon, but he has mines, and has even said guns are on board and that he will use them to intimidate.

1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaling vessel “Sierra”, causing considerable damage. “Sierra” survives attack.

1980: The IWC at its meeting in Brighton, United Kingdom, assigns high-level protection to two Canadian Government delegates after Watson threatened to kill them for voting against a moratorium on sperm whales. Delegates given Royal Canadian Mounted Police protection until

their return home to Canada.

1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility. Investigation shows limpet mines used to blow up the vessel.

1981: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga.

1983: In retaliation for Watson’s arrest by Canadian police, animal rights extremists slash car tires and spray paint slogans on walls of buildings in the inner city of Quebec. “Fisheries Murder Seals” and “Set Paul Watson Free” slogans spray painted on the Department of Fisheries and Oceans offices in Keele Street. Animal Liberation Front delivers letter to the Quebec Star newspaper admitting causing several thousand dollars worth of damage to the Department’s Keele Street offices.

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

1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to a whaling station. (This act of violence was carried out after Iceland stopped whaling in line with the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling.) Attack carried out by Sea Shepherd members Rodney A. Coronado and David Howitt. (Coronado linked to Animal Liberation Front and arrested eight years later by United States FBI for his part in an ALF attack on Michigan State University research laboratory. Charges included use of an

explosive device, theft and arson.)

1991: A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports that Sea Shepherd, some of whose crew were armed with rifles, rammed his vessel causing considerable damage.

1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing.” Outside magazine (Sept. 1991). Paul Watson admits there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” Watson tells the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel. Sea Shepherd crew do not carry out the order, but instead fire a shot across the bow of the Japanese vessel. The Japanese vessel does not stop. (Recorded by Yorkshire Television Documentary “Defenders of the Wild – Ocean Rider”.)

1994: US National Fisheries Institute asks for investigation into Sea Shepherd. “The recent alleged actions against Norwegian fishing vessels constitute a clear case of piracy,” it says in a letter to former US IWC Commissioner James Baker. “Acts of violence against fishermen of any nation cannot be tolerated. Their safety and livelihood could be threatened unless US officials vigorously condemn violence on the high seas.”

I take it you also did not read the links I left about people who have left the Sea Shepard because it is doing more harm than good? Remember the Ady Gill incident? I am suer you do, everyone does. Do you know why Ady Gill no longer supports the Sea Shepard?

Are you sure that your heart is bleeding for the right cause?

Why are you against destroying poaching equipment?

[Yamato]

I also feel having weapons aboard to defend yourself if the need for such action arises is completely OK. There is no reason to use that against the sea Shepard. The cannon thing. Not cool. Though as far as small Arms. I havnt seen any reports they were used specifically on people. Though shooting at rubber dingies again should never have happened. We need a new crew out there. One that will act proper and responsibly and appropriately. Watson has crossed the line a few to many times and has tainted the effort. IMO.

EDIT: so many spelling corrections

If Watson crossed the line, what's the line? What's "a new crew" gonna do out there?

Watson is probably the most exceptional conservationist alive today. He's led a stellar 35 year career that's never killed or seriously injured anyone and a laundry list of barely-sourced snippets from the whaling regulators trying to make him look bad isn't going to influence me and shouldn't influence you either.

[Yamato]

Watson himself is not a great spokesman for his own cause.

Really? Prepare for 52 minutes that will change your life if you have any sympathy for animals:

[media=]

[/media]

[gnostic-deity]

i support Sea Shepard

[Coffey]

To be honest Psyche.... They deserve to be shot, so i don't really care. The Navy should do their job and protect those areas. They don't though, so someone has to.

[psyche101]

First let me thank you for the quality of your reply. To which I either agree or at least sympathize with for the most part. Watson himself is not a great spokesman for his own cause. In fact I feel his one sided view as righteous as he may feel it is, cannot justify certain actions. I will say the part about the baby seal was simply and honest statement and should not be used against him. Though, using the terrible tsunami to further his one sided righteous goal/agenda, was distasteful at the very least, and downright an insult to many people effected by the tsunami that have never participated directly or indirectly in whaling. He was wrong to do so. Sinking the adi Gill or scuttling it as the polite term is used was not a well thought out execution of publicity. It would have been more effective to show the people working hard to repair it and a triumph when it was returned to duty.

I do not agree with whaling for research. I do not agree with the entirety of the sea Shepard's methods. I do however feel the sea Shepard's actions are not to be considered terrorism.there has never been a threat of death or any intention of physically harming any of the fisherman themselves. Otherwise the tools used to prevent whaling would be much different.

HI ADBS

Thank you very much, rather than put so much thought into it, I have to admit to having worn the shoe on the other foot and having a similar argument presented to myself. I had to give in to logic in the end, and from what I read of your post, it seems we are very much in agreement on the issue.

Wether we call the Sea Shepards actions terrorist or not, that is how the IWC see's them, and Watson has admitted to carrying weapons on board, I would also consider the scuttling of vessels a terrorist act by definition. Very good call on the Ady Gill, I agree entirely.

To say that its part of Japan's culture is not a very strong argument either, otherwise we would have to agree to let south Pacific tribes continue in cannibalism practices on any foreign traveler unlucky enough to be caught by these tribes. I will note that most tribes have stopped this practice on their own for what can only be construed as moral reasons. Yet, if they wanted to continue should it be allowed?

Indeed, but some tribes still do practise cannibalism. Some poor sailor fellow lost his life just last year to cannibals. I agree it is barbaric, and that Japan is using it as an excuse, if they wanted to stick with tradition they would be out ion wooden long boats with hand held harpoons, not floating slaughter factories, Problem is that the Sea Shepard is giving Japan an excuse, weak is it might be, the claims of "Scientific Research" stands to scrutiny. I think they have managed a whole 4 papers in the last 2 or 3 decades. What Japan does in wrong, but the Sea Shepard gives them the political leverage to take the upper hand. I'd like to see Japans position weakened.

On to a more progressive approach I feel we need more people out in the water trying to prevent whaling. At the same time we need to extend into the Antarctic waters a preserve for whales that would make it illegal even for research the harvesting of these important creatures. Above when I said more people on the waters to prevent whaling I mean a new organization. Not the sea Shepard. With a no boarding policy first off. Using new technology. The suggestion of audio to warn whales is a start. Also there are new technologies that emit waves that will cause a person to become ill without harm that needs to be implemented. The new group would be the whales liaisons of sorts. We meed 4 to 5 ships per every one of the whalers. Not to attack. Not to ram. But to form a wedge between the whales and the whalers. Standing strong and not leaving until the whalers give up and go back home. Slowly pushing the whalers back not through contact but through presence. Expensive? Yes. It would but this is an ideal. This is how it should be. Unfortunately, this may be unfeasible. There will not be that many ships. What would you do to compensate? You'd likely start with publicity. Then tools of deterrents. So supplement your lack of ships. Next you would begin to be seen as aggressive as possible without endangering anyone on either side in order to assert yourself as a force to be taken seriously. Why? Because this is what you have to do to protect those that cannot protect themselves with the resources available.

Do you agree this is the natural course of action?

Most definitely, but I think this is where the UN needs to step in, unfortunately, the UN is a toothless tiger, and does not achieve much, which leaves little recourse, but the globe needs to act. Australia will be hurt badly financially. So will any individual. We need to level the playing field so that we can take on Japan. They own all our television factories, cameras, phones, heck just about everything we use, and personally, I could go without to stop the whalers, but it will put that many people out of work here and Australia will suffer deep poverty like it has not seen in history. We are still hurting from the GFC.

Any country that wants to help would be more than welcome, we just do not get a lot of that just pointed fingers, and legally, the Japanese are not even in our waters. We still do our bit where we can, spotter planes were grounded and not allowed to refuel or land in Australia last year. We make it difficult for the Japanese, but outright taking them on would be financial suicide for the entire country.

And ask yourselves what Japan would be missing without whaling? No other country openly hunts whales EDIT: forgot iceland which should be treated with the same response as japan EDIT END like this any more. Though there are a few tribes that may. The inuits of Alaska I believe. Their reason would be survival though. Japan does not need whales to survive. Provide enough food for the tribes that use the meat to survive and they would stop. Japan has no reason and after all these years of research if they have not found the information they are searching for they will never find it. They need to stop. They need to stop giving everyone the middle finger and continuing solely because they can. Then on to shark fin soup.LOL

Indeed, the Inuit still go out in wooden boats I believe, I can live with that comfortably as tradition. But as soon as these countries go from sport to comercial floating fisheries, that is a whole new ball game, and where the "traditional " argument should be thrown out. Unfortunately the court system does not work that way and we need to work within it. The Sea Shepard has been out there for decades, and the Japanese only grow in force. Like I said, a lousy 4 papers in something like 3 decades, it's a woeful excuse, but one that stands in a court of law. We need to get smarter than the whalers and beat them at their own game, in a court of law. Brute force is just a push me pull you. And slowly but surely, the Sea Shepard is losing the battle. They can never manage the type of funds available to commercial whalers. As such they will always be on the back foot, while the whalers get bigger and nastier.

If law can allow whaling, I believe it can stop it.

I digress though. Your post was very well written and well thought out. It was not an opinion I feel you just spout for the sake of spouting. You've considered it and came to a conclusion. Though in passing I will say that the sea Shepard's actions are still not causing currently more whales to be taken... that is an opinion which I will research fully after I post this message so if you have any more evidence that the sea Shepard is making whales more endangered I am open to read as much as can be provided. Ill also concede that the sea Shepard should have helped foot the bill for the return of their sailors that boarded the Japanese vessel as there costs were directly causes by an action that never should or would have happened had the sea Shepard acted accordingly.

thanks again for your reply.

EDIT: I forgot to address the whaling moratorium to which I have no arguement and agree fully.

Thank you very much, it actually means quite a lot coming from you as I have read many of your posts in the Ancient Civilisations sections of the boards, and have always very much enjoyed your views and information. I am pleased that I could somewhat return the favour this time. The main problem with the Sea Shepard is that they are provocation, and with the law, and big dollars behind the whalers, it seems they will win every time. For every new boat the Sea Shepard gets on board, the Japanese are likely to float a new floating slaughterhouse. I think in the end, we are fighting someone too smart and too big to lose to brute force. We need to beat them at their own game.

Thank you for reply, in turn, much appreciated. All the best mate.

Cheers.