Dougal Posted July 19, 2012 #76 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Well one of the things I read was Australian waters, where the japanese aren't even supposed to be. See the above post, I edited it whilst you were writing yours I think The Japanese don't recognise those areas as Australian waters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 19, 2012 #77 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Do you know which zones it's whaling in that are illegal? As I said as far as I was aware none of it's operations were technically illegal however I could very well be wrong More info or a pointer in the right direction would be helpful. Thanks Edit * A quick google (VERY quick) has told me that where Japan whale is considered illegal by the Australians, but not by the Japanese as they don't recognise the Australians' claim to the area. As I see it, they can still whale there until they recognise an Australian claim on that area. Until they recognise that claim they're not breaking any laws that they recognise, and so technically still aren't breaking the law. **I'd like to point out that I'm not supporting whaling here even though I seem to be defending the Japanese. I just think that Sea Shepherd are going about this in totally the wrong way and are doing more harm than good to conservation attempts. Everyone always goes on about conservationists.But look at the tiger and other animals that are endangeered. Look at the amount of squid and Jelly fish in the ocean now, proving that these creatures are getting criticaly low. Sometimes talking, debating and planning along with words are just useless and sometimes it calls for action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #78 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Whoevers Navy is supposed to protect the waters where it is ilegal to whale. So in Austrailia it should be their Navy etc. But the legality is in dispute, that is an issue, so no they cannot. It's not about beleive, or who thinks it's right or wrong.It is just wrong. So if the police/goverment stopped arresting people for Child abuse (more specifically rape) you wouldn't want someone to step in? Or you wouldn't step in yourself? Would you jsut walk away and let a child be raped? If the goverment didn't back their law? Now i find that disturbing. Not comparable, whether you think hunting whales is right or wrong is a matter of belief. Predation is not the same as child abuse, sorry it never will be and it is a ridiculous comparison and nor does it justify murder. met someone last weekend who is part of seashepherd and everything but ramming vessals on the list you just posted is BS. lol They certianly do not carry firearms. They fire butter at them which is completely different. And if you say that causing "war" through beleif is Terrosism.. Then I guess the UK goverment and the UK citizens are all terrorists for back the goverment. But they have been recorded doing all these things, much of it on TV. The law says they CANNOT whale in these areas and they carry on doing it. The Navy which should be used to patrol those waters and keep whaling vessals out, isn't doing it's job. So someone else has stepped up to it. Anyway my point is on the over used word "terrorist" which is automatically used to discredit organisations/people and cause hatred. So well done on fueling. The law doesn't, a disputed international agreement does. The law does however say that ramming vessels (or nets with people on like they did in the Mediterranean) is undisputably illegal, as it shooting people like you suggested. You acuse me adding fuel, you think shooting people is ok! What will that do to help? Apart from getting Sea Shepherd to at least a status of Persona non grata, which is should be anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #79 Share Posted July 19, 2012 **I'd like to point out that I'm not supporting whaling here even though I seem to be defending the Japanese. I just think that Sea Shepherd are going about this in totally the wrong way and are doing more harm than good to conservation attempts. Exactly! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougal Posted July 19, 2012 #80 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Everyone always goes on about conservationists.But look at the tiger and other animals that are endangeered. Look at the amount of squid and Jelly fish in the ocean now, proving that these creatures are getting criticaly low. Sometimes talking, debating and planning along with words are just useless and sometimes it calls for action. And sometimes the action of p*ssing off a very patriotic country with some idealistic western views does significantly more harm than good. The part that proves to me that this is more about PR is that they vilify the Japanese, whilst for the large part ignoring the more western countries that whale. There's very little coverage of Iceland even though they take a much larger portion of endangered whales, and they don't even hide under the pretence of science, they just do it in objection. Where's the global uproar and huge media coverage over that? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #81 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Everyone always goes on about conservationists.But look at the tiger and other animals that are endangeered. Look at the amount of squid and Jelly fish in the ocean now, proving that these creatures are getting criticaly low. Sometimes talking, debating and planning along with words are just useless and sometimes it calls for action. But conservation work and education have worked. They certainly work better than the cult of Watson approach which has had 0 effect. You think tigers got protection because of crazy people attacking hunters? No, it was hunters being educated, Jim Corbett being a very famous example. Why do you think Sea Shepherd have no respect within the scientific community? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 19, 2012 #82 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Not comparable, whether you think hunting whales is right or wrong is a matter of belief. Predation is not the same as child abuse, sorry it never will be and it is a ridiculous comparison and nor does it justify murder So is pedophilia... Hence why people do it... It is not ridiculous at all, your reply is ridiculous as my arguement can be backed by facts. Like the fact children under 16 can have sex in some countries and "rape" doesn't exaclty exist die to their laws a man can force a woman to ahve sex and it's legal. So going by that, if you ahd adaughter and you where in one of those countries and a man abused your daughter you would just stand there and let it happen? I don't think so... Now the the majority of the western world can see whaling is wrong, horrible and destroying the ecosystem of the ocean. That's not a beleif, it's a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #83 Share Posted July 19, 2012 So is pedophilia... Hence why people do it... It is not ridiculous at all, your reply is ridiculous as my arguement can be backed by facts. Like the fact children under 16 can have sex in some countries and "rape" doesn't exaclty exist die to their laws a man can force a woman to ahve sex and it's legal. So going by that, if you ahd adaughter and you where in one of those countries and a man abused your daughter you would just stand there and let it happen? I don't think so... Now the the majority of the western world can see whaling is wrong, horrible and destroying the ecosystem of the ocean. That's not a beleif, it's a fact. Sorry mate, but hunting and predation are not equal to child abuse, no matter what you as an individual feel about the animal. Would you say it is ok to shoot someone for killing a wasp? Why is a whale more important? You could argue that it is inhumane and unsustainable. They are the only valid arguments you have and then you need evidence, we'll never get that with the SS running around and then you need to argue, rationially that animal welfare is important. Sorry but you do not understand just how enourmously different this is to child abuse and how illogical you arguement it. Whether hunting whales is wrong or not is a belief. sorry, it is. The ecological impact is not properly studied either and guess what, it won't be now. Science doesn't deal in these absolutes, so don't confuse you belief with fact please. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 19, 2012 #84 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Sorry mate, but hunting and predation are not equal to child abuse, no matter what you as an individual feel about the animal. Would you say it is ok to shoot someone for killing a wasp? Why is a whale more important? You could argue that it is inhumane and unsustainable. They are the only valid arguments you have and then you need evidence, we'll never get that with the SS running around and then you need to argue, rationially that animal welfare is important. Sorry but you do not understand just how enourmously different this is to child abuse and how illogical you arguement it. Whether hunting whales is wrong or not is a belief. sorry, it is. The ecological impact is not properly studied either and guess what, it won't be now. Science doesn't deal in these absolutes, so don't confuse you belief with fact please. Child abuse: Harming an innocent life Whaling: Harming an innocent life + the ecosystem + the future of our planet. Not much difference really. Hunting is a backwards thinking thing as well in the sense you mean, we are "super predators" we also have intelligence, empathy and logical thinking etc. We have a RESPONSIBILITY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #85 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Child abuse: Harming an innocent life Whaling: Harming an innocent life + the ecosystem + the future of our planet. Not much difference really. Hunting is a backwards thinking thing as well in the sense you mean, we are "super predators" we also have intelligence, empathy and logical thinking etc. We have a RESPONSIBILITY. Why is a wasp different to a whale? Is a whale innocent and a wasp? Should killing a wasp also be equated to child abuse? That is you opinion, hunting is actually important in an ecosytem too, we are not excluded from ecology. Humans are natural predators, we hunt prey, in fact some deer population need human predation. I will think you will find that logic is something humans are very bad at, quick check on behavioural science will show that much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 19, 2012 #86 Share Posted July 19, 2012 (edited) Why is a wasp different to a whale? Is a whale innocent and a wasp? Should killing a wasp also be equated to child abuse? That is you opinion, hunting is actually important in an ecosytem too, we are not excluded from ecology. Humans are natural predators, we hunt prey, in fact some deer population need human predation. I will think you will find that logic is something humans are very bad at, quick check on behavioural science will show that much. Wasps aren't suffering because of being over hunted. (I wouldn't even call it hunting, it's slaughter) Actually the only reason we are need to keep animal numbers down is because we killed of their predators.... I'd like to know where we need to keep the number of deer down, because according to all my bushcraft friends they are in low numbers in the UK. Oh and I find it offensive calling whaling "hunting" in the way they do it. Just like I find "hunting" with a gun offensive. Hunting requires skill, neither of those do. Humans were natural predators. We are not anymore, also we are not full on predator either. We are herbivores, which is for survival reasons. We don't even need meat to survive. It was so we could eat one or the other depending on climate and situation. That depends on the human, we are all different. Hence this discussion. Also just to clarify, when I said before about the being shot thing, I was over exaggerating. Edited July 19, 2012 by Coffey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #87 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Wasps aren't suffering because of being over hunted. (I wouldn't even call it hunting, it's slaughter) Actually the only reason we are need to keep animal numbers down is because we killed of their predators.... I'd like to know where we need to keep the number of deer down, because according to all my bushcraft friends they are in low numbers in the UK. Oh and I find it offensive calling whaling "hunting" in the way they do it. Just like I find "hunting" with a gun offensive. Hunting requires skill, neither of those do. Humans were natural predators. We are not anymore, also we are not full on predator either. We are herbivores, which is for survival reasons. We don't even need meat to survive. It was so we could eat one or the other depending on climate and situation. That depends on the human, we are all different. Hence this discussion. Also just to clarify, when I said before about the being shot thing, I was over exaggerating. You would think, but you are wrong. Probably in much worse condition in regards to some species, whales just have much better PR. It is still hunting, I don't agree with it, but there is in my opinion a right and a wrong way of doing things, violence and endangerment of human life are not the way forward, diplomacy and education are, you need to get the people of Japan on your side to make a difference, SSCS has done the oppositte sadly. We are not herbivores, sorry, but that is biologically incorrect mate, we are omnivores and we are still predators. I know, I was just making a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Buzzkill Posted July 19, 2012 #88 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Anyone else think we didn't drop enough nukes on Japan when we had the chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougal Posted July 19, 2012 #89 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Anyone else think we didn't drop enough nukes on Japan when we had the chance? ...really? I know it's hard to tell sarcasm over the internet so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 19, 2012 #90 Share Posted July 19, 2012 (edited) You would think, but you are wrong. Probably in much worse condition in regards to some species, whales just have much better PR. It is still hunting, I don't agree with it, but there is in my opinion a right and a wrong way of doing things, violence and endangerment of human life are not the way forward, diplomacy and education are, you need to get the people of Japan on your side to make a difference, SSCS has done the oppositte sadly. We are not herbivores, sorry, but that is biologically incorrect mate, we are omnivores and we are still predators. I know, I was just making a point. Oh i fully agree that hose are the right ways about it, but those ways are not working. I've watched a lot of things on this and seen all the campaigning. I've seen the Japanese goverment and fishingcommision etc not give a flying monkeys about it. Just like thye don't with sharks. They don't educate the general public enough about these things in Japan, another huge proble. I watched a video where these little school kids jsut walk past a dolphin that has been slashed to s***, but is still alive jsut bleeding out and suffering. They walk past it laighing with each other and not even blinking an eyelid. And yet they have these cute anime characters base don dolphins etc... What is the about?! Lack of education obviosuly, but they aren't trying to fix it because they don't want to. Sorry I meant omnivores. lol I always say Herbivore when I mean Omnivore. But we are omnviore to survive, we don't need to eat both to survive now. Something a lot of people don't understand. Anyone else think we didn't drop enough nukes on Japan when we had the chance? If you're being serious then that is just sick. If you are trying to be funny, it's not funny. Edited July 19, 2012 by Coffey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #91 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Oh i fully agree that hose are the right ways about it, but those ways are not working. I've watched a lot of things on this and seen all the campaigning. I've seen the Japanese goverment and fishingcommision etc not give a flying monkeys about it. Just like thye don't with sharks. They don't educate the general public enough about these things in Japan, another huge proble. I watched a video where these little school kids jsut walk past a dolphin that has been slashed to s***, but is still alive jsut bleeding out and suffering. They walk past it laighing with each other and not even blinking an eyelid. And yet they have these cute anime characters base don dolphins etc... What is the about?! Lack of education obviosuly, but they aren't trying to fix it because they don't want to. Sorry I meant omnivores. lol I always say Herbivore when I mean Omnivore. But we are omnviore to survive, we don't need to eat both to survive now. Something a lot of people don't understand. The trouble is they have not been tried for long enough to make a difference and now SSCS is making efforts in this regard nigh on impossible as Japan feels attack for, as it seems to them, not having western ideas. We do, cept Inuit, they can live of just meat, makes sense, no veg in the Arctic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted July 19, 2012 #92 Share Posted July 19, 2012 The trouble is they have not been tried for long enough to make a difference and now SSCS is making efforts in this regard nigh on impossible as Japan feels attack for, as it seems to them, not having western ideas. We do, cept Inuit, they can live of just meat, makes sense, no veg in the Arctic. Well from what this guy was saying to me and my friend, they don't do stuff like what people say. So I'm going by what he said. We don't need to eat meat at all. Everything in meat that is good for us cna be found in other food. In fact red meat is more unhealthy than anything. Fish is the only meat that is truly healthy for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted July 19, 2012 #93 Share Posted July 19, 2012 (edited) Well from what this guy was saying to me and my friend, they don't do stuff like what people say. So I'm going by what he said. We don't need to eat meat at all. Everything in meat that is good for us cna be found in other food. In fact red meat is more unhealthy than anything. Fish is the only meat that is truly healthy for us. Yes, that is cos SSCS never tried, they just attacked. Arctic peoples do. Balance is best, also vegetarian food is generally not nice and venison is very healthy. Edited July 19, 2012 by Mattshark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnostic-deity Posted July 19, 2012 #94 Share Posted July 19, 2012 But the actions by SS have led to nothing but more whales dying than before their Southern Ocean campaign and an increase in Japanese public support for whaling, clearly they are not helping. Overtly simple way of looking at it and by proxy supporting violence, plenty of other groups oppose whaling with out resorting to the methods SS do. maybe, but didnt they shut the whalers down last year? i think they did. all they need to do it find the factory boat and follow it around so they cannot load whales onto it. i do not think what they are doing is increasing whaling. i think they are increasing the knowledge of the atrocities that happen. knowledge is power. because there is a show, on the tv, a lot of people will find out about what is going on, and hopefully rally to stop it. its not like we can just call up Japan and be like "hey guys, can you stop doing that, cuz its not cool at all anymore". i dont see anyone else out there trying to stop them either. therefore, i support Sea Shepard. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted July 19, 2012 #95 Share Posted July 19, 2012 (edited) Well from what this guy was saying to me and my friend, they don't do stuff like what people say. So I'm going by what he said. We don't need to eat meat at all. Everything in meat that is good for us cna be found in other food. In fact red meat is more unhealthy than anything. Fish is the only meat that is truly healthy for us. just so you know my next venture into activism will be educating people on how wrong it is to kill poor defensless plants that live and breathe and never hurt anyone without provocation. I keep seeing people rip these lovely sweet plants right out of their homes lopping off their heads and chopping them up into little peices... and for what so the humans can feel better about their diet? Blows me away how the plants are never considered. There have been tests that show they respond to kindness and abhore and whither to anger... though they may like rock music as seen on myth busters. The murder of these plants may need to end soon all they ever did was try and give you oxygen so you can breathe. Makes a tear form in the corner of my eye just writing this. Edited July 20, 2012 by Aus Der Box Skeptisch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted July 19, 2012 #96 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I disagree with the statement "as long as the sea Shepard is out there so will be the whalers." That's just one of those funny statements that can be viewed as if whalers stop then the sea Shepard will have no more objective therefore they will not be there any longer... self fulfilling prophecy. On the other hand I believe you implied the whalers are only there because the sea Shepard is. That Psyche I find highly dubious. The whalers are not there for the sea Shepard. They are not there because the sea Shepard. And if the sea Shepard left the whalers would still continue albeit unmolested. Which way were you intending that statement and could you clarify your stance? Thank you in advance HI ADBS I guess perhaps a better way of saying it might be that I feel the Sea Shepard is making a negative impact on the Whalers themselves. They are only provoking them. Obviously they are not there because the Sea Shepard is there solely, whaling has a history going back to the early 1200's. I do feel if the Sea Shepard left that the same sort of pressure might be applied that got Japan to the IWC in the first instance. Japan is the one who has to stop Japan, it is a process that needs encouragement. Rather than ram whalers to stop a dozen deaths a year, negotiations at the IWC that stop whaling altogether I feel should be the goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aus Der Box Skeptisch Posted July 19, 2012 #97 Share Posted July 19, 2012 HI ADBS I guess perhaps a better way of saying it might be that I feel the Sea Shepard is making a negative impact on the Whalers themselves. They are only provoking them. Obviously they are not there because the Sea Shepard is there solely, whaling has a history going back to the early 1200's. I do feel if the Sea Shepard left that the same sort of pressure might be applied that got Japan to the IWC in the first instance. Japan is the one who has to stop Japan, it is a process that needs encouragement. Rather than ram whalers to stop a dozen deaths a year, negotiations at the IWC that stop whaling altogether I feel should be the goal. You bring up something of a good idea. We need Japanese out there as part of the sscs so the Japanese themselves can relate and view the goal as not only a western ideology but an eastern one also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted July 20, 2012 #98 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Whoevers Navy is supposed to protect the waters where it is ilegal to whale. So in Austrailia it should be their Navy etc. That is the thing, they are fishing International Waters, there is no Navy for International Waters. They do not enter Australian waters, or we could act. This is another of those fallacies spread by people like the Sea Shepard. It's nobodies land. Yet for some reason, because Australia is the closest, many think we are responsible. We a re not. Going after Japanese Whalers in international waters would be an act of war against Japan. Australia has no more right over that whaling region than we do over San Francisco Bay. What you want is a UN protest with sanctions. Your Government is every bit as responsible as the Aussie one in that regard. It's not about beleive, or who thinks it's right or wrong. It is just wrong. So if the police/goverment stopped arresting people for Child abuse (more specifically rape) you wouldn't want someone to step in? Or you wouldn't step in yourself? Would you jsut walk away and let a child be raped? If the goverment didn't back their law? Now i find that disturbing. And what happens if you do not handle the case right? The perpetrator gets off scott free. No, the right way is to force the UN into action. I met someone last weekend who is part of seashepherd and everything but ramming vessals on the list you just posted is BS. lol They certianly do not carry firearms. They fire butter at them which is completely different. You seem to have missed the post where Paul Watson blatantly admitted to carrying firearms? 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). Here we have a Sea Shepard member who went in public to say the exact opposite. No offence, but if you friend if gung ho enough to join, what do you think he is going to say? And if you say that causing "war" through beleif is Terrosism.. Then I guess the UK goverment and the UK citizens are all terrorists for back the goverment. The IWC has listed the scuttling of ships as an act of terrorism, and it is. The law says they CANNOT whale in these areas and they carry on doing it. The Navy which should be used to patrol those waters and keep whaling vessals out, isn't doing it's job. So someone else has stepped up to it. Anyway my point is on the over used word "terrorist" which is automatically used to discredit organisations/people and cause hatred. So well done on fueling. You keep saying that but it is simply not true. They are recognised as terrorist Internationally, and the Japanese have broken no laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted July 20, 2012 #99 Share Posted July 20, 2012 That's not true, they are whaling in zones that are ilegal. Which is the point of this. Then the point is moot. Please illustrate an instance whereby the Japanese have infringed on any recognised territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted July 20, 2012 #100 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Everyone always goes on about conservationists.But look at the tiger and other animals that are endangeered. Look at the amount of squid and Jelly fish in the ocean now, proving that these creatures are getting criticaly low. Sometimes talking, debating and planning along with words are just useless and sometimes it calls for action. Steve Irwin was a great conservationist, so was David Fleay. So is David Attenborough etc. etc. None ever had to resort to violence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now