Sea Shepherd Protesters Ram Japanese Whalers in Intense Clash

Deny Ignorance

www.smh.com.au...

Sea Shepherd leader Paul Watson said his vessel hit the Yushin Maru No.1 when it swept in front of him to clear the Steve Irwin away from the stern of the factory ship Nisshin Maru so it could take a whale aboard.

Captain Watson said he tried to back away but the movement of the whaling ships made a collision inevitable. No one was hurt and the vessels were not seriously damaged.

Also...

Originally posted by FRIGHTENER
And Kryties- STARS STARS & STARS! I love your passion on such an emotional issue. I pray to God the Australian Navy puts YOU at the helm, when it's time to expell the Japanese whalers!

Thankyou Frightener! When I feel strongly on an issue, I absolutely REFUSE to back down It is good to see others who feel the same way as I do about these sorts of issues.

And I would LOVE the challenge of being in charge of the Aussie Navy for that mission, it would be an honour an a privilege

reply to post by Saf85


Indeed, it is called the FOOD CHAIN.





Yeah, RIGHT.

====
Mod Edit: large image scaled

[edit on 2/6/2009 by Badge01]

While i do not agree with whaling.

If i was the captain of the Japanese ship i would follow the international law covering a attack on a ship at sea and if attacked would do what was necessary to protect my ship.
Even if that was to ram the sea shepherd ship that was the aggressor.

And the Japanese captain would be in the right to do this under international law.

You do not play dangerous games at sea.

When i was in the Navy i fired a marine flare INTO the sail on a sail boat that entered a closed diving area while divers were in the water.
and was ready to fire a M14 at them if they had not turned around.

The coast guard later arrested the captain of the sailboat.

After the bombing of the USS Cole and the pirates operating in some areas around the world most captains will take no chances.

I hope these stupid sea shepherd people take there ship within 200 miles of japan.
They will find themselves arrested and there ship impounded.

[edit on 6-2-2009 by ANNED]

reply to post by ANNED


You obviously did not read this article I posted not two posts above in which the Captain of the Steve Irwin states that a second Japanese boat swerved in front of them making a collision inevitable. The photo at the top of the page clearly shows the Steve Irwin veering to the right - attempting to avoid collision - as they collide with the stern of the whaling ship that swerved in front of them.

This was the fault of the Japanese whalers deliberately cutting the Steve Irwin off, not the other way around.

Deny Ignorance, please.

P.S. Here is the link again in case you missed it the first time:
www.smh.com.au...


[edit on 6/2/2009 by Kryties]

reply to post by Kryties


Do you really think Watson would come out and own up to ramming the Japanese boat?
So do you trust everything you read? And especially on SHM, probably one of the worst newspapers/ online news sources in Australia, for providing UNBIASED reporting.
Show me a video clip of the whole incident not just one photo that shows the Steve Irwin hitting the rear of the Japanese boat before i will believe anything he has to say. Him and his crew, just like PETA, are a pack of terrorists and should be treated as such.
Follow your own advice Deny Ignorance and do some PROPER research on the tactics of these groups. In this case the Japanese are the lesser of two evils

====
Mod Edit: snipped large quote, used 'reply to' feature.

[edit on 2/6/2009 by Badge01]

Could you please put your money where your mouth is and prove your unwarranted claims that the Sydney Morning Herald is biased?

Didn't think so.

Originally posted by Kryties
Could you please put your money where your mouth is and prove your unwarranted claims that the Sydney Morning Herald is biased?

Didn't think so.

Sure will
Their reporting on any firearms incidents always leads to attacks on legal firearms owners and calls for tighter gun laws rather than blame criminals for their actions and pushing for lets say a mandatory 25 years jail for anyone using a gun in a crime.
Lee Rhiannon and the rest of the NSW greens are always reported in the best of light and are always right and any political story always has either a pro labour or pro green whiles always anti liberal or anti national
Way to much OPINON and not enough FACTS in their stories.
Now i find most papers are biased and you need to read at least half a dozen different versions of the same story before you can even think about trying to work out what the true story is.
Every news source has there own little agendas and are always trying to sway you to there way of thinking.
I may not be able to sway your opinion on whaling but please please take note of what i have been saying about so called journos and news sources and dont trust the very first thing you read.

Is there any reason why the Japanese can't setup whale farms in their own territory?

They could breed their favourite species for commercial use like a fish farm.

Lets preserve the wild, or what's left of it...

reply to post by Kalrana


I said PROOF. Not your opinion.

Proof is verifiable documentation of any kind that can prove your claim. Just because what the Sydney Morning Herald reports is against your OPINION does not mean that it is biased any any way shape or form.

I think you are grasping at straws here.

Originally posted by Kalrana

I support the SUSTAINABLE HARVEST AND MANAGEMENT of any animal.

I love the term "Sustainable Harvest and management"

How do you have sustained harvest of an unknown Quantity?
you are working on estimates, No actual number has been recorded.
When you have researches who see the same whales year after year on the Australian coast you realize how limited the numbers are.

There is no such thing as sustainable fishing in the ocean.

You honestly think that whales can be harvested sustainably when the Japanese describe the minki whale as the cockroach of the sea?

What do you do with cockroaches? most people kill them without a second thought, Japan has the same idea about cockroaches.

Tch, how can you guys say things like "Whales are not important, life will go on without them"? That's not right at all. If you look at it in a whale's perspective, humans aren't important, and MORE life would go on without us.

From what I see here, they are hunting down whales for a cheap source of food. That's a poor excuse, it's not hard to uhh i dunno, stick to their tradition and fish? Cause thats what the Japanese tradition is, fishing and aquaculture. Whales aren't sentient beings? Thats a pretty loaded statement, they seem to understand the world better than we do, cause they arent killing it like we do.

I like how when a young woman gets put into jail for 3 months for tagging, a cop shoots a man being held down, and an 11 year old child gets tazered.. the typical response is "well they broke the law, they should deal with the consequences". Wheres that logic now? Double standards just because you guys feel these whales are not sentient beings. They are sentient enough for me when 100% of mother whales nurse and care for their young. Do 100% of human mothers do the same?

[edit on 6-2-2009 by LeTan]

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Kalrana

 

I said PROOF. Not your opinion.

Proof is verifiable documentation of any kind that can prove your claim. Just because what the Sydney Morning Herald reports is against your OPINION does not mean that it is biased any any way shape or form.

I think you are grasping at straws here.

OK heres some links
www.smh.com.au...
www.smh.com.au...
I use to be a freelance journo but got sick of being told that a particular story would need to be re-worded to give a particular slant to a story, so i think i know a bit more about how these things work than the average person

CAN YOU PROVE THAT THEY ARE NOT BIASED?

As you like to claim " Deny Ignorance " Well its pretty ignorant to rely on one news source and not to think this type of thing happens.
You wont change my opinion on whaling, i wont change your opinion on whaling. I know that and except that. What i would like to change is your reliance on ONE news site and a dubious one at that.

reply to post by Kalrana


Hows this for the other side of the story. Here we have a JAPANESE NEWSPAPER saying the exact same thing as the Sydney Morning Herald:


Japan Today Newspaper

‘‘We were in the process of blocking the transfer from the Yushin Maru No. 2 when the Yushin Maru No. 1 moved directly in front of the bow to block us,’’ said Sea Shepherd master Capt. Paul Watson.

‘‘I could not turn to starboard without hitting the Yushin Maru No. 1. I tried to back down, but the movement of the Yushin Maru No. 2 made the collision unavoidable,’’ Watson told Kyodo News by satellite phone.

The rest of the article is biased toward the Japanese point of view but even THEY admit that this is the way it went down.

Originally posted by munkey66


I love the term "Sustainable Harvest and management"

How do you have sustained harvest of an unknown Quantity?
you are working on estimates, No actual number has been recorded.

EXACTLY. How do you know theres not a million minke whales. Thats the problem with this argument. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH RESEARCH DONE. (and i dont mean the Japanese style of research)
I dont trust the Japanese numbers, i dont trust the antis numbers. All any of us have to go on are estimates. The figures i use are those that are agreed on by IWC, BUT there could be more or there may be less, BUT what all members of the IWC agree on is that numbers are rising
Any and all hunters and this is what the japanese are doing, hunting, are for sustainable harvest. If theres no whales the whalers are out of a job, a future that no one wants. A small number are harvested, and harvested to rules. And yes there are rules. Generally mothers and calves are avioded if possible to ensure future generations. If a mother is killed the calve is then also killed if it is still reliant on the mother to save it from starving to death. Adult males are the main target . In an ideal situation no females would be shot but ID can be hard.
You will never totally get rid of whaling. Its been happening for centuries and will continue so placing strict targets and restrictions on what and how many are harvested is the best outcome. A compromise on no whaling and the slaughters that occurred in the past and will occur again if the IWC was to collapse

reply to post by Kalrana



Do you really think Watson would come out and own up to ramming the Japanese boat?
So do you trust everything you read? And especially on SHM, probably one of the worst newspapers/ online news sources in Australia, for providing UNBIASED reporting.
Show me a video clip of the whole incident not just one photo that shows the Steve Irwin hitting the rear of the Japanese boat before i will believe anything he has to say. Him and his crew, just like PETA, are a pack of terrorists and should be treated as such.
Follow your own advice Deny Ignorance and do some PROPER research on the tactics of these groups. In this case the Japanese are the lesser of two evils

I did read it and the captain of the Steve Irwin was definitely in the wrong by maneuvering in a unsafe manner by closing on the Japanese ships.
he had NO reason to close within 1/2 mile while they were conducting operations.
This is a violation of international law to cause a dangerous condition by hindering the safe operation of a another ship while they are loading transferring or off loading cargo.
it come under hazarding of vessels
under AU law
google books

I also comes under International Regulations for the Prevention of Collision at Sea. because he was maneuvering to close to other ships with out a valid reason and endangering them by doing it for no legal reason.

You can try to come up with strange explanations for his actions but the captain of the Steve Irwin was in the wrong by international law just because he maneuvered way to close and endangered other ships by closing to hazardous range while the other ships were impaired by operations.

it comes under the same rule that require a motor vessel to give way to a sail vessel or a motor vessel to stand clear of a tug with barges under tow.

I got my Merchant Mariner Documents, First Mate certificate for vessels up to 500 tons plus my masters certificate for up to 100 tons while I was in the navy.
I also had a STCW 95 plus a qualified member of the engine department/diesel (QMED/D) Chief Engineer (Limited)
I know the rules.
www.ehow.com...

When i was in the navy all you had to do was get your commanding officer on the ship to sign the papers that you were qualified and take the coast guard test. The coast guard even waved the test fees for active duty navy or coast guard personal.

My CO signed my papers and when i went to test my CO was also there to take his test (Master Ocean over 1600 Gross Tons)so when he retired he could became a Merchant captain if he wanted to.

====
Mod Edit: large quote snipped, 'reply to' feature used.
Link fixed



[edit on 2/6/2009 by Badge01]

reply to post by ANNED


You can rant and rave all you want about the illegality of what the Sea Shepherds' Steve Irwin was doing but it does not change the fact that the Australian Government ordered Japan to stop whaling in our Australian Antarctic Territory and it refused.

In my mind, and in the mind of the Australian Government, the Japanese are illegally harpooning whales in our waters.

End of Story.

[edit on 6/2/2009 by Kryties]

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to

Japan Today Newspaper

‘‘We were in the process of blocking the transfer from the Yushin Maru No. 2 when the Yushin Maru No. 1 moved directly in front of the bow to block us,’’ said Sea Shepherd master Capt. Paul Watson.

‘‘I could not turn to starboard without hitting the Yushin Maru No. 1. I tried to back down, but the movement of the Yushin Maru No. 2 made the collision unavoidable,’’ Watson told Kyodo News by satellite phone.

The rest of the article is biased toward the Japanese point of view but even THEY admit that this is the way it went down.

Thank You. i was actual aware of this and a couple of other stories/ articles on this. i have a pretty good idea of what happened. Both sides are actually at fault in this and a couple of other smaller instances. BUT i achieved what i wanted.
Some research. See how the Japanese are pushing their own agenda? Now find a story from the captain of the Japanese ship and a differnt story will be told

Next step is to start looking at things from both sides of the story. I will admit its hard to put aside biases and prejudices.
Now i can see it from your point of view about the cruelty and destruction of an absolutely magnificant creature
Now from the point of view of the whalers they are doing what their ancestors use to do. Whales are just another form of food and oil. They see nothing wrong with what they are doing and like the taste of whale meat
Who is to decide whats right or wrong?
Im a hunter so i tend to lean towards the Japanese.

Two more questions. Do you object more because its in "our" waters than if it was in theirs?
What about the various indigenous peoples throughout the world that harvest whales. Do you support that?