Three activists 'prisoners' after slipping aboard Japanese ship , page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 12:36 AM by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I agree however, this ship is in Australian waters, so i think that Australia has to intervene, especially considering that Aussie citizens are being held hostage.

I'm just disagreeing with what you're saying for their status. I'd call them prisoners after breaking international maritime law. I'd imagine Australian law too unless Australia condones strangers covertly boarding other people's ships.

"The boats approached the Shonan Maru under the cover of darkness and the three negotiated their way past the razor wire and spikes and over the rails to successfully board the Japanese whaling vessel.

"They came with a message: Return us to shore in Australia and then remove yourself from our waters."

Hostages? I'm just not quite seeing it. Who thought this was a good idea or thought this could possibly turn out well?? Again, I respect the Shepards. I think Whaling is horrific as I believe those animals have intelligence on par with our own, if in a very different way. However.... This strikes me as similar to the worst and most self defeating of the Occupy tactics.....with the attitude of entitlement to go with it.

I'll be disappointed if the Military does something, unless the Japanese get totally inappropriate with their prisoners...like throwing them over the side.

edit on 8-1-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 01:02 AM by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I agree however, this ship is in Australian waters, so i think that Australia has to intervene, especially considering that Aussie citizens are being held hostage.

It is in Australia's EEZ AFAIK - which is NOT Australian waters.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 01:02 AM by rogerstigers

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I sort of agree. I will always support people acting in accordance to their beliefs even if they do not act within the law. Laws are important (when they are appropriate), and when someone does something illegal to support something they KNOW is right, I can't help but support that. Even if I disagree (which I do not in this case).

That being said, one should always expect to reap the consequences of one's actions.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 01:59 AM by steveknows

Originally posted by zooplancton
I was in the US Navy (USS Jouette CG-29) was coxswain qualified and have tons of boat experience under my belt.

when boarding a boat, you are stepping into someone's domain. it is their boat/ship. period. and they make the rules. that is basic maritime rule.

I'm not for whaling by any means but you have to have an ounce of understanding of rules and barriers when trying to make a statement. especially in activism.

Not when it's in sovereign waters. Tresspass yes. Break and enter yes. Sorry. any ship, boat or dingy in Australian waters are subject to Australian law. The captain can detain them and then call the police or coast guard but those people are not subject to the laws of any country other than Australia. And of they don't hand them over strait away it's kidnap.

edit on 8-1-2012 by steveknows because: Typo

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 02:02 AM by steveknows

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I agree however, this ship is in Australian waters, so i think that Australia has to intervene, especially considering that Aussie citizens are being held hostage.

I'm just disagreeing with what you're saying for their status. I'd call them prisoners after breaking international maritime law. I'd imagine Australian law too unless Australia condones strangers covertly boarding other people's ships.

"The boats approached the Shonan Maru under the cover of darkness and the three negotiated their way past the razor wire and spikes and over the rails to successfully board the Japanese whaling vessel.

"They came with a message: Return us to shore in Australia and then remove yourself from our waters."

Hostages? I'm just not quite seeing it. Who thought this was a good idea or thought this could possibly turn out well?? Again, I respect the Shepards. I think Whaling is horrific as I believe those animals have intelligence on par with our own, if in a very different way. However.... This strikes me as similar to the worst and most self defeating of the Occupy tactics.....with the attitude of entitlement to go with it. I'll be disappointed if the Military does something, unless the Japanese get totally inappropriate with their prisoners...like throwing them over the side.
edit on 8-1-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

International maritime law applies in international waters

It says they are being "held as prisoners" inside Australia's 24-nautical mile contiguous zone.

It's subject to Australian law. If some one broke into your house and you didn't call the police and wouldn't let them go then you are as well breaking a law.

edit on 8-1-2012 by steveknows because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 02:05 AM by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by zooplancton
I was in the US Navy (USS Jouette CG-29) was coxswain qualified and have tons of boat experience under my belt.

when boarding a boat, you are stepping into someone's domain. it is their boat/ship. period. and they make the rules. that is basic maritime rule.

I'm not for whaling by any means but you have to have an ounce of understanding of rules and barriers when trying to make a statement. especially in activism.

I completely agree. Now let me state that I think what the Japanese Whalers do, is flat out wrong and I want them to stop whaling very much.

But they boarded a ship. They trespassed onto some one elses property and got caught. What did they think would happen? Did they think they would invite them to play poker?

That is just my humble opinion, but I think it was stupid of these activists to board the ship.

edit on 8-1-2012 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 02:09 AM by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by steveknows

Not when it's in sovereign waters. Tresspass yes. Break and enter yes. Sorry. any ship, boat or dingy in Australian waters are subject to Australian law. The captain can detain them and then call the police or coast guard but those people are not subject to the laws of any country other than Australia. And of they don't hand them over strait away it's kidnap.

This isn't in sovereign waters tho is it - it is in the EEZ - which is international waters unless you are carrying out an economic activity the Australian Govt claims jurisdiction over - and the Japanese ship is not doing that - it is not even an actual whaler as I understand it - it is their ""security ship"?

So although the Aussies have banned the whaling fleet & support ships, including this one, from their ports, they have no jurisdiction over this incident.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 02:14 AM by aRogue

There are some really stupid people in this thread. How is saving whales and even going as far as jumping upon japanese whaling ships to stop this universal crime, "crossing the line"...?

The very fact the japanese are destroying species after species of whale, IS CROSSING THE LINE!!!

Laws this... laws that... HELLO... Use your common sense.

For crying out loud peoples... The Japanese whalers are on the brink of destroying a species unique to this universe. These brave men and women are sacrificing their time, efforts and probably even their very lives to combat this. Show them some respect as they are ALL HEROES.

And we are the idiots behind the line too scared to cross it.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 02:28 AM by Expat888

Good .. hope the activists are charged , convicted and sent to prison where they belong.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 04:31 AM by aRogue

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 05:15 AM by ANNED

international waters start at 12 miles.

The potential territorial sea extends 12 miles off the coast. Here the State has territorial jurisdiction, but only up to a point--the right of innocent passage still applies. The LOSC says:

1. The criminal jurisdiction of the coastal State should not be exercised on board a foreign ship passing through the territorial sea to arrest any person or to conduct any investigation in connection with any crime committed on board the ship during its passage, save only in the following cases:

(a) if the consequences of the crime extend to the coastal State;

(b) if the crime is of a kind to disturb the peace of the country or the good order of the territorial sea;

(c) if the assistance of the local authorities has been requested by the master of the ship or by a diplomatic agent or consular officer of the flag State; or

(d) if such measures are necessary for the suppression of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances.

Because coastal State jurisdiction is limited, even in its territorial waters, the flag State's laws still apply aboard its ships. U.S. courts adjudicate crimes committed aboard ships flying U.S. flags, even if the crime was committed in foreign territorial waters.

Two hundred miles offshore (when I say mile, I mean the nautical mile, which is 6076 feet, or 1.150779 statute miles) is the limit of a State's potential exclusive economic zone. I say potential because States must claim the territory they want within this limit, and not all of them do so. In this zone the State has some exclusive rights to exploration and resources. However, other States' ships have a right of innocent passage through the EEZ,
www.straightdope.com...

edit on 8-1-2012 by ANNED because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 07:12 AM by David_Reale

Personally, I'm sick and tired of 'activists' that justify their criminal actions with their 'cause'. Greenpeace is as close to eco-terrorists as they come. And these anti-whaling activists are saboteurs, nothing else. If I had my way they'd either be publicly flogged or thrown in jail. Seriously, there's a right way to go about change, and there's a wrong way. Theirs is the wrong way. Get a grip, grow up.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 09:59 AM by daaskapital

reply to post by David_Reale

Agreed mate. BTW i like your MGS Avatar

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 01:13 PM by Silverado292

reply to post by daaskapital

I'm not for whaling at all but as a Navy vet these idiots are lucky they weren't tossed over the side. You don't go trespassing onto someone else's vessel and expect to have your demands met. So now Australia will have to go and rescue them which will put everyone lives at risk, great work hippies. I wonder if this is the same group of idiots who kept demanding to board the Kitty Hawk when we made port calls.

reply posted on 8-1-2012 @ 01:25 PM by aRogue

Originally posted by David_Reale
Personally, I'm sick and tired of 'activists' that justify their criminal actions with their 'cause'. Greenpeace is as close to eco-terrorists as they come. And these anti-whaling activists are saboteurs, nothing else. If I had my way they'd either be publicly flogged or thrown in jail. Seriously, there's a right way to go about change, and there's a wrong way. Theirs is the wrong way. Get a grip, grow up.

You're right. We should all just stand in a street and wave flags around chanting. That will surely stop the whaling.

reply posted on 9-1-2012 @ 02:45 AM by David_Reale

reply to post by aRogue

Sarcasm does not do it for me, so spare me.

Do whatever you want as long as you don't break the law, and then think your 'cause' will make you legally immune. Two wrongs don't make a right, and risking people's lives recklessly like this isn't going to help anyone. You do notgo and risk human lives to save whale lives. Doing this kind of crap only pushes people further away from the so-called 'cause' you're fighting for.

edit on 9-1-2012 by David_Reale because: (no reason given)

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^