U.S. Supreme Court rejects plea by Sea Shepherd

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

  • 8

    nigelboy

    Japan uses a loophole in a 1986 global moratorium on commercial whaling that allows “lethal research” on whales and sets out to kill hundreds each year.

    Again, it's not a loophole when IWC convention specifically allows them. This has to be the most asinine statements used repeatedly by the Western media.

  • 16

    Droll Quarry

    If Paul Watson was really about stopping the whaling and not just about him getting the maximum media face time and playing pirate, he would be spending the millions of donated money he wastes on his pirate ships and crew on a legal and social media campaign to stop the whaling, which would be much more effective.

  • 8

    Iowan

    BAHAHA!

    Waddle on Watson

  • -3

    ddpalmer

    Japan uses a loophole in a 1986 global moratorium on commercial whaling that allows “lethal research” on whales and sets out to kill hundreds each year.

    And in addition the permits Japan uses where an original part of the IWC charter in 1946, long before the moratorium was even considered.

  • 12

    semperfi

    The Sea Shepherds' tactis are equivalent to terrorists or sea pirates. . . . .They should be incarcerated for how they violate the law of the Seas.

  • -14

    smithinjapan

    nigelboy: It IS a loophole, and everyone knows it, much to your chagrin. They claim the reason they conduct the hunt is for research, when it is mainly to feed the whaling industry (which throws it on a plate and tells kids to eat and not ask questions). Fool yourself all you like, no one else will allow themselves to be.

    As for the US rejecting it, anyone here could have told you they would -- Japan is giving too much to the Obama government these days in terms of weapon deals and base leeway for the US to side with Sea Shepherd on this. Either way, hopefully SS will continue on as it has been -- the US has no jurisdiction in the South Sea, nor does the Japanese coast guard.

  • 10

    Probie

    nigelboy: It IS a loophole, and everyone knows it

    It's NOT a loophole when it states in the documents that "lethal research" is allowed, and the meat has to be sold.

    If you don't know what a loophole is, at least wiki it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loophole

    I'm sure you can see, the "lethal research" bit, ISN'T a loophole.

  • 6

    Steven C. Schulz

    smithinjapan: the US has no jurisdiction in the South Sea

    No, but it has jurisdiction over its citizens, who must follow U.S. law no matter where in the world they are.

    If any American on related to the U.S. organization is participating in operations in violation of the court order, the organization is in breach of the law.

  • 1

    paulinusa

    Kennedy leans to the right, legally and politically, so you wouldn't expect much sympathy from him.

  • -1

    Disillusioned

    nigelboy - it's not a loophole when IWC convention specifically allows them.

    OK, should it read, **Japan exploits the IWC moratorium to hunt whales commercially under the guise of research. ** Would that be better?

  • -1

    Probie

    OK, should it read, **Japan exploits the IWC moratorium to hunt whales commercially under the guise of research. ** Would that be better?

    "Exploits" is a weasle word.

    Japan follws the IWC moratorium to hunt whales for research.

    This is true.

    Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean it's wrong.

  • -1

    Disillusioned

    Probie - Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean it's wrong.

    The same could be said about your objection to use 'loophole'.

  • 0

    4649Julian

    Sea Shepherd Conservation Society acts as if they were a God. The bottom line is that the everything from sentient beings to insentient beings are living and have a life. Of course it is not right to abuse any living organism for entertainment is wrong ethically. But for eating reason, how we know that we may kill this but not that. Who draw the line? If someone started to say what we may eat and not. it would produce discrimination. Especially the way S.S. attack physically and verbally on the media. Japan is doing research but we should not waste anything as showing our respect, everything should be consumed. Every year it is decreasing. I heard that Japan could take 800 but it was 300 last year. I could be wrong. But Korea got ''accidentally'' 2650 of them. S.S. said nothing about that. So I do not believe that what Watson said is not the only his reason to do this smear campaign to Japan. Many people blindly seem have a faith to him. Or using this as a good reason to manifest their hate to Japan with a justifying reason. I heard that in Australia, they need to exterminate some kangaroos. I don`t like it. But I have no right to do what S.S. does to Australia. They must have some a reason to do so. Life is life, we must all respect. We as a human being every day, we continue to live eating some life even if one is a vegetarian. May be this might be the foundation of this issue. In Buddhism, everything has got a life. So never forget our gratitude to every life. That why we say Itadakimasu before we eat not just to the host of meal. That what I learned over 50 years ago from my grandmother.

  • -1

    Peter Payne

    The thing is, the whaling industry wouldn't survive without the government subsidies it receives. Um, since Japan has no money, why not end these and let the industry do whatever it can. If it disappears, great.

  • -2

    Scrote

    Why not reflag the Sea Shepherd ships, putting them out of US jurisdiction?

  • -1

    Probie

    The same could be said about your objection to use 'loophole'.

    No. Because it's not a loophole. So it's not wrong because I don't like it, it's wrong, because it's wrong.

  • 2

    Wolfpack

    Good! Those Sea Shepherd enviro-whackos are a hazard to safe navigation.

  • 1

    Magnet

    I agree with Peter. Japan's got many other more pressing expenses to deal with at the moment. Cut funding whale 'research' and allocate those funds towards something that would actually improve the quality of life for Japan's residents. Actually compensating the victims of TEPCO would be a great place to start.

  • 2

    Steve Mcgrew

    Watson will be caught and forced to face the court...He is on the run and in hiding because he is a cowardly man. Watson has been scamming gthe public for years,spending donated dollars to make sensational propaganda television shows as a way to gain more money..This Man has not once attempted a court action, nor has he ever tried to work within the political system to effect the change he says he supports...Watson has not saved a single whale!

  • 0

    basroil

    But the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, based near Seattle, said its vessel was sailing under an Australian flag and operated by its Australian sister organization, meaning it is not subject to the U.S. court order.

    I want to see them get out of their upcoming tax-evasion inquiry... The ships, each and every one of them, were registered as being purchased by the US based company (it is a company, using tax exempt status), so if they transferred ownership but still had it in their taxes, we can finally see some Al Capone style justice.

    If they didn't transfer ownership, then they are legally bound to prevent their ship from being within a certain distance, not just their crew.

    ScroteFeb. 15, 2013 - 10:01AM JST

    Why not reflag the Sea Shepherd ships, putting them out of US jurisdiction?

    The ships are still property of SS USA, and no matter how many times they re-register their ports (all their ships are already registered outside the US), they are still subject to the injunction since that has nothing to do with maritime law. The company itself was restricted, so any property is likewise restricted.

  • 1

    basroil

    Steven C. SchulzFeb. 15, 2013 - 09:31AM JST

    No, but it has jurisdiction over its citizens, who must follow U.S. law no matter where in the world they are.

    If any American on related to the U.S. organization is participating in operations in violation of the court order, the organization is in breach of the law.

    Not just citizens, the company is American so it must also comply. You can't exactly jail the company itself though, so only a civil lawsuit would be in order.

  • -1

    AkitaTom

    No. Because it's not a loophole. So it's not wrong because I don't like it, it's wrong, because it's wrong.

    Youre asking people to look up the definition when you yourself clearly dont understand it, or are simply choosing to ignore the facts. What the Japanese government is doing is not illegal, however, they are exploiting a loop hole in the law. They CLAIM that they are killing whales for research and much then not waste the meat/products of the whale, so as to abide by the law. But in fact they are going out there with the purpose to kill whales to sell their meat etc and only conduct the absolute bare minimum research so that they can still have the law on their side. The law was created to assist researchers and hinder those that would only kill whales for profit, the Japanese government`s main aim is to make a profit, therefore using a loophole in the system.

    You`d have to be a moron not to understand that.

  • -7

    gogogo

    Can see how the US court has any rights over a ship that is not even registered in the US nor captained by an American.

  • -1

    arrestpaul

    The US Supreme Court has DENIED a plea from anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd to end restrictions on its movement, following Japanese allegations that its activists had violated orders to stay away.

    Sea Shepherd said it planned to REAPPLY to another of the Supreme Court’s nine justices. “We are hopeful for a favorable decision,” said Charles Moure, a Seattle-based lawyer who is lead US counsel for the group.

    But the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, based near Seattle .....

    So the eco-terrorist Sea Shepherd Conservation Society acknowledges that it is based in Seattle, Oregon in the U.S.A.

    and

    the eco-terrorist SS continues to shop for a sympathetic U.S. Supreme Court justice

    but

    the eco-terrorist SS still claim that the U.S. court has no jurisdiction over the violence committed by the eco-terrorists in international waters?????

    If the eco-terrorist SS truely believed that the U.S. court has no jurisdiction over its U.S. based organization, then why is the eco-terrorist SS so concerned about anything any U.S. court says?

    I suspect that the eco-terrorist SS knows that their U.S. funding is at risk and they're trying desperately to minimize any damage to their fund raising and Watson's income.

  • 0

    Jessica Marie Sato

    I always wondered, do we really need to eat whale? We have so many other kinds of fish to eat...

  • 0

    BurakuminDes

    Japan is doing research but we should not waste anything as showing our respect, everything should be consumed. Every year it is decreasing. I heard that Japan could take 800 but it was 300 last year. I could be wrong.

    @ Julian - sure - how nice of the Japanese Govt. to "voluntarily" reduce the whale catch to 300 last season! Love them or loathe them it was the Sea Shepherd who minimized the catch - and all reports are that they are forcing the catch down even lower this season. I don't like all their methods but they sure are effective in what they are doing.

  • 5

    Heda_Madness

    Anyone just reading the comments would assume that this story was about a loophole. Not the US supreme courts decision to tell Sea Shepherd that they can't get within 500 yards of the Japanese whalers.

  • -1

    Disillusioned

    I heard that Japan could take 800 but it was 300 last year. I could be wrong.

    Yep! You are right! It is because of SS. SS have saved the lives of nearly 10,000 whales in the southern ocean over the last decade. If Japan currently has 5 tonnes of whale meat in storage, how many more tonnes would be sitting (rotting) in freezers across the country without the efforts of SS?

  • -7

    smithinjapan

    Probie: "No. Because it's not a loophole. So it's not wrong because I don't like it, it's wrong, because it's wrong."

    It's not 'wrong' at all, given the primary reason for their so-called 'research', and everyone knows, is to catch whales to sell for their meat, not for science. They are, therefore, exploiting a loophole. So, yes, it IS in fact wrong because you don't like it -- or because it's using "weasel words", as you call them (clearly indicating you don't like them).

    Hell, just corner a politician or winger about this issue and watch how quickly they fall back on the 'you have no right to dictate our ancient culutural custom of catching whales and selling the meat' argument and as such how quickly the 'science' flies out the window.

    As I said before, the US government dare not lift any ban on approaching the loophole exploiters because it might come up in all the current backroom deals going on between the US and Japan. In short, it would no doubt be 'very regrettable'.

  • 1

    pointofview

    Of course they would.

  • -2

    cleo

    all reports are that they are forcing the catch down even lower this season

    Word is that the Yushin Maru, dangerously low on fuel and unable to proceed, has been abandoned by the rest of the fleet. The SSS Sam Simon is keeping an Korean refuelling ship away from the Japanese fleet. without the refuelling ship, and unable to refuel in any Australian port, the whalers may soon be forced to head home again soon, with their smallest catch to date.

    http://www.seashepherd.org.au/news-and-media/2013/02/10/japanese-whaling-fleet-abandons-harpoon-vessel-nearly-empty-on-fuel-1491

  • 2

    Heda_Madness

    How can someone keep a refuelling ship away from another ship? Pretty sure it's illegal to force a ship to stop or prevent a ship from travelling from a to b?

  • 1

    basroil

    Jessica Marie SatoFeb. 15, 2013 - 11:26AM JST

    I always wondered, do we really need to eat whale? We have so many other kinds of fish to eat...

    Minke whales are less endangered than pacific bluefin tuna... And as a mammal it's not actually fish.

  • -1

    Disillusioned

    Heda_Madness - Pretty sure it's illegal to force a ship to stop or prevent a ship from travelling from a to b?

    You should read the whole article Heda. They cannot enter an Australian port and they are not allowed to carry out refueling operations within the whale sanctuary. They will have to tow their ship out of the sanctuary to refuel it if it actually runs out of fuel. That will stop them killing whales and will not go against the ruling of the US court. The US court only ruled that SS can't go within 500 meters of a 'Japanese whaling ship'. They failed to mention anything about a Korean refueling vessel. Noice! Give em hell SS!

  • 0

    slump

    <>

    The law was created to assist researchers and hinder those that would only kill whales for profit, the Japanese government`s main aim* is *to make a profit, therefore using a loophole in the system.

    ...if the "loophole" is so wrong ...close it. Simple as that. That is how laws work. Oh, and are you really so naive to think no one noticed the "loophole" when it was written up?

    This is how politics works- 1986 revisited (in lay men's terms) --

    Anti-whaling nations:Let us create a moratorium where we can tell the anti-whaling public we got you to fold and that Zero whales are now (officially) allowed to be caught for consumption. (psst psst, of course, you know, we do know that that is totally unreasonable-- but, that's the only way could impress those people and shut them up. we'll create this loophole, though, so, actually, a reasonable degree of sustainable whaling can continue. come on, throw us a bone here. we do this kind of thing all the time. the majority of the public really is quite gullible. this will work.

    Japan & whaling nations: Oh, okay. Yes, the whaling stocks need to replenish themselves. Zero is good for now. Right now, let's just concentrate on letting the population replenish. When the time comes, and science shows sustainable whaling can continue, we'll discuss lifting the moratorium. Although it's not us, but you now-anti-whaling but former-big-whaling-nations-that-now-don't-need-whale-oil that depleted the whaling stock in the first place, ...we understand. ...this is politics. We'll let you "save face" (or rather "create face"). You can go ahead and act like heroes now.

    20 yrs later-

    Japan & whaling nations: dang, stabbed in the back... seriously? We were supposed to start talking science, and let logic determined whether to lift the moratorium or not. Let's talk.

    Anti-whaling crowd: No discussion. Zero forever & ever. Our word is final.

  • -3

    slump

    Anti-whaling crowd-- worried about Japanese taxpayers wasting some of their budget?... seriously? If they moved that money to create the biggest pile of **** in the world-- just to get on the guiness book of world records, these people wouldn't give a ****...

  • -3

    cleo

    How can someone keep a refuelling ship away from another ship?

    There's one refuelling ship, more than one whaling ship, and the factory ship needs to be refuelled several times during the season. It appears the whalers have abandoned the low-on-fuel harpoon ship in an attempt to get the refuelling ship near to the factory ship. The whalers seem to be being pretty anal about losing sight of the SS ships, so the whaling ships follow the SS ships (These ships are of course unable to kill any whales while they are acting as tails) and the SS ships follow the factory ship which is running as fast as it can in a futile attempt to get away from the SS ships so that they can kill, transfer and flense sorry I mean research, at leisure. SS reckons the factory ship, monitored by a fleet of aerial drones and a helicopter, is travelling at an average of some 200 miles a day, which doesn't leave much time at all for 'research'. As Disillusioned puts it, Noice.

    http://www.seashepherd.org.au/news-and-media/2013/02/07/sea-shepherd-severs-fuel-supply-to-the-whaling-fleet-1489

  • 1

    hokkaidoguy

    Disillusioned: how many more tonnes would be sitting (rotting) in freezers across the country without the efforts of SS?

    None.

    Frozen food doesn't rot.

    That's why freezers are so popular.

  • -2

    Probie

    Probie: "No. Because it's not a loophole. So it's not wrong because I don't like it, it's wrong, because it's wrong."

    It's not 'wrong' at all, given the primary reason for their so-called 'research', and everyone knows, is to catch whales to sell for their meat, not for science. They are, therefore, exploiting a loophole. So, yes, it IS in fact wrong because you don't like it -- or because it's using "weasel words", as you call them (clearly indicating you don't like them).

    If anyone of you can hear a banging sound, don't worry, it's just me hitting my head against the wall here. I've decided it's better I do that.

  • 2

    basroil

    DisillusionedFeb. 15, 2013 - 01:19PM JST

    not allowed to carry out refueling operations within the whale sanctuary.

    No such place exists anywhere in the world. That's some bullcrap story made up by the australians when they demanded half of antarctica.

    The US court only ruled that SS can't go within 500 meters of a 'Japanese whaling ship'. They failed to mention anything about a Korean refueling vessel.

    Absolutely false there, the judge stated "In no event shall defendants approach plaintiffs any closer than 500 yards (meters) when defendants are navigating on the open sea" (http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/12-35266/12-35266-2012-12-17.html)

    Notice that it makes no mention of "whaling ships", and the refueling ship is 100% covered by the injunction (according to both SS and the whalers, considering SS only denies that the USA has jurisdiction, not that they are not in violation of the injunction) . Sure you can make up details that fit what you want to say, but those are flat out incorrect.

  • 1

    Kyoko Sakata

    I seriously have grown tired of Sea Shepard and their tactics. I hope their pleas fall on closed ears with the Supreme Court. I just don't get why they feel the need to harass the doings of a country on the other of the planet and won't even police their own waters. It smacks of, "We don't eat or use whales for research so neither should you!"

    Upstart country trying to be the moral police to nations/people's who have been around for thousands if years :/ ugh.

  • 3

    cabadaje

    @Slump

    20 yrs later-Japan & whaling nations: dang, stabbed in the back... seriously?

    20 years? Oh my, no. You missed a little part of the story there. Allow me:

    US: Hey, Japan, hi, how ya doin'? Hey, I hear you, Peru, Norway, and the commies are objecting to the moratorium?

    Japan: Yes, we have pointed out that the moratorium isn't actually based on advice from the scientific committee whose job is pretty much to give us advice on these sorts of things.

    US: Oh, yeah, science, science is cool. Hey, you know what else is cool? Fishing in US waters is cool. You catch, what, about a million tonnes of fish here? That's, what, 400 some-odd million bucks a year, something like that? Would be a shame to lose all that, wouldn't it? All that money, all those kids with no fish sticks on their plates...

    Japan: You're saying...

    US: Withdraw the objection or we cut off your fish.

    Japan did withdraw the objection upon what some would refer to as coercion. Later on that year, the US began the process of barring entry to all foreign fishing vessels to Alaska.

    20 years? Japan didn't even have to wait 20 weeks before being stabbed in the back.

    @Probie

    If anyone of you can hear a banging sound, don't worry, it's just me hitting my head against the wall here. I've decided it's better I do that.

    I feel for you man. It is utterly ridiculous how willing people are to use whatever word they like to make something sound bad, even if it doesn't actually define what is being said, and then turn around and object to a word used specifically for what it means because they don't like it. It is truly astounding, the fluidity or irrationality, how it protects itself from even noticing its lack of consistency.

    Just for giggles, I'll take a crack at it:

    A loophole is an ambiguity in a system, such as a law or security, which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loophole

    You will find almost identical wording in pretty much any other definition. Now, let's take a look at article VIII of the IWC moratorium:

    1. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as the Contracting Government thinks fit, and the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention. Each Contracting Government shall report at once to the Commission all such authorizations which it has granted. Each Contracting Government may at any time revoke any such special permit which it has granted.

    2. Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_Japan

    Sound vague? Ambiguous? Nope, pretty much black and white. By sheer definition, if something is explicitly stated, regulated, and permitted, by the rules, it is not a loophole. A loophole, as the name implies, is a hole in the rules, an "absence" of guidelines, not detailed instructions in something deemed worthy of its own article specifically outlining the conditions, requirements, and disposal of whatever it is you are doing.

    Particularly if what you are doing was pretty much the only method they had at their disposal to learn about whales to begin with.

    Back in 1986, following whales was harder to do than it is today (and it isn't all that easy nowadays either). Observation is of limited use with a species that spends 99% of its life under water. The only way we were going to learn anything about them was to study them in the most biological sense of the word. Are there people who claim lethal research is redundant? Okay then, since the purpose of the moratorium was to gather research and replenish the stocks, both purposes have been fulfilled and it's time to lift the moratorium. Are there people who claim the research is fake? The scientific community doesn't see much of a scandal. But whatever side of the fence you are on, there is one thing that is hard to dispute with actual...logic: You cannot consider something to be a loophole if it is specifically permitted in the rules.

  • 2

    ReformedBasher

    Why don't Sea Sheperd just offer their donations to the whalers? If it's a commercial enterprise, money will talk. If it was up to me, I'd gladly receive it for staying in port, instead of travelling to the Antartic and do dangerous and dirty work.

  • 4

    megosaa

    terrorist. don't bow down to them!

  • -7

    Craic

    For a country that has recently blown up a nuclear powerplant, more modesty and respect for the earth would be very appropriate. Or is it all part of Japanese cultural traditions?

  • 0

    Heda_Madness

    The list of lies that the SS come out with is long and never ending

    By reading that link would prove nothing factual.

  • -6

    BurakuminDes

    terrorist. don't bow down to them!

    Agreed buddy! NEVER bow down to these eco-terrorists on the Shonan-Maru - terrorising the Southern Ocean to hunt whales that no-one eats.

  • 0

    CraigHicks

    The thing is, the whaling industry wouldn't survive without the government subsidies it receives. Um, since Japan has no money, why not end these and let the industry do whatever it can. If it disappears, great.

    I think the Sea Shepard's action of physical aggression induces an inevitable cultural backlash and actually helps to perpetuate an industry which would otherwise be going bankrupt. Which suits Sea Shepard just fine, as otherwise they would go bankrupt (or have to go after Icelandic whalers in which case they would face serious physical danger or death.)

  • -1

    nigelboy

    nigelboy: It IS a loophole, and everyone knows it, much to your chagrin. They claim the reason they conduct the hunt is for research, when it is mainly to feed the whaling industry (which throws it on a plate and tells kids to eat and not ask questions). Fool yourself all you like, no one else will allow themselves to be.

    Smith,

    When people use "everyone knows it" without citing any evidence clearly demonstrates the immature nature of anti-whalers. It's a sign of desperation for they are left with just repeating this utter nonsense.

    You know what a "loophole" is? A loophole is within the IWC where they let anti-whaling nations become members who have absolutely no interest in "orderly development of the whaling industry" which states in the charter. This is, by far, the biggest loophole in the IWC.

  • 2

    nigelboy

    OK, should it read, **Japan exploits the IWC moratorium to hunt whales commercially under the guise of research. ** Would that be better?

    If that's the opinion of the IWC's Scientific Committee, then yes. If not, chalk it up as another "asinine statements used repeatedly by the Western media" and anti-whalers.

  • 0

    arrestpaul

    cleo - all reports are that they are forcing the catch down even lower this season. Word is that the Yushin Maru, dangerously low on fuel and unable to proceed, has been abandoned by the rest of the fleet.

    Hahahaha. Your "all reports" are simply cut-and-paste repeats of the same eco-terrorist SS stories. Do you have anything from a credible source?

    Or something about Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's rejection of the appeal by the U.S. based branch of the eco-terrorist Sea Shlepherd organization?

  • 0

    arrestpaul

    BurakuminDes - Agreed buddy! NEVER bow down to these eco-terrorists on the Shonan-Maru - terrorising the Southern Ocean to hunt whales that no-one eats.

    The U.S. 9th Circuit Court judge ruled that the actions of the eco-terorist SS were dangerous and that's why the eco-terrorist SS have been ordered to stay 500 away from the whalers.

    The U.S. Supreme Court just rejected the eco-terrorist SS appeal. If the eco-terrorist SS continue to resort to repeated acts of violence to force it's will on others, it may lose a big chunk of it's funding in the U.S.. Funding that seems to come from pro-violence supporters.

  • -3

    cleo

    arrestpaul - 'all reports' was a quote from another poster. Do try to pay attention.

  • -3

    MasterBape

    Still doing a stellar job, SS.

    All the arguments and running around by the whalers should see this season come to a close with a pitiful catch.

    No mater which side you're on, you have to question the motives of the so-called "scientific research" and its costly, time-consuming actions.

    Pride on behalf of the Japanese is at stake, nothing more, nothing less. A poor case of one upmanship.

  • -2

    MasterBape

    At the end of the whaling season, it will be the numbers of whales caught, not the court ruling that indicates how successful the SS has been and how the whalers have been foiled yet again.

    Back to the drawing board, whalers. And another cash injection.

  • -3

    Alex Roncelli

    The SS is only hope of the ocean.

  • -1

    gelendestrasse

    Well, the lawyers are going to get rich, the whales will get killed, the J-budget will be wasted and SS will get more publicity. Sounds like everybody loses, except the lawyers. Business as usual then.

  • -1

    arrestpaul

    cleoFeb. 15, 2013 - 01:01PM JST

    all reports are that they are forcing the catch down even lower this season

    Word is that the Yushin Maru, dangerously low on fuel and unable to proceed, has been abandoned by the rest of the fleet....


    cleo - arrestpaul - 'all reports' was a quote from another poster. Do try to pay attention.

    Since you didn't mention the name of who you quoted, I assumed you were claiming the statement as your own. It's difficult to pay attention to the name of someone you didn't mention.

    Which brings me back to my original question, "Do you have anything from a credible source?"

  • 3

    Little Boots

    Just so I got this straight; you're telling me they wanted the SC to overrule an order so they can get close enough a whaling vessel to cause harm? They pretty much were asking permission to commit terrorism.

  • 1

    cabadaje

    @MasterBape

    Still doing a stellar job, SS.

    Yeah, way to harass blue-collar workers for doing their job!

    All the arguments and running around by the whalers should see this season come to a close with a pitiful catch.

    Yeah, and this intentional sabotage will prove just how commercially viable whaling is! Because, y'know, all harvesting businesses should have to incorporate sabotage and directed violence into their cost-benefit plans.

    No mater which side you're on, you have to question the motives of the so-called "scientific research" and its costly, time-consuming actions.

    Motives? To comply with the IWC's regulations regarding permissible research while at the same time providing employment for a segment of workers who would otherwise be disenfranchised?

    What part of that are you questioning?

    Pride on behalf of the Japanese is at stake, nothing more, nothing less. A poor case of one upmanship.

    So, let's assume this was true...Why, exactly, is it a bad thing?

    Is there any particular reason why Japan, having been coerced into an agreement it didn't want, having been stabbed in the back after that agreement was made, to accept a moratorium that was not proposed by the scientific committee studying the issue, made by countries who had been responsible for the slaughter of millions of whales (who created the actual industry to begin with, for that matter), voted on by countries who don't even have access to the ocean, let alone consider whaling to be part of their economy, and now being physically harassed by a bunch of self-righteous moralists telling them that they are evil and wicked, and are willing to prove that by hurling glass bottles of acid at them, fouling their ship propellers, accusing them of ramming and sinking their deliberately scuttled ship, to the point their own government is telling them to back off...

    Why, exactly, is Japan supposed to hang its head and contritely walk away?

  • 3

    SamuraiBlue

    Game Over.

    Looks as if the SS had violated the injunction and tried to stop a Japanese whaling ship by throwing ropes in hopes of it gets tied up in the screws.

  • 1

    cleo

    Since you didn't mention the name of who you quoted, I assumed you were claiming the statement as your own.

    Well we all know what happens when you assume stuff.

    If something is in quotes, it's a quote. Not that hard to understand. I haven't mentioned the name of the person I'm quoting here, so maybe you will assume I'm claiming your statement as my own?

    Which brings me back to my original question, "Do you have anything from a credible source?"

    You don't accept the SS as a credible source, I don't accept the whale killers or their apologists as a credible source, there's no one else down there in the Southern Ocean - so I guess we're stuck with no 'credible' sources.

  • 2

    Heda_Madness

    For someone as intelligent as you, it always amazes me how you can swallow the SS hook line and sinker. Whenever anything big happens they have always been found to be lying and they even tried to destroy evidence in the sinking of the AG. Just because you find whaling to be reprehensible doesn't mean you should swallow the lies from the SS.

  • 1

    Steve Mcgrew

    Bottom line..The whalers are not targeting endangered whales and are no where near over exploiting the whales that are targeted for harvest.and they are operating legally. I agree the whaling fleet is exploiting a loop hole in the law but that is not a crime,infact that is common practice in MOST Japanese business ventures. If the Japanese anti whaling crowd wishes to end their countries whaling ships they should do so via changing laws and attitudes in japan,not via funding and supporting criminal ventures such as SS.

  • -3

    cleo

    Whenever anything big happens they have always been found to be lying

    The biggest and most important thing is that they claim to be reducing the number of whales that the whalers kill. The icr also complain that SS prevent them from making their quota.

    ....so they're both lying?

  • -3

    ddpalmer

    The biggest and most important thing is that they claim to be reducing the number of whales that the whalers kill. The icr also complain that SS prevent them from making their quota.

    ....so they're both lying?

    Yes, they are both lying.

    The ICR lies to stir up sentiment against the Sea Shepherds and make themselves look like the victims. Thus ensuring they will be funded the next year.

    The SSCS lies to boost their own ego and encourage their sheeple. Thus ensuring they will keep getting donations.

  • -1

    cleo

    The ICR lies to stir up sentiment against the Sea Shepherds and make themselves look like the victims...The SSCS lies to boost their own ego

    Cute, but not what I asked. Are both sides lying about the number of whales killed? That's the only really important fact.

  • -1

    arrestpaul

    cleoFeb. 16, 2013 - 03:24PM JST

    Since you didn't mention the name of who you quoted, I assumed you were claiming the statement as your own.

    Well we all know what happens when you assume stuff.

    If something is in quotes, it's a quote. Not that hard to understand. I haven't mentioned the name of the person I'm quoting here, so maybe you will assume I'm claiming your statement as my own?

    I apologise. "Claim" was probably the wrong word. You agree strongly with the statement, "all reports are that they are forcing the catch down even lower this season". The ONLY party making that claim is the eco-terrorist SS and the people who copy-and-paste their press releases. Since the whalers are not communicating with the eco-terrorist SS, and the eco-terrorist SS hasn't been aware of the locations of all the whaling vessels have been this season, the eco-terrorist SS would have no idea how successful the whalers have been so far this season.

  • 1

    ddpalmer

    Cute, but not what I asked. Are both sides lying about the number of whales killed? That's the only really important fact.

    Sorry cleo but that is not what you asked. Maybe it is what you meant to ask but since I am not psychic i had to rely on what you wrote.

    You made two statements. Basically that the SSCS claims to reduce the number killed and that the ICR claims the SSCS causes them to get less than their quota. Then asked are they both lying. Neither statement is about the number killed but about the reason the number is low.

  • -2

    cleo

    arrestpaul, ddpalmer, Wow, thank you both for telling me what I think.

    I agree strongly with the statement? No, I quote it by way of an intro to what I am about to say, and make a comment related to it.

    the SSCS claims to reduce the number killed and that the ICR claims the SSCS causes them to get less than their quota. Then asked are they both lying. Neither statement is about the number killed

    I pointed out that both sides make claims about the numbers killed. Then I asked if they were lying about the numbers killed. I see no direct mention of reasons, but fine, bring reasons into it. SS claim the reason for fewer kills is their intervention. icr claim the reason for fewer kills is SS intervention. So, are they both lying?

  • 1

    ddpalmer

    I didn't tell you what you think. But nice attempt at a strawman and diverting attention from your false claims.

    No you did not point out that both sides make claims about the numbers killed. You pointed out what each side claims is the reason for the number killed. And you say you see no direct mention of reason?

    The biggest and most important thing is that they claim to be reducing

    That would be you pointing out the direct reason SSCS claims the numbers are down.

    The icr also complain that SS prevent them from

    And that would be you pointing out the direct reason the ICR claims the numbers re down.

    And I already gave my opinion of what the answer to your question is.

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • 営業/建設機械  

    営業/建設機械  
    MB Japan 株式会社、埼玉県
    給与:給与要相談 歩合制 給与参考例・・・2013年度営業職月給平均 45万円  
  • TOEICインストラクター

    TOEICインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:時給 3,000円 相談可
  • TOEFL・IELTSインストラクター

    TOEFL・IELTSインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:時給 3,500円 相談可
  • 海外留学担当者

    海外留学担当者
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、東京都
    給与:月給 25万円 ~ 35万円 相談可
  • PR and Communication Specialist

    PR and Communication Specialist
    Italian Chamber of Commerce in Japan、東京都
    給与:給与についての記載なし

More in National

View all

View all