JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- Full-time English Teacher - Osaka
- Epion English Language Schools, Osaka
- Salary: ¥200,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month Depending on your ability and experience
-
- Part-time English Teacher - Osaka
- Epion English Language Schools, Osaka
- Salary: ¥10,000 ~ ¥15,000 / Day Depending on how many days a week are worked
-
- Core Developer - コアディベロッパー
- Midokura Japan K.K. - ミドクラジャパン株式会社, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥4.0M ~ ¥10.0M / Year Negotiable
3
davidattokyo
OssanAmerica,
Indeed. It seems some people's comprehension goes as far as a school level dictionary, but can't grapple with the same words in the context of international laws
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
3
davidattokyo
smithinjapan,
what part of "I will respect the ICJ judgment" did you not understand? If the ICJ rules against Japan, I will accept it.
Spidapig24 on the other hand already declared he won't accept it, because of some fancy allegations that Japan is putting pro whaling judges on the ICJ panel ( when in fact the only nation that has done this has been Australia)
I can't see the ICJ ruling against Japan, having analysed Australia's initial document submitted to the ICJ, which appeared to have advancing former PM Kevin Rudd's domestic political purposes as it's main goal.
That said, if the ICJ judgement were to go against Japan, of course I would accept it. What else is the ICJ for if not resolving international disputes? (Pity some kids can't recognise this)
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
1
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
Heh. Good luck living in the real world, where you can't always get whatchoo want.
Hahaha (in fact the only nation getting a judge appointed to the ICJ panel for this case is Australia, but who cares right?)
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
0
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
Then that's equivalent to admitting that the "moratorium" is illegal.
IWC Scientific Committee reports are not "statements from JWA and ICR".
You can ignore IWC Scientific Committee reports, but doing so does not validate your position.
As I have also noted, it'll come out in the ICJ case as well. My assumption is that you will ignore that as well.
Yes.
Wrong and right is not determined by anti-whaling nations. I respect the law - I will respect the ICJ judgment - will you?
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
1
davidattokyo
Tamarama,
The difference between a ban and a temporary zero-catch limit is significant.
The reason the anti-whaling forces had to use a ostensibly temporary zero-catch limit measure was because if they had called it a ban would be overtly illegal, as it would obviously contravene the whaling convention's purpose.
Ironically the same people who imposed a ban in the guise of "temporary zero-catch limits" are the same people who accuse Japan of conducting commercial whaling in the guise of scientific research, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
But it would be naive to expect the malcontents of the anti-whaling movement to respect international agreements and the law. See Sea Shepherd for another example.
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
0
davidattokyo
It's odd that the anti-whalers claim that Japan doesn't listen, when it's Australia that's gone off crying to the ICJ despite knowing full well that biological data from Japan's research programmes is being utilised in ongoing research conducted by the IWC's own scientific committee.
Australia should immediately drop their ridiculous ICJ action and donate the funds allocated for that to the reconstruction of Tohoku, as well as banning eco-terrorists from using Australian ports, which would spare Japan from the need to deploy defenses to protect their innocent citizens from conducting their legal activities.
This is Japan, not North Korea.
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
6
davidattokyo
This report is incorrect.
Commercial whaling is not banned, there is just a zero-catch limit in place at the current time.
Scientific research is allowed to be conducted by IWC member nations as they see fit, and in Japan's case this means conducting population sampling to gain biological data which is used by the IWC's scientific committee for their stock assessment of whale stocks.
The "loophole" in the whaling convention is that it does not sufficiently protect the organization from anti-whaling forces. This was something not envisaged when the treaty was drafted, because it was assumed that nations that do not agree with an international agreement do not adhere themselves to be bound by it's rules. The anti-whaling nations are abusing this loophole, which is why there is conflict at the IWC.
There are various robust whale stocks in the world, it's not like there is only one type of whale.
It's unfortunate that western news media articles continue to mislead the public about this issue. It's no wonder that the conflict can't be resolved in such an environment of poor reporting by the media.
Everyone knows that the whaling convention is for the purpose of regulating commercial whaling, if they don't like the fact they should exit the whaling convention and complain from there.
And let other Japanese citizens conducting their lawful activities go un-protected from eco-terrorists?
Disingenuous comments from the convicted whale meat thief. Let's have the IWC set sustainable catch limits for commercial whaling, rather than "zero" quotas, and see how the industry does then.
Posted in: Whaling fleet off to Antarctica with beefed up security measures
0
davidattokyo
Mmmm, fascinating. So who is it that keeps voting for these two major parties and several small parties?
Gee, is it the Aliens? Or the Gaijins?
Oh no, that's right, it's the public who are responsible for who they voted for.
Same problem as over in the USA I guess, but I don't see no tea party equivalents here yet (except perhaps for Hashimoto's movement down in Osaka).
Posted in: Noda's consumption tax hike plan unpopular, poll shows
2
davidattokyo
Tragic.
Thankfully no Maseratti was involved.
(Love all the envy comments here!!)
Posted in: Speeding blamed for pileup involving 8 Ferraris, 1 Lamborghini
2
davidattokyo
Apparently Sheena Ringo will appear this year for the first time. So the girls team should win, 1-0.
Posted in: NHK announces lineup for 'Kohaku Uta Gassen' on New Year's Eve
1
davidattokyo
Two wrongs don't make a right, and I've no love for GWB, but I'd be interested to hear what Amnesty International thinks about "9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed", too. Just for balance ya know.
Posted in: Amnesty International urges African nations to arrest George Bush
2
davidattokyo
On the contrary, it's precisely because the mistakes of the past have been learned from that prohibition of commercial whaling is no longer justified.
There are plenty enough minke whales for conservative harvests under quotas set by modern day management procedures.
Posted in: Japanese whaling: Why the West is in the wrong
4
davidattokyo
One poster suggests that Japan is not acting in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea states in Article 65.
That claim is backwards. Even Australia in their spurious complaint to the ICJ about Japan's contributions to the IWC didn't have the gall to suggest that.
There are many nations that undermine conveservation, management and study of whale stocks at the International Whaling Commission, but Japan is not one of these anti-whaling nations.
While Japan and otheres seek to aid the Whaling Commission fulfil it's mandate, their opponents actively seek to prevent it from doing so. It is those anti-whaling nations, who are also involved in repeatedly passing resolutions at the Whaling Commission calling on Japan to stop killing whales that are failing to cooperate for the conservation, management and study of whale stocks.
Everyone knows what Whaling means. Due to anti-whaling nation's intransigence, the "moratorium" is still in place after 25 years, scientifically baseless "sanctuaries" that encompass the whaling grounds themselves have been imposed, and spurious resolutions requesting nations that act in accordance with the Whaling convention cease their activities have been agreed. It is the nations who have overseen these deeds that have failed in their obligations under the Law of the Sea, the Whaling convention, and the Vienna Convention which requires adherents to international agreements act in good faith.
Posted in: Japanese whaling: Why the West is in the wrong
-5
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
JFYI people don't trust Greenepace because they commit crimes and produce frivolous & misleading propaganda for their ends. People have no problem with freedom of expression but Greenpeace have frequently abused this privilege.
Posted in: Greenpeace says it has detected radiation in fish sold in supermarkets
-8
davidattokyo
Jannetto,
I don't trust the government or Tepco much on this issue either, and it's great if you trust Greenpeace, but a lot of people don't trust them at all because of their various past misdeeds. That's why I suggested they should rebrand themselves, if they find something important. To lose the tainted Greenpeace name would benefit both their organization and the public.
They are claiming that the levels are safely within the limits anyway. Hopefully it stays that way.
Posted in: Greenpeace says it has detected radiation in fish sold in supermarkets
-3
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
The article states that GP found radiation of 47.3 becquerels versus the official limit of 500, e.g. Greenpeace seems to be claiming that the fish are safe to eat in one accepts the 500 limit.
So what are you criticising the government bodies for? What are you demanding be investigated fully and transparently?
Posted in: Greenpeace says it has detected radiation in fish sold in supermarkets
-1
davidattokyo
Interesting. Would be instructive if comparative studies could be performed elsewhere so we know what is normal. There is natural radiation in the world.
And if they find something important, I hope their change their name because Greenpeace is regarded by many as having zero credibility. They cry wolf so often it's hard to know when to pay attention to them.
But just going by the story, they found radiation of 1/10th the limit set, so it actually sounds to me like eating the fish is perfectly safe (unless the 500 limit is not stringent enough, but then Greenpeace always believes whatever limits there are are not stringent enough).
Posted in: Greenpeace says it has detected radiation in fish sold in supermarkets
3
davidattokyo
arrestpaul's point was quite correct. Australia does not own international waters, by definition, although they claim otherwise.
Those actions are in accordance with the Law of the Sea and Whaling convention. They are exercising their established rights, not claiming ownership as Australia has done.
Just FYI Spidapig24, you can type "I" by holding down the shift key and then pressing i, rather than using l all the time.
That's a great rebuttal.
Is it just me, or does it reek of irony and black pots here today?
Posted in: Japanese whaling: Why the West is in the wrong
3
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
FYI, the story is about whaling more broadly, as is the discussion.
The claim that "no one" opposes coastal whaling was what warranted correction, IMO. Thanks for your understanding.
Posted in: Japanese whaling: Why the West is in the wrong
2
davidattokyo
TheNickster,
Doesn't matter, anti-whalers only care about what their propaganda says.
Spidapig24,
Are you not aware of: 1) SS being on the ground in Japan trying to stop whaling in Japanese waters, and 2) Australia's policy of "bringing about a permanent ban on commercial whaling world-wide"?
Posted in: Japanese whaling: Why the West is in the wrong