British anti-whaling protester held hostage on Japanese harpoon ship offered whale meat for dinner

[Barrett808]

Source: Daily Mail

British anti-whaling protester held hostage on Japanese harpoon ship offered whale meat for dinner
By RICHARD SHEARS
Last updated at 19:48pm on 16th January 2008


Held: Aussie Benjamin Potts could be seen clearly bound yesterday

The crew of a Japanese harpoon ship holding a British anti-whaling protester captive insist they are treating him well - and have even offered him a meal of whale meat.

British protester Giles Lane remained a captive on board the Japanese harpoon ship tonight as accusations flew across the icy, fog-shrouded waters of Antarctica.

The Japanese crew accused 36-year-old Mr Giles, from Cuckfield, West Sussex, and an Australian colleague of piracy after the pair stormed the whaling vessel Yushin Maru on Tuesday.

But the captain of the Sea Shepherd conservation vessel which sent the men on a protest mission against the whaler fired back - accusing the Japanese of terrorism on the high seas.

...

To add insult to injury for the two imprisoned protesters, it was revealed that the Japanese crew had even offered them the chance of having a meal of whale meat in their locked cabin.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=508674&in_page_id=1811

[tekisui]

1. That is asshole thing to do. -nt.

[wtmusic]

5. If they weren't assholes, they wouldn't be there. nt

[DS1]

49. The Japanese have a long track record of treating prisoners with dignity

:crazy:

[Bonobo]

62. As do Americans.

[saigon68]

66. VERY DIGNIFIED

[Bonobo]

70. Frankly, I'd rather have my head chopped than this:

And this is happening in the country YOU fought for. How does that make you feel?

[saigon68]

92. Ah Yes the Abu Ghraib card

You know by now how I feel about the War Criminals and troopers like Lynndie ( the subhumanoid types)

[Bonobo]

98. I know how you feel. That's why we should not "go there".

The U.S. has lost the right to brag about the way they treat prisoners.

The Japanese, on the other hand, are on the opposite side of the pendulum swing.

Believe me when I tell you, they are fantastic, kind, trusting human beings now. Different completely than the ones your father suffered at the hands of (for which I am sorry).

We in the US however have been slumming it ethics-wise for quite some time.

[saigon68]

100. Yes I know that

One does not judge a whole country or all of its people -- by the actions of a few misguided traditionalists

[Barrett808]

93. But haven't you heard? These "enhanced interrogation techniques" are nice and legal

And they've saved lives!

U.S. interrogations successful, lawful: spy chief
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3143445&mesg_id=3143445

[geardaddy]

114. Not to mention the "Rape of Nanjing"

[Bonobo]

116. These thread always go there! Geardaddy, you're tired.

[geardaddy]

118. You're right. I am tired.

[Submariner]

2. I hope they can break out their room and sneak below decks

to open the seacocks and sink the ship.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tyler Durden]

40. You ARE missing your "SARCASM" smilie....

...aren't you?

If you are not, and are indeed supporting the international CRIMINAL activity of the Japanese, then both WELCOME and enjoy your short stay.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bonobo]

44. I guess the counter-argument must be:

They don't think it is piracy if it is THEIR issue. I mean "piracy" is what the OTHER guys do. You know who I mean, right? The ones we don't agree with. THEY are the pirates. If it is our cause, and we say it is just, than we can do whatever we want and be ceratin God or the spirit or whoever is on our side.

Forget about the fact that ANYONE on ANY SIDE would say the same thing.

Muslim terrorists, anti-abortion whackadoos, anyone with a strong enough emotional argument has COMPLETE MORAL CERTITUDE.

That's why it is okay.

Anyone interested in really understanding the issue, I encourage to read the posts of kristopher". They are far more well-written, intelligent and lucid than what I can come up with. But they are the truth, from a non-emotional, logical, rational, political point of view.

[Marrah_G]

89. This is one of the dumbest posts I have seen in quite a long time

I believe you are on the wrong website.

[LanternWaste]

42. You're not aware of the legal definition of 'piracy', are you?

You're not aware of the legal definition of 'piracy', are you?

Nice to know you think violence and firearms will solve that pesky little problem called "Responsible Stewardship of the Planet" though.

[The Stranger]

43. Wrong. Piracy necessarily involves theft of some kind. There is no theft of any kind here.

Sea Shepherd forcibly enforces international law. Congratulations, you have it exactly fucking backwards.

[Bonobo]

45. Stranger, they do not enforce "international law" any more than you do.

They are pirates by the very definition of the word.

Every rational person admits this. It is beyond argument.

[The Stranger]

46. I have already been through this with you. Piracy involves theft, by definition.

Both legally and otherwise. Sea Shepherd isn't taking anything from anyone. They are trying to keep the criminal Japanese whalers from killing animals protected by international law.

You have some personal issue with Watson of Sea Shepherd you posted about yesterday. You also take it as some slight to all Japanese people, but it's not. Try to realize that this isn't about you and it isn't about Watson. It is about saving an intelligent species.

And it is about enforcing the law when everyone else stands on the sidelines.

[Bonobo]

48. If you cared about the whales and not the vicarious thrill you are experiencing...

You would take a more reasoned and diplomatic apporoach to this problem. It would yield much better results.

The fact that you guys are so hung up on this adolescent and arrogant way of trying to approach the problem makes me think that something else is at work besides saving whales.

You take a very emotional approach to this whole thing yourself. Please read the other posts on this thread. There is some good information about Japanese political culture with regards to this issue. There are much better ways to achieve what you say you want instead of being an American cowboy and playing into the hands of right-wing ultra-nationalists.

[14thColony]

101. I guess I'm not rational then

Let's play a fun game of Figure Out How "they are pirates by the very definition of the word"

Our first contestant: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, which defines "maritime piracy" as:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:
(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;
(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).<30>

Contestant Number Two: The International Maritime Bureau, which defines piracy as "the act of boarding any vessel with an intent to commit theft or any other crime, and with an intent or capacity to use force in furtherance of that act."

Key words for those playing along on our home version are: violence, detention, "private ends", theft, and force.

Show me PIRACY! Survey says...oooohhhhh, that's too bad.

[Bonobo]

107. Perhaps a pictorial description of your logic would be in order:

[Bonobo]

51. Wrong. Here is the definition.

Definition of piracy

Piracy consists of any of the following acts: (a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed-

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft; (ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/piracy

[The Stranger]

103. Actually, according to your very own definition, I am right.

There is the requirement of some form of theft, here, "depredation, committed for private ends by the crew."

You do not seem to dispute that Sea Shepherd is not robbing, pillaging, looting the criminal Japanese whalers. In fact, Sea Shepherd is trying to prevent the Japanese whalers from poaching illegally the protected species.

I don't know what happened between you and Watson, but it isn't worth your defending criminals who are destroying a species.

[Barrett808]

58. "There was no intent on the part of the Sea Shepherd to seize control of the Yushin Maru"

Professor Rothwell, of the Australian National University, played down speculation that they could face prosecution for piracy. "I think you can conclude there was no intent on the part of the Sea Shepherd individuals to seize control of the Yushin Maru and that would be one of the crucial elements of any attempt to charge these two with an act of piracy," he said.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23068974-2,00.html

[Bonobo]

71. Well, there was intent to do violence and that is enough so he is wrong.

[Barrett808]

77. The intent was to deliver a letter informing the captain of the Australian court ruling. n/t

[Bonobo]

81. Japanese reports say they boarded after trying to foul up the prop and throwing acid.

[Barrett808]

83. Most other accounts say the reverse is the case. n/t

[Bonobo]

85. You mean the other reports coming from Captain Watson, I assume.

Who else would know?

[Barrett808]

87. I mean media reports, generally. n/t

[Bonobo]

88. Where are they getting the facts from? I thought there were no other ships out there.

So it's he said/she said, no?

[The Stranger]

104. The taboo against violence is often cited by the empowered to quiet the disempowered.

Meanwhile, the empowered torture, rape, wage war, mass murder, steal, plunder and destroy -- using that very same violence they purport to decry.

[Robb]

108. Like that fascist, what's his name...

...Gandhi.

[The Stranger]

109. Not, him. Try, what's his name . . .

Che.

[Robb]

112. So you want to live in Kinshasa, La Paz, Havana or Bombay?

Proof's in the pudding.

[The Stranger]

113. Live where you want, but understand the politics of the empowered and the taboo against violence.

You will be much better off.

[14thColony]

105. And I suggest you might want to eat some Prozac

Full marks on your knowledge of modern naval weaponry. Minus a million points on your "when in doubt kill someone/everyone" view of diplomacy. To sink an unarmed vessel on the high seas might look great in an action movie, but it's also an act of war against the nation in which the vessel is flagged.

[NashVegas]

3. Where's the British Foreign Embassy in Japan?

You'd think they'd be busy on this one, no?

[lonestarnot]

4. Wonder what a world of modern day pirates would be like. I wonder if parlay works.

[wtmusic]

6. It will be interesting to see if that's all they offer them

That would be truly sick (and do wonders for our cause).

[Ian David]

7. I hope Godzilla comes and stomps them. n/t

[kristopher]

8. I think it's funny.

The Japanese have a terrific sense of humor, IMO. I don't endorse whaling, but, the Japanese have legal right to do what they are doing. They have gone along with completely illogical restrictions on whaling that, once at risk populations stabilized and recovered, have no basis in "scientific management" of the whale as a resource (which is the premise of the IWC).
We (in America) have extended the umbrella of human compassion to marine mammals and that is the real basis of our effort to halt whaling. When we argue at the IWC however, we make claims of extinction risk that are so obviously and grossly exaggerated that we end up just pissing them off.
This is the result of that dishonesty.
If we really want to stop them from whaling there is probably a way; but harassing them by ramming and boarding their ships is wrong and only serves to make them more determined.

[Barrett808]

9. Fin whales are endangered, and slaughtering them violates CITES

Japan has no legal right to slaughter these whales; the ICR whalers are poachers and should be treated as such.

...The London Report finds Japan's current and proposed takings of humpback and sei whales as well as other whale species "are for primarily commercial purposes" and "plainly constitute international trade." Japan has previously announced it intends to kill more than 1,400 whales this year including 100 sei whales and 50 humpback whales, a species protected from commercial hunting for more than 40 years. ...

Ambassador Alberto Szekely, an international law Professor who served as coordinator of the London Panel and related expert panels convened in Paris and Sydney last year said "Japan's repeated assertion that its whaling activities are legal is incorrect and misleading. "Scientific whaling" as conducted by Japan violates international law and should not be allowed to continue."

http://www.earthtimes.org:80/articles/show/news_press_release,223991.shtml

An Australian court has ruled that the activities of the Japanese whaling fleet are illegal and ordered it to halt its operations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7188674.stm

[kristopher]

11. Your response is a perfect example of what's wrong

There are a lot of whale species that are endangered and the Japanese aren't hunting any of them. Your post makes a dishonest argument and that type of dishonesty is what has them pissed off. They are in waters that the Australian courts have no jurisdiction over and, as your article clearly states, they are targeting minke - an abundant species. They intended to take some humpbacks but altered their plans to accommodate the Western public. Instead of acknowledging the actuality of their actions in relation to the intent of the IWC and international law, there are too many who are willing to resort to the kind of dishonesty you've demonstrated.
All I'm saying is be honest - you don't want them killing whales because you like whales and feel that killing them has a sort of equivalency with the killing of a human. Essentially my thesis is that in the modern era, westerners have (for reasons that require a rather long explanation) extended the cannibalism/murder taboo to non-humans.
That is a valid enough claim to make to the Japanese; it doesn't need to be hidden and argued through the use of transparently false/misleading arguments.

[Barrett808]

13. Japan has no legal right to slaughter these whales; the ICR whalers are poachers

Speculating about my honesty is a relevance fallacy.

[kristopher]

24. They are absolutely within their rights

...That's why there is no legal action to prevent what they are doing.

And I'm not speculating about your honesty. I'm saying explicitly that the arguments you expressed are false and dishonest. It is relavent because it is this dishonesty that motivates the sense of nationalism which Japanese whalers depend on to shape public opinion in their favor.
Look at the other responses to my posts - a primary ingredient of those replies is indignation that the Japanese disguise their true motives (commercial whaling) behind the facade of scientific research. What makes you think the Japanese are any different than we are? The foundation of the IWC is scientific management of a resource. They entered into the IWC treaties in good faith based on that premise but saw the hijacking of that organization by anti-whaling interests that have not played square from day one. So when those opposed to whaling point to the obvious fiction of "scientific whaling" and claim duplicity on the part of the Japanese, do you know the effect of that criticism? Do you know how they react to the claim they are "buying" votes of smaller non-interested countries?
They love it for it is seen as justice for the miserable and DISHONORABLE way they have been treated in the IWC. Both the vote buying and lying are strategies that were employed FIRST by antiwhaling interests.

Let me repeat that I also want them to stop whaling. I just think that the key is honest discussion starting with the fact that they are violating a taboo that many feel as strongly about as they do murder or cannibalism. Believe it or not, the Japanese are an incredibly sympathetic and understanding people and I think they will respond positively such an appeal.

[Bonobo]

29. You can't post that shit!

It is the absolute stone cold, unvarnished truth!

Who the hell do you think you are interjecting facts into a discussion where clearly OUR opinion about the sentient (not to mention just plain cute) little whales are the main thing at issue.

The Japanese are little more than vamphirric barbarians, sucking upon the life-blood of our Mother Earth. They must be stopped, etc.

----------------------------------------

The truth is, this approach by the Sea Shepherd society has hardened the positions of the whaling interests. The real truth is that most of Japan is uninterested in eating whale meat, but the antagonism and cultural arrogance displayed by the West has allowed the far-right Nationalists who are allied with the whalers to make good advantage of the issue by couching it in Nationalistic terms.

[kristopher]

31. Precisely.

[hoboken123]

86. I'm curious...

Do you think your childish postings take away from whatever point you might have?

[Barrett808]

50. I repeat: Japan has no legal right to slaughter these whales; the ICR whalers are poachers

End of line.

[Bonobo]

52. You forgot to stamp your feet.

[Barrett808]

53. See my post #9 for the legal arguments. n/t

[Bonobo]

57. I don't see it. A law professor and an Australian court?

The Japanese are not interested in driving the whales to extinction. That is why they use numbers to establish a reasonable number instead of just "grabbing all they can"-the way other types of fisherman behave.

The world is being emptied of its fish in an unexamined rape of the ocean. The Japanese whalers at least are grabbing whales in small, sustainable numbers.

The argument that it is illegal is based on emotion, not facts. You can't expect everyone to worship our sacred cows.

Speaking of cows, we kill millions and millions and millions and millions. They are sacred to Hindus. What if the Hindu nations demanded we stop killing them or that we change the way we slaughter them and then threatened us if we didn't comply?

Would that work?

[Barrett808]

60. Relevance fallacy: Cows are domesticated animals, property

Whales are exclusively wild animals, not property.

Whaling is part and parcel of the "unexamined rape of the oceans," and by far the easiest part of that destruction to cease.

[Bonobo]

64. But the whaling is not "unexamined" is my point.

[LeftyMom]

15. That is a crock of shit.

Even the most healthy whale populations are still bare fractions of their historic numbers, whales reproduce slowly and to low numbers and are already threatened by climate change, pollution and destabilization of oceanic food chains due to commercial fishing. Two of the species targeted this year, fin whales and humpbacks (they later backed out on the humpback target under pressure) are endangered species, and while more common most species protection schemes list minkes as threatened, near-threatened or a species of concern, and they're relatively plentiful when compared to their kin. Quite frankly, there isn't a species of whale with ANY surplus population, before one even gets into the amount of cruelty involved in killing the poor beasts.

In any case, the IWC, of which Japan is a member, does not permit commercial whaling, and the ICRs program is clearly commercial in nature.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

17. and the IWC has lost a lot of its credibility and are in my eyes

working against its purposes due to the anti-whaling nations that are a member

And i don't feel to sorry for the activists due to them breaking the law and boarding a ship without permission(so i almost hope they get em to Japan and can charge them)

[Barrett808]

18. Oh yes, I hope the whalers take the activists back to Japan

Oh, I drool to think of the trial and the videos of illegal whale slaughter entered into evidence and into Japanese mass media. Oh yes... (rubs hands)

[LeftyMom]

19. As opposed to Japan paying landlocked nations to join and vote for commercial whaling?

At least most of the anti-whaling countries involved have certain advantages like a coastline, and a word for whale in their native languages. Which is more than can be said for a few of Japan's proxies.

Anyhow, the IWC is a regulatory body, which Japan freely joined and in which it remains, whose rules- which Japan flagrantly violates- permit it to limit or eliminate whaling of species under it's purview (other cetaceans, like dolphins and pilot whales, are not under IWC management.)

[Bodhi BloodWave]

21. agreed, that japan has done that with a few nations is bad

tho when i look into it i also found this: Currently, there are 8 landlocked IWC members. Mali and Mongolia voted with other pro-whaling countries. Austria, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Switzerland and San Marino voted with other anti-whaling countries.

So it seems like the anti-whalers have been 'buying' landlocked members as well, and we can add in this


Regardless it does not excuse the anti-whaling nations twisting the IWC to what it wants, in case you wonder what I'm babbling about, its this:

After the moratorium entered into force in 1986, the Scientific Committee was commissioned to review the status of the whale stocks and develop a calculation method for setting safe catch limits. At the annual meeting of the IWC in 1991, the Scientific Committee submitted its finding that there are approximately 761,000 Minke Whales in Antarctic waters, 87,000 in the northeast Atlantic, and 25,000 in the North Pacific. With such populations, it was submitted, 2000 Minke Whales could be harvested per year without endangering the population. Nevertheless, the IWC Plenary committee voted to maintain the blanket moratorium on whaling, noting that formulas for determining allowable catches had not yet been adequately evaluated.

In 1991, acting on the recommendation of the Scientific committee, the IWC adopted a computerised formula, the Revised Management Procedure (RMP), for determining allowable catches of some whale species. Despite the fact that the RMP indicated that it would be possible to authorize a catch that year, the moratorium was not lifted. The IWC noted the need to agree on minimum standards for data, to prepare guidelines on the conduct of population surveys, and to devise and approve a system of measures for monitoring and inspection.

The IWC Plenary committee adopted the RMP in 1994, but decided not to implement it before an inspection and control scheme had been developed. This scheme, together with the RMP, is known as the Revised Management Scheme (RMS). Since then it has been all but impossible for the member countries in the Plenary committee to agree on an RMS.

Ray Gambell, then the Secretary of the IWC, agreed at least in part with the argument of the pro-whaling nations: "In all reasonableness, we would have to say that a commercial catch could be taken without endangering stocks." In June 1993 the Chairman of the Scientific Committee, Dr Philip Hammond, resigned in protest to what he saw as contempt of the Scientific Committee’s recommendations. The same year Norway became the only state in the world to resume commercial whaling, on the grounds that they had objected to, and thus opted out, of the moratorium.
|

a blanket ban is not the purpose of the IWC as its decisions are supposed to be based on scientific knowledge and not on political/emotional views

the info i pasted was gotten from Wikipedia for what its worth(or not)

[LeftyMom]

23. Those are old and inaccurate data

We have genetics now, we don't have to rely on old whaling records.

" In their study, Roman and Palumbi focused on the genetics of humpback, fin and minke whales -- three species decimated in the mid-19th and early-20th centuries by the demand for whale oil (for lamps, candles, soaps and perfumes), baleen (for whips, corsets and other devices) and meat. Although humpbacks, fins and minkes are found in many oceans, the researchers restricted their DNA analysis to the North Atlantic -- with surprising results.

"The genetics we've done of whales in the North Atlantic says that, before whaling, there were a total of 800,000 to 900,000 humpback, fin and minke whales -- far greater numbers than anybody ever thought," Palumbi said.

Take humpback whales, for example. According to the IWC, the current population of North Atlantic humpbacks is about 10,000, compared to its historic high of 20,000 -- a figure based on old whaling records. But after comparing DNA samples from 188 humpbacks, Roman and Palumbi concluded that the historic population in the North Atlantic may have been 10 times greater than the IWC estimate. "

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2003/august6/whales-86.html

[Bodhi BloodWave]

25. Thanks for the updated info, for some reason anytime i have tried to look

after info on it i only find old data

[LeftyMom]

26. No problem. The same researchers just looked at Gray Whales with similar results.

They're saying they're at most 28-56% of historical abundance (54% is the IWC's minimum before they'll consider resumed whaling.)

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/104/38/15162

[Bodhi BloodWave]

35. out of curiosity

Based on the old info i posted, would you consider the anti-whaling countries to have made their decisions based on politics/emotions rather then the scientific knowledge?

[LeftyMom]

54. No, I think they're mnotivated by concern for whales.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

110. yes, but concern is not based on scientific knowledge which

is what the organization was supposed to make judgments on(which means it was more emotional then scientific based)

Least thats my view on their decisions(Based on the new info they did the right thing, but based on the old i see them as twisting the meaning of the group over a number of meetings)

[LeftyMom]

117. Let's just say we disagree.

If anybody's disregarding science, and letting emotions (greed!) override good sense, it's the pro-whaling faction.

[kristopher]

30. I believe your evaluation is flawed

I believe your evaluation is flawed if we start with the premise - as the IWC did - that whales are a resource to be managed and harvested.
Your argument is formed on beliefs and values that have very little do do with science and reproduction rates. I mean, really, look at what you wrote: "Quite frankly, there isn't a species of whale with ANY surplus population, before one even gets into the amount of cruelty involved in killing the poor beasts."

Do you see that you are making an emotional judgment first then evaluating information in a way that presets your conclusion? To emphasize my point I'll note that you've doubled the "sin" of Japanese by claiming "Two of the species targeted this year, fin whales and humpbacks (they later backed out on the humpback target under pressure) are endangered species."
Actually, the fin whales and the humpbacks are one and the same - the fins are a type of humpback. The minke is also a type of humpback, but is present in much much greater numbers than other flavors (excuse the pun, I couldn't resist) of humpback.

The point you raise regarding how many whales there actually are demonstrates well why honesty is important. The original estimates of the recovered minke population placed the number at nearly a million. As a counter to Japanese pressure to resume whaling a new estimate was made that reduced this number to less than 200,000. Later surveys put the number at nearly double that.
Now my point isn't the precision of the numbers, it is that the dishonesty of OUR argument has made the science suspect and provided for the Japanese a firm justification for thumbing their noses at us.

If someone wanted to kill dogs would you try to argue on the basis of their suitability as a food source or whould you argue from the heart based on compassion?

[LeftyMom]

33. Both arguments have validity.

That there is no species of large whales currently within shouting distance of historical numbers is a fact only disputed by advocates of renewed commercial whaling.

That there's no way to kill a large oceangoing creature at all quickly while still leaving still leaving a mostly intact carcass to be "harvested" (and "studied" in the case of Japanese "scientific whaling") is both common sense and quite evident in the average time (about twenty minutes, and keep in mind that's a number that comes overwhelmingly from smaller minke whales) it takes even the very large and very modern Japanese fleet to kill one.

And while Fin whales, Humpbacks and Minke whales are fairly closely related as Rorqual whales, they are distinct species (and obviously visually distinct, for that matter) and are members of two different subfamilies. Humpbacks are subfamily Megapterinae while Fins and Minke (and Blue whales, to name a more famous relative) are subfamily Balaenopterinae.

[kristopher]

34. Not saying there is no validity in your argument.

What I said was that the basis for decision making within the IWC is NOT the one you are using. You have adopted the goal of reaching "historical numbers" (as if we knew what those were) instead of the stated IWC goal of managing a resource for harvest.
Can't you see the problem using such disingenuous arguments creates? You can't even acknowledge that you are using incorrect information - you wrote that the Japanese were hunting fin whales as well as humpbacks. They aren't. The 50 humpbacks they agreed not to take are the fin whales you are talking about.
The taboo argument is a valid one, you don't need to manufacture a smokescreen and outrage here. If you really want whaling stopped, you need to reach out to the Japanese people directly, let them know how you feel and "ask for their understanding." I put that in quotes because it is a standard phrase in Japanese negotiations. Another standard phrase - always a negative - is arrogant and high handed. That is how they perceive our dishonest actions and statements, as high handed and arrogant. If you want them to stop you must shift that perception to one of sincerity and deeply held emotional convictions.

[Lorien]

111. Vile, disgusting, pathetic. n/t

[Harper_is_Bush]

10. who gives a flying fuck? I mean, wow, what next?

Every little press release by that Sea Shephard (demonstratd liars) is news? NO.

[LeftyMom]

16. Apparently you

'cause you're all over any Sea Shepherd-related thread like white on rice on a paper plate in a snow storm.

[Harper_is_Bush]

12. TERRORISM!?!?!?

The whaler is boarded by "Captain" Watson's boys, and the intruders are captured, and the Japanese are accused of terrorism? Something wrong in that assessment.

[KingOfLostSouls]

14. ARRRR MATEY!!!

make the lilly livered land lubbers walk de plank

send 'em down te the locker, arrrr


and bring me the rum

[KingOfLostSouls]

20. Hang 'em

pirates tend to steal all the rum.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KingOfLostSouls]

27. these goddamn hippies ruined piracy

it used to be about fun things like drinking rum, and wenching, and looting and pillaging, and making land lubbers walk the plank

but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

these goddamn hippies had to go and ruin piracy. now they want it to be about protesting and crappy folk music and veganism and stupid hippy beads and when you board another ship, its to deliver a sissy letter. not to attack them with cutlasses and steal their women and rum


bah, goddamn hippies.

[Judi Lynn]

36. Australia intervenes in anti-whalers stand-off

Australia intervenes in anti-whalers stand-off
By Julian Ryall in Tokyo
Last Updated: 7:01am GMT 17/01/2008

The Australian government has offered to send a ship to retrieve two seized activists from a Japanese whaler in Antarctic waters in a bid to end a two-day stand-off.

Stephen Smith, the foreign minister, said that the Australian customs ship Oceanic Viking will pick up the two men, Giles Lane, 36, from Cuckfield in West Sussex, and Australian national Benjamin Potts, from the harpoon vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 and return them to their anti-whaling vessel if details can be arranged.
(snip)

Mr Smith urged both sides to end their acrimony to allow a safe transfer of the pair. "The transfer of men from one ship to another, and then to a third ship in any circumstances is a potentially difficult operation," he said. "This will be an difficult operation, occurring as it does in the Southern Ocean."

The whalers and campaigners dispute how the men have been held and what contact has been made.
(snip)

One concern, he admitted, is that Sea Shepherd members might mount their own attempt to rescue their colleagues, who are no longer bound to the exterior of the ship but are being held in a cabin.

More:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/01/17/eawhale117.xml

[Judi Lynn]

37. Rudd on whalers

Rudd on whalers
Updated: 21:48, Thursday January 17, 2008

The Prime Minister has called for calm from both sides of the standoff over the two detained whaling activists being held by a Japanese whaling ship.

Mr Rudd said:

'There are particular laws that apply under international maritime law concerning responsibility of masters of vessels at sea - be they Japanese registered vessels or vessels registered in the Kingdom of the Netherlands, as is the case with the Sea Shepherd operation.

'And those responsibilities go to the maximum preservation of human life and taking all taking all necessary and responsible actions to that end.

'Therefore I would again urge restraint on the parties and full cooperation on the part of those involved to ensure the safe return of those two individuals'.

http://www2.skynews.com.au/news/article.aspx?id=211999

[Judi Lynn]

38. Whalers on shaky ground, need help in hostage hand

Whalers on shaky ground, need help in hostage hand
Thursday, 17 January 2008, 12:58 pm
Press Release: Green Party

17th January 2008

Whalers on shaky ground, need help in hostage handover

Japanese whalers who have abducted two protesters are on very shaky legal ground and are in no position to make demands from the crew of the Steve Irwin, Green Party Conservation Spokesperson Metiria Turei says.

"While the Sea Shepherd activists, in boarding the Japanese ship, were very probably not acting within maritime law themselves, the whalers are certainly getting into deep waters if they think that abducting the activists and then making demands of the Sea Shepherd are wise actions," Mrs Turei says.

"The Green Party does not support any violent actions, but neither do I believe that the whalers have any moral right to hold the activists against their will.

More:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0801/S00123.htm

[Judi Lynn]

39. Australia Steps Up Pressure on Japan Over Detained Anti-Whalers

Australia Steps Up Pressure on Japan Over Detained Anti-Whalers
By Ed Johnson

Jan. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Australia pressed the Japanese government to secure the release of two anti-whaling activists detained two days ago when they boarded a harpoon ship in Antarctic waters.

The government has been in regular contact with officials in Tokyo ``about the urgent need for both men to be released,'' Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said in a statement.

Australian Benjamin Potts and U.K. citizen Giles Lane, both members of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, are being held on the Yushin Maru No. 2, which is part of the Japanese fleet hunting minke and fin whales in the Southern Ocean.

Japan's Institute for Cetacean Research has promised to free the men on condition the protesters stop pursuing the fleet, Sea Shepherd President Paul Watson said by telephone today from the group's ship, the Steve Irwin. The institute says Watson is deliberately delaying the handover to capture more media attention.

More:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aPB0MDCGJzXg&refer=australia



Minoru Morimoto, director-general of the Institute for Cetacean Research

[Bonobo]

47. According to the Tokyo Shinbun, they have been released to an Australian vessel.

Probably a lot cleaner than they were when they attacked the Japanese vessel with ropes to destroy the ships' screws and acid onto the deck.

[Barrett808]

55. Here's video of the "attack":

Video Clip 1
Steve Irwin crew members board the Yushin Maru No. 2 and are taken hostage
http://seashepherd.org/migaloo/video/2008-01-15_video_clip_04_Steve_Irwin_crew_members_board_the_Yushin_Maru_No_2.wmv

http://seashepherd.org/migaloo/video.html

[Judi Lynn]

59. Oh, the humanity! Thanks for posting the link. n/t

[Bonobo]

61. Here are the real videos, taken by the Japanese ship. They show the ramming, the acid, etc.

This is from last year:
You hear the woman in Japanese saying (something) was thrown onto the ship.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8


And here is a nice video on racism and the whaling issue. You probably have no interest in it since it is only cruelty against Asian people, not marine mammals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8lvep0-Ii0&feature=related

[Barrett808]

63. "Cruelty against Asian people"

Wow.

[Bonobo]

65. Shocking, ain't it?

But white people really can't imagine what that is like.

Oh, did you see the video? Still think you can say they aren't pirates?

[Barrett808]

68. Pfft.

:eyes:

[Bonobo]

73. No comment on the ramming?

[Barrett808]

74. Sea Shepherd does that from time to time

Doesn't surprise me.

[Bonobo]

75. Me neither. That's kinda why the Japanese have a right to defend themselves.

Ya think?

[Barrett808]

79. The whalers typically flee. n/t

[Bonobo]

80. They were moving away from that ship when they were rammed.

The whaler is not as fast.

[depakid]

115. That's butyric acid -the vomit smelling stuff

not particularly dangerous, just foul. Get some on your lab coat in an organic chem lab, and you have basically throw it out.

As to racism- fishning laws are also strictly enforced against South Americans in these waters. Has nothing at ALL to do with race. Anyone violating interbational laws neeeds to be held accuntable- if not by governments, then by NGO's.

Look for a lot more of this kind of thing, as fisheries decline in the coming decade.

[Barrett808]

56. Whaling standoff end 'in sight'

Whaling standoff end 'in sight'
By Michelle Draper
January 18, 2008 12:15am
Article from: AAP

ANTI-WHALING activists in the Southern Ocean have been contacted by officials aboard an Australian customs vessel to arrange the transfer of two environmentalists detained on a Japanese whaling boat.

Australian Benjamin Potts and Briton Giles Lane have been detained on board the Yushin Maru No. 2 since Tuesday when they boarded the harpoon boat from the Sea Shepherd protest group's vessel, the Steve Irwin.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith yesterday offered to use the Oceanic Viking customs vessel to end the two-day standoff between the whalers and Sea Shepherd activists.

Sea Shepherd executive director Kim McCoy said the Steve Irwin crew was delighted at the Australian Government's intervention.

“We have just spoken very recently with an agent on board the Oceanic Viking customs vessel,” she said last night.

“We have received official contact from them stating that they're just waiting for the Japanese to confirm that they're willing to accept those terms.

“My understanding is that the Australian Government is not going to impose any conditions on us to stop harassing the whaling, because the whaling is illegal.

“The only condition that the Australian Government wants to impose is the safe transfer, and of course we're going to have to facilitate a safe transfer, we don't want to jeopardise anyone's safety during the transfer of Giles and Pottsy (Benjamin Potts) to our ship.

“Beyond that, they've told us that there will be no additional conditions.

“In other words, we are going to continue intervening against the illegal whaling activity of the Japanese.”

Ms McCoy said the Oceanic Viking officials would be emailing the activists information about how a transfer of the detainees would take place.

A transfer could take place some time in the next 24 hours, but would depend on whether the Japanese agreed to release the detainees, she said.

(more)

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23070247-2,00.html

[Bonobo]

67. It's over already.

[Barrett808]

69. I haven't seen any stories confirming this.

The transfer has apparently been planned, but I don't think the ships are even in range yet.

[Bonobo]

72. I read it in Japanese.

Here is the link.

http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/s/article/2008011701000954.html

Machine translation:

Australian activists to surrender two research whaling, the prospect of the resumption of

2008年1月17日 23時43分 January 17, 2008 23:43

水産庁は１７日夜、南極海で調査捕鯨中の日本の第２勇新丸に、米環境保護団体シー・シェパードの男性活動家２人が拘束された事件で、日本時間の同日午後１０時半すぎに２人をオーストラリア税関の巡視船へ引き渡したと発表した。 The agency has 17 night on the research whaling in the Antarctic Ocean in Japan's Shin Isamu second round, the environmental group Sea Shepherd activists of the two men arrested in the case, the same day Japan time of 22:30 to 2 too Customs patrol boat people to Australia and delivered Monday. これにより、日本が一時中断していた調査捕鯨は、安全が確認され次第再開する見通し。 As a result, Japan has temporarily suspended research whaling is safe to be resumed as soon as expected.

活動家は英国人とオーストラリア人で、捕鯨への抗議文を手渡すため１５日に第２勇新丸に乗り込んだ。 British activist and the Australian and hand over a letter of protest to whaling 15 for the second round Shin Isamu boarded. シー・シェパードが同船のスクリューにロープを巻き付けたりデッキに薬品をまくなど危険行為を行ったため、日本側は活動家を拘束した。 Sea Shepherd is the ship's propeller with a rope wrapped deck or risky behavior, such as drug sow went to the Japanese side was detained activists.

水産庁は１６日に釈放を決めたが、再び妨害を受ける恐れがあるため、釈放まで調査捕鯨を一時中断。 The agency decided to release the 16th, again because of fear of obstructing the investigation released to suspend whaling. シー・シェパードが、日本が捕鯨できないようにする狙いもあってか、引き渡しに応じなかったためオーストラリア政府に仲介を要請していた。 Sea Shepherd is the Japanese whaling is not as a goal because, Pradip for delivery to the Australian government had been asked to mediate.

[Barrett808]

76. Thanks for the link, although I'm not sure the story states that the transfer has happened already

I think it's reporting what other papers have said: the transfer has been agreed upon, but is still pending.

[Bonobo]

78. It is unambiguous in Japanese.

２人をオーストラリア税関の巡視船へ引き渡したと発表した。

It says: "It was announced that the two people were transferred to an Australian customs patrol boat."

[Barrett808]

82. Thanks for the translation

I'm a bit skeptical, however -- this is the only report that claims the transfer has occurred. The Oceanic Viking has been absent from the scene, and there's been some question about whether it can negotiate the Antarctic seas.

[Barrett808]

84. Ah, now I'm seeing your story elsewhere:

Anti-whaling activists handed over to Australian vessel
http://www.japannewsreview.com/society/international/20080118page_id=3740

Japan hands whale militants to Australia
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gAKPWHD1Y6qs5FFnCzRZayPJKQyQ

[go west young man]

90. The Daily Mail article says they "stormed" the whaling vessel.

Man I'm just curious how 2 guys in an inflatable boat in cold heavy seas manage to "storm" a massive ship with decks 60 feet high and a crew that outnumbers the two of them ten fold. Wow talk about bullshit. Must be a Murdoch owned papaer.

[Barrett808]

91. The two just climbed aboard, with nobody to meet them on deck

The deck of the Yushin Maru No. 2 is practically at the water line, so it was relatively easy.

Then they stood there and took their gloves off, and that's about the extent of the "storming."

[Bonobo]

94. Why did the video cut there and then not come back until they were in the

hands of the Japanese?

Why did Watson edit it so much? None of the "confrontation" can be seen.

Is it possible that there is something he does not want shown? It seemed well, "fishy".

[Barrett808]

95. Probably edited down the running time

Most likely it was boring footage of them standing on the deck with nobody around.

[Bonobo]

96. I doubt it was boring when the Japanese sailors got down there and said hello.

Don't you?

[Barrett808]

97. Indeed, it appears they tried to throw Pottsy overboard

'Twas not a friendly welcome, for sure.

[Bonobo]

99. That's terrible! I always liked that guy!

On edit, if they had wanted to throw potsie in the drink, he would have been thrown in the drink.

[Xithras]

102. Legally the Japanese ship had a right to do so.

In a way, these guys should be thankful the Japanese sailors merely held them until they could be turned over to the Australians. Under international law a ships captain has the right to repel boarders and pirates using any and all force he deems necessary. They could have just tossed the two over the side...which might have killed them since the ship was underway.

[Barrett808]

106. Detained activists released: Sea Shepherd

The Sea Shepherd organisation say two of their members are now aboard the Australian Customs ship the Oceanic Viking after being held for two days on a Japanese whaling ship.

Crew members on the Sea Shepherds' ship, the Steve Irwin, say they have received confirmation from Australian Customs officials that Benjamin Potts and Giles Lane were been picked up from the Yushin Maru 2 in the early hours of this morning.

They say they will meet the customs boat the Oceanic Viking at a rendezvous point in the Southern Ocean later this morning, when the men will be transferred back to the Steve Irwin.

Mr Potts and Mr Lane have been held by the Japanese crew since they boarded the ship on Tuesday to deliver a letter of protest against the Japanese fleet's whaling activities.

The executive director of Sea Shepherd, Kim McCoy, says the group will continue their protest against the Japanese whale hunt once the men are aboard.

"The moment we get them back on board we plan to resume what we came here to do, which is enforcing international conservation law," she said.

"Now more than ever it's imperative that we get right back on track immediately and go out and intervene against the illegal activities of the Japanese fleet."

Ms McCoy says they expect to pick up their colleagues from the customs boat in a matter of hours.

"We received confirmation, and I've since spoken with one of the hostages who's no longer being held hostage, on board the Oceanic Viking, and he confirmed that they're both completely safe," she said.

"They're on the Oceanic Viking and they're just going to give them a place to sleep until we can pick them up in the morning at a rendezvous point."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/18/2141147.htm