Japanese Whalers.....
POSTED BY: Calhoun
UPDATED: Friday, June 12, 2026 18:00
VIEWED: 19782
PAGE 6 of 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Mike: Ridiculous. The actions by Japan have been far more aggressively violent than those by the SSCS over time; there is no comparison, however this individual incident came about. You can try to argue otherwise, but I don't think you'll convince anyone except those already believing as you do. Those on each side can only agree to disagree.
Seems we will indeed have to agree to disagree, because I posted video of the Sea Shepherd ramming a Japanese whaling ship with their own similarly-sized whaling ship, which is the exact kind of bullshit action that can and does lead to sinkings and deaths, even if the dickheads responsible claim that wasn't what they intended to do. I'm sure nobody aboard the Titanic intended to attack that defenseless iceberg, either. ;)
In the articles linked by Gino, it's noted that the Sea Shepherds' leader has bragged about ramming whaling ships, and has taken credit for sinking one of them with a limpet mine. In the face of clear acts of violence and piracy, is it unreasonable for Japanese sailors to defend themselves when they feel they are being attacked?
Also, many have pointed out that there are things that are worth breaking the law for on moral grounds. I'd humbly submit to all of you that Osama bin Laden feels exactly the same way. I can admit that he has a gripe with the U.S. and the West; I can even go so far as to begrudgingly admit that he may have LEGITIMATE issues with us and our policies and actions in the mid-east. But where he loses me, utterly and completely, is with his methods. Apparently y'all beg to differ, and have no problems with killing people whom you disagree on moral issues.
I'll leave you to your hatred.
Mike
Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde
Both case Mike, the failure to have adequate international laws for whaling / fishing or the lack of any redress methods for Osama bin Ladens issues...
The United Nations was founded to provide a forum for both, but over the years it has been subverted into being a mouthpiece to accommodate the politics and policy's of a few influential nations.
I like to talk about conventions and international law... but these are the tools of the folk who allow these things to become the problems they are today. Look at the climate change conference... the PTB behind the leaders aren't interested, and they should be the enemy that is targeted, hunted down, and killed... Not activists, whalers, fishermen, Muslims, or ordinary folk.
While I don't agree with the actions you are talking about,...
anyone ever see the movie the Jack Bull?
Plot summary
The Jack Bull tells the story of Myrl Redding (John Cusack), a Wyoming horse trader who clashes with Henry Ballard (L.Q. Jones), a fellow rancher, after Ballard abuses two of Redding's horses and their Crow Indian caretaker, Billy (Rodney A. Grant). When a local judge throws out Redding's complaint, the war he wages to force Ballard to nurse the emaciated animals back to health escalates into a vigilante manhunt, murder, and the possible defeat of Wyoming's bid for statehood.
The law ( Judge Wilkins ) was bought and paid for by the rich rancher who did whatever he pleased,
John Cusack, while rallying his neighbors against the wealthy rancher, corrupt sheriff and judge said something like " When you have no law, all you have is the law you make"
some truth to that
mind you at the end when the hanged John Cusack, the judge who sentenced him to death, played by an excellent John Goodman said..
Judge Tolliver: Well, I worry about you and me, Judge Wilkins. I swear to God I do, 'cause if this country gets ruined... it'll be ruined by people *like* you and me. This is a territory of unimportant people; most folks around here...
[laughs softly] can't even write their name. You and me... we're the important people. Trouble is, there's not enough of us i
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Blah blah blah. Might makes right is all you ever come down to. He who has the gold, makes the rules, and by God, they must be obeyed.
Originally posted by Hero:
There is no moral equivilant between harvesting whales and invading Poland, also these protestors are not a nation acting in its own defense or with regards to their treaty obligations.
Your example would require war with Japan rather then violent action on the high seas by non-government actors.
It was legal to invade Iraq BECAUSE WE SAID SO.
It is legal to kill whales for "study" and then consumption BECAUSE THEY SAY SO.
If everyone in this world were a lawyer, the peeps at the top would develop a "Unique & Profound Ministry" or some such to create a NEW convoluted language to fuck this world up legally in the name of profit.
In your job you certainly do good works, but defending the level of corruption that exists with a simple "well then change the laws" manifests your lap dog status to the MAN, whoever that may be at the moment.
I fart in your general direction.
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.
Eff 'em. Live by
die by...whatever.
Jerks. Good Nazis. Murders.
Take your pick.
Sorry. I grew up watching Flipper.
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.Quote:is a snark, pure and simple. I'm certainly not calling for violence, and said I agreed with you on that point, and potentially others.
have no problems with killing people whom you disagree on moral issues.
Of course, you SHOULD realize that most of what I post is at least half-snarky, so it's not as if you've never been warned... ;)
Quote:
From what I've read, the Japanese HAVE been more aggressive, but that's neither here nor there. Your comment lessens my respect for you.
Can't help you on the respect issue, but from what I'VE read, it seems there's plenty of aggression and incivility on both sides of this issue.
Quote:
I now see you're happy to go after those of us who usually agree with you, and paint us with the same brush as those who are regularly out-there and call for violence. Didn't think you were like that; thanx for putting me straight.
Wait a minute - That sounds suspciously like you're asking me to apply one set of rules and standards to those I usually agree with, and another set of rules and standards to those I DISAGREE with. I had thought you were more objective than that, and interested in the truth of things more than the agenda and spin of them. Thanks for putting me straight on that. ;)
(And yes, THAT was snark, pure and simple.) You and I *DO* agree on most things, but as Lennon said, "If you want money for people with minds that hate, all I can tell you is, Brother, you'll have to wait."
And I realize I quoted your response, but I also realize that YOU personally aren't calling for violence, but you're the most active "opposition" member on this thread, so I tend to quote you and then address others in a more general sense. My apologies for that. My rant against the "by every means necessary" crowd is aimed more at those who are calling for violence. I won't advocate violence against sailors who are, for whatever you may think of them, just trying to do their jobs and earn a living. That's like spitting on soldiers because you disagree with the war. Don't spit on the soldiers, and don't sink the whaling ship with the Japanese sailors on board - if you really MUST go after somebody's blood, go after the heads of the companies that own the ships and sign the contracts to take whales and then sell them. Even if they DO claim it's just for research. (What are they researching, anyway? How tasty whales are? Is that legitimate research?)
Anyhoo, I'm not a big fan of attacking boats, BY ANYBODY.
I can understand why tempers get heated during this debate, and about this issue. Still, "Kill the fuckers!" is hardly ever the correct course of action, and there's usually more constructive ways of meeting the problem and solving it.
Mike
Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Violence is never the best solution. And it should be the last option to consider, always.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I can understand why tempers get heated during this debate, and about this issue. Still, "Kill the fuckers!" is hardly ever the correct course of action, and there's usually more constructive ways of meeting the problem and solving it.
But then, I would shed no tears for peeps on a whaling ship should they be killed by some wacky extremists. Just like I shed no tears for the cooks aboard the Death Star- they knew what was up, what they were serving aboard.
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, I accept what you say, Mike. And no, I wasn't asking you to use different sets of rules, I dislike it when you snark at anyone, often because your snarks don't really relate to what was actually said. I have the right to resent it when what you say seems directly aimed at me and is patently untrue.
I'm NOT the most active opposition voice on this issue; reread and you'll see that.
I'll freely grant that the Sea Shepherd has been condemned for using violent means, and recently HAS used more violence against the Japanese whalers than they have against SSCS, but historically that wasn't the case. There are documented instances of the SSCS' violent actions against Japanese whalers, and the IWC is calling for them to be condemned. But the fact is it's happened on both sides, period. And both sides are wrong. You can easily find more recent stories on the Sea Shepherd's actions against the whalers, so I'll just quote a couple of stories on the other side:Quote:
The anti-whale hunting group the Sea Shepherd said a Japanese security ship has illegally followed them into French Antarctic waters and fired "a military class weapon" at their helicopter.
The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society said the Japanese ship the Shonan Maru No 2 had been following its vessel, the Steve Irwin, for nine of the 10 days it had been sailing since leaving Fremantle.
A Sea Shepherd spokeswoman said the Steve Irwin entered French Antarctic territorial waters, with permission from the French Base at Dumont Durville, in a bid to lose the Shonan Maru.
But, the Shonan Maru No 2 followed the Steve Irwin without the French's permission, Sea Shepherd said.
The Sea Shepherd group said the French base had confirmed that the Japanese ship neither requested nor received permission to enter French waters.
The spokeswoman said the Steve Irwin helicopter then flew back to film the Shonan Maru in its pursuit.
"In response, the crew of the Japanese ship activated their Long Range Acoustical Device (LRAD) at the Sea Shepherd helicopter," she said.
"LRAD is a military class weapon."
Helicopter pilot Chris Aultman said activating the weapon was extremely irresponsible.
"That device can cause nausea and disorientation and the use of it against an aircraft is extremely dangerous," he said.
The Sea Shepherd helicopter returned to the Steve Irwin for safety, at which point the Shonan Maru increased speed and aimed their water canons at the helicopter on the landing pad, the spokeswoman said.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/sea-shepherd-compla
in-about-japans-military-fightback/story-fn3dxity-1225811661366
The Australian SenateQuote:
condemns the violent actions of the Japanese whaling fleet, who have reportedly thrown metal balls at environmental activists
http://www.thegenerator.com.au/index.php/news/8-sustainable/2565-the-a
ustralian-senate-condemns-japanese-violenceQuote:
....A group of extremist whalers were deliberately trying to ram the Sea Shepherd ship Steve Irwin and trying to disable the ship's propeller....Over the last week we have witnessed and documented Japanese whalers throwing projectiles at Sea Shepherd crewmembers
http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/news-090211-1.html
I repeat: Both are wrong.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Violence is never the best solution. And it should be the last option to consider, always.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I can understand why tempers get heated during this debate, and about this issue. Still, "Kill the fuckers!" is hardly ever the correct course of action, and there's usually more constructive ways of meeting the problem and solving it.
But then, I would shed no tears for peeps on a whaling ship should they be killed by some wacky extremists. Just like I shed no tears for the cooks aboard the Death Star- they knew what was up, what they were serving aboard.
The laughing Chrisisall
I wondered if anyone was going to bring that argument up. Surprised it took so long. :)
As you say, I might not shed tears for the crew of a whaling ship if it were sunk, but I'll likely not shed any tears for a bunch of environmental terrorists if THEY were sunk, either. Both sides are behaving badly, and saying, "They did it, too!" isn't a justification in second grade, so I don't know why it would be in this instance, either.
Others refuse to play by "the rules". That doesn't mean WE have to follow. We can be better than that; we really can. We can refuse to torture. We can refuse to be terrified. And we can refuse to endorse piracy on the high seas.
I can understand why those poor Somalis take the actions they take, too, but I sure as hell don't condone those actions, and I'll not shed a tear when a crew of pirates gets shot in the neck by snipers. As with the Death Star crew, they knew what they were doing, and they knew the risks before climbing aboard.
I'm with Gino on this one. Wanna enact stricter laws and harsher penalties? I'm in. Wanna seize boats and levy heavy fines? Woo boy, let's go. Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own. And remember, if I decide I don't like what YOU are doing, I'm fully within my rights (according to you) to sink your boat, too.
Sometimes you go by the law even when it's a shitty law, because if the law doesn't protect all of us, it doesn't protect any of us. And you work for better laws.
Mike
Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Posted by Niki:
I repeat: Both are wrong.
Yup, I figured there was something in this mess we'd find to agree on.
About "Hero" and his point about taking on the Japanese Navy: The Japanese Navy hasn't been a viable force since the Battle of Midway, and hasn't officially even EXISTED since 1947, when it was permanently disbanded under Japan's new constitution. They DO have a Maritime Defense Force, but it is critically short of offensive capabilities (by design and constitutional decree), and is also critically short of resupply ships and logistical support, so it is incapable of projecting military power much of anywhere without strong support from the United States Air Force and Navy.
Mike
Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interesting, while I have my own take on the topic at hand, and for a couple reasons cannot add my two cents to it, I do think this semi-related and very salient bit should be chewed over by all.
Would You Hurt Me If I Said No to Your Politics?
http://www.strike-the-root.com/node/25638
The way disagreement has the potential to spiral brought it to mind as very relevant.
Which always begs the question of how MUCH force are you willing to use, if negotiation and reason fail ?
I think the folk in that extremely awesome looking boat there shouldn't bitch so much - they were aware of the potential when they entered the situation, and knowingly entered it of their own free will - at which point they HAVE to assume some responsibility for the risks they deliberately took.
Doesn't absolve the other ship of responsibility for THEIR actions, but trying to pretend they're blameless is bullshit, unless you need rescue or are transferring supplies/passengers, you don't come THAT close to someone elses boat on open water unless you *want* to start something, period.
Oh, and just a personal pet peeve, at any time during which you have prominently displayed, or especially, raised on the mast, the Jolly Roger...
Do *NOT* go whining to the law about anything that happens during that period, it's fucking disrespectful and insulting - if you're gonna go outlaw have the damned balls to stand behind it.
Sorry, that rooks me on a personal level, is all.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.
Eff 'em. Live by
die by...whatever.
Jerks. Good Nazis. Murders.
Take your pick.
Sorry. I grew up watching Flipper.
The laughing Chrisisall
Effin' A Chris! Besides, how could anyone in the world continue to kill whales after her tearful and powerfully desperate pleas on behalf of whales???
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME