Sea Shepherd spots whaling fleet 1000 miles away from sanctuary using Drones. - Polidicks

I remember the Steve Irwin had a fine of something like £1,000,000 when it docked in Lerwick a few months ago. One of my old friends from work got massively involved and is now a ground crew member here as well.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;33890638]The problem is that fact that they're over fishing, so regulations had to be put on whaling otherwise they'd go extinct at the rate they were being fished. Also from what I know Sea Shepard doesn't do any of that violent stuff any more and instead just block ships which from what I've heard has been quite effective.[/QUOTE] The stupidest shit i've seen them do is throw some acid on their ships to spoil the meat resulting in the Japanese needing to kill another whale. If they want to fight whaling they should do it through normal means, not by trying to be a hero. Besides, Japan isn't the only country whaling. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling[/url]

[QUOTE=MuTAnT;33888158]How can whales not be considered intelligent? I don't really think you can classify humans as the only "intelligent" species on the planet just because we're pretty good with our thumbs.[/QUOTE] frankly I dont really care if whales are intelligent or not more on topic, imo the japanese whalers should only be persecuted if they whale inside australia's waters (if they do then australia has every right to shoo them away)

[QUOTE=sami-elite;33891498]The stupidest shit i've seen them do is throw some acid on their ships to spoil the meat resulting in the Japanese needing to kill another whale. If they want to fight whaling they should do it through normal means, not by trying to be a hero. Besides, Japan isn't the only country whaling. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling[/url][/QUOTE] Uh, they throw acid on the ship so the whalers can't go outside. It stinks so bad you can't breath normally. How would the acid ruin the whale meat? It's not like the cargo hold is open or anything :downs:

[QUOTE=Eltro102;33891691]frankly I dont really care if whales are intelligent or not more on topic, imo the japanese whalers should only be persecuted if they whale inside australia's waters (if they do then australia has every right to shoo them away)[/QUOTE] Why? There's no good reason for us to kill off whales.

[QUOTE=sami-elite;33891498]The stupidest shit i've seen them do is throw some acid on their ships to spoil the meat resulting in the Japanese needing to kill another whale. If they want to fight whaling they should do it through normal means, not by trying to be a hero. Besides, Japan isn't the only country whaling. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling[/url][/QUOTE] What "normal" means? Due to the loophole there is nothing they can do in regards to legal methods, and due to the Australian government being unwilling to get the Japanese out of their waters, Sea Shepard are the only ones who can really do anything.

[QUOTE=sami-elite;33891498]The stupidest shit i've seen them do is throw some acid on their ships to spoil the meat resulting in the Japanese needing to kill another whale. If they want to fight whaling they should do it through normal means, not by trying to be a hero. Besides, Japan isn't the only country whaling. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling[/url][/QUOTE] Just want to point out here and to anyone else who goes with the "They're just being a useless nuisance.". As OvB said earlier, they're the main reason the whaling business in Japan is failing. Last season Japan ended the hunt early citing Sea Shepherd as the reason. So I'd say they're leagues more successful than organizations trying to it through non-invasive means.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33892659]Uh, they throw acid on the ship so the whalers can't go outside. It stinks so bad you can't breath normally. How would the acid ruin the whale meat? It's not like the cargo hold is open or anything :downs:[/QUOTE] They said in the show that's why they did it. They throw it on the area used to butcher whales and on the ramp.

I support the sea shepherds, anyone who supports whaling is a cunt. How can you kill whales, it serves no purpose and they are endangered enough as it is.

[QUOTE=sami-elite;33895361]They said in the show that's why they did it. They throw it on the area used to butcher whales and on the ramp.[/QUOTE] Nope, they throw it on deck and against the doors and windows of the bridge.

[QUOTE=devotchkade;33887580]Except, um, laws can be wrong sometimes. They're not vigilantes because they're not seeking to punish the whalers for reasons of retribution, they're trying to stop what they see as illegal, immoral, and environmentally devastating behaviour that no-one else is stopping.[/QUOTE] And it just so happens that what they 'see as illegal' is actually legal- loophole or not. Insurance companies use legal loopholes to defraud people out of money, sometimes even costing them their lives, but that sure as hell doesn't give me license to go shoot up an office building. Vigilantism is illegal, and 'vigilantism' where you're acting entirely contrary to existing laws and punishing legal behavior is even more illegal. I'm against whaling. I think what the Japanese whalers are doing is despicable. But I'll be damned if I'm going to cheer on a bunch of terrorists. Laws exist because raw morality is too flexible and too subjective to be a basis for enforcing punishment, and if we start adopting the position that illegal wanton destruction is okay when it's directed at things we don't like, it will only come back to bite us. [editline]26th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=devotchkade;33889806]Eugh, I have such a huge problem with people like you who espouse this kind of shit. By your standards, then, African Americans should still be second class citizens in a segregated society, and women shouldn't be allowed to vote, because that's what the fucking law said at the time. It takes people who disobey these laws deliberately and fight against them for progress to occur. And what the flying fuck is the law for if it's not about morality? Don't give me this crap about 'I'm not debating the morality' - if you're arguing about the law, then you are. It has to come into it, by the very nature of law. [/QUOTE] What an excellent example. Who do we remember as heroes- the protestors led by Martin Luther King Jr. and others who conducted civil disobedience, with rallies and marches, or the revolutionary groups who used violent acts of terrorism to get the point across? One of these two methodologies worked [i]within the law[/i] where possible, calling attention to how they were being unjustly oppressed, and so faced the problem in a way that led to increased public support and eventually changes to the law. The other violated the law in the name of vigilante justice with violent acts against police, making the movement seem like a bunch of criminals, and the people responsible for this are now almost universally condemned. The moral of the story is that if you have a problem with the law, and it's not so unjust and insurmountable that overthrowing the government outright is necessary, the responsible thing to do is to work within the law to get it changed. Deciding you're going to outright ignore the law and harm others because it doesn't happen to exactly correspond to your moral beliefs is incredibly petty. The reason Sea Shepherd is using for attacking Japanese whaling- that while technically legal, it is morally wrong and should be opposed- is the [i]exact same reasoning[/i] that right-wing extremist groups use to justify firebombing abortion clinics, or pro-animal rights groups use to raid research labs. Such a subjective distinction is not a legally or morally justifiable basis on which to be making decisions that will harm other people. And this isn't even going into the fact that the whales the Japanese are hunting, almost exclusively minke whales, aren't considered endangered, threatened, or even protected. Nor did I mention that the founder and leader of Sea Shepherd is currently wanted by Interpol for various crimes. Or that the 'Australian Antarctic Territory' is only recognized as a legitimate maritime claim by 4 out of 194 countries- and Japan isn't one of the four. Or how Sea Shepherd illegally interferes in the 100% legal seal hunts in Canada and elsewhere, which a couple years ago led to several members being arrested by Canadian police. Basically it's a lot less black-and-white than the portrayal of 'evil Japanese whalers hunting endangered animals using a loophole to evade the law, while volunteer vigilantes non-violently oppose their industry'. [QUOTE=devotchkade;33889806]Also, how are they 'risking everyone's safety' and 'attacking' innocent 'civilians'? How many people do you think they've hurt? You seriously think throwing rancid butter at them is harmful?[/QUOTE] Sea Shepherd has a colorful history of sinking ships, mostly through ramming, occasionally with the use of limpet mines and improvised weapons, and sometimes with intentional scuttling onboard. Stranding sailors in freezing water by destroying their ship is far more harmful than rancid butter. In fact, Paul Watson, the founder of Sea Shepherd, was expelled from the leadership of Greenpeace because his methods were too violent and outright illegal. Greenpeace, an organization dedicated to non-violence, has had very public disagreements more than once with Sea Shepherd over their methods. I'm just going to leave this quote from Greenpeace's website because it speaks for itself: [quote]We passionately want to stop whaling, and will do so peacefully. That's why we won't help Sea Shepherd. Greenpeace is committed to non-violence and we'll never, ever, change that; not for anything. If we helped Sea Shepherd to find the whaling fleet we'd be responsible for anything they did having got that information, and history shows that they've used violence in the past, in the most dangerous seas on Earth. For us, non-violence is a non-negotiable, precious principle. Greenpeace will continue to act to defend the whales, but will never attack or endanger the whalers. We differ with Paul Watson on what constitutes violence. He states that nobody has ever been harmed by a Sea Shepherd action. But the test of non-violence is the nature of your action, not whether harm results or not. There are many acts of violence -- for example, holding a gun to someone's head -- which result in no harm. That doesn't change their nature. We believe that throwing butryic acid at the whalers, dropping cables to foul their props, and threatening to ram them in the freezing waters of the Antarctic constitutes violence because of the potential consequences. The fact that the consequences have not been realized is irrelevant. In addition to being morally wrong, we believe the use of violence in protection of whales to be a tactical error. If there's one way to harden Japanese public opinion and ensure whaling continues, it's to use violent tactics against their fleet. It's wrong because it puts human lives at risk, and it's wrong because it makes the whalers stronger in Japan.[/quote]

Both of these sides are in the wrong here. I'm on the whalers side. Imagine this - You're doing what your family has done for generations. You're on your boat killing whales for a living. Then some eco-terrorists board your ship all pissed and trying to kill you. And then, they try to arrest you. They also try ramming ships into you, to SINK you.

[QUOTE=TestECull;33888696]Doesn't matter. They're eco-terrorists, simple as that. I'm not debating the morality on whaling in either direction, personally, I hold no opinion on that. I just go by what the law says here. What I'm against is vigilantes that think they have authority over people that don't even live in their nation and are willing to ram vessels and risk everyone's safety to do something that's illegal. What they're doing, if it was done to any other sea-faring industry, would be considered piracy. Think about it, if they were ramming container ships full of Hummer parts because hummers use more fuel and put out more CO2 this lot would have been jailed and booked on piracy charges by now. If they were going after oil rigs they'd have the USS Nimitz breathing down their neck within the hour. Going after a crab boat? Coast guard helis would surround them faster than they can tweet "Oh fuck". We'd never hear of them again. However, since it's a whaling operation, everyone's conveniently forgetting that because "OMG Whales!", even though their actions are no less illegal than they would be carried out against any other commercial navy with an environmental impact. Honestly, I don't give a shit why they're attacking unarmed civilians, what they're doing is wrong and should be stopped. Let law enforcement do their job. Should the Nisshin Maru be scrapped? Should that outfit be punished? Law says so. Should civilians be the ones to do it? No, that's what maritime police are for.[/QUOTE] Thing is most western states take pretty strong care in deterrent illegal fishing and often hunt illegal fishers over half the globe. For the record obstructing a ship on open sea (standard sea shephard tactic) is not illegal. [QUOTE=devotchkade;33887580]Your argument is bordering on the lines of, "Well, it's illegal what they're doing, so...." Except, um, laws can be wrong sometimes. They're not vigilantes because they're not seeking to punish the whalers for reasons of retribution, they're trying to stop what they see as illegal, immoral, and environmentally devastating behaviour that no-one else is stopping.[/QUOTE] To mention the majority of what Sea Shephard dies these past few years is legal.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;33899527]For the record obstructing a ship on open sea (standard sea shephard tactic) is not illegal.[/QUOTE] I don't think if that's all they were doing anyone would have a problem, since the people who are defending the whalers are defending their right to do as they wish within the confines of the law. The problem is when Sea Shepherd is violating international law to do so, like when they directly attack other ships. That's what I personally take issue with.

[QUOTE=catbarf;33899781]I don't think if that's all they were doing anyone would have a problem, since the people who are defending the whalers are defending their right to do as they wish within the confines of the law. The problem is when Sea Shepherd is violating international law to do so, like when they directly attack other ships. That's what I personally take issue with.[/QUOTE] It's not like the Japanese whalers stick to the law either. They've been known to have hunted in Australian waters where it's highly illegal which I personally think is complete bullshit.

[QUOTE=DarkCisco;33899418]Both of these sides are in the wrong here. I'm on the whalers side. Imagine this - You're doing what your family has done for generations. You're on your boat killing whales for a living. Then some eco-terrorists board your ship all pissed and trying to kill you. And then, they try to arrest you. They also try ramming ships into you, to SINK you.[/QUOTE] Any time Sea Shepherd has boarded a ship (which [i]is[/i] illegal) they have been peaceful. They have never boarded with hostilities. Even when Bethune boarded with the citizens arrest paper, on the way back to Japan he got to know some of the whalers quite well and became friends to some of them. People form both sides said the other was friendlier than they expected. The whalers are basically told Sea Shepherd are terrorists out to kill them like Al Qaeda. Sea Shepherds generally think the whalers are heartless beings.

Bomb 'em

[QUOTE=MuTAnT;33888158]How can whales not be considered intelligent? I don't really think you can classify humans as the only "intelligent" species on the planet just because we're pretty good with our thumbs.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying whales aren't intelligent. Pigs are also very intelligent, doesn't stop people from slaughtering thousands of them every day. And the Japanese primarily hunt pilot whales, which are not considered endangered. Banning the hunting of whales just because they are whales is irrational. I know I have the unpopular opinion on whaling, but I don't understand why there is such a big difference between hunting whales and slaughtering cattle. Actually, I was mistaken, Japanese whalers hunt Minke whales, which are even more abundant.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;33888991]I'm no professional, but I don't think pretending to be a submarine commander in a plane will work.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://rookery.s3.amazonaws.com/778500/778544_dee3_625x1000.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=gamefreek76;33927912]I'm not saying whales aren't intelligent. Pigs are also very intelligent, doesn't stop people from slaughtering thousands of them every day. And the Japanese primarily hunt pilot whales, which are not considered endangered. Banning the hunting of whales just because they are whales is irrational. I know I have the unpopular opinion on whaling, but I don't understand why there is such a big difference between hunting whales and slaughtering cattle. Actually, I was mistaken, Japanese whalers hunt Minke whales, which are even more abundant.[/QUOTE] Hunting whales has been illegal since 1986. The IWC year after year criticizes Japan for not meeting the standards that the Scientific Whaling thing was suppose to be. The idea was to allow countries to do RESEARCH on whales, only using lethal methods when there was no non-lethal method known. What Japan (and Norway, and Iceland, but not nearly as much) has been doing is a blatant violation of the 1986 whaling moratorium. If they don't want to be a part of it, they can leave the IWC. [editline]27th December 2011[/editline] And I've never heard of the United States or any other country using 30,000,000 dollars that was donated to them [i]specifically[/i] for disaster relief to subsidize the Pig industry.

Ok, but that still doesn't explain why whaling should be illegal? Just because they are cute?

[QUOTE=gamefreek76;33928486]Ok, but that still doesn't explain why whaling should be illegal? Just because they are cute?[/QUOTE] As far as I am aware they are: 1. A lot more intelligent than pigs, and are killed in a much MUCH more inhumane way. being dragged up the back of a ship and killed with exploding harpoons with deaths lasting over an hour irrc? 2. Whaling was never some great Japanese tradition as far as I am aware, and only became widely done after food shortages caused by world war 2. 3. It's illegal, unnecessary and from what I know a lot of the meat goes to waste anyway. My biggest problem with it though is the inhumane killing of an intelligent animal, if you can't do it humanely then just don't do it.

[QUOTE=gamefreek76;33928486]Ok, but that still doesn't explain why whaling should be illegal? Just because they are cute?[/QUOTE] The 1986 moratorium was put in place as a temporary ban on whaling because populations were extremely low. Because there is no real economic reason to whale anymore, no one wants to do it except for Japan, Norway, and Iceland, so each time it's brought up they lengthen the ban. Another reason why whaling cannot be compared to industrial farming is the growth rates of the populations. With farming the population is controlled and constant depending on demand. With any kind of fishing, you are not ranching, you are hunting. Therefore quotas must not reflect demand but the health of the population. If the Moratorium was never put in place, it's safe to say there would be multiple species of whales that would have gone extinct specifically because of human interaction. Nearly every species of whale suffered from the mass-whaling era including minke. I guess the only reason Minke still have a relatively high population is because the bigger whales like Blues, Humpbacks, Sperms, and Fin Whales were a lot more profitable and economically viable. Whaling completely destroyed most of the populations. There are only 10,000 give or take blue whales left throughout the whole ocean.(and thats after breeding for 20 years without being slaughtered en-mass) Minke would have faced the same fate after the bigger ones collapsed. Hell, Japan still puts Fin and Humpback on their Quotas. Iceland hunts Fin Whales too. TL;DR, The only way to regulate whaling back to health from what we did to whales over the past century or so, was to completely ban it except for extremely small research quotas.

[QUOTE=gamefreek76;33928486]Ok, but that still doesn't explain why whaling should be illegal? Just because they are cute?[/QUOTE] Well you know, just a century ago we almost driven them to extinction. Look at the buffalo.

[QUOTE=catbarf;33898442] Nor did I mention that the founder and leader of Sea Shepherd is currently wanted by Interpol for various crimes. [b]Paul Watson is wanted by Interpol on orders from Japan. He has yet to be arrested for it despite having numerous opportunities to do so.[/b] Or that the 'Australian Antarctic Territory' is only recognized as a legitimate maritime claim by 4 out of 194 countries- and Japan isn't one of the four. [b]There's also the Whale Sanctuary that was created by the IWC lets not forget.[/b] Or how Sea Shepherd illegally interferes in the 100% legal seal hunts in Canada and elsewhere, which a couple years ago led to several members being arrested by Canadian police. [b]They were "arrested for bringing their vessel to within one-half nautical mile of seal hunters" and "convicted of endangering lives by bringing the Farley Mowat to within one-half nautical mile from sealing activities without an official permit." Hardly violent. Though they did have a scuffle with a Canadian Ice Breaker when it pulled in front of them...[/b] Basically it's a lot less black-and-white than the portrayal of 'evil Japanese whalers hunting endangered animals using a loophole to evade the law, while volunteer vigilantes non-violently oppose their industry'.[b]No one ever said Minke whales were endangered[/b] Sea Shepherd has a colorful history of sinking ships, mostly through ramming, occasionally with the use of limpet mines and improvised weapons, and sometimes with intentional scuttling onboard. [b]They have sank a few ships in their past, yes. However, being arrested and convicted are two different things. Carl Sagan was once arrested for protesting. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Shepherd_Conservation_Society_operations[/url] Search through there and tell me how many times a Sea Shepherd member was convicted of a crime.[/b] Stranding sailors in freezing water by destroying their ship is far more harmful than rancid butter. [b]Sea Shepherd has never attempted to harm a human being in their entire history. A few years ago a Whaler went overboard and the whaling fleet went into a search pattern. Sea Shepherd offered to call truce so to speak and help them search. The Whalers denied the request and the whaler was never found. Just last year they provided medical attention to fishermen in Libya when they were there to monitor fishing in Libya.[/b] In fact, Paul Watson, the founder of Sea Shepherd, was expelled from the leadership of Greenpeace because his methods were too violent and outright illegal. Greenpeace, an organization [b]dedicated to non-violence[/b], has had very public disagreements more than once with Sea Shepherd over their methods. I'm just going to leave this quote from Greenpeace's website because it speaks for itself: [b]Likewise, I'll leave these pictures of Greenpeace that speak for themselves:[/b] [img]http://i.imgur.com/XYa3y.jpg[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/pVQWC.jpg[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/EbDYe.jpg[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/Ef46A.jpg[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/JPj6u.jpg[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/aaIh7.jpg[/img][img]http://i.imgur.com/x6dwi.jpg[/img] Greenpeace is just as wreak less. [/QUOTE] Just noticed that post. Had to inquire.

Aww yeah, more Whale Wars! :smile:

[QUOTE=OvB;33900688]Any time Sea Shepherd has boarded a ship (which [i]is[/i] illegal) they have been peaceful. They have never boarded with hostilities. Even when Bethune boarded with the citizens arrest paper, on the way back to Japan he got to know some of the whalers quite well and became friends to some of them. People form both sides said the other was friendlier than they expected. The whalers are basically told Sea Shepherd are terrorists out to kill them like Al Qaeda. Sea Shepherds generally think the whalers are heartless beings.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Hvalur_sinkings[/url] mmhmm. Peaceful my ass.

I thought it was the whaling ships hunting whales with drones, dissapointed.

[QUOTE=DarkCisco;33929869][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Hvalur_sinkings[/url] mmhmm. Peaceful my ass.[/QUOTE] The 1986 Hvalur sinkings occurred in Iceland's Reykjavík harbour in November 1986, when anti-whaling activists from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society sank two [b]unoccupied[/b] whaling vessels, Hvalur 6 and Hvalur 7, and sabotaged a whale processing station in Hvalfjörður. [b]No one was injured in the incident.[/b]

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33933542]The 1986 Hvalur sinkings occurred in Iceland's Reykjavík harbour in November 1986, when anti-whaling activists from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society sank two [b]unoccupied[/b] whaling vessels, Hvalur 6 and Hvalur 7, and sabotaged a whale processing station in Hvalfjörður. [b]No one was injured in the incident.[/b][/QUOTE] Doesn't matter. So a terrorist attack is okay when no one dies?