 |
[ login or create an account ]
|
|
[ login or create an account ]
|
Give it up Jap whaling dudes! So you sunk a boat after you zapped the crew with an evil noise machine? Problem is that more boats will come and plenty of volunteers to crew them.
The confrontation is heating up down there in the Southern Ocean and with both sides getting pig headed over the issue the pressure just keeps ramping up. Something has got to give. The sinking of the Ady Gil has upped the stakes. If a solution isn't found soon it won't just be the whales that are dying down there.
The battle lines are so black and white that for the issue to be resolved someone is going to have to back down. The Japanese are not culturally inclined to back down on anything where 'face' may be lost. Their whalers have bought votes on the International Whaling Commission through aid and have protected their whaling fleet with an increasing sophistication that is only a notch or two below hostile military action.
But if the Japanese whaling industry thinks that the fanatical single minded determination that has been utilized in the past by their military and more recently their industries is an asset then sorry chaps you are wrong. All that you have done is lock yourselves into a war you cannot win. Sound familiar? Yes well the last war cost millions of lives and was one you were never going to win right from the start. This new war over whales won't cost many lives but it will cost you billions of Yen.
Why are you going to lose? Because if we had to pick an opponent for you that could match your single minded fanaticism them the international environmental movement would be on most peoples shortlist.
What is Japan going to do next? Start killing people who are protesting over the killing of whales? Every act of aggression by the whalers adds to the ranks and the funds of organisations like Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace. Maybe if the whalers didn't have so many scientists tied up scientifically glancing at dead whales before they are sold in supermarkets then they might have worked this one out for themselves.
In years gone by countries could exercise a large degree of control over their subjects. Using propaganda they could even manipulate the way they thought and responded.
Those days are gone now. With the internet, if ordinary citizens from any country have a cause then they can quickly mobilize likeminded people and money from all over the world.
Any movement without borders and the restraint of a National Government is hard to stop. The environmental movement is driven by a small group of hardened professionals backed up by an ever increasing army of dedicated volunteers and supporters. How will you stop them Japan? The battle in the Southern Ocean is not going to be won by you. You can't beat an enemy that you cannot nail down. Look at the United States and its battle against Al Qaeda. Most of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi Arabian, but the Saudi nation faced no action from America. Who will you punish for supporting the protesters and how will you do it?
Don't pin your hopes on the rumoured backroom deal you've done at the International Whaling Commission that will still see you carry on killing whales. The environmental movement is not bound by any such compromise laden treaty.
The price of preserving a fading cultural culinary tradition will at best be an international consumer backlash against Japan. At worst it will be the loss of human lives. Whatever ends up happening down there in the Southern Ocean it will - thanks to technology - be splashed across the world's media and internet.
The ordinary people of the Earth will decide who wins. Not Governments, not treaties, not the IWC or the ICR. So give it up now please or that red sun in the middle of your flag will become a 'bulls eye' target for every pissed off whale lover on the planet who will close their wallet to you. How much will it cost you? I don't know best get your scientists to work on that one, if you can spare any.
Popular competitions and giveaways from Gimme.co.nz: NZ's People Powered Guide to Free Stuff. Links will open on Gimme.
Health Tips, Recommended Movies, Recommended Books, Recommended Places.
Links will open on recommended.co.nz.
All articles and comments on Voxy.co.nz have been submitted by our community of users. Please notify us through our contact form if you believe an item on this site breaches our community guidelines.
Voxy: Your Voice - Uncensored
Got Something to Say But No One’s Listening?
Message to Spread? – Distribute News
Product to Promote? – Run a Promotion
We Can Help You Spread The Word.
Comments
First, before anything, the
First, before anything, the use of the word Jap is derogatory. If you want to show any sort of valid commentary, vulgarity show's little argumentative value.
Second, Japan is not on a war against anyone. All they are doing is finding a way to hunt whales. That's it. Not a mission to punish those who are anti-whaling or anything. They use a loophole of research to hunt whale which is not only
No i am not supporting Japan in this issue. Actually I'm not on either side because both sides fail to show any maturity on the issue. I do not support the constant accusatory tone taken by the environmental groups against the country. It is taken to the proportion of racism, accusation of sinking of a ship which so far is unfounded. Japan could better explain itself, but so far, commentators like you and the many so-called environmentalists who so far show nothing but whining and derogatory comments, making your own argument weak and leaving Japan having to do nothing. Because the everyday person just sees the environmentalists who keep this up and don't want to even listen to the valid comments.
Write a decent post on the actual facts, not the blown up media stunt to win air time, and people will listen.
Thanks for commenting
Thanks for commenting Anonymous. Not sure how the word Jap is derogatory any more than Brit, Yank, Ruskie or for that matter anon. It is an abbreviation. I am against Whaling but that doesn't make me an extremist. I am not against Japan, but against one small section of their business community who annoy me with their hypocrisy over the 'science' loop hole. It is up to them if they exploit that loop hole or not, but I would rather they were open and didn't insult our intelligence by claiming otherwise.
I agree with you that the Japanese whaling industry could explain itself better. Part of the problem with the whole whaling issue is that we have been drowned in facts. Both sides of the confrontation have wheeled out ocean loads of facts to support their pre-conceived stances. What I have tried to do on this issue is look to where this whole thing is heading and make a judgement on what the outcome will be. As a historian I have looked at the facts but rather than regurgitate them in bulk I prefer to mould them into an easy to understand format. Please do not take my more satirical tone as researchless stupidity. I have done my homework, I just choose not to present it all - rather to offer my summation in simple terms
I am happy to listen to any 'valid comments' you would like to add to the pro/anti whaling argument. Only through open discussion - free from propaganda- will we get anywhere.
1. The Japanese are whaling
1. The Japanese are whaling in violation of the International Whaling Commission's global moratorium on commercial whaling. The IWC scientific committee does not recognize the research that the Japanese are using as an excuse.
2. The Japanese are killing whales in the internationally recognised Southern Ocean Sanctuary for whales.
3. The Japanese are killing whales unlawfully in the Australian Antarctic Territory (Australian Law - Federal Court judgement January 2008 under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999)
4. The Japanese are targeting fin whales and humpback whales. One is listed as an endangered species and the other listed as a threatened species. This is a violation of CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, of which both Japan and Australia are signatories.
5. The Japanese are in violation of IWC regulation 19. (a) The IWC regulations in the Schedule to the Convention forbid the use of factory ships to process any protected stock: 19. (a) It is forbidden to use a factory ship or a land station for the purpose of treating any whales which are classified as Protection Stocks in paragraph 10. Paragraph 10(c) provides a definition of Protection Stocks and states that Protection Stocks are listed in the Tables of the Schedule. Table 1 lists all the baleen whales, including minke, fin and humpback whales and states that all of them are Protection Stocks.
6. The IWC regulations specifically ban the use of factory ships to processy any whales except minke whales: Paragraph 10(d) provides: "(d) Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10 there shall be a moratorium on the taking, killing or treating of whales, except minke whales, by factory ships or whale catchers attached to factory ships. This moratorium applies to sperm whales, killer whales and baleen whales, except minke whales."
7. the presence of military/ security forces breaches the Antarctic treaty
8. the whaling fleet regularly refuels in the treaty zone below 60 degrees south in breach of the Antarctic treaty. In October 2008 the whaling fleet's refueling and cargo vessel, Oriental Bluebird, was deflagged following a ruling by Panamian Authorities. The maximum fine of 10,000 Balboas (US$10,000) was imposed on the owners of the ship, Hiyo Shipping Co. Ltd, in Japan who on October 8th removed its Panamanian registration and flag. Japan has ratified an international treaty which seeks to end the practice of 're-flagging' vessels in order to circumvent international environmental law.
9. the Whaling fleet fails to submit Environmental Management Plans in case of a maritime disaster in the Treaty zone which breaches the Antarctic treaty. The Nisshin Maru factory ship caught fire in 2007 losing all power including to its engines. One crew member died. An environmental disaster was threatened, but did not eventuate.
How many different places
How many different places are you going to copy and paste this same pack of lies?
You could at least switch it around a little so it isn't so obvious.
1. No and No
2. Yes, and it is completely legal
3. No, the Federal Court judge even said his ruling has no effect
4. Yes, No, CITES only applies to trade, that is where the 'T' come from, also Japan has reservations to the listing of fin and humback whales
5. No, IWC Article VIII trumps all other IWC Articles
6. No, IWC Article VIII trumps all other IWC Articles
7. No
8. refueling is not a breach of the ATS
9. No, the ATS requires the government involved to assess the environmental impact
Wow, so suddenly the
Wow, so suddenly the Japanese are engaged in a "war" because some publicity seeking morons decide to recklessly maneuver their plastic boat dangerously close to a mere surveillance vessel that is not actually catching any whales, and eventually get themselves nailed? Sorry, but that is a pretty fanatical jump of logic.
Just take a look at what is happening in Australia. There is a proposal to "ban the supporting of whaling". That's right, to make supporting whaling ILLEGAL. Freedom of belief or opinion, except when whaling is concerned!? What is going on in Australia and New Zealand that could bring about such a fascist action?
The Japanese have every right to find out about the whereabouts of dangerous morons like Sea Shepherd, who have been repeatedly condemned by the IWC for their actions in past years.
But now the fascists in Australia want to ban the Japanese from obtaining such information (for everyone's safety) in a safe and legal way, because... mmm, they will be able to avoid the dangerous freaks from Sea Shepherd? Yep, sure we had better ban that!
There is only one side here that is trying to start a war, and it's the nut cases in Australia and New Zealand that are opposed to whaling. Wake up, whaling has been going on for hundreds of years, and in Japan's case they've been catching whales in the Antarctic with the research loophole since the 1980's. Australians and New Zealanders today in 2010 are being manipulated into strong responses towards this, and for what reason? Whales are "too special" to be eaten!?
I guess war could be
I guess war could be described as the unrestrained attempt to impose ones will upon another and visa versa. It is not hard to argue that Sea Shepherd is the aggressor in the latest skirmish, but they would argue that they are provoked by the actions of the whalers. Either way it is not business and it is not healthy debate, it is just mutual aggression that in one sense is war.
I'm sure Sea Shepherd would
I'm sure Sea Shepherd would say that they are being provoked by the actions of the whalers (e.g. doing what whalers do and kill whales).
I am however not at all sure that a person being a whaler is sufficient enough reason to go and out be aggressive towards them. If it was, then I supposed New Zealand slaughterhouse workers could be next.
As such, I disagree strongly that there is "mutual aggression". There is aggression from Sea Shepherd towards people doing something that they don't like, and those people trying to protect themselves from Sea Shepherd. I think a great many people who are not in favour of whaling are feeling quite alienated by what Sea Shepherd are doing. I certainly don't think all anti-whaling people support Sea Shepherd.
The Sea Shepherd issue is a
The Sea Shepherd issue is a tricky one. A lot of people opposed to whaling do not agree with all their methods, yet the overall goal is still the same to stop whaling. This shared goal means that there is some silent grudging respect for them, even if it is not the way that a lot of us would go about it.
You are a dingbat. Spread
You are a dingbat. Spread your propaganda elsewhere.
wow so suddenly: Good useful
wow so suddenly: Good useful comment. Post your vile comments somewhere else and go away - scum bag. You work for the ICR yeah?
"Their whalers have ...
"Their whalers have ... protected their whaling fleet with an increasing sophistication that is only a notch or two below hostile military action."
Protecting oneself against attacks is not a "hostile" action.
"Start killing people who are protesting over the killing of whales?"
I think it's ridiculous to suggest the Japanese would start killing people for protesting against whaling. However, you should not that the Sea Shepherd organization is at pains to point out that they are not a protest group. They regard themselves as an enforcement organization.
Perhaps it is easier for you to justify what appears to be your implicit support for their actions (to "save whales") by ignoring the fact that they themselves claim not to be a bunch of protesters.
"The price of preserving a fading cultural culinary tradition will at best be an international consumer backlash against Japan."
Your threat is just well repeated hyperbole. An international consumer backlash has never eventuated because of whales despite this issue running for the past 3 decades. On the other hand Toyota sales appear to have been hit recently due to quality issues with their cars.
"At worst it will be the loss of human lives."
If Sea Shepherd people want to martyr themselves there is not much anyone else can do about it. The New Zealand Foreign Minister has noted as much.
Cheers Malcolm. Thanks for
Cheers Malcolm. Thanks for your input. It is nice to have a name with a comment. I am not offering whole hearted support for Sea Shepherd. I am much more sympathetic toward the actions of Greenpeace who make their point with more restraint.
Hi Dave, Firstly, please
Hi Dave,
Firstly, please remove your head from between your buttocks.
Secondly, settle down and bring your hormones into check.
Whales are animals and are fit to be killed provided they are not endangered. And lo and behold! The minke whale (and arguably the humpback) is not endangered. Therefore, it is open seasons.
Sea Shepherd only continues to exist as Japan allows it to. Any normal nation would have offered a military solution to the ongoing piracy and terrorism and sent the Sea Shepherd criminals to the bottom of the ocean. When Japan's patience runs out, she will do likewise.
Perhaps you could find a real environmental issue to support instead of belating on about your sentimental attachment to these abundant creatures?
Hi Kimitake good to hear
Hi Kimitake good to hear from you. Let me assure you that I am far too old to get my head anywhere near my buttocks.
Whales are mammals like we are as opposed to cold blooded fish. I have an attachment to them because they are so big and unique. I believe we should err on the side of caution in making sure they survive. I make no apology for that. To many of the worlds big creatures have been driven into distinction. Lets keep what we have got left.
Yep, that argument is the
Yep, that argument is the one we need to convince the Japanese. Why hasn't anyone thought of that brilliant argument already?
Oops above reply should read
Oops above reply should read "driven to extinction". I guess thats what happens when I am up late on the net when I should be sleeping.
The term Jap comes across as
The term Jap comes across as an insult primarily because of its history. For example as a Chinese-American, the term Ch**k is derogatory to me. While it seems like a simple shortening, its usage can be traced to American reaction after pearl harbor which did provoke strong racist reactions in America. Now that being said everywhere is different. Me as an American, I see this term as offensive. To people from other countries this may differ. Not being sure of your upbringing, I won't make any comments to that fact.
Hello again anonymous. Yes,
Hello again anonymous. Yes, you make a good point that in the context of American history around the time of the Second World War it was a racist term. In New Zealand where I am from it is not considered an insulting term. I apologise for any offence and will choose my words more carefully next time.
For clarification I am not
For clarification I am not the same anonymous as above. My apologies for the confusion.
No worries there are lots of
No worries there are lots of anonymous's in the phone book. Hard to tell them apart. Not that I am intending to be derogatory in any way towards anonymous's. Some of my best friends are anonymous.
Great word "Jap' or better
Great word "Jap' or better still "Jappa"...conjures up all sorts of history that was equally punctuated with a pollution apparently known as "yellow peril arrogance" like Jappa tailpipe crap.
Greenpeace, go for it guys....Best solution, sink the bastards as a "scientific experiment" Ahem....
Then force the gutless governments to step in and finally do something instead of talking about it...YEAH RIGHT...Can you imagine it ???
BG
The perfect post for people
The perfect post for people to get on here and post some false indignation at grammar and so forth...in the end all they are doing is supporting japans illegal and immoral activities in the southern ocean. How many are on the payroll of Glen Inwood and co?
Fully agree with you that japan cannot win this whale war. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a COMPLETE AND UTTER fool. I agree that the japs wont like backing down, after all it took 2 A bombs before they even considered backing down from their aggression in 1942.
Good to see that supporting the illegal whaling activities of the Japanese through spying etc ( note Glen Inwoods team!) is soon to be made ilegal.
Good to hear you are still
Good to hear you are still out there Imforthewhales. I guess a lot of people don't understand the depth of feeling about whaling in countries like Australia and New Zealand. It is easy to see why Sea Shepherd gets so much support in these countries - even veiled support from their governments. having a country from way up in the northern hemisphere come down here and kill whales in the waters around us does not sit right with most of us
Well stated, chap. Most
Well stated, chap.
Most (maybe all) of the negative responses posted here are part of the Japanese whale meat industry paid PR response program. The Japanese are slaughtering thousands of whales, not for subsistence, but for the rarefied delicacy of whale sashimi and the like. Yet, the Japanese slaughterers LIE to the world and cynically claim they need to kill whales to study them. They killed almost 2000 whales for each peer-reviewed paper they have produced. And none of their research is of any objective importance, unless you consider the study of the best "grenades" to kill whales an important scientific endeavor. Honest, that is one of their "studies." We humans ought to be better than having to kill some of the most unique and endangered species in the world for an hors d'oeuvre. And to the whale meat attack machine: this is not a racial or xenophobic attitude. It is stirred by the arrogance and blind aggression of an industry based on greed that fills the Southern Ocean with innocent blood of peaceful and objectively beautiful creatures. So don't be so quick to think this is about the Japanese. It is about the whales, and the murderous factory ship owners that would kill them all if they could.
It is time to end the needless slaughter. Go back to Japan and start fixing your Toyota gas pedals instead.
I guess many of us here in
I guess many of us here in New Zealand get sensitive about the whaling in the Southern Ocean because it is in our backyard. We are not anti Japanese it just happens that it is the Japanese whalers that are doing it. Just like the French were testing nuclear weapons for years down our way. When bad things are happening close to home being a spectator is not always an option. Like the nuclear testing it took decades of protest to force a change. The whaling issue will be just the same.
New Zealand and Australia
New Zealand and Australia have no greater claim to the international waters of the Southern Ocean than anyone else does.
Yeah it is ignored by an
Yeah it is ignored by an arrogant and selfish Japan. its self interests are #1.
It is ignored by ever
It is ignored by ever country in the world except Australia, Norway, France and the United Kingdom. So evrybody except those four are arrogant and selfish with their self interests #1? Or is it that Australia is arrogant and selflish with their interests #1? World opinion would say the latter.
Your Back! You gave up the
Your Back!
You gave up the last time we were having a discussion. But I see you are still telling the same lies your where then. The Japanese have published 104 peer reviewed papers, so if you are right that make 208,000 whales killed, that is over 8500 a year! I think your numbers are off by a little. Yes, they studied the grenades that are used to try and improve them to minimize the time to death and thus the suffering, and the IWC asked them to assists the Norwegians in this endeavor. Or would you rather they still use solid metal barbed harpoons that can takes hours or even days to kill the whale? Minke whales still aren't endangered and they never have been. Whale meat is not a rarefied delicacy, it is like any other meat source sold in Japan and it's cost is similar to beef, chicken, pork or tuna. I see you say 'objectively' beautiful, well sorry to inform you of the truth but not everybody agrees with you, the term you should have used is subjectively.
No, there are only about 28
No, there are only about 28 papers that can be called "peer reviewed." The rest are not. Most aren't even translated into anything a non-Japanese scientist could read. But what is your point, anyway? Either YOU guys are killing for important scientific research (as YOU claim) OR you are killing to eat whale meat (which YOU also claim). Why the cynical lies that you are doing research at all? And how much is the whale meat industry paying you to scan the Internet for critical comments Palmer San? Look, no one needs to eat whales. And if YOU really want to hunt them and spill their blood, why not do it in your own territorial waters. Get out of the protected Southern Ocean!
I,m with World Lawyer on
I,m with World Lawyer on this one. I wrote must last article because of the charade of 'scientific' research that saw dozens of Minke whales killed. This time around I am only making the observation that with the ramping up of tentions and no one backing down that Japan now finds itself in a war that it cannot win. It just doesn't realise it. I have now beef (or whale) with the Japanese people, just their whaling industry.
Well your link from 2006
Well your link from 2006 says 55 peer reviewed papers while you say today it is 28. So 27 papers disappeared? And the 3 scientists they had review the paper in 2006 didn't seem to complain about not being able to read them, so it appears that at that time they were translated into something non-Japanese.
"Look, no one needs to eat whales." Well no one needs to eat pomegranates, is that a reason to stop harvesting them?
"Get out of the protected Southern Ocean!" Protected by what or who? The Australian claim is not allowed by the ATS and New Zealand doesn't make a claim. The IWC sanctuary specifically exempts research whaling. And the UN has made clear numerous times that international waters are open to anyone who wants to use them, as long as it doesn't violate any other UN or international agreement, which the Japanese whaling doesn't.
Not liking whaling and lying about the facts isn't going to change them. The Japanese whaling program is legal.
The ad hominem attacks are really getting old; they also indicate that you know you don't have facts on your side so you decide to shot the messenger instead. And as I told you before, if you know how I can get someone to pay for posting here please let me know because I can always use some extra money. I mean currently the only thing I get out of it is seeing you look ignorant. And as I also said before, I hope you aren't really a lawyer and if you are I feel sorry for you clients because obvious couldn't argue your way out of a paper bag.
Good thing you don't engage
Good thing you don't engage in ad hominem attacks yourself. I have reviewed stacks of so-called "research papers" put out as propaganda by the Japanese Whale Meat industry. I was a biologist before I was a lawyer, so unlike you who sits around in your pajamas defending the brutal slaughter of whales, I am actually qualified to evaluate what the whalers cynically call "research." Real peer review involves making research available to the general scientific community, not your own scientists. Almost none of the so-called research papers are widely distributed for comment and criticism. Few are translated into English, French or German (or any other language, for that matter). It is all a smoke screen for hunting, killing and selling whale flesh. You can't have it both ways. Either you are doing this for research, in which case you do not need to kill hundreds or thousands of whales a year, or you are hunting for food in which case you are violating international treaties. Douche bag. How's that for ad hominem?
I am not sure who besides
I am not sure who besides the Japanese and their friends in Norway and Iceland are strongly interested in the type of research that they are conducting.
I do not think policy in New Zealand and Australia even permits scientists to consider whales in a resource management context anymore.
The reality is that the Japanese are doing research.
This is just research that doesn't serve the needs of anyone except the Japanese and other potential whaling nations.
So much time is wasted talking about the research, but the research is not the issue. The issue is that whales are food to some people and needing to be saved to others.
I agree, there is no real
I agree, there is no real research going on. So called "research" is a smoke screen for the Japanese true motive of slaughtering and selling whale meat. But whether there is real research going on IS an issue. Because, if there is no real research, then this mass slaughter is willful violation of the International whaling treaty.
Fri, 05/02/2010 - 05:13 —
Fri, 05/02/2010 - 05:13 — World Lawyer (not verified)
"They killed almost 2000 whales for each peer-reviewed paper they have produced."
"...unless you consider the study of the best "grenades" to kill whales an important scientific endeavor."
So you seem to agree that some research is being done and the link you provided agreed that some research is being done. Just because you don't think it is needed research doesn't somehow make it no longer research.
As an example, here is a research on cockroaches’ ability to learn at different times of the day. "A new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that while cockroaches were able to pick up and remember lessons taught in the evenings, they might as well have stayed in bed during the morning hours." http://www.livescience.com/animals/070930_cockroaches_learning.html
To me that is useless research. But somebody thought otherwise and somebody was willing to pay them to study it.
So are the Japanese doing research? Yes.
Do you think it is worthwhile research? No.
Is it still research? Yes.
So are the Japanese violating the IWC treaty? No.
The difference between the
The difference between the cockroach research you cite, my little pathetic friend, and the Japanese whale slaughter research is the scientists actually studying cockroaches aren't doing it to kill and sell the cockroaches for meat and profit. The Japanese mass whale slaughter is absolutely, objectively unnecessary to do valid scientific research. Any defense of the slaughter of thousands of whales and the sale of their flesh as high-priced delicacy food on the grounds that it is necessary to carry out research is a cynical, bald-faced lie of the greatest proportions. We all know the so-called research by the Japanese whale meat industry is only an attempt to use a loophole in the treaty. This is about greed and death, not about science.
In YOUR opinion it is not
In YOUR opinion it is not valid research. But since YOU are not world emperor, just world lawyer, YOUR opinion doesn't hold more weight than the opinion of anyone else.
And even if it is a loophole, which I don't agree with, as a lawyer I would expect you to be more knowledgeable about loopholes and their effects.
Loophole - A technicality that allows a person or business to avoid the scope of a law without directly violating the law.
So if it is a loophole it is still legal. YOUR opinion, morals and ethics may disagree with it, but that doesn't change the fact. It is legal and until the treaty is changed it will remain legal. Which means Japan will continue to legally whale in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary.
Whining about it on the internet will not change anything. Lying about it on the internet will not change anything. Harassing the whalers while they are doing their jobs will not change anything, at least not in the way you want. The only thing that will change it is to change the opinions of the majority of the Japanese people, because even if the IWC charter is changed to remove research whaling the Japanese can just leave the IWC and keep legally whaling, unless and until the Japanese people decide to stop.
While the "validity" of the
While the "validity" of the so-called Japanese "research" may be subject to debate, the fact that the minimal research done by the Japanese whale meat industry does not justify the slaughter of hundreds or thousands of whales every year is not subject to debate. The Japanese whale slaughter industry sets its own quotas based not on what it might need to determine what whales are eating but on what the market for whale meat for consumption is. On the one hand they argue that they are only doing research, on the other hand they argue they have a cultural imperative to eat whale meat, and anyone who disagrees is a racist. This is beyond disingenuous.
I commend the following to your reading: http://tinyurl.com/lrlqqh
And see: http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1657789.htm:
EXCERPT :
"Prof Archer: . . . And from that whole pile of papers we’ve got a total of one, two, three, four papers that can be said to be peer reviewed, that have some relevance to developing or managing a whaling industry and also would require lethal sampling of whales to get that information. Just four papers.
Nick Gales: So with the eighteen year program and sixty eight hundred whales divided by four papers - that means 1700 whales killed for each one of those four papers.
Mike Archer: Extremely depressing. Nick Gales: It wouldn’t pass an ethics committee. Archer: No it would not.
Dr Jonica Newby: So - the verdict - science or smokescreen?
Mike: I have to say, having seen it all it’s more like a smokescreen than science.
"The Japanese whale
"The Japanese whale slaughter industry sets its own quotas based not on what it might need to determine what whales are eating but on what the market for whale meat for consumption is." Then why are the Japanese importing whale meat from Iceland? If they set their quota based on how much of a market there is then they shouldn't have to import any, they can just raise their quota.
Now I have asked you to explain a number of things that you have lied about, yet you refuse. Why is that?
"Then why are the Japanese
"Then why are the Japanese importing whale meat from Iceland?"
Simple: Because of the great and brave work of the Sea Shepherd crews! They are cutting into the Japanese whale meet industry's slaughter! If the the Sea Shepherds continue to be as effective as they have been, it will soon become totally unprofitable for the Japanese whalers to bloody the Southern Ocean. This is admirable, direct world citizen action where governments will not take action due to other diplomatic entanglements.
Why do you think the Japanese whale murdering conglomerate has had to hire thugs to protect them? You think the Yoshin Maru comes cheap? When those creeps attempted to murder on the crew of the Ady Gil, money poured into the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. It was the stupidest thing the Japanese industrialists could do. Not only will the YM captain be prosecuted, but the whaling fleet will now be confronted with more and better direct action ships and volunteers. Maybe the Japanese whale meat industry should switch to tofu! Ha.
"They are cutting into the
"They are cutting into the Japanese whale meet industry's slaughter!"
But the Japanese whalers have increased their catch every year since 2002 and now even with a bigger catch they are still importing even more. I guess the demand for whale meat in Japan must be increasing.
Way to go SSCS you managed to revieve a dying industry. Thanks to your efforts to bring whaling to world attention you have gotten more Japanese interested and they have tried whale meat and they like it.
Now I have asked you to explain a number of things that you have lied about, yet you refuse. Why is that?
Little dd, why do you revel
Little dd, why do you revel in the mass slaughter of innocent whales? Could it be a deep-seeded inferiority complex? Or is it the tiny paycheck the Japanese Whale Meat Industry sends you every month? In any event, you prove my point: Japanese whaling has nothing to do with "research." It is only about sushi. So, you admit Japan is in violation of international treaties? But you don't care because whale meat is just sooooo tasty. Right? Now, let's see the ol' dd back-pedal. Tell me the research is really real and it makes the killing of thousands of whales legal because, uh, well, the innocent scientists are FORCED, yeah that's it, FORCED to sell the meat because, uhh, the treaty requires it. Yeah that's it, they are forced to sell the meat. And they can't do any of the research without killing the big, evil whales because that would be too easy. And whale meat is just so tasty. Must be the heavy metals.
Little dd, why do you revel
Little dd, why do you revel in the mass slaughter of innocent whales? Could it be a deep-seeded inferiority complex? Or is it the tiny paycheck the Japanese Whale Meat Industry sends you every month? In any event, you prove my point: Japanese whaling has nothing to do with "research." It is only about sushi. So, you admit Japan is in violation of international treaties? But you don't care because whale meat is just sooooo tasty. Right? Now, let's see the ol' dd back-pedal. Tell me the research is really real and it makes the killing of thousands of whales legal because, uh, well, the innocent scientists are FORCED, yeah that's it, FORCED to sell the meat because, uhh, the treaty requires it. Yeah that's it, they are forced to sell the meat. And they can't do any of the research without killing the big, evil whales because that would be too easy. And whale meat is just so tasty. Must be the heavy metals.
You appear to have a
You appear to have a stuttering problem.
You obviously didn't read what I wrote. I never admitted that the Japanese are in violation of anything. I said the number of whales killed every year since 2002 has increased, but you know what? The quota has remained the same. They have just been taking closer to the limit of their quota.
And personally I think that Japan should leave the IWC. Then they could take as many whales as they wanted and it STILL would be legal. Wouldn't that upset a lot of people!
Now I have asked you to explain a number of things that you have lied about, yet you refuse. Why is that?
Listen Dick, I don't need to
Listen Dick, I don't need to get into the weeds on every ancillary point you raise. It makes no difference how many fake research papers one source considers "peer reviewed" versus another source. I cited at least 2 different non-scientific reports that come to different conclusions. I personally found only 4 that MIGHT be considered "peer-reviewed," although the quality is another story (pathetic excuses for a middle school science fair project). But the numbers of research reports are tiny compared with the thousands and thousands of whales that are needlessly slaughtered in the Southern Ocean. The Japanese whale meat slaughtering industry is violating international law. That is clear. But you and I arguing whether that is true or not will not resolve the issue. The world has to put the criminals on trial.
Neither of the first or
Neither of the first or second 'd' stands for Dick. But nice guess.
The Japanese are not violating any international laws or treaties. They may be using a loophole, but until they regulations are changed use of the loophole is still legal.
And if the loophole is closed the Japanese can either leave the IWC and continue whaling legally, or the can file an objection to the change to the IWC charter and continue using Article VIII to legally hunt whales.
Now I have asked you to explain a number of things that you have lied about, yet you refuse. Why is that? You try and tap dance around one of those things but still completely ignore the others.
Look Timmy, I don't need to
Look Timmy, I don't need to address every little frivolous piece of ancillary crap you throw up on your computer screen. The fact is you admit the so-called research is just a smoke screen, a loophole if you will, to allow the Japanese to kill as many whales as they want to sell for food. If that is the case, you admit that the research is not the reason they are killing the whales and they are thus in violation of IWC agreements. In addition, they are whaling in a protected wildlife sanctuary, also a violation of international law. If we assume, pro arguendo, that some of the so-called research is valid, it begs the question of why that small amount of research warrants the slaughter of thousands of whales a year. No rational scientist could defend such a mass slaughter when biopsy needles would do just as well. If you are arguing that is is okay for the Japanese whaling industry to ignore international treaties and hunt for food with wild abandon, then you are in the significant minority world-wide. In any case, I am done dealing with your tiny mind as I have to prepare for trial. Cheers.
BOYCOTT JAPANESE GOODS. DONATE TO SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY. www.seashepherd.org
Another nice guess but no my
Another nice guess but no my name isn't Timmy.
Your right you don't have to address anything I post, but by refusing to address the lies you have posted you taint everything you post.
I never admitted that the research is just a smoke screen. That is just another lie you keep posting. They are not in violation of IWC agreements.
They also are not violating international law by where they are whaling. That is just another lie by you. I am not sure which illegal sanctuary you are referring to, so I will explain why neither one actually exists. The Australia sanctuary is non-existent as a legal matter for two reasons; first the ATS prohibits any nation from expanding their claim, when the ATS was signed that included 12 miles from the Antarctic shore. Australia now tries to claim 200 miles therefore not allowed by the ATS. Second only France, Australia, Norway and New Zealand even recognize Australia’s claim so the international consensus is that Australia has no off-shore claim. The IWC sanctuary doesn't legally exist because the IWC charter requires a scientific basis for any sanctuary, there isn’t one for the Southern Ocean Sanctuary so that sanctuary doesn't legally exist, and even if it did the Japanese filed an objection to the sanctuary so by the IWC regulations it doesn't apply to Japan.
As far as how many whales are sampled, using standard sample size statistics it requires 1065 samples of a population size 670,000 (most recent estimate of Minke population) to achieve +/-3% at 95% confidence. Looks like the Japanese quota is right inline with what statistics say it should be. And even the IWC agrees that some data, such as age, can not be determined by biopsy. Age requires the whale’s ear plug which can't be done non-lethally.
Now I have asked you to explain a number of things that you have lied about, yet you refuse. Why is that?
OK world lawyer. Let's look
OK world lawyer.
Let's look at facts. You said 28 peer reviewed papers. The link you provided says 55 peer reviewed papers. Please explain?
You said almost 2000 whales per peer reviewed paper. The link you provided says 6800 whales for 55 papers which gives 124 whales per peer reviewed paper. Please explain?
Peer review does not involve making your research available to the general scientific community. It involves having some of your peers (other scientists from the same discipline) review it.
You again claim that few of the papers are translated. But the link you provide has 3 english speakers who had no problem reading the papers and the papers submitted to the IWC are all in english. Please explain?
How many thousands of research animals are killed every day? And they would be violating the international treaty if they didn't sell the remains of the whales.