OUTRAGE! Ady Gil (Earthrace) trimaran rammed and sunk by whalers!

Looks to me like he already has one......

 

This would be appropriate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beluga_class_submarine

So, when is the ADY GIL Scenario coming out for http://www.shipsim.com/home.php

 

That would be the way to handle things...until the Maru starts lobbing depth charges or dynamite sticks that were "supposedly" being used to make a chum slick for fishing...still...who makes good mini-subs these days..."The Penguin" had one didn't he..who made his?

 

I thought they had a sub and then abandoned it because of how expensive it was?

 

Very well put.

Paul Watson also advocates tree spiking, and freely admits having done it in this email exchange where he says, "To me, spiking a tree is simply the inoculation of the tree against a fatal disease...."

http://www.forestcouncil.org/tims_picks/view.php?id=841

He honestly doesn't give a damn whether people get hurt or not, in spite of all his pious claims about never having injured anyone. He's a contemptible piece of exrement, and I'm amazed that people hold him up as a hero and role model.

As the final touch he's anointed himself 'Captain' Paul Watson, even though he's never held a Master's License of any sort.

 

why do I say Japan Norway and Iceland are poaching and trading in endangered species


CITES

List of pertinent Contracting Parties


signator #27

Norway
signing dates 27/07/1076 and again to ratify species addendum 25/10/1976

signator #57

Japan
signing date 06/08/1980 and again to ratify species addendum 04/11/1980

signator #148

Iceland
signing dates 03/01/2000 and again to ratify species addendum 02/04/2000

specifically Japan is poaching an endangered species listed on the CITES red list as threatened 1997

Balaenoptera acutorostrata made the red list in 1996
Balaenoptera bonaerensis also made the red list in 1996
both species called by the common name Minke whale


Minkes whales are listed on the endangered species list as a threatened species. Minke whales have been protected by international law since 1986, however I then stumbled upon a big fat loophole

ok well that was interesting cause I just proved myself wrong about cites being unilaterally binding in all cases

so while CITES allows for any party to withdraw partially from the convention and trade in a species red listed by CITES there is also the IWC which is a bit more strict

so it seems that I was wrong about Japan being in violation of CITES, but they are in violation of the IWC

as such they were committing a crime by whaling in any waters and SS had a humanitarian obligation to interfere although if in territorial waters they might find themselves subject to transient jurisdictional law IE get screwed for acting in accordance with international law by interfering

who says digging through the net isnt educational
I'd have sworn that by signing CITES they were obligated to respect the red list species
had no idea there was any provisions for backing out on a specific

 

this is something I vehemently disagree with if done on any ground were logs are taken legally

Paul Watson also advocates tree spiking, and freely admits having done it in this email exchange where he says, "To me, spiking a tree is simply the inoculation of the tree against a fatal disease...."

Ive hit old sugar taps cutting down maple up in Vermont and Im here to tell you Im lucky to be here

spiking a tree will kill someone eventually

oh one more little tid bit about poaching
in many countries you can be shot for poaching
Japan included

 

Reading through your posts one could start to think that you have some sort of vested interest in raping the worlds remaining resources.

Are you an out of work logger or whaler perhaps?

I was thinking exactly the same myself, but Paul Watsons image was not the one I was attaching the thought to

 

I already gave the relevant quotes from the IWC's own website, where it specifically says, and I repeat:

All proposed permits have to be submitted for review by the Scientific Committee following Guidelines issued by the Commission but the ultimate responsibility for their issuance lies with the member nation.

While the Commission cannot interfere with the right of a member nation to issue a permit, it can comment on the permit, after receiving the report of the Scientific Committee.

http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/permits.htm

Since the IWC acknowledges that Japan has the right to issue those permits, the whalers operating under them are not criminals--much less 'violent' criminals who need to be stopped by force.

 

I make a perfectly decent living without raping anyone, or anyone's resources. But thank you for your concern.

That's a remarkably dishonest personal attack, by the way. Shame on you. I suppose by your lights that since I also object to vigilantes burning down the homes of registered sex offenders, it means I'm a child molester?

I have no use for radicals and terrorists who attempt to enforce their beliefs on the world through violence. That goes for religious fanatics who fly planes into buildings, and it goes for ecological fanatics who sink ships and fishing vessels, spike trees, or otherwise endanger the lives of sailors, loggers and bandsaw operators.

The fact that you seem to admire such people says more about you than I really wanted to know.

 

ya you might reread the legal brief I provided and remember that you probably do not have the legal knowledge as these two lawyers who wrote it.


as for the later portion

would be the key pericope
and those guidelines are what I listed

the responsibility for implementing those guidelines remains with the member states

you are arguing minutia and semantics
if you have some specific legal brief you would like to present Ild be happy to read it but barring any new information there is no benefit in taking a purely argumentative position. Personally I'd rather find some common ground than widen the chasm between our opinions.

cheers
B

 

If you walk into any court in the land, you'll find lawyers on both sides of every lawsuit and every trial. Since normally only one side is legally right, that means that at any given moment half the lawyers in court are attempting to use their knowledge of the law to subvert it, rather than to uphold it. So I see no point in simply trying to match you, lawyer for lawyer, instead of using my common sense.

I don't need a lawyer to translate plain English. The quotes I gave--directly from the IWC itself, instead of from some lawyer's interpretation of what it means--clearly acknowledge Japan's legal right to issure whaling permits.

Yes, Japan is gaming the system. But as TollyWally pointed out, it's gaming a system that has been highjacked and corrupted to begin with. Whaling opponents have taken over a process designed to ensure that whaling remained sustainable, and turned it into an attempt to outaw whaling completely, instead. That's a complete perversion of the IWC's original purpose.

 

From the document you cited:

According to the International Whaling Commission the stock of minke whales in the North-East-Atlantic was reduced by about fifty per cent between 1930, when commercial whaling of minke whales began, and 1980 (see also BundestagS-Drucksache parliamentary records no. 13/3969, Appendix 2, of 5 March 1996). The stock has not sufficiently recovered since then. The IWC has therefore upheld until today the protected status it accorded the minke whale stock in the North-East Atlantic in 1985.

From this you state:

How convenient it is to take the statement concerning the population in the North-East Atlantic and make the leap to a violation of international law ... based on an assumption that one threatened population means the worldwide population is threatened.

Did you miss that the reason the ICW was formed was to have sustainable whaling, not to ban it?

Where does the data on population come from? Japanese research on a population that is NOT labeled as threatened?

You seem like a well educated individual, can you see how when your own citation does not support your statements that it forces people to question every conclusion you come to?

I'm against whaling for all the warm and fuzzy reasons that I don't eat dogs. I realize this is cultural. I do eat pig and they are intelligent too.

 

And your attempt at insinuating that I am a vigilante that would burn down a sex offenders house is equally as dishonest of you..Shame on you.

Perhaps you should desist from starting the personal attacks, especially on those that are unable to defend themselves, Play the ball, not the man.

Talking about those unable to defend themselves, I have no issue with attempting to help those that cant.

Just like I have stood up to you for Paul Watsons I would also stand up for someone attacked on the street that was unable to defend themselves and I would gladly to the same for endangered or non food source animals as well.
Going on your comment I suppose you would consider me a vigilante, and you would just stand by and watch these people be attacked and suggest others do the same.

It's not a belief its a law, Japan and others are disregarding that law.
Those that fly planes into buildings are not attempting to enforce a law, they are enforcing a belief.


Are you capable of seeing the difference between the two?

The sinking's were done in harbour and with no people on board at the time, so no lives being endangered.
I see it as being the same as the police that confiscate and crush cars of hoons who are breaking the law.

Its a shame that sea shepherd need to do this job, it would be better if the authorities manned up to their responsibilities intsead.

I do agree that these arent a particularly good way to go. I dont believe in risking lives of employees, saying that they are surely aware that cutting down old growth forest is not sustainable, not right, in many cases illegal and will not be winning them any friends.
Sensible people with any sort of conscience would be looking at another source of employment.

Right back at ya big fella

The fact that you seem to admire whalers and loggers and their actions, tells me exactly the sort of person you are.

 

Been searching around the web and found these:
http://ecorazzi.com/slideshow/high-tech-whale-wars-8-weapons-used-in-the-fight-down-under/

Interesting from the slide show - okay, I know collision took place in daylight with decent visibility - but the night thing -

As far as AG crew not being able to hear on account of the LRAD, they previously know it can be used

and, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction

And:
On 15 December 2009
http://www.ecorazzi.com/2009/12/15/sea-shepherds-ady-gil-having-a-rough-time-joining-the-party/

In reference to that, this makes interesting reading
Sea Shepherd Forum
http://www.seashepherd.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=6267&page=7