Whale wars

[gordon2007]

Have a look at the video I posted above. /QUOTE]

I looked at it before I posted a response to your original post. Quite honestly, nothing in that video upsets me. It's no different than the pork, chicken, lamb and other meats and fish I eat.

Apparently a cow is dumb so it's OK to eat it? A roo is a pest, so it's OK to kill them? It's OK to shoot a duck with a shotgun? I just cannot see how killing a whale for consumption is any different.

I still don't understand how you fail to understand that within this thread most people will agree that the japanese do this for consumption as opposed to research. It doesn't matter though. They have found a way to do this legally.

I don't understand how you cannot understand the repeated points about the legal claims we have to these waters. You seem to just constantly ignore these very valid claims. As if they don't mean anything?

I can appreciate you're passionate about this. Though I cannot understand your blindness to the many other factors that are related to this issue.

At the end of the day, this is not just about a whale being killed. May I suggest you research the coorong in SA, the migratory birds from all over the world who use these vital eco systems, and our governments failure to do anything about the problem there. What I'm implying is that before we go and try to save the world, perhaps we should look in our own back yard before we start supporting vigilanty style acts against a government.

 

[Macquack]

Apparently a cow is dumb so it's OK to eat it? A roo is a pest, so it's OK to kill them? It's OK to shoot a duck with a shotgun? I just cannot see how killing a whale for consumption is any different.

The difference is it is illegal to kill a whale strictly for consumption (unless it is thoroughly "researched" first to make sure it is dead and up to Japanese "sashimi" standards).

I don't understand how you cannot understand the repeated points about the legal claims we have to these waters. You seem to just constantly ignore these very valid claims. As if they don't mean anything?

I am against Japanese whaling in any waters where they conduct their "scientific research". If it happens to be in Australian waters (which our Government claims), I expect the Government to do something about it as promised.

 

[Ageo]

The difference is it is illegal to kill a whale strictly for consumption (unless it is thoroughly "researched" first to make sure it is dead and up to Japanese "sashimi" standards).

Macquack so if they passed the law that allowed the japs to harvest whales for consumption would your anger and frustration be over?

or would it then lead to the ethical & humane methods of killing?

then if they satisfied your humane killing methods would you be fine with it?

or would it lead to the gender and age of whales being harvested?

etc...............


The point being no matter what they do you will never be happy because your only thinking about what you care/want which is "Save the Whales".


How come cockroaches dont have the anti brigade by their side? poor bastards.

 

[gooner]

Macquack so if they passed the law that allowed the japs to harvest whales for consumption would your anger and frustration be over?

or would it then lead to the ethical & humane methods of killing?

then if they satisfied your humane killing methods would you be fine with it?

or would it lead to the gender and age of whales being harvested?

etc...............


The point being no matter what they do you will never be happy because your only thinking about what you care/want which is "Save the Whales".


How come cockroaches dont have the anti brigade by their side? poor bastards.

Ageo

Don't forget the flies. These are totally victimised in our house. Particularly at the moment when there seem to be lots of them settling on the screen of my iMac.

But they are not as cute as whales. Or as tasty..........

 

[nioka]

The difference is it is illegal to kill a whale strictly for consumption .

There is NO law that makes killing a whale illegal. There are laws that make it illegal to kill whales in some individual countries territorial waters. (The same as it is illegal to kill a snake in your own back yard in Australia, catch fish in marine parks etc)

There was a moratorium on the killing of whales to let the numbers recover. Then the tree huggers took over or think they have.

So Japan breaks no laws, nor would we or any other country if we or they decide to recommence whaling or catch whales in international waters.

 

[Bloveld]

Well the government is going to try legal action to stop the whaling.
You know, our democatically elected government.
Must hurt to know you are in the minority.
Must hurt more, to know your tax dollars are being used to fight whaling.

 

[IFocus]

Macquack so if they passed the law that allowed the japs to harvest whales for consumption would your anger and frustration be over?

or would it then lead to the ethical & humane methods of killing?

then if they satisfied your humane killing methods would you be fine with it?

or would it lead to the gender and age of whales being harvested?

etc...............


The point being no matter what they do you will never be happy because your only thinking about what you care/want which is "Save the Whales".


How come cockroaches dont have the anti brigade by their side? poor bastards.

Hope you don't apply this logic to the markets

 

[Macquack]

There is NO law that makes killing a whale illegal.

The International Whaling Commission (84 member states including Japan) has in place a ban on commercial whaling as per the 1986 moratorium.

The international ban may not be a law as such, but there are consequences if a country does not conform to the convention.

 

[Macquack]

The point being no matter what they do you will never be happy because your only thinking about what you care/want which is "Save the Whales".

Ageo, when are you going to get the concept that it is the international community being 84 member countries of the International Whaling Commission that are "saving the whales". It is not just IFocus, the Sea Sherpherd and myself "flying the flag".

 

[Ato]

The international ban may not be a law as such, but there are consequences if a country does not conform to the convention.

Would you mind providing evidence of the bolded statement, please, Macquack? As far as I am aware (and I'll admit I dont know much of the specifics), the IWC has no ability to penalise members. Therefore there would be no consequences.

 

[gooner]

Would you mind providing evidence of the bolded statement, please, Macquack? As far as I am aware (and I'll admit I dont know much of the specifics), the IWC has no ability to penalise members. Therefore there would be no consequences.

Japan could pull out of the IWC, continue whaling and no legal issues. It is a bit like the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. India, Pakistan, Israel are not members and create nukes, no legal issue. For Iran that is a member, there are sanctions, inspections etc

 

[Macquack]

Would you mind providing evidence of the bolded statement, please, Macquack? As far as I am aware (and I'll admit I dont know much of the specifics), the IWC has no ability to penalise members. Therefore there would be no consequences.

IWC member nations can take action against non-complying nations, such as the adoption of trade sanctions.

For example, after the commencement of the 1986 Moratorium on whaling, the Japanese (showing no respect for the world governing body) continued full commercial whaling until the United States pressured the "Land of the Rising Sun" into withdrawing their objection to the Moratorium and finally ceasing full commercial whaling in 1988 ( whaling for "scientific research" continues).

 

[gordon2007]

Ageo, when are you going to get the concept that it is the international community being 84 member countries of the International Whaling Commission that are "saving the whales". It is not just IFocus, the Sea Sherpherd and myself "flying the flag".

Using that same thought process macquack (a majority rules), why is it then that you cannot accept or fail to realise that australia claiming these waters as our own is a ridiculous arrogant claim when 99% of the rest of the world does not recognise this claim.

It does not seem fair dinkum that you use this very same logic to advance your thoughts but dismiss it when it does not suite you.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

The difference is it is illegal to kill a whale strictly for consumption (unless it is thoroughly "researched" first to make sure it is dead and up to Japanese "sashimi" standards).


I am against Japanese whaling in any waters where they conduct their "scientific research". If it happens to be in Australian waters (which our Government claims), I expect the Government to do something about it as promised.

Mate if the Australian guvment cannot even control the Torres Strait how in hells name can you expect them to control Antarctica.

And this mob can't even put batts in attics, so protecting a drongo for them would be difficult at the moment never mind bloody whales.

Get real mate.

gg

gg

 

[Macquack]

Using that same thought process macquack (a majority rules), why is it then that you cannot accept or fail to realise that australia claiming these waters as our own is a ridiculous arrogant claim when 99% of the rest of the world does not recognise this claim.

It does not seem fair dinkum that you use this very same logic to advance your thoughts but dismiss it when it does not suite you.

Gordon, if you are going to throw around numbers (%) then at least get them right.

Using your ill founded logic that "if a country does not have a claim, it must by nature oppose".
[189/196 X100 = 96%]. 96% is not 99%.

The facts are there are only 46 member nations of the Antartic Treaty.
28 Consultative members.
18 Acceding status members.
Only the Consultative members (including the 7 nations that make territorial claims) have voting rights.
[21/28 x 100 = 75%]. 75% is not 99%.

Furthermore,
"The 21 non-claimant nations either do not recognize the claims of others, or have not stated their positions."

So Gordon, please explain how you come up with your magic "99% of the rest of the world does not recognise this claim"?

 

[Ato]

Fair enough. I wonder why Japan simply doesnt pull out of the treaty then. That way they could just do their whaling without the pretence of doing it for science. I guess they must have some agenda for staying in IWC. Wonder if the US pressures them to stay in the IWC so that the Japanese are given continued access to US waters for fishing (and the US hopes to stop them whaling that way)?

The skipper(?) of the Andy Gil has been arrested here today.

 

[IFocus]

Fair enough. I wonder why Japan simply doesnt pull out of the treaty then. That way they could just do their whaling without the pretence of doing it for science. I guess they must have some agenda for staying in IWC. Wonder if the US pressures them to stay in the IWC so that the Japanese are given continued access to US waters for fishing (and the US hopes to stop them whaling that way)?

The skipper(?) of the Andy Gil has been arrested here today.

I think this would be close to the situation as for Peter Bethune it will keep the issue in the headlines.



The US stance on Whaling is clear, if this guy is found guilty will be interesting to see what he gets the US wildlife and customs generally don't mess around

US sushi chef charged with serving whale

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/12/2843784.htm?section=world

 

[Ageo]

Hope you don't apply this logic to the markets

Logic? in this thread there is no logic, just emotional responses to how they feel about something.

It reminds me of when the greenies protest about duck hunting and i remember seeing a sign on 1 that said "shoot me not the ducks"

lolol i think that summed up how they were.

 

[IFocus]

Logic? in this thread there is no logic, just emotional responses to how they feel about something.

This is IMHO true and its true for both sides both for the hunter (the need for the emotional feed back of killing some thing) and the conversationalist (emotional feed back for preservation)

With out experiencing emotion and all the colors it has to offer life would be dull.

Emotional choice is another thing, chose the right emotions and you can grow / gain wisdom, choose the neg / dark emotions and you become just another drop kick.

 

[IFocus]

This article is probably bias but interesting insight to Japanese government fishery behavior and I wonder is it the type of thinking that has placed Japan into the economy black hole they are currently facing "the bug looking for a windscreen economy"

The disappearing bluefin stirs calls for urgent action

Last paragraph

In a sushi-train restaurant in Tokyo this week, Osamu Morita, 38, a banker, seemed bemused by the fuss. ''When the tuna is all gone we can find something else to eat. There are plenty of delicious creatures in the sea.''

http://www.smh.com.au/world/the-dis...rs-calls-for-urgent-action-20100312-q477.html