- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,372
- Reactions
- 17,750
Money does, unfortunately, determine the outcome of just about everything."Japan is Australia's largest export market, accounting for $52.6 billion in 2008–09"
http://www.innovation.gov.au/Section/AboutDIISR/FactSheets/Pages/Australia'sExportsFactSheet.aspx
And the basket weavers wonder why our govt does nothing...
the foreign pines planted in Australia that have exterminated Koala habitats in th e past. Emphasize peace as much as you want in Japan and get David Suzuki (the state supported Canadian apologist know-it-all) to make as many docos as he wants about nature. But in the end you have killed too many Koalas.
As has been pointed out, the waters are not Australian territory.
As far as I know Australia has juristiction in those waters.
gg
(Wikipedia)(my emphasis)The Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) is the part of Antarctica claimed by Australia and is the largest territory of Antarctica claimed by any nation. The claim is formally recognised by only four States, each of which also has a claim over part of the Antarctic
I assume you mean jurisdiction. Australia claims jurisdiction of the zone extending 200 nautical miles north of the coastline of Australia's claimed Antarctic Territories.
Our claim incidentally is recognised by only four other countries (UK, New Zealand, Norway and France*, and certainly not Japan.
(Wikipedia)(my emphasis)
* Thieves stick together.
JAPAN has risked an open breach with the Rudd government by hitting back hard at Acting Prime Minister Julia Gillard's handling of last week's whaling confrontation in the Southern Ocean.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials have accused Ms Gillard of aggravating the whaling controversy between Tokyo and Canberra, and called for Australian action to prevent further illegal activities by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.
The officials warned a senior Australian diplomat on Friday that Ms Gillard's statements immediately before and after the collision between Sea Shepherd's speedboat and a Japanese whaling ship were inflaming public opinion in Japan and making diplomatic resolution of the underlying dispute harder to realise
......This is the toughest public stance a Japanese government has taken towards Australia on Antarctic whaling -- or any other issue -- in recent times and is also highly unusual in singling out for criticism a senior member of a friendly government
.......The move betrays Japanese frustration with the Australians' political management of the issue, including Kevin Rudd's repeated threats of international legal action against so-called scientific whaling, while not obviously helping to curb hazardous protest activities, including Sea Shepherd's efforts to disable whaling ships.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs senior officials told acting japan ambassador Allan McKinnon it was "not appropriate" for Ms Gillard to urge Japanese whalers and the activists in equal terms to show restraint, "notwithstanding the Sea Shepherd itself was conducting the unlawful rampage"....
Generalisations are rarely correctA belief that whales are sacred creatures, or a hatred of the Japanese does not justify hooliganism on the high seas.
Criticising Japan for killing a relatively small number of whales allows the green extreme to attack Asia's first successful capitalist economy and a major customer for Australia's energy exports.
The anti-whaling protesters need to be aware that they don't have unlimited goodwill from the general public.
Every statement/comment/media release that they come up with that isn't 100% correct, erodes the positive sentiments many people have for the Sea Shepherd.
It is very rare to hear anything rational about whaling.
True, although I believe for many people the location of the whaling (a declared reserve under the guidelines of Whaling's own international body) is more of an issue. I suspect people would be far more accepting of coastal whaling operations that are carried out in a nation's own EEZ, especially in countries like Japan and Norway which have some traditional basis for consumption of whale blubber.When it comes to whaling, you have one side saying whales are critically endangered and can not be harvested (a false story to achieve their goal of stopping people from killing a creature that apparently has more right to live than a fish, cow or pig) and on the other side there are people who will just catch whales because they want to eat them.
Could you please point out any statement that I have made on this topic that is not rational, or factual.
As an ex whaler I accepted the need for conservation at the time that whaling ceased. I state that whale numbers have recovered to a point where whaling could be carried out on a sustainable basis. I stated that it was the cuddly factor that was behind a lot of sentiment. I stated that whales are a large food reserve. I stated the amount of food that the whales themselves consume.
All actual facts that can not be disputed. All rational statements from someone that has "been there and done that".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?