The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is one of the most radical environmentalist groups around. Not only is its leader Paul Watson anti human–once calling us the “AIDS of the Earth”–but the Shepherds engage in dangerous interference activities aimed at preventing legal hunting–most particularly seal pup harvesting and whaling.
This year, it is engaging in unsafe navigation practices to harass Japanese whalers in the open oceans off of Antarctica, resulting in one of its inflatables sunk and a collision between its Bob Barker and a whaling ship at sea. From the story:
The anti-whaling Sea Shepherd Conservation Society said at 12.09pm today the Yushin Maru 3 intentionally rammed the Bob Barker penetrating its hull and endangering the lives of its crew. No-one was injured.
The collision follows a collision between the space age carbon fibre trimaran Ady Gil and the Japanese whaling ship Shonan Maru 2 on January 6. The skipper of the trimaran powerboat Capt Pete Bethune accused the Japanese ship’s crew of “attempted murder” by “deliberately ramming their boat” into the Ady Gil but the Japanese denied they were at fault saying the Ady Gilturned deliberately in front of them. The Ady Gil has since sunk.
Sea Shepherd society said today’s “intentional ramming” occurred about 180 miles off Cape Darnley in the Australian Antarctic Territory. Video of the collision, which is on Sea Shepherd’s website appears to show both vessels left taking evasive action until too late. The society said the Bob Barker had been actively blocking the slipway of the Nisshin Maru, the Japanese whaling fleet’s factory ship.
That’s just nuts. If they keep this up, somebody is going to be seriously injured or killed.
Many oppose whaling. I certainly do because the kills often aren’t quick and the need for harvesting is questionable at best. (The excuse is scientific research, but that is a ruse.) But the essential point here is that what the Japanese are doing is legal, and preventing the deaths of small number of whales is not worth the sacrifice of one human life, whether of a whaler trying to earn a tough living, or a Shepherd putting his or her body between whales and their hunters.
The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is acting recklessly and dangerously–and I presume, illegally–by intentionally harassing ships at sea. Before this confrontation ratchets one notch higher, international authorities should step in and threaten the licenses of the captains of the Shepherd ships and the organization’s ability to sail. And the Japanese whalers should sue their ships right out from under them.
Ending whaling should be done legally, not by such human life-threatening so-called direct actions.
February 7th, 2010 | 6:49 pm
Didnt you know that it is a sin to spread fasle witness? being a god botherer, i thought that you were supposed to preach love and forgivness, not spread the word ofd of harte and mistruth?
The big problem here is the love of money. As we all know , money is the root of all evil. The Japanese whale killers are obsessed with making money out of killing gods creatures.
They are whaling commercially..i dont think anyone disagrees with this.,.because of their love of money.
sea Sherpd are doing their best to stop this unlawfullness, and are in fact supported by the United nations, the UN charter for nature.
The law also states that it is illegal ( see Cites) to trade in endangered wildlife. Jqapan hunts Fin whales other than minke whales and have even been known to kill humpback whales which are slowly recovering after much human greed almost drove them to extinction.
The Japanese dont like this much so resort to ramming the Sea Sheperd ships and sinking them. Luckily sea sheprd are still there, making a stand…just like jesus did when he was nailed to the cross.
They Japanese mafia run whaling industry also realise that the law is weak…while the laws are in place to protect the great whales from mas slaughter, they governments of the world are more interested in keeping up good trade relations with japan rather than take them to task.
I say, the devil be damned here….sea Sheperd have god on their side and the blessing of his hioliness the Dalai Lama. They will not lose this battle. Agfter god had made the world he saw that it was good. We need to keep it that way rather than destroying it for the love of money.
February 7th, 2010 | 6:54 pm
So what have you recently done to stop whaling? Hot air? nice.
February 7th, 2010 | 9:18 pm
Oh, for God’s sake. Good for them. I notice it wasn’t the whaling ship that was harmed, it was their own. LEGAL? My mother’s murder, and Terri Schiavo’s, were considered legal at the time, weren’t they. I’m a lot more concerned about what happens to the whales and seals than I am to the barbarians these brave humans are trying to stop. Which, by the way, legal means haven’t been able to do yet.
February 7th, 2010 | 10:11 pm
Wesley,
My initial response is to definitely agree with you regarding any action taken by the Shepherds that would put another person, such as a whaling vessel crew member, in danger. I am, however, less certain when it comes to any action they might take that would put only their own (the Shepherds’) lives in danger, assuming, that is, such an action were possible in these conditions without endangering others. If they were to only expose themselves to risk in a nonviolent manner, then their actions would, be, arguably, in the moral sense, a form of civil disobedience. In order for it to be so, they would also have to be willing to accept the legal, financial or other consequences that would follow. Again, I am not sure if on the high seas it would ever be possible to put oneself at risk without also exposing to risk others who are not part of the protest. The whole point of civil disobedience is to challenge an activity or restriction that is “legal”, but is in the minds of the protesters, wrong. This is one of the ways that people try to apply pressure to change laws or practices.
I think what prompted me to write all this is your putting the word “legal” in italics in your second to last paragraph. As you know, that is exactly the same type of use of emphasis that “pro-choice” advocates employ to belittle any attempt to enact laws restricting abortion, any peaceful (and I emphasize “peaceful”) acts of protest, witness or education outside of abortion clinics, or even pregnancy support centers that do not provide the full range of “reproductive health services”.
February 8th, 2010 | 7:10 am
For the record, the sunken Ady Gil was not an “inflatable” as stated in the article. It was a speed boat, indeed under its earlier name ‘Earthrace’ it had set the record time for circumnavigating the globe.
As to ‘legality’… it essentially does not exist in this situation. The Japanese are clearly conducting commercial whaling with ‘research’ as a fictitious cover… but then the IWC ban on whaling which inspires this Orwellian charade has no force of law, only the agreement of IWC members. Japan could as easily quit the IWC and openly conduct commercial whaling, as other nations do. Likewise, the fact that they are performing this whaling in a whale sanctuary makes the whole ‘legality’ thing extra special. Australia says that part of Antarctica belongs to them, and that the oceans along that part of the continent are a whale sanctuary. Japan (and most of the rest of the world) do not recognize Australia’s claim. Essentially, Japan is whaling in Australia’s ‘exclusive economic zone’… which would definitely be illegal under the UN Law of the Sea. But then Australia hasn’t seen fit to enforce their claim so that is again just so much smoke. Ships crashing into each other? Illegal… if the countries where those ships are registered choose to enforce it. Which… they haven’t.
The simple reality is that no one is ready to go in and ‘lay down the law’ in the Southern Ocean… and until someone does there IS NO LAW down there.
February 8th, 2010 | 10:07 am
If you want to know what Paul Watson is really thinking read this:
http://www.eco-action.org/dt/beerswil.html
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 8th, 2010 at 10:32 am
That’s very interesting. I may find that useful. Thanks.
February 8th, 2010 | 10:23 am
“Seal pup harvesting”? That’s simply a euphemism for clubbing the little guys to death so their coats won’t be spoiled by bullet holes. Wesley, for someone who stands up for the “rights” of zygotes you’re hardly Mr. Ethical Humanitarian where egregious cruelty to other life forms is concerned. For those who’d like to see the kind of stuff Wesley’s supporting, try this site:
http://www.google.com/search?q=harp+seal+pups&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 8th, 2010 at 10:30 am
History Writer: I didn’t say I support the harvest. But there are whole communities dependent on it for their economic survival. And that matters too. But the point of my post was that endangering human life over these important ethical issues is wrong. Good luck with your surgery.
February 8th, 2010 | 1:22 pm
Their campaign has recently been well-documented and aired on cable TV. No charges are pending. If their protests were illegal it stands to reason that their organization would have been brought up on charges and shut down. They have the cooperation of several governments who clearly implicitly support their work and are otherwise not ready to challenge the Japanese organized crime syndicate or their puppets in the Japanese government.
February 8th, 2010 | 2:32 pm
every single person involved has made the decision to be there.
the only victims are the whales.
whalers want to kill whales.
shepherds willing to die for whales.
whales are potentially as smart as humans.
they can’t be killed quickly OR humanely (4 hours to kill a whale even after exploding a harpoon into its skull).
the food is neither necessary or popular.
this is all happening in a WHALE SANCTUARY.
endangered whales (Fin) are being killed in a sanctuary – akin to going to Yellowstone and wiping out Bald Eagles.
leave the whales alone and the problem will be solved.
February 9th, 2010 | 2:35 pm
Wesley: in your article about the seal pup hunt you said you were “ambivalent” about it. I take that to mean you believe clubbing the little fellas to death has its good points as well as its bad ones.
While I agree that this annual slaughter provides a livelihood for some people, it remains an act of egregious cruelty which few people, even those with a minimum sense of decency, can justify; least of all on economic grounds.
I have yet to devalue animal life to the extent of claiming its defense is unworthy of even a single human sacrificing his or her life. To make such claims says less for so-called human “exceptionalism” than it does for human hubris.
February 9th, 2010 | 2:38 pm
Wesley: And thanks for the good wishes. Surgery is over, and was 100% successful. Presumably I’ll see everything more clearly now. :-)
February 9th, 2010 | 7:56 pm
Can we segue the conversation to the dangers faced by women and health care workers at reproductive care clinics when they are targeted, stalked, shamed, harassed or harmed by radical religious activists who refuse to accept that women have other beliefs than they do?
Endangering lives is never right, right? I don’t believe in absolute consistency but you’re showing more compassion for commercial (lying) whalers than you are for your fellow citizens. Or is capitalism less a crime than being female?
February 10th, 2010 | 6:23 pm
Wesley already doesn’t approve of violence over the abortion issue, so what’s your point? Did you miss the entry about condeming the actions of the man who killed the abortion doctor?
You also act like all women are pro-choice, which they aren’t. :p
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact