Someone in authority has to take control at Greenpeace, or it will lose much of its credibility. Since yesterday Greenpeace has posted at least three versions of their collision with the Japanese whaling mother ship on Sunday.
This is a serious matter that might even have repercussions in criminal law. Greenpeace has to tell the truth, discipline its operatives and move on. Otherwise the organisation that drew so much credibility from the criminal actions against it of the French government will lose its own credibility, not just on whaling, but on all of its campaign issues.
Story 1:
On Sunday, 8th January, 2006 Greenpeace Southern Ocean Expedition Leader Shane Rattenbury was quick off the mark in a media release entitled ‘Whalers ram Greenpeace Ship in Southern Ocean’.
“…the Nisshin Mura suddenly disengaged from the supply vessel coming around a full 360 degrees before making for the Arctic Sunrise and striking it on the port side.
Story 2:
Well, this picture posted by Greenpeace says it all. This is the Greenpeace ship, these are its injuries, and Greenpeace claims it was rammed? The damage is to the bow because as the video, also posted by Greenpeace shows, their ship struck the whaling vessel amidships.
Story 3:
Rattensbury also said,
The ship’s captain tried to pull out of the way of the oncoming whaler.”
In the Greenpeace video, their Captain says that because their ship the Arctic Sunrise had right-of-way,
“I maintained course at speed”.
Greenpeace’s own video contradicts Rattenbury’s story.
In order to restore its credibility Greenpeace’s first move is obvious. It has to stand aside its frontline operatives, specifically Rattenbury, and explain why they misled the press, the public, and their own supporters.
This is a serious matter. Damage has been done to private property. It could fall within the ambit of the criminal law. A respectable organisation cannot allow itself to even potentially shelter wrong-doers.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Jen – how much utter spin can you put on this.
The GP vessel is stopped and engines in reverse – your piccies how this !
The video shows the other vessel moving across the bow of a stalling GP vessel.
The impact is minor – a biff – more than a ram.
GP’s web version which is consistent with video and pictures says:
“The Arctic Sunrise was more than a kilometre from the other two ships when the Nisshin Maru hurriedly cast off its lines and made a sharp turn to port (left) – coming all the way around the stern of the tanker in a circle – to set a collision course for the Arctic Sunrise. At first Arne (captain of the Arctic Sunrise), maintained his course and speed, as he was obliged to do under maritime rules of the road. But still the factory ship kept coming.
The Nisshin Maru is more than twice as long and six times heavier than the Arctic Sunrise. When Arne realized the Nisshin Maru was set on a collision, he put the Sunrise into full astern (reverse) in an attempt to avoid it. The Nisshin Maru put on more speed, and very intentionally struck the Sunrise a hard glancing blow on her port bow with their starboard side. More of a sideswipe than a direct hit, thank god.
As the Nisshin Maru went by her crew directed one of their massive fire cannons at the bridge of the Sunrise.
We’ll get some video footage of the incident up soon. It’s possible this ramming was purposefully done in a way that makes us look bad if you don’t have all the facts. Fortunately, the video record makes it obvious the whalers were at fault. I really encourage you to watch it so we can get back to talking about how to end commercial whaling.”
Reporting on whale population dynamics 0.0 – let’s divert attention onto the ramming – bugger the whales.
All this is no more than mock indignation and grandstanding.
Send the navy and impound the Japanese whaling fleet !
Phil,
You’ve never been near the sea have you? Any idea how difficult it is to get a ship to go sideways and take another ship on the bow with its midships?
You must have donated so much to Greenpeace you virtually own it to put this sort of nonsense up, or are you just trying to queer Jennifer’s pitch?
It is possible, looking at the pictures, that the Greenpeace boat had been put into reverse, but that’s not what the Greenpeace captain maintains, and when you listen to the sound of the engines on the video they are just chugging self-satisfiedly along, not screaming in reverse.
When you look at the bow waves that both boats are creating they are both travelling very slowly – hardly a ripple.
If the Japanese were trying to ram the Sunrise and it was trying to avoid them, then it wouldn’t have been heading in the direction it was. Do the geometry. If you’re trying to get in front of a ship and it is turning to avoid you, you have to travel more or less around the circumference of the arc that it is describing with its bow, but at quite a distance. It require probably more speed than the Kisshin Maru possesses, and certainly more speed than it is exhibiting in these pictures and videos.
And anyway, where exactly was the Greenpeace vessel trying to head so that it needed to take right of way? It’s just hanging around afterall trying to “observe” (there’s an innovatively active verb).
I’ve followed you on this forum for quite a while and you’re a good proof of the adage that “there are none so blind as those who will not see”.
Like Bob Brown said, the only research the Japanese are conducting is to see if whale meat tastes better with wasabi or soy sauce. Obviously they’re in their face down there, being antagonistic and all however they continue to bring world attention to the brutality and stupidity of Japanese research whaling. Also the last thing we want to see is those redneck Norwegians doing it as well.
Sea Dog – woof woof ! Dream on.
Look at the damage to GP boat – A ramming would have crushed the nose. It’s a glancing side blow. Others on previous post have concurred. So it’s not just my medication.
The rear wash of the GP boat indicates it’s in reverse. Why reverse if you intend to ram.
Did the Japanese vessel break moorings and set course for the GP vessel. Or did the GP boat line up the Japanese vessel and ram it. It’s a clear case of bullying by the Japs and they’ve done it before.
They’re not trying to ram the Sunrise. They’re creating an incident for spin.
Good to hear you’re a lurker anyway. Someone has to keep the right wing extremists honest – and obviously you’re not going to do it.
Jennifer you are sensationalising. These “stories” are not inconsistent: if you read all of their accounts and look at the images a clear picture emerges.
The Arctic Sunrise was watching the whaler next to the supply ship, from a distance, when suddenly the whaler sped towards the Arctic Sunrise, which being a slower vessel, maintained its course and speed AS REQUIRED BY MARITIME LAW whilst also signalling the whaler to avoid a collision.
At that point, not knowing the intentions of the Japanese vessel, had the slower Arctic Sunrise veered course in front of the approaching, much faster and larger whaling ship, it could have caused a collision. The video shows waves (wake) off the bow off the Japanese whaling ship, there are no waves off the bow off the Greenpeace ship. Why ignore that fact?
Then, when the Greenpeace crew realised the whaler was not avoiding them and was about to hit them, they put the Arctic Sunrise in reverse yet still the Japanese ship collected the bow of the Arctic Sunrise. Greenpeace knows its supporters want peaceful, not radical protests, so they wouldn’t ram the (much larger) whaler.
The Japanese may not have intended to actually hit the Arctic Sunrise. It’s equally plausible as was suggested (I think on the Greenpeace site), that the Japanese ship may have suddenly fled and behaved so erratically because the radical Sea Shepherd vessel was approaching. The Sea Shepherd subsequently ran its “can opener” device along the side of the supply vessel. Why isn’t that getting more attention? That was clearly deliberate aggression and may explain the seeming panic of the whaler boat that was moving faster than the Arctic Sunrise when the 2 collided.
Jennifer – why are you twisting Greenpeace’s statements? Captain Arne very clearly says “I maintained course AND speed”, not “…AT speed” – quite different, no? Whilst the Captain does not say it in the video, in their crew’s blog, Greenpeace state “When Arne realized the Nisshin Maru was set on a collision, he put the Sunrise into full astern (reverse) in an attempt to avoid it”. You say that Greenpeace “has posted at least three versions of their collision”, but not whether the versions conflict. Have you found that they conflict, or is that spin?
“Sea Dog” – as you would well know, if the Nisshin Maru were making a hard left, its stern would be heading out to the right (in the direction of Arctic Sunrise). This could easily be accentuated with the assistance of stern thrusters that I expect would be fitted to the Nisshin Maru. That WOULD be difficult to avoid even if the Sunrise was just sitting still.
We all know why Greenpeace are there – this (thread) is not about whether Greenpeace “needed to take right of way” as you say – but about the fact that ships navigating in proximity to each other follow rules to avoid collision. The factory ship appears by all accounts to have been manoeuvered in a way that caused a collision.
Jennifer – how does this incident require disciplining? Nobody doubts that Greenpeace are annoying the whaling fleet. This agressive manoeuver was perhaps triggered when the Captain of the Nisshin Maru snapped after Greenpeace got the better of the whalers by successfully tagging their supply ship “WHALE MEAT FROM SANCTUARY”. That’s “damage to private property” as you put it, isn’t it? Perhaps Greenpeace need to discipline their frontline operatives about graffiti then? And while you’re at it, discipline them about spraying water in front of the killing vessels – it is no doubt contributing to premature corrosion of private property.
Well what a difference a day makes, the original Greenpeace video has been substantially changed.
* Arctic Sunrise was always in reverse with engines working hard
* Plume from engine stack moves with ship (indicating strong head winds)
*Sea is glassy indicating zero winds (either plume has been added OR camera is moving fast creating illusion of reverse movement thru parallax)
*Capt Arne has hit the cuttingroom floor
*ditto Shane Rattenbury
*voiceover (in passive voice) carefully explains maritime law.
*the Japanese warnings have been deleted
What is the law for a ship maintaining course and speed whilst in reverse? Minimum three blasts from the ships horn?
Who is spinning who now?
Now we have claims that Sea Shepherd activists/pirates were attempting to foul a ships propellers with heaving lines.
http://smh.com.au/news/world/look-up-whale-warriors–the-air-attack-is-coming/2006/01/09/1136771500767.html
whaling battles
Greenpeace continue to annoy the Japanese whaling fleet in the southern oceans: Paul Taggart, World Picture News The photo depicts an attempt by the group Sea Shepherd to disable the Japanese factory ship Nisshin Maru after it collided with the Greenpe…
Greenpeace now concede that the Japanese may have been alarmed at the presence of Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace are now reviewing their “terms of engagement”.
It is quite possible that declarations of attack and the presence of “activists/pirates” provoked a defensive response from the Japanese.
http://www.pacificislands.cc/pina/pinadefault2.php?urlpinaid=19415
Rog you’re desperate.
Face it mate – you went out first thing rhetorical guns blazing and with your beloved 4×2 swinging – unlike Louis who wan’t sure. As we looked at it further, and the day wore on. it was clear this was nothing like what we’ve been told.
Put down the Right-winger’s Guide to the Environment and start thinking independently for once.
Phil,
You’re a big one for peer review. Well, I’ve peer reviewed the Greenpeace case and it stinks. On your previous form that should mean that you concede they have no argument, because peer reviewing experts can’t be wrong.
I thought you might have known something about global warming, but after your performance on such a simple system as two boats in a relatively calm sea, you have no credibility when it comes to objectively anaylsing evidence in front of you.
Yes Rog – It’s all right. Breathe slowly. You’ve been done like a dinner. Have a cup of chamomile tea and a lie down.
The pier review we need here is for an impounded whaling fleet.
Fancy our guys are defending their troops over there while they trash our mega-fauna. Where’s your patriotism.
Why get into such a lather – frankly the best things for the whales – remember them – would be for both boats to have holed each other and all of them and their productas of nonsustainable consumption slowly sink to the bottom of the sea.
Sea Shepherd founder is a controversial character to say the least, definitely an anti-human.
From the hallowed texts of Wikipedia;
In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Jim Bohlen, one of the founders of Greenpeace, said: “I’ve known the guy [Watson] for 15 years, and he’s absolutely insane, out of his mind.”
Watson arrested in 1993 in Canada on charges stemming from actions against Cuban and Spanish fishing boats off the coast of Newfoundland. In 1997, Watson was convicted in absentia by Norway on charges of sinking the small scale Norwegian fishing vessel Nybrænna in 1992, but Dutch authorities refused to hand him over to Norwegian authorities although he did spend at least 60 days in detention in the Netherlands before being released. Costa Rica filed attempted murder charges against Watson for an incident after he caught a Costa Rican fishing boat poaching, but charges were dropped after prosecutors were shown a film of the incident that was shot by a team making a documentary of Sea Shepherd. Thus far, all attempts at prosecuting Watson for his activities with Sea Shepherd have failed. Watson himself defends his actions as falling within international law and Sea Shepherd’s right to enforce maritime regulations against illegal whalers and sealer.
Actions taken by Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd to protest a resumption of whaling by the Makah tribe in Washington in 1998 have also proven controversial. The protests resulted in some unusual alliances, with environmental, animal rights groups, and conservative former Congressman Jack Metcalf protesting the whaling, while native rights groups, wise use groups, and anarchists associated with Indymedia supported the whaling.
[edit]
Quotes
“As for myself, I do not believe in loggers, I believe in trees. I do not believe in fishermen, I believe in fish. I do not believe in miners, I believe in the rocks beneath my feet. I do not believe in pie in the sky spirituality, I believe in rainbows, rivers, mountains, and moss. I do not believe in environmentalists, I believe in the environment. I am a proud traitor to my species in alliance with my mother the Earth in opposition to those who would destroy her, those parasites who believe the Earth is here to serve human interests.”
“We don’t give a damn what you or anybody else on this planet thinks. We didn’t sink those ships for you. We did it for the whales.”
“There’s nothing wrong with being a terrorist, as long as you win.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Watson
Wow – sounds like some members of company boards.
As you’ve always said Rog – don’t trust Wiki ! Remember Rog you big hypocrite – you distrust Wiki.
Rog – tell us aout all the other “piracy” and nautical incidents you really care about. How about Exxon Valdez – you wouldn’t say a word would you. How’s the t/b cause going – devoted any money yet? And for violence – it’s Mr 4 x 2 himself. This wreaks of your total dishonesty and grandstanding. Ha !
You would rather side with the Japs who were so helpful to us in WW II rather than look after look after our own mega-fauna in our territory.
You guys don’t even deserve to be in the right-wing. You’re simply apologists for resource vandals and looters.
It may be the truth that Greenpeace were sitting a kilometre away from the Japanese ship, but when they saw them moving off tried to intercept them by deliberately steering across their pojected path in an attempt to block them from moving away.
As it turns out Greenpeace were not fast enough and the Japanese ship got through. Greenpeace are doing a fairly typical protest manouvere of choosing to get in the way. One has to wonder about the safety of this type of action though when dealing with large ships with slow stopping abilities. I remember accounts of activists sitting on train tracks in USA to prevent the transportation of hazardous material through an area they felt was unsafe. One of the activists lost both legs because by the time the train saw the activist it could not stop even if it wanted due to the weight involved.
I agree with Jenn that the Greenpeace organistion has a moral duty to discipline those within their ranks, unless of course such idealistic individuals are simply being used as fodder while the organisation maintains a safe legal distance.
Phil, I have to wonder about your continual reference to “japs” and “WWII” as some sort of justification for distrusting them.
The key ethical test here is whether the same action, done by a group of japanese pro-whaling activists in a ship of their own and motivated by a strong ideological zeal, would be regarded as acceptable. My guess is that most Australians would not regard the on-going interference with a Greenpeace vessel by a Japanese activist vessel as acceptable or lawful behaviour. Indeed, the loudest proclamations of thuggery, intimidation and piracy would come from the very same people who are defending Greenpeace today.
Your hypocrisy is breathtaking but no surprise.
But the message for the Japanese and Norwegians is quite clear. Fight them at their own game. Get a group of your own strongest supporters, tap into the funding base in the same way that Greenpeace does, get out there in your own boat and give the Sea Shepard a good, continuous and repeat dose of their own medicine.
Where can I send my cheque?
So the sad conclusion is that you lot would arrest Greenpeace, let the Japs & Norwegians do whatever they want and just stand by.
You would urge the continuation of diplomatic solutions which have not worked. While obfuscation occurs you continue to waffle and defend their “rights”.
You have no solutions except to wash your hands of the matter and shrug your shoulders.
What a national disgrace !
They cant be arrested by us, they are not in Australian waters and the Australian government is without legal authority.
Anyway, Green Senator Brown has always protested against Australia being a deputy sheriff.
What a turn of events, i.e. a supporter of left-wing ideals becrying the continuation of diplomatic solutions to an international issue in favour of actions which could see human lives placed in jeopardy. I thought that approach was predominantly the domain of right wing idealists, but I guess I was mistaken.
I am just glad that I looked at this website to see the video as media coverage last night painted a far less balanced picture.
People who have a genuine interest in the environment deserve to see the whole truth about the organisations they support. Greenpeace need to realise that there are 1000’s of NGO’s out there with better ethics and less dishonest practices and people will let their money speak for them and take their support elsewhere. They have screamed very loudly about reporting and transparency for industry and government and yet they seem to ignore these values when it suits.
What about the impact of their lies on the rest of the NGO sector? Many industries are defined by their worst performer and in the credibility stakes Greenpeace may be doing massive damage to other environmental organisations seeking support from the general public.
Anybody interested in whales then !
Or is mock indignation more important ?
This is about whales and all the other animals that need protection. It is also about dminishing funds being made available to NGO’s to protect them because they have lost credibility. Like any industry Greenpeace should be leading by example. Thanks to them – the funds needed to protect endangered species may dwindle as the general public starts to doubt the integrity of the organisation’s championing the cause.
So yes – its still about whales.
I dont think it has anything to do with whales, more with a pathological hatred of humanity.
“A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.”
–Richard Benedict, Clinton State Dept. employee working on assignment from the “Conservation Foundation”
“The secret to David McTaggart’s success is the secret to Greenpeace’s success: It doesn’t matter what is true . . . . it only matters what people believe is true . . . . You are what the media define you to be. [Greenpeace] became a myth, and a myth-generating machine.”
–Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace
“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”
–H. L. Mencken
“I suspect that the politicians and businessmen who are jumping on the environment bandwagon don’t have the slightest idea of what they are getting into. They are talking about emission control devices on automobiles, while we are talking about bans on automobiles.”
–Dennis Hayes, in “Earth Day Agenda” (1970)
“… a year is about one-fifth of the time we have left if we are going to preserve any kind of quality in our world.”
–Garrett de Bell (1970)
“Measured on virtually any scale, the world is in worse shape than it was 20 years ago.”
–Dennis Hayes, Chairman of “Earth Day 1990”
“We reject the idea of private property.”
–Peter Berle, President of the “National Audobon Society”
“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
–John Davis, editor of “Earth First! Journal”
“I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
–John Davis, editor of “Earth First! Journal”
“… The collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.”
–Dr. Reed F. Noss, of “The Wildlands Project”
“Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover the source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.”
–Amory Lovins, of the “Rocky Mountain Institute”
“Giving society cheap, abundant energy … would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
–Paul Ehrlich
“It’s (the prospect of cheap fusion energy) the worst thing that could happen to the planet.”
–Jeremy Rifkin
“The damage people cause to the planet is a function of demographics-it is equal to the degree of development. One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladeshes… This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.”
–Jacques Cousteau, in the UNESCO “Courier”, November 1991
“Free Enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process … Capitalism is destroying the earth.”
–Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists
“Christianity is our foe. If animal rights is to succeed, we must destroy the Judeo-Christian Religious tradition.”
–Peter Singer, the “Father of Animal Rights”
“I look forward to seeing humanity free someday of the tyranny of Christianity no less than Capitalism.”
–Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood
“The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing … This is not to say that the rise of human civilization is insignificant, but there is no way of showing that it will be much help to the world in the long run.”
–Economist editorial
“If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
–Prince Phillip, of the “World Wildlife Fund”
“People are the cause of all the problems; we have too many of them; we need to get rid of some of them, and this (ban of DDT) is as good a way as any.”
–Charles Wurster, of the “Environmental Defense Fund”
“The world has cancer, and the cancer is man.”
–A. Gregg, in “Mankind at the Turning Point”
Roq, it reads like a who’s who of the gucci green/left. Though you left one or two out, Adolf and his final solution, Mao for his great leap forward and Pol Pot for his year zero. All systematic killers of ordinary men and women in a context of demonisation and medical/infection control analogies. By their deeds shall ye know them.
Says a paid industry apologist.
Anyway – anyone interested in whales perchance?
What a hoot – some seriously intense people out there – keep the fires burning.
Rog – interestingly we could mail in a few gigabytes of corporate disasters and disgraceful practices. But we won’t. Interesting thing Rog – I have never heard anything constructive from you or ever anything that builds something. All we get is “yea the market, kill greenies”.
So what is your interest on an enviromental blog then?
Want to improve anything or just be a ragger?
My own acquaintance with Greenpeace dates to 1991. This was when ‘Rainbow Warrior’, with its supercargo of young, fire-breathing, anarchist (?Californian? ocean-ecology coordinator) Molly Olson, harassed the seismic boat ‘Western Odyssey’ while it was shooting BHP Petroleum’s Otway Basin survey. (Does anyone know what has become of Molly?)
In our opinion, the Greenpeace boat’s disregard for the rules of navigation endangered the BHP boat and the lives of its crew.
The day prior to the confrontation at sea, Greenpeace’s explanatory letter of 24 March 1991 to BHP chairman Sir Arvi Parbo said: “Given the questionable safety record of the offshore oil industry worldwide, and the scant regard for the environment shown by your colleagues at Exxon in the ‘Valdez’ spill, and by other oil companies elsewhere, Greeenpeace has reached the conclusion that offshore oil development is incompatible with the wise and sustainable use of Australia’s marine resources.” (Goodbye Gippsland; goodbye Northwest Shelf.)
The BHP survey had been timed to miss the seasonal visit of southern right whales to the Warrnambool region; and was a crucial part of the process that led to the discovery of the Minerva gasfield.
W H O A …. REMEMBER PEARL HARBOR ??? I DO.
DONT BE FEELIN SORRY FOR THEM JAPS FOR 1 SECOND.
SINCE OUR WORLD FAMOUS ELECTED POLITICANS CANT STOP EM ???
IT LOOKS LIKE GREENPEACE HAS GOTTA DO IT ALL … BY HOOK OR CROOK.
THE GEORGE DOUBWYA BUSH = SODAM INSANE VENDETTA ISNT THERE.
WE HAVE TO MANY SUPER BRAINS RUNNIN THINGS TODAY
“EDUCATED~BIG~MOUTHS~WITH~NO~BALLZ” SO BUSY ATTACKING THE SMOKERS THEY CANT SEE WHATS REALLY GOING TO KILL THEM & DONT CARE.
THE “SMOKERS” ARE EASY PREY.
Greenpeace are the aggressors here hassling wherever possible. Their motives, whether commendable or not, do not mitigate their pathetic seamanship and appalling disregard for the safety of life at sea. They should be hauled before an international court and brought to account for their actions.
Gail Carpenter,
Just who elected Greenpeace for this role?
Louis,
Which is precisely where we came in, 107 messages ago.
And we still haven’t got an answer.
Cathy
Cathy, Louis – I hadn’t noticed Jennifer blogging about Greenpeace being elected for any role.
Greenpeace don’t need to be elected for the roles they play. They, like Sea Shepherd and other NGOs are acting on the will of their mission, and the people that support them. That’s democracy – people support them, and that facilitates their ability to act. They exist where individuals have understood and recognised issues that are not being satisfactorily dealt with by governments and elected organisations. More power to them for this vision.
Apparently, no (elected?) government is interested in dealing with these matters in the southern oceans, as it doesn’t satisfy any of their (typically short term) political or commercial agendas to do so – so why waste the time.
Max – that’s your personal judgement call about the seamanship/diregard here, but really – international court? That is laughable on so many levels I don’t know where to start.
I guess Jennifer must be busy, since she hasn’t dropped in to answer why she is twisting and spinning this incident. It’s blatantly obvious that Greenpeace’s agendas do not align with hers.
In blog comments, flame wars are a waste of time, but an exchange of perspectives can be illuminating.
Commenters who don’t agree that Greenpeace and the Sea Shepherd should be interfering with the Japanese whalers: let’s assume they’ve been thrown in gaol. Now, if you also don’t support unauthorised Japanese whaling in a whale sanctuary, then what do you recommend be done to prevent it? I’d like to hear your suggestions.
Really, Phil, so I am a paid industry apologist now. Best tell my wife and kids then, and please tell them, and me, where the money is.
You have this quaint, but hardly uncommon, exit strategy of attaching a label to a contrary view whenever you have argued yourself into a cul-de-sac.
I wonder if the Yakuza eat whale meat? Now that would make good reality TV, Eco-thugs vs Yakuza. If it is OK for GreenFarce to foul propellers on the high seas then, surely, a samurai sword to the inflatable boat should be fair game. Don’t you think?
On your personal assurance then I withdraw the word “paid”.
Where did the propellor fouling bit come from ?
Richard, “Think Objectively”, and others.
You continually, and perhaps deliberately, miss the point.
Greenpeace and other NGOs are entirely entitled to protest and to represent the views of their members, included on whaling, PROVIDED THAT THEY OPERATE WITHIN THE LAW (and, I would add, commonsense, which seems almost entirely lacking
too in their present protest).
There is a strong prima facie, but not proven, case that in their antics in the Southern Ocean these organisations have been breaking the law and putting lives and property at risk.
Several contributors have pointed out that large vessels at sea are not like mopeds in Rome: they are heavy, cumbersome, and slow to respond to the helm and engine. It is breathtakingly silly and dangerous to zip around them in zodiacs or to approach them closely whilst they are engaged
in fishing operations, not to mention that they are also firing explosive harpoons.
And as several other contributors have pointed out, by doing this, Greenpeace are damaging their reputation, and the impact of their protest, rather than furthering their aims.
The great majority of the public do not support reckless illegal actions, be it on behalf of whales or any other environmental sacred cow (to coin a phrase), and will be estranged by the behaviour of the NGOs during this confrontation.
Cathy
Cathy I do acknowledge that the activists are engaging in risky behaviour, I also acknowledge that they may be breaching regulations or the law.
In turn, will you acknowledge that the Japanese whalers are not conducting legal or authorised whaling?
Realising that this will probably set some rabid hares running (who will be desperate to set me right), but not wishing to duck the direct question, my understanding is that the Japanese are taking whales under the excuse that they are undertaking scientific research.
Whether or not you believe that, or agree with it, is a totally separate issue from whether such an action is legal or not.
I understand that many people are outraged by what they see as the Japanese using an artificial (not to mention transparent) excuse for their activities. But your outrage doesn’t necessarily equate with someone else’s illegality.
Perhaps there is a lawyer reading this thread who could advise us on whether the Japanese actions actually are illegal, as many conservationists allege, rather than simply distasteful to some.
Cathy
It is simplistic to say ‘Greenpeace is just democracy in action’, any more than to say ‘provided it operates within the law’. In my view, Greenpeace is a very successful multi national franchise. Self perpetuation and green objectives are two (sometimes even conflicting) reasons for its high-profile activities.
Coming back to democracy. An article by Andre Carothers in “Greenpeace” magazine for March/April 1990, said: “Neither the savage capitalism practiced by the United States, Britain, Japan and many third world countries nor the repressive command economies that governed Eastern Europe harboured much concern for the plight of the individual, and even less for the environment. From a purely ecological perspective, the two competing ideologies were barely distinguishable.”
Carothers then continued: “Somewhere between these systems, or perhaps in front of them, lies a third way. Such a social order would recognise and harness the fruits of human ingenuity while providing for the poor and unfortunate, as well as preserving the global environment on which hinges the future wealth of all people.” Above all, Greenpeace is a social engineer.
Phil: the propeller fouling came from Sea Shepherd (not GP as Ian suggests). Commenters and media reports have been confusing Sea Shep & GP, but the 2 organisations are quite different and not co-operating (they disagree with each other’s tactics).
GreenPeace have made it clear that they are peacefully demonstrating. In the past they engaged in direct action, but these days their organisation depends on influential relationships and funds from supporters who don’t condone direct action.
Sea Shepherd however has a record of sinking illegal whaling vessels and they make it clear that they out to stop whaling. They describe an incident where the whaling ship came at them, as if to ram them, so they dropped a line to foul the propeller and then the whaler suddenly veered.
The approach of the (slower) Sea Shepherd vessel has been put forward as an explanation why the whaler suddenly cast off from the supply vessel in a hurry and steamed near the GreenPeace. The ‘dingle’ between the whaler and the GP ship may have been an accident (or diversionary tactic) by the feeling whaler.
There is no love lost between the organisations of GP & Sea Shep. The capt of the SS ship (ex founder of GP) seems to consider GP a bunch of flag waving sissies. (I’m just an interested observer, btw. No vested interests).
Cathy thanks for that reply. I combed through the reports from the IWC 2005 annual meeting because I wanted to doublecheck if GreenPeace was making spurious claims. The IWC passed the following resolutions against Japan’s request for permits for research whaling (JARPA):
“the IWC has generally expressed its opinion that Special Permit whaling should be terminated and scientific research limited to non-lethal methods only; refrain from involving the killing of cetaceans in sanctuaries; ensure that the recovery of populations is not impeded (1987); and take account of the comments of the Scientific Committee (1987).
no additional Japanese Whale Research Program under Special Permit in the Antarctic (JARPA) programs be considered until the Scientific Committee has completed an in-depth review of the results of JARPA;
STRONGLY URGES the Government of Japan to withdraw its JARPA II proposal or to revise it so that any information needed to meet the stated objectives of the proposal is obtained using non-lethal means.
The IWC also states that some of the species Japan is targeting are vulnerable (local genetically distinct populations or total numbers of species) or the numbers are unknown.”
It seems that Australia could initiate legal action for whaling (without IWC permit) of protected species (under CITES) in protected waters without Australia’s agreement. It seems it was illegal to refuel the whaling ship in protected Antartica waters. However, trade relations are too important to the Austn govt to make waves.
Laura O’Connell, (if that is your real name) aka think objectively, I repeat my question;
Are you now, or have you ever been, a member or employee of Greenpeace or any related organisation. I will gladly list all my affiliations if you will provide readers of this blog with the same courtesy. They have a right to know.
Dr. Eric Wilson, a noted maritime law expert at Marosh University, determined that while the Arctic Sunrise collided with the Nisshin Maru, the Japanese skipper executed a 360 turn that not only precipitated the collision, but made it unavoidable.
These Japanese Whalers are like the insurance scammers who cut in front of you and slam on the brakes.
And its on purpose, since they know that their every whaling action is illegal. Their research is discredited. They hold up “science based lethal research” signs as they box whale meat for sale.
The waters in which they “surveying” are Australian and or International. The fact that Japan doesn’t recognize these waters is irrelevant – if the United States failed to recognize the South Pacific, does that mean we can drop another A-bomb on Bikini Atoll?
Japan has the right to engage in cultural practices the world finds abhorrent — but only within their own borders.
Nothing Greenpeace or Sea Shepherd has done or will do can possibly be illegal since the UN Law of the Sea gives them the right to stop illegal activity. They could literally fire a missile at the propeller of these ships and there isn’t a court in the world that could claim legal jurisdiction.
There are no less than 20 international statutes, treaties and conventions that Japan is abrogating. THAT IS THE ISSUE. Not greenpeace. Not Sea Shepherd. Not environmentalism. Hell, not even whales.
If Japan believes that it has the right to pick which laws and treaties it will and will not decide to follow, then every country has that right.
And that is a recipe for disaster.
Ian you posted this question on every thread, do I need to answer on every thread? No I don’t work for greenpeace.
Mike thanks for posting that determination by Dr Wilson on the accident. The last time these exact same 2 ships collided it was officially noted in Lloyds that the Nisshin M was at fault.
And your perspective highlights the important issue, that Japan is showing flagrant disregard for international agreements and getting away with it (because as the media are reporting, Japan is Australia’s biggest trading partner).
This is stupid, even the pictures you have previously posted show that the Greenpeace vessel is in reverse.
Also an expert in maritime has said that this was the whalers fault:
“By executing a 360-degree turn at exactly the moment he [Nisshin Maru Captain] did, he created a situation where the Greenpeace vessel could not but strike the Japanese vessel.”
People who want to all the evidence should also check this blog in witch the blogger changed his mind after about who was to blame after reviewing the evidence: http://dontgointothelight.com/2006/01/a_greenpeace_member_responds.php
I personally believe Greenpeace is doing a vital job by protecting whales witch are endangered. It is also putting a global spotlight on the fluting of laws designed to protect the ecosystem.
Seeing as you may wish to know this, I am an active member of Greenpeace; however I have never been employed by it or any other environmental or political organisation. I would like you to note that both links I have sent come from independent sources, in fact the blog is conservative.
If I believed Greenpeace were to blame for this I would give up my membership, the passive protest Greenpeace do is part of their philosophy and mine. In fact, it is due to this philosophy that Paul Watson set up the more militant Sea Shepard that Greenpeace regularly distances itself from.
According to this expert Greenpeace struck the other vessel – this conflicts with GP who said that they had been “rammed”?
Ha! Looks like Phil has well and truley be Done. Never let truth get in the way of a good story.
HJ
Haywood Jablowme. Didn’t I see you on a video at a friends house? It’s a Rog puppet isn’t it – come on fess up.
All very interesting but are we any wiser? “Illegal” is not the right word to use regarding whaling (or the Iraq war for that matter) There is no single set of laws that all nations must adhere to. If there was, who would decide what they are? Who would enforce them? The West should be more sensitive to other cultures, rather than the usual “we know better” diatribe. Can I remind readers that the West has a long history of inflicting major environmental disruption on this earth. Who are we to turn around and accuse every one else for the worlds problems?
The world is complex……Rejoice in it!!!
u all suck alot of luarens have u ever tried Mc Donalds fish burger? talk about sickness i would sooner have a whale burger instead u stupid hippies
Please send me emails on ur thoughts about greenpeace cuse their a bunch of hippies
I just luv your blog TajaC
…i agree that they will loose all credibilty if they dont jus tell tha truth