Your Opinion on the Sea Shepherds

[Isard]

Originally Posted by redpaintednavi

Well, sometimes we have to take action, because otherwise it can be to late before more or less corrupt politicians have reacted and dared to cross the will of capitalist enterprises or lobby groups that hold back all sort of progressive development. Extra parliamentary action is not terrorsm, instead it can be a way to protect life.

And by the way, who sets the rules? Often it is corporations, lobbyists and similar with the consent of weak politicians. One can just see how matters of marine fishing have been handled lately. No politician dare to cross the fishing industry, eventhough researchers have sound the alarm for years now. Still not much happens, instead marine resources are being depleted and the only ones to try to do anything about it is environmentalists like Sea Shephard, Greenpeace and some others.

TEH CORPORATIONS! TEH CORPORATIONS!

And we come to the heart of the matter. You don't like those in power. Let me tell you something friend, I work for one of "teh corporations" and they have shown the most care and concern for me as an individual, than any other person outside my family. Tangent rant, over.

Fun fact, do you know Greenpeace threw the Sea Shepards out of their organization for committing acts of terrorism? In the words of Stephan Colbert, Tip of my hat to Greenpeace for refusing to harbor terrorists.

[redpaintednavi]

Originally Posted by Aihwa

TEH CORPORATIONS! TEH CORPORATIONS!

And we come to the heart of the matter. You don't like those in power. Let me tell you something friend, I work for one of "teh corporations" and they have shown the most care and concern for me as an individual, than any other person outside my family. Tangent rant, over.

Fun fact, do you know Greenpeace threw the Sea Shepards out of their organization for committing acts of terrorism? In the words of Stephan Colbert, Tip of my hat to Greenpeace for refusing to harbor terrorists.

Noone said that all environmental groups agree of the same methods. Some like Sea Shephard are perhaps less patient. This is not to unusual in different struggles when there are those who want a to go forward fast and hard, and those who want to go forward in a slower, more moderate way. One can always discuss who have the right approach.
But we must not forget that more than often it is the ones in power, auhorities, corporations and similar that use force, and often do it first. Corporations and capitalist enterprises have a long history of using force when they feel their economic interests threatened in some way.

[Fosus]

Whalers are those who commit the crime and Sea Shepherds are the ones who should be thanked for trying to stop them.

[Isard]

Originally Posted by Fosus

Whalers are those who commit the crime and Sea Shepherds are the ones who should be thanked for trying to stop them.

By becoming terrorists. Wonderful, I'm sure if I were to bomb the Republican National convention I'd be hailed as a hero by the rest America.



(for legal reasons, I am going to confirm that that was intended as satire, I do not, nor have I ever planned to commit an act of domestic terrorism on any group or organization.)

[Human No More]

Like I said, I don't like hunting for sport, and they ARE an endangered species... I am completely against illegal whaling, but nobody has the right to completely ban it... If they want to make a difference, they should put pressure on governments to stop illegal whaling and have quotas reduced... Endangering lives politically is just selfish and has a negative impact on the public's perception of environmental groups, same as all these 'animal rights' groups who seem to think humans don't deserve rights either when neither is any more or less important.

A lot of species of fish are endangered too, but I doubt many people here would say 'ALL FISHING MUST BE BANNED AND NOBODY MUST EAT ANY FISH!'. That is why there are limits and restrictions - if more effort is needed, it is on enforcement.

Sentience... There isn't any actual evidence of sentience - if there was, then that would be fine and I would oppose the hunting, but communication itself is not sentience. Yes, there's a lot that isn't understood, but that goes for a LOT of the world.

Originally Posted by redpaintednavi

Well, historically we would still have slavery, nearly the whole of Africa and parts of Asia would perhaps have been European colonies without some extraparliamentiary methods. Also women would perhaps not have the right to vote and apartheid would have reigned in South Africa. Even more trees would have been felled in different parts of the world and the Amazon of Peru and Ecuador would even more than today have been turned into an oil infested, dead swamp.

Campaigning by the public is not terrorism. If people had gone around attacking random people and claiming it was for the cause of abolishing slavery or apartheid, or environmental protection, something tells me that would have had a negative impact on the cause.

And one can not talk about Hamas or Al-Quaida without talking about the history of Israel or the provocative US foreign policy that created Al quida and came to its logical consequense in 9/11. Also it is hard to talk about IRA without discussing the interactions between Ireland and England through the centuries.

Be careful... you are close to being offensive to a lot of people, if interpreted in a certain way, that could almost be seen justifying the atrocities those groups commit. Nobody deserves to get murdered for their government's foreign policy.

But here we do not talk about IRA or Al quaida, we talk about an organisation that try to stop whalers from commiting theft on an international resource and destroy threatened animals.
This must also be seen in the light of Japans plundering of other marine resources as for example Tuna that they overfish and also buy from others in large quantities.

As I said above, yet nobody wants to ban the fishing of tuna... Restrictions are in place for a reason.

[redpaintednavi]

I do not defend Al quida or IRA, I just pointed out that they are the result of historical circumstances and different countries foreign politics. No one deserves to die for their countries or leaders foreign politics, thats true, and that also ought to apply for Iraqis, Afhghans and North Irish catholics.

[Fosus]

Btw, it seems that the difference between acceptable actions and terrorism is very small here. Aihwa talks about throwing a bomb at innocent people and I guess we can all agree that it's terrorism.

But what exactly have Sea Shepherds done that makes them terrorists? They have not killed anyone as far as I know and even if they did, it could be argued not to be terrorism as those whalers are clearly not innocent but directly involved in an illegal act.

[Isard]

They throw chemical bombs designed to make a deck at sea unusable. Tbh I'm surprised none of the crews of the Japanese boats have been killed yet. They've boarded the Whalers vessels as publicity stunts, They RAMMED a whaling vessel.

That's not protesting, that's naval warfare.

[redpaintednavi]

Originally Posted by Aihwa

They throw chemical bombs designed to make a deck at sea unusable. Tbh I'm surprised none of the crews of the Japanese boats have been killed yet. They've boarded the Whalers vessels as publicity stunts, They RAMMED a whaling vessel.

That's not protesting, that's naval warfare.

I am more surprised that not more members of Greenpeace, Sea shephard and others have been killed yet by the pirate-fishers.

[Fosus]

I envy them, those people have a thing worth fighting for.

[Isard]

I have no doubt the seashepards would love a martyr. And the Whalers have shown great restraint. They are the cooler heads in this conflict.

[redpaintednavi]

Originally Posted by Aihwa

I have no doubt the seashepards would love a martyr. And the Whalers have shown great restraint. They are the cooler heads in this conflict.

Well, to run over rubberboats with big ships is not great restraint, it is just sheer luck that not more members of environmental organisations have been killed at sea.

[Isard]

Originally Posted by redpaintednavi

Well, to run over rubberboats with big ships is not great restraint, it is just sheer luck that not more members of environmental organisations have been killed at sea.

Yeah, they sit in front of large moving vessels. That's real smart. Like I said, I'm surprised that the whalers have shown the restraint they do. They're trying not to kill anybody, but the Sea Shepard's are doing their damnedest to get themselves killed.

[redpaintednavi]

Originally Posted by Aihwa

Yeah, they sit in front of large moving vessels. That's real smart. Like I said, I'm surprised that the whalers have shown the restraint they do. They're trying not to kill anybody, but the Sea Shepard's are doing their damnedest to get themselves killed.

Well, sometimes it actually seems that some of the hotheads among whalers really want to kill someone.

[redpaintednavi]

Originally Posted by Aihwa

TEH CORPORATIONS! TEH CORPORATIONS!

And we come to the heart of the matter. You don't like those in power. Let me tell you something friend, I work for one of "teh corporations" and they have shown the most care and concern for me as an individual, than any other person outside my family. Tangent rant, over.

Those who are in power, or belong to corporations are not all inherently evil, but they often have a way to run over those who stand in the way of their political or economical interests.
Also, if politicians really did their job and had the ability to restraint corporations and other economic interests, and, as in the case of whaling and fishing, they listened to the researchers and acted according to that, then probaly we did not need Sea Shephard, Greenpeace or similar organistaions. But as long as economic greed is considered more important than environmental concerns, or in many cases human rights, organisations like Sea Shephard and others are necessary.