Japanese Whalers..... by Calhoun

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

There is no moral equivilant between harvesting whales and invading Poland, also these protestors are not a nation acting in its own defense or with regards to their treaty obligations.

Your example would require war with Japan rather then violent action on the high seas by non-government actors.

Blah blah blah. Might makes right is all you ever come down to. He who has the gold, makes the rules, and by God, they must be obeyed.
It was legal to invade Iraq BECAUSE WE SAID SO.
It is legal to kill whales for "study" and then consumption BECAUSE THEY SAY SO.
If everyone in this world were a lawyer, the peeps at the top would develop a "Unique & Profound Ministry" or some such to create a NEW convoluted language to fuck this world up legally in the name of profit.
In your job you certainly do good works, but defending the level of corruption that exists with a simple "well then change the laws" manifests your lap dog status to the MAN, whoever that may be at the moment.

I fart in your general direction.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 9:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.

Eff 'em. Live by

die by...whatever.
Jerks. Good Nazis. Murders.
Take your pick.

Sorry. I grew up watching Flipper.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 9:30 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.
Quote:
have no problems with killing people whom you disagree on moral issues.
is a snark, pure and simple. I'm certainly not calling for violence, and said I agreed with you on that point, and potentially others.

Of course, you SHOULD realize that most of what I post is at least half-snarky, so it's not as if you've never been warned... ;)

Quote:

From what I've read, the Japanese HAVE been more aggressive, but that's neither here nor there. Your comment lessens my respect for you.

Can't help you on the respect issue, but from what I'VE read, it seems there's plenty of aggression and incivility on both sides of this issue.

Quote:

I now see you're happy to go after those of us who usually agree with you, and paint us with the same brush as those who are regularly out-there and call for violence. Didn't think you were like that; thanx for putting me straight.

Wait a minute - That sounds suspciously like you're asking me to apply one set of rules and standards to those I usually agree with, and another set of rules and standards to those I DISAGREE with. I had thought you were more objective than that, and interested in the truth of things more than the agenda and spin of them. Thanks for putting me straight on that. ;)

(And yes, THAT was snark, pure and simple.) You and I *DO* agree on most things, but as Lennon said, "If you want money for people with minds that hate, all I can tell you is, Brother, you'll have to wait."

And I realize I quoted your response, but I also realize that YOU personally aren't calling for violence, but you're the most active "opposition" member on this thread, so I tend to quote you and then address others in a more general sense. My apologies for that. My rant against the "by every means necessary" crowd is aimed more at those who are calling for violence. I won't advocate violence against sailors who are, for whatever you may think of them, just trying to do their jobs and earn a living. That's like spitting on soldiers because you disagree with the war. Don't spit on the soldiers, and don't sink the whaling ship with the Japanese sailors on board - if you really MUST go after somebody's blood, go after the heads of the companies that own the ships and sign the contracts to take whales and then sell them. Even if they DO claim it's just for research. (What are they researching, anyway? How tasty whales are? Is that legitimate research?)

Anyhoo, I'm not a big fan of attacking boats, BY ANYBODY.

I can understand why tempers get heated during this debate, and about this issue. Still, "Kill the fuckers!" is hardly ever the correct course of action, and there's usually more constructive ways of meeting the problem and solving it.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 9:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

I can understand why tempers get heated during this debate, and about this issue. Still, "Kill the fuckers!" is hardly ever the correct course of action, and there's usually more constructive ways of meeting the problem and solving it.

Violence is never the best solution. And it should be the last option to consider, always.
But then, I would shed no tears for peeps on a whaling ship should they be killed by some wacky extremists. Just like I shed no tears for the cooks aboard the Death Star- they knew what was up, what they were serving aboard.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 9:42 AM

http://www.thegenerator.com.au/index.php/news/8-sustainable/2565-the-a
ustralian-senate-condemns-japanese-violence

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Okay, I accept what you say, Mike. And no, I wasn't asking you to use different sets of rules, I dislike it when you snark at anyone, often because your snarks don't really relate to what was actually said. I have the right to resent it when what you say seems directly aimed at me and is patently untrue.

I'm NOT the most active opposition voice on this issue; reread and you'll see that.

I'll freely grant that the Sea Shepherd has been condemned for using violent means, and recently HAS used more violence against the Japanese whalers than they have against SSCS, but historically that wasn't the case. There are documented instances of the SSCS' violent actions against Japanese whalers, and the IWC is calling for them to be condemned. But the fact is it's happened on both sides, period. And both sides are wrong. You can easily find more recent stories on the Sea Shepherd's actions against the whalers, so I'll just quote a couple of stories on the other side:

Quote:
The anti-whale hunting group the Sea Shepherd said a Japanese security ship has illegally followed them into French Antarctic waters and fired "a military class weapon" at their helicopter.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society said the Japanese ship the Shonan Maru No 2 had been following its vessel, the Steve Irwin, for nine of the 10 days it had been sailing since leaving Fremantle.

A Sea Shepherd spokeswoman said the Steve Irwin entered French Antarctic territorial waters, with permission from the French Base at Dumont Durville, in a bid to lose the Shonan Maru.

But, the Shonan Maru No 2 followed the Steve Irwin without the French's permission, Sea Shepherd said.

The Sea Shepherd group said the French base had confirmed that the Japanese ship neither requested nor received permission to enter French waters.

The spokeswoman said the Steve Irwin helicopter then flew back to film the Shonan Maru in its pursuit.

"In response, the crew of the Japanese ship activated their Long Range Acoustical Device (LRAD) at the Sea Shepherd helicopter," she said.

"LRAD is a military class weapon."

Helicopter pilot Chris Aultman said activating the weapon was extremely irresponsible.

"That device can cause nausea and disorientation and the use of it against an aircraft is extremely dangerous," he said.

The Sea Shepherd helicopter returned to the Steve Irwin for safety, at which point the Shonan Maru increased speed and aimed their water canons at the helicopter on the landing pad, the spokeswoman said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/sea-shepherd-compla
in-about-japans-military-fightback/story-fn3dxity-1225811661366

The Australian Senate

Quote:
condemns the violent actions of the Japanese whaling fleet, who have reportedly thrown metal balls at environmental activists

Quote:
....A group of extremist whalers were deliberately trying to ram the Sea Shepherd ship Steve Irwin and trying to disable the ship's propeller....Over the last week we have witnessed and documented Japanese whalers throwing projectiles at Sea Shepherd crewmembers

http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/news-090211-1.html

I repeat: Both are wrong.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

I can understand why tempers get heated during this debate, and about this issue. Still, "Kill the fuckers!" is hardly ever the correct course of action, and there's usually more constructive ways of meeting the problem and solving it.

Violence is never the best solution. And it should be the last option to consider, always.
But then, I would shed no tears for peeps on a whaling ship should they be killed by some wacky extremists. Just like I shed no tears for the cooks aboard the Death Star- they knew what was up, what they were serving aboard.

The laughing Chrisisall

I wondered if anyone was going to bring that argument up. Surprised it took so long. :)

As you say, I might not shed tears for the crew of a whaling ship if it were sunk, but I'll likely not shed any tears for a bunch of environmental terrorists if THEY were sunk, either. Both sides are behaving badly, and saying, "They did it, too!" isn't a justification in second grade, so I don't know why it would be in this instance, either.

Others refuse to play by "the rules". That doesn't mean WE have to follow. We can be better than that; we really can. We can refuse to torture. We can refuse to be terrified. And we can refuse to endorse piracy on the high seas.

I can understand why those poor Somalis take the actions they take, too, but I sure as hell don't condone those actions, and I'll not shed a tear when a crew of pirates gets shot in the neck by snipers. As with the Death Star crew, they knew what they were doing, and they knew the risks before climbing aboard.

I'm with Gino on this one. Wanna enact stricter laws and harsher penalties? I'm in. Wanna seize boats and levy heavy fines? Woo boy, let's go. Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own. And remember, if I decide I don't like what YOU are doing, I'm fully within my rights (according to you) to sink your boat, too.

Sometimes you go by the law even when it's a shitty law, because if the law doesn't protect all of us, it doesn't protect any of us. And you work for better laws.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:17 AM

Quote:
Posted by Niki:

I repeat: Both are wrong.

Yup, I figured there was something in this mess we'd find to agree on.

About "Hero" and his point about taking on the Japanese Navy: The Japanese Navy hasn't been a viable force since the Battle of Midway, and hasn't officially even EXISTED since 1947, when it was permanently disbanded under Japan's new constitution. They DO have a Maritime Defense Force, but it is critically short of offensive capabilities (by design and constitutional decree), and is also critically short of resupply ships and logistical support, so it is incapable of projecting military power much of anywhere without strong support from the United States Air Force and Navy.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:35 AM

Interesting, while I have my own take on the topic at hand, and for a couple reasons cannot add my two cents to it, I do think this semi-related and very salient bit should be chewed over by all.

Would You Hurt Me If I Said No to Your Politics?
http://www.strike-the-root.com/node/25638

The way disagreement has the potential to spiral brought it to mind as very relevant.

Which always begs the question of how MUCH force are you willing to use, if negotiation and reason fail ?

I think the folk in that extremely awesome looking boat there shouldn't bitch so much - they were aware of the potential when they entered the situation, and knowingly entered it of their own free will - at which point they HAVE to assume some responsibility for the risks they deliberately took.

Doesn't absolve the other ship of responsibility for THEIR actions, but trying to pretend they're blameless is bullshit, unless you need rescue or are transferring supplies/passengers, you don't come THAT close to someone elses boat on open water unless you *want* to start something, period.

Oh, and just a personal pet peeve, at any time during which you have prominently displayed, or especially, raised on the mast, the Jolly Roger...
Do *NOT* go whining to the law about anything that happens during that period, it's fucking disrespectful and insulting - if you're gonna go outlaw have the damned balls to stand behind it.
Sorry, that rooks me on a personal level, is all.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:42 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.

Eff 'em. Live by

die by...whatever.
Jerks. Good Nazis. Murders.
Take your pick.

Sorry. I grew up watching Flipper.

The laughing Chrisisall

Effin' A Chris! Besides, how could anyone in the world continue to kill whales after her tearful and powerfully desperate pleas on behalf of whales???

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:45 AM

I wonder if the Japanese could take them prisoner, and hold them as "enemy combatants"...

Of course, I'm sure we'd hear plenty of talk about how "they're AMERICANS, DAMMIT!" and "they have AMERICAN RIGHTS!" - even though they're in international waters far, far away from American soil and jurisdiction...

And Frem, thanks for jumping in. I've been wondering what your take on it would be, and on the Jolly Roger bit, I'm right there with ya. If you're going out with the specific intention of disobeying the laws of the high seas, then for the love of all that's right and holy, DON'T COME BITCHING ABOUT IT WHEN SOMEONE ELSE DISOBEYS THOSE SAME LAWS AND SINKS YOUR ASS! Honestly, it's not that they're mad at being sunk - they're just mad because they got sunk FIRST, and they got sunk before they were done filming.

And that's the part that rooks ME, really - they're not doing it because it's anything they profoundly believe in, I don't think; they're doing it FOR A FUCKING REALITY SHOW. For ratings. For money. And they're bitching about the whalers whom they say are only in it for money.

Seems disingenuous, is all.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:50 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

And here I'll insert a remark from the "Animal Intelligence" thread, just 'cuz: Isn't it amazing how gentle and compassionate almost all whale and dolphin species are, in return, to man (well, not counting killer whales, but they DO mostly only attack men when they mistake a wetsuit for a seal)? Even going out of their way numerous times to save them? Wolves almost never attack humans, yet we go after them like crazy! Which is the more compassionate species? (rhetorical question, obviously!)

Just to keep things even: The people who go out in the Sea Shepherd know perfectly well the danger they are in and they accept that danger. It's totally predictable for them to make hay in the media over the Japanese boat's action...everyone does. Simple as that.

Quote:
it's not that they're mad at being sunk - they're just mad because they got sunk FIRST, and they got sunk before they were done filming.

I cry bullshit--unless you're just snarking--otherwise, are you seriously saying you know what their full intent was and what's in their minds?? By the way, they've never "sunk" another ship, but irregardless of that, I take issue with your assumption. Like I said, they'll use the media, and this was a prime way to get coverage and rile people up against the Japanese whalers. Working pretty good, too, from what I see on the internet and news. No doubt, except for Faux Noise.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
at any time during which you have prominently displayed, or especially, raised on the mast, the Jolly Roger...
Do *NOT* go whining to the law about anything that happens during that period, it's fucking disrespectful and insulting - if you're gonna go outlaw have the damned balls to stand behind it.

Absolutely agree, matey.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:59 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I may not have read everything on the matter, but did they go whining to the "law"? I thought they just broadcast the incident and used it for media coverage; there literally IS no law to run to out there, is there? Just as the Japanese couldn't get them to stop harrassing them, they can't look to anyone else to keep them safe from the Japanese, isn't that so? Also, if you want to be totally accurate about it, the Japanese whalers are doing something against the "law" in the first place...except there's no law against THEM, either.

I'm not arguing in favor of the Sea Shepherd, by the way, despite my heart being with them; I'm trying to keep things even, because I believe they ARE. Both are performing actions which should be illegal, neither one has my sympathy or support when they do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 11:59 AM

Very much so, which is what struck me raw as well.

Reason it pushed a personal button is that in my youth we did raise the Jolly Roger over something we pulled against one of the companies dumping toxins in the Patapsco river, and because not one of us would confess the "authorities" couldn't build a case against us over it.

Thinkin back on it, I woulda never guessed I'd be sittin here one day with a real pegleg, eyepatch*, and a cat flopped on my shoulders...

Yarr?!

-F

*Nothin serious, just that one eye going off on it's own, so we're hoping this'll help fix it, but it's screwing with my depth perception something awful and it's all I can do not to hurl the thing in frustration right now.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 12:02 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Mmmm, a bit of trouble with that one, Frem. You say YOU utilized the Jolly Roger to make a statement, yet you couldn't be caught and punished because nobody would cop to it. Ergo, you understand the reason for using it.

Then, despite the button-pushing issue, how can you be so vehement against the Sea Shepherd doing the same? THEY can't run away and not be caught and held responsible for the action, like you and your helpers could...eh?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 12:13 PM

Quote:
THEY can't run away and not be caught and held responsible for the action, like you and your helpers could...eh?

Well, they CAN'T run away, because their boat's been sunk. They COULD HAVE run away BEFORE their boat was sunk, but they chose not to.

And yes, at this point I'm just playing. I'm trying to inject a little levity into the situation.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 12:27 PM

Quote:
I cry bullshit--unless you're just snarking--otherwise, are you seriously saying you know what their full intent was and what's in their minds?? By the way, they've never "sunk" another ship, but irregardless of that, I take issue with your assumption. Like I said, they'll use the media, and this was a prime way to get coverage and rile people up against the Japanese whalers.

Please don't cry. You should KNOW I'm just snarking. I've never been completely serious about anything in my life, Niki. I was the guy laying on the gurney in the E.R. with more than a dozen broken bones and a team of doctors telling my parents that I was almost certainly going to lose my leg, and I was the one cracking jokes and telling the staff, "Don't worry - I'm sure there's absolutely nothing wrong with me that a series of expensive operations can't prolong."

I learned a long, long time ago that you have to find the humor in bad situations, because if you start crying about the all the tragedy in the world, you'll never stop.

And no, I don't know exactly what their motives and intents were towards the other ship. But at the same time, none of you here know with any certainty what the intentions of the Japanese were towards the Sea Shepherds. That hasn't stopped several people here from saying that the whalers "clearly" and "violently" "attacked" the Sea Shepherds, despite having no real evidence to back any of those claims.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 12:28 PM

Cause not only did they admit it, they went on to try to morally justify it, which they might have a point with and all, but my issue is that if you're gonna raise that particular banner over an act, you absolutely, totally, should not be claiming any moral superiority whatever - it's an admission of sorts that you are knowingly doing something criminal... I dunno how to explain it, call it a code, if you like, but once you put the banner in the air, any pretense to moral high ground is gone.

They actually did "catch" us, but without an admission they didn't have enough evidence to charge us - besides which, I doubt the company in question would want it on record in open court exactly what was comin outta them pipes we stopped up.

I'm not all that much against what they did, mind you - just that they strike me as playing a victim/martyrhood mentality which ill suits their actions and comes off as kind of weaselish, yes ?

Aw hell, I probably ain't gettin it across so well, but leastways I tried.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 12:34 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"If you're going out with the specific intention of disobeying the laws of the high seas ..."

Well, there are a few navigation laws, along with who has authority (ie the captain). (Coastal and high seas navigation - that's another thing I studied up on, aside from helicopter ground school and a few other odd things - ADD has its benefits, sometimes. Anyway ...) A smaller ship doesn't cut into the path of a larger ship. Two ships meeting in that configuration must both move to (their) starboard. It doesn't look as if the smaller ship was actively cutting into the path of the larger ship. BOTH vessels should have moved to starboard. By aiming at the smaller vessel, the captain of the larger ship was in violation.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 1:01 PM

CALHOUN

Quote:
Kwicko wrote:
Friday, January 08, 2010 11:01

Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own.

The Australian Gov/Navy intercepts people smugglers, confiscates their boats and sinks them without the killing.. perhaps this is the way we should go?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 1:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:
Quote:
Kwicko wrote:
Friday, January 08, 2010 11:01

Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own.

The Australian Gov/Navy intercepts people smugglers, confiscates their boats and sinks them without the killing.. perhaps this is the way we should go?

or even better impound them until the fines are payed, or auction them

then use the funds to pay for the interdiction mission

mind you ships that size do make nice reefs

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 1:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"If you're going out with the specific intention of disobeying the laws of the high seas ..."

Well, there are a few navigation laws, along with who has authority (ie the captain). (Coastal and high seas navigation - that's another thing I studied up on, aside from helicopter ground school and a few other odd things - ADD has its benefits, sometimes. Anyway ...) A smaller ship doesn't cut into the path of a larger ship. Two ships meeting in that configuration must both move to (their) starboard. It doesn't look as if the smaller ship was actively cutting into the path of the larger ship. BOTH vessels should have moved to starboard. By aiming at the smaller vessel, the captain of the larger ship was in violation.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

See, when I watched the video, it looked to me like the smaller vessel DID cut across the path of the larger one, and the larger one DID veer to starboard. Maybe we're seeing the video differently, but from what I saw and you said, it seems the whalers are the ones in the right. (And it pains my hands to even type those words together!)

It's all screwy...

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 1:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:
Quote:
Kwicko wrote:
Friday, January 08, 2010 11:01

Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own.

The Australian Gov/Navy intercepts people smugglers, confiscates their boats and sinks them without the killing.. perhaps this is the way we should go?

Perhaps. It's not a bad idea, especially if you make artificial reefs of them, which become home to more sealife (I was going to say "fish", but surely someone would then have to point out that whales aren't fish, they're mammals...) ;)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 1:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:
Quote:
Kwicko wrote:
Friday, January 08, 2010 11:01

Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own.

The Australian Gov/Navy intercepts people smugglers, confiscates their boats and sinks them without the killing.. perhaps this is the way we should go?

or even better impound them until the fines are payed, or auction them

then use the funds to pay for the interdiction mission

mind you ships that size do make nice reefs

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

Now you're talking! There's an idea I can 100% get behind.

Or, seize their ships if in violation, and if they can't/won't pay the fines, you could always give their ships to the animal rights groups, just as an added extra "Eff You" to the whaling industry. :)

Oh, and one last thing - Maybe we can push to get some REAL clarification and restriction upon what "research" consists of. I mean, if these "research" vessels are taking whales that consistently turn up in fish markets and restaurants, the only real "research" I can see behind that is the research into how tasty and delicious whale meat is, and I wouldn't really consider that a valid scientific endeavor.

So, in the end, most of us have the same ideals and goals; we're just approaching them from wildly differing points of view. It's almost as if we're all touching different parts of some giant animal and trying to describe what that animal is. ;)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 2:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:
Quote:
Kwicko wrote:
Friday, January 08, 2010 11:01

Wanna sink ships because their crews are doing stuff you don't like? You're on your own.

The Australian Gov/Navy intercepts people smugglers, confiscates their boats and sinks them without the killing.. perhaps this is the way we should go?

or even better impound them until the fines are payed, or auction them

then use the funds to pay for the interdiction mission

mind you ships that size do make nice reefs

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

Now you're talking! There's an idea I can 100% get behind.

Or, seize their ships if in violation, and if they can't/won't pay the fines, you could always give their ships to the animal rights groups, just as an added extra "Eff You" to the whaling industry. :)

Oh, and one last thing - Maybe we can push to get some REAL clarification and restriction upon what "research" consists of. I mean, if these "research" vessels are taking whales that consistently turn up in fish markets and restaurants, the only real "research" I can see behind that is the research into how tasty and delicious whale meat is, and I wouldn't really consider that a valid scientific endeavor.

So, in the end, most of us have the same ideals and goals; we're just approaching them from wildly differing points of view. It's almost as if we're all touching different parts of some giant animal and trying to describe what that animal is. ;)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

But now that we are there....

What do you do, as in the case of the Somali pirates... they went to the UN, stated what was going on showed evidence, etc...( mid 90's I believe) and were then ignored

Not so much as they didn't agree with you
Not so much as you didn't have a case

just they didn't care to do anything...

where do you go from there?

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 10:24 PM

PERFESSERGEE

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Unfair, Mike. Only one or two have called for violence against the whalers.

Eff 'em. Live by

die by...whatever.
Jerks. Good Nazis. Murders.
Take your pick.

Sorry. I grew up watching Flipper.

The laughing Chrisisall

Chris,

I know you're not laughing in the least at this photo, and thanks for providing me some ammunition about Japanese whaling. The head in this photo is of a whale belonging to the Family Ziphiidae, often called the "beaked whales". They are by far the least known of all whales; they live on the high seas and never come near shore, and a few species are known only from the skeletons of carcasses that have washed up onto beaches (some of them as much as a century ago).

My point here has to do with the "mindset" of the Japanese whalers (I was going to say "philosophy", but that word suggests some degree of thought within the context of marine ecology and I doubt that there is any such thing).

And that "mindset" values the killing of the rarest of the rare - species that we don't know anything about! I've already pointed out that the Japanese kill and sell all kinds of whale, legal or not.

(Note that "Hero" never responded to my post that the Japanese have vastly exceeded their legal rights according to treaties they agreed to and signed. Any comments "Hero"?)

And then there's the issue of the tradition of the sea, of rescuing those in need (even during warfare, once a battle was concluded, the victor assisted in salvaging the vanquished). Instead of helping those involved in a collision in the coldest and most hazardous of oceans, the whaler hosed them down with pressure pumps. The most reprehensible conduct imaginable. Absolutely disgusting. They should be prosecuted under international law.

perfessergee

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 8, 2010 10:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
]Violence is never the best solution. And it should be the last option to consider, always.
But then, I would shed no tears for peeps on a whaling ship should they be killed by some wacky extremists. Just like I shed no tears for the cooks aboard the Death Star- they knew what was up, what they were serving aboard.

The laughing Chrisisall

But dude... don't you live in the east end of the death star?

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 1:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by perfessergee:
(Note that "Hero" never responded to my post that the Japanese have vastly exceeded their legal rights according to treaties they agreed to and signed. Any comments "Hero"?)

And then there's the issue of the tradition of the sea, of rescuing those in need (even during warfare, once a battle was concluded, the victor assisted in salvaging the vanquished). Instead of helping those involved in a collision in the coldest and most hazardous of oceans, the whaler hosed them down with pressure pumps. The most reprehensible conduct imaginable. Absolutely disgusting. They should be prosecuted under international law.

Japanese Whalers are acting legally unless and until they are convicted in Court. If you are not satisfied with the Courts then run people for office, make signs, stand around chanting 'we shall overcome', rally public sntiment, pressure the govt to change the laws, etc. However, the evidence and charges are being brought by the same folks who are engaged in repeated acts of violence against the whalers. Not a lot for the public to support (unless the Jap whaler were to ram an innocent protest vessel).

Its self-serving at best.

The issue here is not the conduct of the whalers, its the conduct of the protestors.

If you watch these videos... http://www.icrwhale.org/gpandsea.htm

...you see Japanese whalers being rammed (twice) by protest boat the Steve Irwin.

You see bottles of toxic acid being fired at the whalers.

You see close approaches and 'crossing the bow' by the Ady Gil (the ship that allowed itself to be run over).

Why the dangerous close approach? You can see them deploying ropes to catch in the Jap's rudders and propellers to disable them and so a laser device could be used against the whaling ship.

All the attacking ships have a skull and crossbones. This is piracy and terrorism and its only a matter of time till they get someone killed.

Edited to add: Bob Barker (he's old, but still kicks ass) rescued the stranded protestors and left the area. The Jap ship remained 'on scene' and recorded the rescue and would have been available to pull them from the sea had it been necessary. As for being hosed down...that's only after hosing them down for a good long time before the collision, if they didn't like getting wet, they should never have approached in the first place, the video shows those pumps have extremely short range. It also does not appear that they were intentionally hosed down after the collision, but rather as the ship was passing in the few seconds immediately following the incident as part of the continuing action. Now if you have video of the ship stopping or coming around for another pass with the cannons, then I'd say you have an issue, but the video speaks for itself.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 4:20 AM

Quote:

Edited to add: Bob Barker (he's old, but still kicks ass) rescued the stranded protestors and left the area.

Note: "Bob Barker" in this case refers to the SHIP, the Bob Barker, not the actual PERSON Bob Barker, who was nowhere near all this kerfluffle.

For the most part, I find myself in the uncomfortable position of having to agree with "Hero" on this one. But I do take issue with his claim that someone is acting legally unless and until they're convicted in court. That's a lie. They're acting ILLEGALLY; they just haven't been convicted and punished - YET.

You wouldn't argue that a serial killer isn't a criminal, would you? Or that Bill Ayers ISN'T a terrorist, right? I mean, I thought you were one of the ones who claimed he IS (and WAS) a terrorist, just one who could never be convicted. If that's so, then by your standards listed above, he wasn't doing anything illegal; if he were, he'd have been convicted, and if he wasn't convicted, there was no crime.

You seem to be falling into the notion that if there's no punishment, there's no crime. I don't buy it. A drug dealer who doesn't get caught is still breaking the law.

Now, as to what the Sea Shepherds can do about it... I suppose they can try to sue the Japanese whalers, and whoever sent the Shonen Maru out on this run, in civil court. They'd likely find a sympathetic jury (even though the jury is SUPPOSED to be impartial) to listen to their case, and I'm sure they could dig up all sorts of nastiness in discovery to embarrass the whaling industry, and they might win significant damages. But a lot of what they have on record might ALSO come out in discovery, so that can be a double-edged sword...

Of course, that all presumes that an international court would hear the case, and that the rules of evidence at least somewhat follow those in the U.S. court system, which is not a foregone conclusion.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 4:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by perfessergee:

My point here has to do with the "mindset" of the Japanese whalers (I was going to say "philosophy", but that word suggests some degree of thought within the context of marine ecology and I doubt that there is any such thing).

And that "mindset" values the killing of the rarest of the rare - species that we don't know anything about! I've already pointed out that the Japanese kill and sell all kinds of whale, legal or not.

Thank you, Perfesser, for putting that so succinctly. While I may disagree with the ACTIONS of the protesters, I fully agree with their goal. We share the same destination; we differ on which route to take to get there.

And yes, there IS a certain "cachet" to eating the rarest of the rare. If you can find an endangered species, you'll also find someone who wants to roast it on a stick, just so they can brag about eating something so rare. It's a sickness of the soul, I think.

Quote:

(Note that "Hero" never responded to my post that the Japanese have vastly exceeded their legal rights according to treaties they agreed to and signed. Any comments "Hero"?)

It's beyond time for the international community to put pressure on EVERY governing body to ramp up the pressure on Japan in this area.

Quote:

And then there's the issue of the tradition of the sea, of rescuing those in need (even during warfare, once a battle was concluded, the victor assisted in salvaging the vanquished). Instead of helping those involved in a collision in the coldest and most hazardous of oceans, the whaler hosed them down with pressure pumps. The most reprehensible conduct imaginable. Absolutely disgusting. They should be prosecuted under international law.

That's also where I have my biggest problems with the Sea Shepherds group, in the other videos where they are clearly ramming whaling ships with an equally large vessel. This isnt in your bathtub, or in the nearby lake - THIS IS HUNDREDS, IF NOT *THOUSANDS* - OF MILES FROM SHORE!!! You fuck up and unintentionally sink somebody out here, and people are most likely going to die. This kind of assing around, by EITHER SIDE (or by ANYBODY, when you get right down to it), is unconscionable and unacceptable. I'm glad the Barker was there to pick up the stranded crew of the Ady Gil, but you'll note in several of the pictures that the Shonen Maru is at a full stop close by, just in case. Sailors - even ones who are bitter enemies - generally DO have a sense of honor and obey "the rules", whether written or unwritten.

In this instance, it appears both sides my have violated those rules, but when it all went wrong, clearer heads did seem to prevail.

On the bright side, this incident, while it cost the group their "flagship" DID bring them a metric shit-tonne of publicity and exposure, so I've little doubt that they'll pick up something new with which to attack other ships.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 5:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You seem to be falling into the notion that if there's no punishment, there's no crime. I don't buy it. A drug dealer who doesn't get caught is still breaking the law.

I'm not falling into anything...except the presumption of innocence.

For liberals that presumption is subjective. If you like the Defendant, they get all the protections and presumptions in the world. If you don't like them then they are guilty regardless of actual innocence.

We are not talking about drug dealors being guilty. Besides the fact that the whalers are engaging in a legal activity, which drug dealing is not...we're talking about Joe, the guy accused of being a drug dealor or in this case Hiro, the guy accused of whaling illegally.

Joe gets the presumption of innocence, I can't just go out and ram my car into his. Hiro is guilty, because you hate whalers. Perhaps a lynching is in order.

And lets not ignore the cultural and racial implications of some white (mostly European) liberal intellectual types dictating to the little misguided orientals just what business they are allowed or not allowed to engage in.

And finally, Japan is no slouch or 2nd rate country to be screwing around with. In about fifty years they went from Feudal swords to sinking the Russian Navy in a war of industrial powers. Fifty years from now do you want Japan telling Sweden what their laws should be and using this as a precedent to enforce them on the high seas.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 5:51 AM

Quote:
For liberals that presumption is subjective. If you like the Defendant, they get all the protections and presumptions in the world. If you don't like them then they are guilty regardless of actual innocence.

Oh how quickly you forget...

You were among the blithering hordes who wanted to lynch Obama for "palling around with domestic terrorists" like Bill Ayers, who was never convicted, and therefore MUST be considered innocent. Unless you're one of those "liberals" you accuse of having subjective presumptions about guilt. ;)

In fifty years, Japan built a navy. And in five years, they went from the largest aircraft carrier force in the world, and the second-largest navy on Earth, to not having a navy at all. So what was your point?

By the way, you misspelled "dealor". Haven't you learned yet that spelling matters? Seems if only they'd spelled Cap'n Underpants's name right, they'd have had him before he stepped on a U.S.-bound flight. So yes, spelling DOES count. :)

Quote:
Joe gets the presumption of innocence, I can't just go out and ram my car into his. Hiro is guilty, because you hate whalers. Perhaps a lynching is in order.

Can you show me where I presumed or pronounced "Hiro" guilty?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 6:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

I'm not falling into anything...except the presumption of innocence.

"Fuck you, asshole."
Really, I'm done with you man. There was a time when you seemed to be making sense, now it's same-ol-by-the-book dogma with you. Like a good little man of law, objective reality does not exist. Unless a judge, the most incorruptible & infallible of all God's creations, says it does.

So sorry you broke up with that girl; she was a good influence on you.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 6:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

This isnt in your bathtub, or in the nearby lake - THIS IS HUNDREDS, IF NOT *THOUSANDS* - OF MILES FROM SHORE!!! You fuck up and unintentionally sink somebody out here, and people are most likely going to die. This kind of assing around, by EITHER SIDE (or by ANYBODY, when you get right down to it), is unconscionable and unacceptable.

I don't disagree on any particular point.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 8:36 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Geez, I go away overnight and look what happens!

Guess I just have two things to add:

Quote:
Japanese Whalers are acting legally unless and until they are convicted in Court.

It's true, they are technically acting "legally" in that there is no international law against whaling...which is what we need. I don't know we get one tho'...does anyone know how you get an INTERNATIONAL law for what happens on the high seas? I'd like to know.

Because electing officials ain't gonna do it...it has to be numerous countries agreeing on anything to impact the legality of their action. They've been condemned for their actions for decades; they don't care. There is no court under which to sue them, and they’d lose a lawsuit because there is no “law” they’ve broken.

They are acting "illegally" in that they did sign a "treaty" and are continuing to take whales under the guise of "research". That can't be enforced, even tho' the vast majority of countries in the world are strongly against whaling. (as evidenced by the actions and writings of the IRWC). Nobody's going to hold Japan accountable, so who else is there to fight for the whales who are being taken "legally" illegally?

There is no defense for either side except the use of violence, which should not be acceptable to anyone

Quote:
Not a lot for the public to support (unless the Jap whaler were to ram an innocent protest vessel).

No support from YOU, and many like you, but vast support from everyone all over the world who recognizes that what the whalers are doing is a sham and wrong in these days when we’re destroying species daily, and where whale and dolphin intelligence has been recognized and is thought highly of. Look at the furor this incident raised internationally to see for yourself.

Quote:
For liberals that presumption is subjective. If you like the Defendant, they get all the protections and presumptions in the world. If you don't like them then they are guilty regardless of actual innocence.

What bullshit!! It’s downright laughable. What about all the laws the past administration inflicted on our legal system? What about the people who have made a hero out of the abortion-doctor killer? There are a million examples of right-wingers IGNORING the illegalities of those they “like”. To say it’s just the liberals is just plain absurd.

Quote:
And lets not ignore the cultural and racial implications of some white (mostly European) liberal intellectual types dictating to the little misguided orientals just what business they are allowed or not allowed to engage in.

Again laughable. Aside from what was dictated after America WON A WAR against Japan, who started that war against us, the Japanese have done precisely whatever they want, irregardless of how it might harm another country! Add to that the fact that all the countries in the IWRC voted FOR the ban on whaling except four, three of which are white Europeans. Here’s the membership list of the IWC. Show me all the “poor little” countries that "America" is telling what to do with regard to whaling: http://www.iwcoffice.org/commission/iwcmain.htm#nations

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 9:14 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"See, when I watched the video, it looked to me like the smaller vessel DID cut across the path of the larger one, and the larger one DID veer to starboard. Maybe we're seeing the video differently, but from what I saw and you said, it seems the whalers are the ones in the right. (And it pains my hands to even type those words together!)

It's all screwy..."

The laws of the sea are different from traffic laws b/c your FIRST AND ONLY duty is to avoid collision at all costs - even if you don't follow the rules of the road (so to speak). And speaking of which, since there are no lane markers or road signs or stoplights, what there is is agreement on who gives way and how do you pass each other.

As to who was to give way to avoid collision, in the two videos I saw, it was pretty much a draw AS THINGS WERE AT THE START. The larger vessel, being larger, is presumed to be less maneuverable. However, the smaller vessel may not have been underway at the time. At the least, moving more slowly gives it a right to stay its course.

Generally, each vessel moves to starboard. BUT - to ENSURE that they avoid collision in this case - the vessels each needed to move to port. They signal their intentions with two short blasts to avoid misunderstandings.

In this case, the larger vessel veered so as to collide with the smaller one, violating the first duty. That should lose the captain his captaincy, at minimum.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 10:58 AM

Hero

Quote:
All the attacking ships have a skull and crossbones. This is piracy and terrorism and its only a matter of time till they get someone killed.

That's being redundant, Piracy I'll give you, that's where my issue is with it, once you've raised the Jolly Roger you do *NOT GET* presumption of innocence anymore, not whatever.

All else aside, that's kinda my issue with the folks in the pretty little boat there.

When you raise the pirate banner and get in someone elses personal space on the high seas, whatever happens to you AFTER that, isn't something you can bitch about to me - morals be damned, YOUR intentions were made clear by that single act alone.

That's not to say I don't sympathize with their cause and all, just that once you've put the banner in the air, anyone not flyin it has cause to consider you a potentially armed hostile and act accordingly, up to and including sinking your ass on the spot - and while not well versed in maritime law, I do believe they have legal justification to forgo "duty to render assistance" if they belive it will present a danger to their vessel, AND I believe they have full justification to actually outright seize any vessel flying the banner, although they must return it to it's country of origin thereafter.

That said, with all the bruha raised about it, one could say they accomplished their objective more successfully than they had hoped to.

I just wish they fully understood that the mere act of even raising that banner is entirely sufficient justification for any craft under any flag to blow you out of the water right on the spot, and leave any survivors to fend for themselves - it's not just an idle prank, it means something.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 1:06 PM

Frem, Rue, and Niki,

YES to pretty much everything each of you posted in your most recent posts.

There absofreakinglutely need to be stronger laws and treaties. The UN is a place to start, but given our recent actions, it's not like we hold any moral high ground when it comes to trying to get people to follow what the UN says...

Most modern seafaring craft have some sort of GPS systems on board, so it really shouldn't be too hard to figure out who did what, and when, in leading up to this incident. 'Course, one boat is now a couples miles down under the ocean, so it's data isn't going to be easy to retrieve, but authorities can likely get a look at any "black box" the whaler has onboard.

And as Frem has pointed out, for all the cock-ups on both sides, this certainly HAS given the anti-whaling crowd a huge boost in publicity.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 5:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Frem, Rue, and Niki,

YES to pretty much everything each of you posted in your most recent posts.

There absofreakinglutely need to be stronger laws and treaties. The UN is a place to start, but given our recent actions, it's not like we hold any moral high ground when it comes to trying to get people to follow what the UN says...

Most modern seafaring craft have some sort of GPS systems on board, so it really shouldn't be too hard to figure out who did what, and when, in leading up to this incident. 'Course, one boat is now a couples miles down under the ocean, so it's data isn't going to be easy to retrieve, but authorities can likely get a look at any "black box" the whaler has onboard.

And as Frem has pointed out, for all the cock-ups on both sides, this certainly HAS given the anti-whaling crowd a huge boost in publicity.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

So what happens if this goes before the UN and once again they take No Position...

does that make the Southern Oceans something like the American West before statehood... a place where laws really don't apply?

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 10:47 PM

PERFESSERGEE

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Japanese Whalers are acting legally unless and until they are convicted in Court.

WHAT?!!! Good god you are a hypocrite. Damn, I thought that even you had some rational ethics in your background, but you have proven me wrong. Anything that backs up your prejudices appears to be OK, including hosing down a disabled ship after it had been rammed. Do you have any sense of decency at all? You have apparently no honor whatsoever. Heaven save us from prosecutors who think they should rule the world....

perfessergee

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 9, 2010 11:28 PM

PERFESSERGEE

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Thank you, Perfesser, for putting that so succinctly. While I may disagree with the ACTIONS of the protesters, I fully agree with their goal. We share the same destination; we differ on which route to take to get there.

That's also where I have my biggest problems with the Sea Shepherds group, in the other videos where they are clearly ramming whaling ships with an equally large vessel. This isnt in your bathtub, or in the nearby lake - THIS IS HUNDREDS, IF NOT *THOUSANDS* - OF MILES FROM SHORE!!! You fuck up and unintentionally sink somebody out here, and people are most likely going to die. This kind of assing around, by EITHER SIDE (or by ANYBODY, when you get right down to it), is unconscionable and unacceptable. I'm glad the Barker was there to pick up the stranded crew of the Ady Gil, but you'll note in several of the pictures that the Shonen Maru is at a full stop close by, just in case. Sailors - even ones who are bitter enemies - generally DO have a sense of honor and obey "the rules", whether written or unwritten.

In this instance, it appears both sides my have violated those rules, but when it all went wrong, clearer heads did seem to prevail.

I agree. The actors on both sides of this issue are being hideously stupid (homicidally stupid as well, at least in terms of risk). Neither side has any moral ground for claiming benefit from preventing human casualties.

A pox on both their houses

perfessergee

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 2:21 AM

Hmm, apparently you've been laboring under a misconception of exactly what a prosecutor *IS*, there, Perfesser.

You see, their whole job consists of throwing someone in jail, it don't matter whether they're innocent or guilty, it don't even matter when they are OBVIOUSLY innocent, as the prosecutors office runs on conviction rate, not justice, which it ain't got a damned thing to do with.

Add to this, that the State allows them to stack the deck, even helps them do so, whether it be pre-stacked jury pools (and here you thought that selection was RANDOM ? HAHAHAHA!) to violations of discovery, illegal jury instructions, picking favorable venues or judges, even provides them with an opponent perfectly willing to take a dive (the public defender) who's whole job is to tank the case while making the prosecutor look good, cause if they do that *enough* they get a shot at the other side of the courtroom and eventually the bench, see ?

In fact, prosecutorial immunity allows them to go so far as to fabricate evidence or testimony in efforts to convict you - more or less outright frame you, free of any particular consequence - I do NOT jest, this is actually a current issue being chewed on by the Supreme Court after decades worth of blatant abuse.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/how-broad-is-prosecutorial-immunity/
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/what-would-prosecutors-do/

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/us/05scotus.html
"The men then sued Pottawattamie County, Iowa, and two former prosecutors, saying the prosecutors had ordered them arrested without probable cause, had coerced witnesses and had fabricated and concealed evidence.

"In November, lawyers for the prosecutors argued before the Supreme Court that they were immune from lawsuits because they were acting within the scope of their job."

You can find more about that here.
http://truthinjustice.org/systemworks.htm

Before our justice system was so thoroughly corrupted, prosecutors were often as not the aggrieved party themselves and viewed with proper skepticism, and for some time after the adoption of a "professional" one - they were considered lower than tax collectors on the scale of humanity, which is where they belong, but lots of bullshit myth-making and media spin have somehow created the fictional idea that they're decent human beings, which is as much of a shoveljob as police work being dangerous - and lied about mostly for the same reasons, to excuse conduct that really should be inexcusable for ANYONE.

A prosecutor is nothing more than a paid bully for the state, pounding on someone who that State has stripped of both their freedom and income, often leaving the only defense they can obtain or afford in the hands of the States professional dive takers, or for braver souls, their own hands, which is considered mostly a joke because while the State supposedly *HAS* rules, exactly how do you enforce that when the party that would be enforcing them happens to be the one breaking them, eh ?

So, a Bully, with the loaded deck and the full force of the State behind them, whom you are supposed to cheer on as they hammer down, humiliate, and then incarcerate, whatever poor schmuck the cops rounded up to close the case and get it out of their hair so they can get back to the lucrative exortion of ticket spamming and asset forfeiture.

And once you fully understand that, the true nature of the creature in question, then it's behavior makes perfect sense when placed in a real world context instead of the make believe fantasy your civics class fed you, it being part and parcel of the same "system".

Government can't stop crime because Government *IS* crime, they just hate competition, is all.

-Frem

PS. It also explains why he's so bloody awful at making his arguments in the real world, especially here - since he doesn't have a Judge holding his hand and silencing his opponents, nor does he have a pre-stacked deck of State worshipping idolators to salivate over his every proclaimation.

And the results of THAT, are as predictable as where the sun rises.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Government can't stop crime because Government *IS* crime, they just hate competition, is all.

PS. It also explains why he's so bloody awful at making his arguments in the real world, especially here - since he doesn't have a Judge holding his hand and silencing his opponents, nor does he have a pre-stacked deck of State worshipping idolators to salivate over his every proclaimation.

O.M.G. BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
I can't *wait* to see Hero's response to THIS, Frem!!! You

with such extreme eloquence & decisiveness!!
On the high sea of reason, you've sunk Hero's dingy, I'm afraid!

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 1:31 PM

What? No defense against the specified charges, H?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 7:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by perfessergee:
WHAT?!!! Good god you are a hypocrite. Damn, I thought that even you had some rational ethics in your background, but you have proven me wrong. Anything that backs up your prejudices appears to be OK, including hosing down a disabled ship after it had been rammed. Do you have any sense of decency at all? You have apparently no honor whatsoever. Heaven save us from prosecutors who think they should rule the world....

As a Prosecutor I see daily the power the State has. We can come into your home seize you and your property and imprison or execute you. We can do all those things provided we can make our case in a court of law.

Are you and the liberals on this board advocating we eliminate the Courts in all situations or just the ones involving folks and practices you don't approve of?

Or maybe, since no State was involved, you want to approve violent action by non-state actors when they fail to get what they want by peaceful mean. That's a dangerous path, especially since you wont find Batman on that path, but Al Queda is hanging out at the end wondering why they got so close and didn't just blow themselves and the Jap ship up. I note for the record that if these protestors approached a US warship in the same manner the protestors would be fired on (because of the Cole).

I linked to videos showing the incident was clearly the result of the pattern of irresponsible acts of the protest boat, videos that show numerous "crossing of the bow" incidents, videos that show attempts to damage or disable the Jap ships, and videos that show the intentional ramming (twice) of a Jap whaler by the Steve Irwin, a large ship similar to the whaler, not a small racing boat like the one damaged in the most recent incident.

On the other side the videos show the Japs using water cannons and noise generators to drive off the attackers (noting for the record the same tactics are used by commercial vessels to repel pirates).

As for hosing down the disabled ship, the video speaks for itself. It was only a few seconds as part of the ongoing hosing down of the vessel as it moved dangerously close (noting that the water cannons have a very short range).

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 7:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

As for hosing down the disabled ship, the video speaks for itself. It was only a few seconds as part of the ongoing hosing down of the vessel as it moved dangerously close (noting that the water cannons have a very short range).

LOL,

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 7:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
A prosecutor is nothing more than a paid bully for the state, pounding on someone who that State has stripped of both their freedom and income...

Wow, somebody has a lot of hostility. I wonder why he sees things so one sided?

Quote:

Government can't stop crime because Government *IS* crime

Oh, he hates govt, well no wonder he hates me. I work for the govt. He described our City Hall Janitor the same way:

Quote:

A City Hall Janitor is nothing more then a paid bully of the State sweeping up helpless dirt and cleaning innocent public toilets soiled through not fault of their own.

Quote:

It also explains why he's so bloody awful at making his arguments in the real world, especially here - since he doesn't have a Judge holding his hand and silencing his opponents, nor does he have a pre-stacked deck of State worshipping idolators to salivate over his every proclaimation.

Wow, so your for surrending to international authority over local laws, having others tell you what business or industry you can engage in, vigilante justice, and removing the protections of the courts.

Good luck with that.

H
"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 7:41 PM

Perhaps the question will be resolved when the Sea Shepard's purchase a replacement vessel ?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23392713-for-sale-to-a-fore
ign-navy-the-british-warships-that-could-have-saved-hostages.do

HMS Dulverton, Brecon and Cottesmore, which cost £35million each when they were built in the Eighties - are now likely to be sold to a foreign navy or commercial buyers for as little as £200,000 each.

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Life is like a jar of Jalapeño peppers.
What you do today, might Burn Your Ass Tomorrow"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 10, 2010 7:46 PM