A swanky eco-estate, saving whales, Michelle Rodriguez without a shirt or shoes on…what’s not to love?

Rodriguez, Daryl Hannah, Beau Bridges, Isabel Lucas, and Animal Planet’s “Whale Wars” star Captain Paul Watson were among the guests at Saturday’s Animal Planet & Sea Shepherd Conservation Society event, where Watson revealed his new Interceptor vessel (see pictures here).

The new vessel will replace the Ady Gil, which was damaged during the last season of “Whale Wars.” The catch is, the Interceptor is not totally paid for yet. Sea Shepherd is seeking an ocean-loving philanthropist to foot the bill ($1 million dollars if you happen to have it handy). What else does that $1 million buy? The vessel that is now being referred to as the Interceptor, will be named after her benefactor. (Editor’s note: Watson has also called it the “Ocean Adventurer”, the original name of the vessel)

Why do Watson and his crew need this big-ticket boat?

“We need a vessel that can keep up and that is faster than the harpoon vessels,” he says. “If we have these guys trailing us, we can’t close in on the mother ship, so if we have a vessel that can outrun them, we’re in a better position.”

Ms. Rodriguez celebrated the occasion by DJing sans T-shirt for a crowd of Hollywood Hills residents, celebs and philanthropists. She must be gearing up for her trip to the Antarctic Ocean this summer, because the woman’s abs look uh-mazing. (Editor’s note: Though there appears to be new doubts over whether she will actually be going this year…)

Here’s what she has to say about why she’s joining Captain Paul Watson and his crew this summer:

“I feel like the government should be backing [Paul] up, not looking at him like some kind of rebel…[Sea Shepherd] is just watching over the laws that already exist…doing the job of governments around the world.”

And what does she want her fans to take away from next season’s “Whale Wars”?

“Balls. Balls to get involved!”

So, let’s all grow a pair?

Check out more info about Sea Shepherd here. Pictures from the evening below.

  • Kimitake Hiraoka

    This is an incorrect use of the term “philanthropist”. The term related to a love of mankind, being humans. Sea Shepherd is a misanthropic organisation and is [supposedly] dedicated to the advancement of certain species of animals.

    For instance, its leader Paul Watson (not a captain by any measure) once stated that human life is not worth that of an earth worm. He has also decribed humans as being a virus on the planet (presumably he holds himself as an exception to these judgments). These comments demonstrate a hatred of human kind – “misanthropy”, if you will. So therefore, it is inappropriate in the extreme to call the support of Sea Shepherd “philanthropy”.

    Furthermore, contrary to Ms Rodriguez’s claim, Sea Shepherd is not doing the work of governments and is not upholding any law. It is involved in the perpetration of numerous acts of violence and its members have been convicted to serious criminal offences, including Watson himself.

    • romika3

      Folks I have to say this is an embarrassment for the conservation movement. Just look at them.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-DeMartino-Jr/100001412431157 Joseph DeMartino Jr.

        your not one to say whats and embarresment or not, you hate conservation.

      • romika3

        I am a conversationalist. My problem is with the SSCS is it methods. Their violent and terror tactics,there for all to see on YouTube and Whale Wars, its demonization of people and culture, there to see in posts, webpages etc and it choosing of issues based in safety, potential fund raising and media coverage. Plain and simple.

    • Chris H.

      Glenn,

      why do you try to mislead people so much? You twist words and meanings until the point of the original statement is changed almost completely…

      You said “Paul Watson once stated that human life is not worth that of an earth worm”, which is a gross distortion of his original comment.

      Paul’s actual comment was that, from an ecological perspective, earthworms are more important than people because earthworms could survive on this planet without people, but people could not survive without earthworms. He also said that the same was true of honeybees and ants. For anybody that has taken even a basic introductory ecology course, this statement is an obvious truth. For those who have spent their post-secondary education studying the artificial construct that we refer to as “law”, it may not be so obvious.

      If anyone would like to see a video of Paul talking about this statement, here it is (see part 3 at approx. 7 min.):

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3gHxYT9QaM&feature=related

      Glenn, since you have never studied ecology (only language & law), then I suspect that you have difficulty seeing things from an ecological perspective, which might explain why you misunderstood, and then misrepresented, Paul Watson’s original statement. Somehow though, I think it has more to do with you being paid to spread misinformation about Paul Watson, SSCS, and the anti-whaling movement in general.

      In addition, your fixation on the etymology of the word “philanthropy” betrays your lack of understanding of the interconnectedness of living things and your short-sighted perspective on what is, or isn’t, beneficial to humankind. As Paul likes to say, “if the oceans die, we all die”, but I imagine that the truth of this statement is lost on you.

      Btw, David’s been working really hard just lately. I think he deserves a raise…

      • romika3

        The inuit of the north survive perfectly well without earthworms. Watson knows nothing of ecology even his three rules of ecology are incorrect.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-DeMartino-Jr/100001412431157 Joseph DeMartino Jr.

      uh, hello? whalings illegal. so is fishing without a license, (bluerage), various poaching offenses in the galapagos, which, honestally, all fishing should be there.

      • David

        You need to study a little more.

        All whaling isn’t illegal. Japan, Iceland, Norway and Greenland (just to name a few) all whale legally.

        And the Tuna fishermen that Paul attacked in the Med did have legal tuna permits.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-DeMartino-Jr/100001412431157 Joseph DeMartino Jr.

      and, as a matter of fact, it is properuse of the word. saving whales helps sea, ad people need the seas to survive, not to mentione the chemicals they take in.

  • Kimitake Hiraoka

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rodriguez#Legal_issues

    Interestingly, it appears Ms Rodriguez has a long and colourful criminal history that including acts of violence.

    I think she’ll fit in just great at Sea Shepherd. She and Paul Watson can exchange stories of their criminal convictions between violently assaulting the Japanese research team. How sweet.

  • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

    so funny, always when there are much posts from Romika, the other troll David doesnt post. Maybe thats because they are the same troll ?

    • Anonymous

      @herwin – Please look in the mirror, you and Chris H are also trolls

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        dear “anonymous”, as has been pointed out in previous posts by people who have done a check on David (which isnt that hard because the guy has his own pro whaling website) one of the first twitter friends of David is the infamous Glenn who lives in Tokyo and is paid by the japanese whaling industry for promoting whaling, and according to Davids own website he has tried whalemeat once but didnt like the taste of whalemeat. So thats David, a guy daily posting dozens of pro whaling and anti seashepherd comments on various forums while he even doesnt like to eat the meat. He simply is trolling around the internet and is getting paid for it. Simple.
        As for me, you can call me a troll, whatever, but i speak my own mind and certainly dont get paid for it.

      • Anonymous

        @herwin – the simple point about David or anyone on this site — I don’t care if he works for the whalers or not. Either his argument will stand up to scrutiny or it won’t. Personal attacks simply mean the person doing the attack has lost the arugment.

        I also ignore any post which does personal attacks on Paul Watson. I can read about his history myself at any number of sources. And again a personal attack which makes fun of his name or even his weight (which I have seen in other threads) means the commentor had nothing of value to contribute to the discussion.

    • romika3

      Watson trolls for comments about himself on the web, we troll for comments about the SSCS, the SSCS trolls for trolls and Japanese whaling ships. The SSCS use to troll the ice floes off the East Coast of Canada for the best photos so that they could troll for funds. Now SSCS trolls Hollywood to hook unsuspecting “famous” people who are trolling for meaning in their life. Bottom line we are all trolls and may the best troll win.