A lot of things have been happening in the world of whaling recently; with Japan officially suspending whaling operations for the year thanks in part to the work of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, and funnyman Stephen Colbert even congratulating the group on their triumph.

So, at the Global Green Pre-Oscar party where we were able to catch up with Charles Hambleton, the associate producer of The Cove, we knew he’d have a lot to say on the matter!

“I’m a huge Paul Watson fan,” Hambleton exclaimed. “Everybody involved with The Cove and the Oceanic Preservation Society… We feel that Paul’s only problem is he doesn’t have a big enough navy. And his tremendous effort has come to show that commercial whaling is completely insane… Sea Shepherd has done a wonderful job of exposing how ludicrous this is. So, I’ve been following it by the minute, I love what they’re doing and I’m a big fan. It was a wonderful day when we got that news.”

It was a great day for us too! And Hambleton explained why he thinks this recent development is such a big step in eliminating the whaling industry. “Portugal recently changed from a whaling nation to a non-whaling nation in one generation, in 20 years— Japan can do the same.” But he did add, “I don’t think that’s it’s over, the repercussions will be seen at the International Whaling Commission meeting in June, and also I think Japan will start to ramp up it’s small time coastal whaling, which is a lot of what The Cove is about. Dolphins are whales, and there’s money changing hands, ergo that is commercial whaling. So, we will see these repercussions but it was an enormous step, and I’m very happy for them.”

We then asked Hambleton if he had any plans to return to Taiji, where the annual dolphin slaughter was filmed in the Oscar winning documentary The Cove. “There’s an arrest warrant out for me in Japan, but that didn’t answer the question,” Hambleton smiled. “There’s always a way. Watch the media next week, okay? I would love so much to tell you what’s going to happen next week, but I can’t.”

Well, not that I’m saying something might happen **wink wink** but it looks like you better check back on Ecorazzi to get all the details in case something does or doesn’t happen **wink wink**.

 

  • Michael Raymer

    Jeez Louise….it never unravels just a little bit, does it? km, another one of our mysteriously disappearring peanut-gallery members, was going on and on about how “The Cove” and its people were dead-set against Admiral Watson and SSCS. But, no! It seems one of the other big-wigs has two thumbs way, way up for SSCS.

    “We feel that Paul’s only problem is he doesn’t have a big enough navy.”

    We feel ya, my homey. My predictions seem to be coming true so I’m going to bet a buck seventy-five that SSCS has a fourth ship for next year. It’d be cool if they named it after me but I won’t hold my breath on that one. Maybe they should name it “Isoroku Yamamoto” who, like the whaling fleet, got shot down in flames.

    • km

      Look at you Michael proving what a hateful person you are. I never said I opposed what SSCS did. The latest developments change nothing about what I’ve said but you’re too angry and bitter of a person to realize that. My problem is with Paul and his lies. It is also with the SSCS campaign in Taiji. Note, Ric O’Barry is not OPS and his statement still stands unless he has said otherwise since? The statement above is inconsistent with that to the extent that he says he represents everyone involved with The Cove but of course you think that it is valid because it supports what you say. And, by the way,they are saying they support Paul’s campaign in the Southern Ocean. Maybe they do in taiji as well but I don’t see that stated above. And when did I say all The Cove people were against Paul and SSCS? Please find that statement. Great job sticking it to me. You, like the others, have resorted to telling lies to discredit me but you just discredit yourself. Go on.

      Also, note that 170 whales were killed while you were sticking with Paul’s zero number. I kept saying it was impossible but you believed the unbelievable because it came from your god’s mouth. Wow so I was proven right yet again about his lies, I’m still here. You, on the other hand, have completely lost focus and you trying to pretend you were a good guy was complete BS. What is said here, what happened with whaling, it changes nothing. I have integrity, not hate.

      By the way, Paul already announced a fourth ship.

      Have a good weekend, if that’s possible.

      • km

        by the way, I know other people like you. It’s sad. I call out liars who I believe hurt people. You’ll see no hatred in what I said. You want to though. I wonder why? I would feel sorry for you but people like you never change. You find some satisfaction in bringing others down even if you have to lie to do so. You want us to be like you because you can’t understand people like us being happy.

        Am I happy whales aren’t being killed? Of course. Do I still think Paul and his lies are dangerous? Yes. Has he lied even more? Yes. Have I been proven right? Yes. Am I happy that he lies? No. I criticize with the hope that people like him and those in Taiji change because I know they have a voice. Find fault in that. Please. You know what? You can’t. But keeping spewing your hatred.

      • Michael Raymer

        Well, I’m not sure where to put my answer, so I’ll just stick it here. First of all, I’m not mad at anything, I’m not spewing hatred and I’m so happy right now I might become twins. Y’see, Antarctic whaling has been shut down for this year. Maybe you didn’t get the memo.

        “Also, note that 170 whales were killed while you were sticking with Paul’s zero number.”

        I never “stuck” with zero, and since you are so full of challenges, why don’t you show me where I did. In fact, I distinctly remember posting concern at the continued absence of the Nisshin Maru.

        “You, on the other hand, have completely lost focus and you trying to pretend you were a good guy was complete BS.”

        I don’t pretend anything around here. I say what I think and I mean what I say. And it has cost me. I’m typing this at night but you aren’t going to see it until morning because I’m on double-secret probation until the end of the semester. So don’t try to tell me I’m BS’ing when it’s my honesty that got me into trouble.

        “You find some satisfaction in bringing others down even if you have to lie to do so.”

        I don’t lie and the only ones I’m interested in “bringing down” are the whalers. You’re at your computer and I’m at mine. What harm can I do to you?

        “Do I still think Paul and his lies are dangerous? Yes. Has he lied even more? Yes. Have I been proven right? Yes.”

        No you haven’t. What lies? You keep making the accusation without any specific charges, let alone proof. It’s rich that you’re attempting to slam me when any court in the land would nail you to the wall for libel and slander.

        Without quoting, I notice you bringing up Pete Bethune below. Why aren’t you whining about his lies? Bethunes lies are right there on last season’s “Whale Wars”. You don’t even have to dig. Just pop some popcorn and enjoy the show. Where is your indignation when someone other than Admiral Watson lies? I find this interesting.

        “I have integrity, not hate.”

        That would explain the four separate responses to one remark. You have a good weekend too.

      • km

        So it’s whining to call someone out on their lies? You use that word often. Someone criticizes Paul and you automatically resort to that term. There’s no negativity there at all.

        And are you sure that a court would bust me for libel and slander? You understand what those terms mean, right? Only one would apply unless you have heard me speak or are you also claiming that I have said something aloud about Paul? You and your ilk do like to lie about what I’ve said. You said this to me once too: “If this was a court of law, the judge would be kicking you out of the room by now.” If you want to insist on using the law, then learn it.

        You went out of your way to call me out. You were looking to prove me wrong. That’s a bit sad when I was right and more sad that you had to lie to do it. You stated that I said that The Cove folks were against Paul Watson and SSCS and that I was “going on and on” about it. All lies. Plain and simple. You tried to “get me” somehow (why?) but failed (not surprisingly). And what do you say about Louie’s comment below? Had I said what you accused me of saying, would that not in part support that? Also, you stated that the SSCS website says nothing about boycotting Japan. Check Paul’s commentary re Taiji and get back to me.

        I’ll give you some lies: They saved 528 whales last year. The lies that no whales were being killed. That butyric acid is just rancid butter. And getting shot. I’d love to get into court on the last. I’d probably call a forensics expert and Paul would insist on his expert, the guy from CSI or whatever.

        Pete admitted that he lied and exercised bad judgment. Do I like that he lied in the first place? No, but I can give some respect to someone who admits to being wrong. I never deny what Paul has done in terms of saving some (though not as many as he claims) animals but have issue with how he does it. In fact, check what I said on Feb 5 at 12:46 pm.

        Looks like I’m consistent. I oppose the same lies. I don’t believe lies should be used to solicit donations. And I don’t discount things accomplished.

        Four responses means I have hate? Really? That I don’t like someone making up facts about me means I hate or does it mean that I am consistent?

        And as for whales being killed, I do feel like you would say one thing and then another. January 22, you stated: Whales are still alive, RIGHT NOW, because they are doing a terrific job stopping the whalers. And this: I have looked all over the place and I see no evidence of anyone “happily hunting”. And this: What with the lack of updates on the SSCS site, I have the sinking feeling that they are, in fact, conducting whaling operations.

        And you still seem like a very bitter person. It’s sad. Seems like SSCS supporters are mostly either those who may or may not like whales but definitely don’t like humanity and are pissed at the world OR those who love animals and just support any group who they believe is acting on behalf of animals.

      • km

        More lies below. I never felt the need to bring it up. I’m just hear to ask them to stop lying.

        Didn’t Paul also say last year that the SM didn’t respond to their mayday? Yet the maritime report and Whale Wars show proves otherwise. And what did happen to those simrads from the AG and the BB? Oops, better read that same report. And the bow and arrows that he accused the whalers of planting? And the Ady Gil sinking? And the anthrax? And that he has never had a crew injury? And that those two guys were taken hostage? And that every collision was the Japanese doing the ramming?

        Want me to go on?

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        you know, i always read your posts with great interest, Km, and about the lies, you certainly have a very good and valid point.
        It’s so true, Paul Watson sometimes tells lies, and rather silly obvious lies ! Paul getting shot by the whalers ? Me don’t think so.
        But, you know, how i see it, Paul Watson despite this little fault, is a great person with a great heart, and a true hero. His silly lies are maybe, like many great historical persons, part of a somewhat eccentric caracter. His actions though, speak for themselves, these are actions of a hero and a great man, and most importantly, he and SSCS saved much animals.
        And for Michael, you are a good guy, we share the same things like protecting whales and that whaling stopped for this season, is a victory for all of us,you, me, just everybody, but you gotta slow down on some of your comments, in that respect i am afraid i have to agree with Km, just another guy who also seems to be happy that the whaling season ended early this year.

      • Michael Raymer

        Basically, I think my 1:47PM comment answers this area too. I’ll say this much: For all these accusations of bitterness I supposedly have, this is just one more know-it-all, peanut gallery accusation. I’m sitting here, drinking tea, petting my cat at the end of each sentence because she wants me too, very comfortable in the fact that I’ve got work in my future. And, oh yeah….whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary has come to an end this year. Does this spell a recipe for bitterness? It doesn’t. But i admit, I am enjoying throwing it in the faces of everyone who thought that SSCS wasn’t the way to go. Whaling has stopped and the winner is right there on the battlefield for all to see. Piss about tactics, whine about supposed lies, moan about egos. Whaling is not being conducted in the Southern Ocean WHALE SANCTUARY as we speak.

        And if anyone thinks the “Tokyo Two” played some huge, honkin’ role in all this, welcome to the real world. It was a story for a day or two and now it is gone from the public consciousness, just like news stories pop up here, then go away.

        And I don’t get why I have to slow down with my comments. In my time here I have exposed outright identity theft here on this site, I have been accused of being paid by SSCS by someone who claims to have proof, and, while maintaining an honest dialog about what I like and don’t like about SSCS…..my side won. Everything I have stood up for, everything I’ve debated (including my dislike for the vessel “Ady Gil”, come to think of it), every rebuttal I’ve made has been completely vindicated in the last week. So, eat it losers. Me, crumpets, Animux, imforthewhales and anyone else I’m forgeting are declaring complete and total victory over the doubters. And I’m mindful of the past fallen like ddpalmer, Hideyoshi Toyotomi (who I think is Kimitake in disguise), Kevin, David and all the rest who swore up and down that SSCS was going to get people killed, was going to wind up sunk (again, don’t get me started about the “Ady Gil”), blah blah blah. And I always loved the threats of what the Japanese Navy was going to do, when they get involved.

        We won, everyone else lost. Now, if you’ll excuse me, it’s time for Cheerios.

      • km

        “We won, everyone else lost.”

        And here I thought this was about whales. Silly me.

        And, at the end, nothing I said about Paul or the campaign in Taiji has changed based on what happened in the Southern Ocean. And, you know what, it makes me sad. I derive no pleasure from what I see as destructive behavior.

        Also, I’m not happy that 172 whales were killed. Or should I be because that means I was right and being right is really what this is about? Do I take a page from your book and start posting everywhere that I was right? Nah. I’m not like you, thankfully. Instead, I focus on the lying part, which was the claim that little to no whales were being killed and trying to raise donations on false claims, because I’m consistent and not messed up in the head. And I give credit where it is due because I’m not at war with you or Paul.

        Also, thanks herwin for your comments. It is very much appreciated.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        WAR IS OVER, i repeat WAR IS OVER

      • crumpets are yummy

        What is your point Herwin?

        You going around telling people to shut up again?

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        Hello Crumpets.
        i think saying to a person with a long history of personal attacks to many people including anti whaling posters like Huffy and me, to the point of his post being removed by Ecorazzi , to say to him to “slow down in his comments”, is a good and friendly advice, and only somebody who willingly wants to twist my words and meaning can say that i “am going around telling people to shut up.” which i don’t.

        is it the dog protecting his master…?

      • Lolz

        @KM, you’re a pretty bad liar :P . It’s interesting to see people who’m are so spiteful(don’t feign otherwise, it’s sad) that they’ll take anything from anyone which plays against their enemy. I’m sure you read that diatribe by Pete Bethune when he said that Butyric acid C4H8O2 is more acidic than battery acid and loddy doddy dah. Which is funny though because that’s not a arguable fact. BA has a pka of 4.82, not 1.5 like silly Mr. Bethune said. But it’s funny that people trust him like he’s a chemist lol.

        You got proof that Paul wasn’t shot? If not that’s a very moot point to try and drill over don’t you think? You’re evidence there would literally to have the absence of such a thing, which is a very poor way to win an argument I must say.

        In the beginning of the season Paul said 0 whales were killed from what they had seen from the state of the harpoon vessels, that’s not lying, that’s being very optimistic on the situation, and optimism is something you really need in such situations.

        “I’ll give you some lies: They saved 528 whales last year” How is that a lie when the whalers quota was 1035? Should SSCS kind of make something up NOT based on the numbers?

        “Yet the maritime report and Whale Wars show proves otherwise.”
        Oh really? Sea Shepherd said that in their official statement? I don’t thing so

        “Captain Komura almost killed six Sea Shepherd volunteer crewmembers and did not respond to the Ady Gil’s mayday distress signal.” from the SSCS website

        tell me what part of the show did the Ady gil get contacted by the SM#2, I don’t remember seeing that part, do you? I doubt it sincerely.

        ” Nah. I’m not like you, thankfully. Instead, I focus on the lying part, which was the claim that little to no whales were being killed and trying to raise donations on false claims, because I’m consistent and not messed up in the head. And I give credit where it is due because I’m not at war with you or Paul.”

        Goodness gracious aren’t you the spiteful one. In contrast to the quota which the whalers set out for I would call that very few whales, getting approximately 16% of what they wanted seems to be few does it not? Then how can you call it lying anyways? Again, it’s called optimism, you go with the best result out of what you have seen, and that’s what sea shepherd went on. In the past the whalers didn’t slaughter entire pods, this season it’s believed they did. So how can you call them liars for being ignorant to the same things EVERYONE was to?

        Oh and for St. Peter I’d like to drop some info on you. I have personally talked to SSCS crew who have extended contact with him, even having him sleep over at friends. According to what I’ve been told Pete not only wanted to shoot a poison arrow into a whale, but he wanted to pull the whale off the harpoon and slice it’s jaw off so he could hang it on his wall at home with all of his stuffed ducks and deer. What a nice guy. FOR THE ANIMALS!

      • km

        So now another person comes out to engage me in some discussion? I guess you don’t think the other five or six are doing a good enough job of proving me wrong. Very interesting.

        I will leave you to believe that because I’m not responding to you in length as I tend to do that you’re absolutely right in everything you said even though it actually contradicts nothing I’ve said. I never discussed ph so good job on proving me wrong on something I never discussed. You’re saying now that Paul was being optimistic even though he stated the numbers as fact. You’re now saying I referred to the SSCS official website when the quote that you yourself quoted specifically refers to the Whale Wars show. What else? You’re telling me Pete hunts when I never said he didn’t. As for Paul being shot or not, if it is moot and if Paul wasn’t able to prove it and there was no conviction then perhaps you should be telling him to stop bringing it up. Fair play and all…

        Next?

      • David

        @Lolz, but the quota wasn’t 1035. It was 950 and 50 of that was removed before they even left port. So the real quota was 900.

    • km

      One more thing. Interview with Louie Psihoyos over a year ago:

      LP: Listen, I know Paul Watson but I’m not a terrorist and I personally don’t subscribe to his methodology. I feel like film is the most powerful weapon in the world, more so than terrorism. You drop a bomb and you kill people, you drop a great film on them and it changes them forever. My strategy is to give a powerful piece of filmmaking to people to create a legion of activists. By activists I don’t mean sinking ships or burning down buildings, I mean people becoming active in their own lives.

      http://hesomagazine.com/featured/the-cove-interview-with-louie-psihoyos/

      Maybe Louie’s position has changed. Maybe not.

      • crumpets are yummy

        What about if you drop a bomb on them and film it at the same time? Ever think of that?

        Sounds like SSCS are ont eh right track here, they are stopping the illegal whalers AND they are also filming it.

        “My strategy is to give a powerful piece of filmmaking to people to create a legion of activists. By activists I don’t mean sinking ships or burning down buildings, I mean people becoming active in their own lives.”

        Describes SSCS to a T !

        Geeze, talk about WIN WIN!

    • km

      And because I know you hate Bethune because your god hates him (despite Bethune supporting SSCS’s campaign in the Southern Ocean). First mission, seems like success. Sure, the government may not follow through but signs look good. Go Trini Eco warriors and Earthrace! I hope Ecorazzi posts this wonderful news.

      http://arzone.ning.com/profiles/blogs/earthrace-conservation-and

      A PROMISE OF FULL PROTECTION FOR ALL SEA TURTLES IN TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AFTER JOINT MISSION BY EARTHRACE CONSERVATION AND TRINI ECO WARRIORS

      Shocked by finding out that up to 15,000 vulnerable and endangered sea turtles are killed in Trinidad and Tobago each year during a legal five month hunting season, environmental activist Pete Bethune joined forces with local activist group, the Trini Eco Warriors Trini Eco Warriors, with a goal of encouraging strong measures to put an end to the practice. This was the first mission for Bethune’s new marine conservation organisation, Earthrace Conservation Earthrace Conservation.

      The Trini Eco Warriors, Kyle De Lima, Marc de Verteuil and Stephen Broadbridge, together with Bethune, met this week in Trinidad with Mr Vasant Bharath, Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, and the Director of Fisheries, Christine-a-Shing, together with four Government advisors.

      During the meeting with the Ministers, Mr Bharath made a commitment to present a law protecting all turtle species year round in Trinidad to the Cabinet, and would see it passed into law before the end of this year. Rumours in Trinidad and Tobago are suggesting that the law may be presented to Parliament as early as this week.

      Bethune and the Trini Eco Warriors took with them a 110lb live green sea turtle rescued from a local beach, where it had been lying on his back in the sun waiting to be sold for around US $1.5 per lb. Bethune said, “Sometimes these turtles are left upside down for weeks at a time, waiting to die. We took the Ministers and the advisors down to see the turtle and they looked very shocked. Obviously the Government are aware of the hunting season, but I don’t think they’ve ever bothered to investigate or go and see for themselves what long, drawn out agony the ‘hunting’ really involves for the turtles.”

      Kyle de Limo said, “I am very encouraged by the Minister’s announcement. We will continue to monitor the progress of the proposed new legislation, and will not stop until we ensure that the Minister honours his commitment, the law is passed, and we can see that it is being rigorously enforced across the whole of Trinidad and Tobago.”

      Bethune said, “I am pleased that we were given a chance to speak directly with the Ministers, and that our request for action to protect and preserve these incredible creatures appears to have been listened to. However, I will not be celebrating until the new laws are introduced, hopefully before the start of the new hunting season in October. We also want to see the current laws more strongly enforced in the meantime. Earthrace Conservation will be returning later this year to find out for how things are progressing.”

      An additional and very real threat to the turtles is the risk of becoming by-catch in fishing nets. Estimates are that around 1,000 Leatherbacks die outside the hunting season due to drowning in nets.

      According to the Director of Fisheries, Christine-a-Shing, the Fisheries (Conservation of Marine Turtles) Regulations, stipulate that all medium and large trawl vessels operating since 1994 with mechanically operated net retrieval systems or hydraulic winches, should be fitted with Turtle Exclusion Devices (TEDs).

      However, as Kyle de Limo said, “In reality, these laws are flouted and unenforced. We have spoken to many fishermen here who say they have never even seen a TED. The Minister informed us at our meeting that she would be very interested to see any video or photographic proof that vessels were not using TEDs, and we will be providing her with that in the hope that it persuades her to ensure that the law is enforced and that there are strong penalties for ignoring it.”

      ‘Bobbo’ the rescued sea turtle

      The rescued sea turtle, estimated to be around 15 years old, was suffering from lesions that were removed before it was fitted with a transmitter and released from an island about five miles away from Port of Spain in an area with fewer hunters. The turtle is swimming well and is now in Venezuelan waters in the Gulf of Paria.

      Bethune said, “We named the sea turtle ‘Bobbo’ in honour of a benefactor who supports what we’re trying to achieve. When we released it, it slowly moved over the sand and gradually swam away. After about 20 metres, it realised it was free and just took off like a rocket. It was an amazing moment.”

      There are only five days left of the legal hunting season, so Bethune and the Trini Eco Warriors are hopeful that this turtle at least stands a good chance of survival and that it will return some time in the future to a coastline that offers full legal protection to all turtles all year round, regardless of whether they are nesting females, males or hatchlings.

      The transmitter sends out a signal that can be tracked via satellite, and the rescue team hope that this will show local people and others around the world that far from being indigenous to any particular country, sea turtles travel many thousands of miles around the oceans on their migratory journeys and therefore no one individual or country has the right to kill and profit from them.

      “We hope to fit more turtles with trackers in future, not just in Trinidad and Tobago, but in other places where sea turtles are still considered ‘fair game’. They cost around $2000 each, but I hope ‘Bobbo’ is just the first of many”, Bethune said.

    • km

      herwin, let them post what they will. They clearly have issues and probably couldn’t care less about whales. People like that embrace causes and become obsessed not because they are compassionate or because they care about the cause but because no one listens to them and it is an outlet for their anger. It took me a long time to understand that about people but now that I do, I just feel sorry for them. There are good people in the conservation and the animal rights movement, people who truly care. Those people sometimes don’t question things enough and that is not always good but they mean well. People like those we see here just need an outlet for their hate but try to mask it or legitimize it by attaching themselves to causes like saving innocent animals.

  • JayP

    I predict that SSCS heads up to Japanese waters with their ’navy’ now they have the time….at the right time.
    I suppose SS needs permission to fly the heli over the cove to take videos right?
    Maybe the launch of a fourth SSCS vessel right from the Taiji harbour.

    • Hammer614

      I would think that they would not be able to enter Japanese waters with their boats unfortunately…..and if it’s anything like the US there our federal waters extend to 12 miles off our beaches.

  • SCS

    Initially, Admiral Perry forced Japan to open itself to Western trade. After WWII the U.S. forced Japan back into pelagic whaling. Post war occupation and local starvation forced many Japanese women and girls into prostitution. Resigned to fate or karma, often the Japanese mindset has been summed up by the phrase, “It can’t be helped.” That the West, a nascent cultural entity. has been responsible for slaughter of many millions of dolphins which were merely collateral damage in our pursuit of tuna sandwiches, is not lost to the Japanese. And, it was the Western whaling fleets and coastal stations that brought many cetacean species to the brink of extinction in it’s pursuit of fuel oil.

    During the past half-century Western and Japanese conservationists, working together, have tried to foster a pro-cetacean conservation sentiment within Japan. Project Jonah, Rick O’Barry, Dexter Cate and the Hawai’i contingent, Kaoru Iijima and the Japanese activists, Greenpeace, Hardy Jones the film maker, and dozens of others have worked for years to save the lives of marine mammals threatened by Japanese fishermen and whalers. Some feel the whaling issue may have died away decades ago were it not for the antagonistic strategies used by some Western NGOs who found it made “good copy” in their fundraising efforts. Racism did play a part in fostering anti-japanese sentiment by elements of the anti-whaling industry and it was profitable to prolong the battle using such methods.

    To what extent economics over eco-warriors have affected this ebbing of whaling remains to be seen. Racism in Japan is more opaque and is a factor that affects the level of acceptance of logical environmental arguments about whaling or pleas for compassion. Whether the “change” is enduring depends ultimately on how Japanese people feel about the issue and whether the fishery unions have the support of a growing nationalism in Japan.

    Paul and his crew deserve credit for what they have done to save the lives of hundreds of whales in the short term. The economy of whaling is the ultimate reality, not some reality show (which is another economy created by this same whaling). If the hearts and minds of both sides of the Pacific cannot come together on the sentiment of respect for cetaceans as non-resource entities with the basic rights of life and liberty, then simple economics will tell the whalers when to resume the slaughter as whale populations eventually rise to sustainable numbers.

    It is a tough call.

  • http://www.thewhalepeople.com thewhalepeople.com

    SCS,

    I very much agree with your points.

    In terms of battle, it is not always the “nice guy” who wins. It the guy who plans, goes the extra mile and yes, takes chances and risks because he cares enough to put his own neck on the line.

    That’s really the basic difference. People that point fingers but afraid to put their own necks on the line. People who say “no more”. If everyone played by “the Queen’s rules of boxing”, well maybe there would be a chance. But in war, covert operations and diplomacy, fairness and openness is not the rule of the day.

    Watson and his merry men (and women!) saved a bunch of whales for one year. In the western culture, men are not willing to be patient. You might say they “chop”, shooting first and asking questions later. The Asiatic cultures deal more in “endure” or wait it out. So there are dichotomous philosophies to a certain degree.

    Dealing with that mindset, we could wait years while Japanese argue over the “shape of the conference table”, without concern for what is happening outside their bubble. Only when economics step in (and greed) will you see change.

    I am hoping that several points occur: 1. That Japan deems whaling in the Southern Seas not profitable. Maybe one year of little whale results might be enough, but I doubt it. 2. That the continued enlightenment of the Japanese masses continues to occur by whatever means, which brings creates internal pressure. 3. That the current BRIC trade agreements and nations involved act as an incentive (enough of a carrot) to Japanese businessmen and officials to stop whaling as a demonstration they want a bigger game. Call it a concession if you will to be invited to the BRIC. I may be wrong, but I don’t think that Japan has been invited to the trade agreement table and it has been suggested that this is one of the reasons Japan is not yet a member.

    So all the groups above and not mentioned just need to keep the heat on. And soon, hopefully very soon, we will have one more country who has stopped whaling (including dolphins!).

    • DannyBoy

      I thought that countries that were in the OECD weren’t asked to join BRIC? That is believed to be why Mexico and South Korea were excluded.

      I mean it was set up for countries with newly advanced economic development and countries in a similar phase of economic development. This would obviously exclude Japan.

  • km

    I wonder if the big news is that the Japanese version of The Cove is now out and is available for free online? Today is also the last day of the slaughter. That is great news.

    • crumpets are yummy

      Yes it is great news. Finally they are done in the killing fields of Taji.

      The cove is definitely one of the more powerful pieces of film out there, look forward to the revealing of the secret !

  • http://www.Seashepherd.org Captain Paul Watson

    It is amusing to see people so negatively obsessed with what I say and do. What we have here is a difference in perception. I never said that zero whales died this year, I said that it was our objective that zero whales be taken. The kill was 172. My estimate based on the time frame they had was 30-50 but I was not aware that all the harpooners had been put on the one harpoon vessel and it was working 24 hours and that they changed their policy of “sampling” (you know for science) and instead took out entire pods to get as many whales as possible in the short time they had when not running. They took only 16% of their kill quota this year, the lowest kill in their entire history but some people would complain if they were hung with a new rope it seems. The bottom line is that we have achieved our objectives in the Southern Ocean. What are the other “lies”. I never said anthrax was sent. A letter was delivered to me in the presence of a quarantine officer who quarantined the ship to investigate the white powder in the envelope. Was I shot – yes I was. The Australian Federal Police refused to do a forensic examination at my request citing they had no jurisdiction. Therefore I can’t prove I was shot BUT there is also no proof that I was not shot. The Annimal Planet people interviewed me before the incident and there was no bullet hole in my suit. A few minutes later there is a bulet hole in my suit. As for Taiji, Sea Shepherd initiated that campaign in 2003. We brought Ric O’Berry there in 2003. We freed dolphins in 2003 and as a result the baricades were put up and paved the way for the making of the Cove, a film that I appeared in by the way. I have not lied about anything. There may be an appearance that I lied because of people twisting the facts and making false accusation – but I don’t believe I have lied at all. One of the reasons I have always allowed independent journalists to come on our ships is to allow for an objective viewpoint. Not one of the journalists who have accomanied us has accused me of lying. No those accusations come from armchair “activists” who seem to think that their opinions are facts. People may have an opinion that I was not shot but they cannot provide proof that I was not. People may have an opinion that buytric acid is dangerous but that does not make it dangerous. It is an organic non toxic substance with a ph higher than beer, coke and vinigar. The bootm line is that despite accusations and criticisms, we accomplished what we set out to do in the Southern Ocean – we saved whales and we drove the whalers out of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and quite frankly that is all I really care about – results not opinions. Thanks Michael for your defense of Sea Shepherd. I don’t know who this Kim person is but he/she needs to stop obsessing over trivialities – it’s not healthy to be so negatively vile. BTW I consider Charles and Louis to be friends. We work together on issues like Taiji and the Hump restaurant whale meat scandal in Santa Monica. Ric O’Berry is doing a great job. Pete Bethune, now his lies were captured on film and seen by a few million people – just saying!

    • km

      It’s just as amusing to see you as negatively obsessed with Greenpeace, Eyes on Taiji, Black Fish, Pete Bethune, Ady Gil… The difference of course between you and me is that I’m not the leader of an organization with a television show that puts out press releases denouncing other groups. I don’t ask people to choose between me and others on Facebook. You’re a 60 year old man. A father. You think you’d be content in your achievements so that you wouldn’t have to put others down. You couldn’t even resist another dig at Pete here. It’s not healthy to be so negatively vile, you know.

      As for Taiji, aren’t there pictures of Ric there before 2003? I may be wrong but just asking? When did Hardy Jones first go to Taiji? 1979? That’s per wiki, which I acknowledge is not the best source of information. And that you are friends with Charles and Louie or that you brought Ric to Taiji doesn’t change what they said in interviews. And I acknowledged that they may have since changed their position.

      Nice bypass on the butyric acid. Is it rancid butter or not?

      I love how you accuse people of being armchair activists when you know nothing about what people do in their lives. You have plenty of public critics who are just as active as you, albeit with different campaigns, so enough with that ridiculous attempt to deflect.

      And did you save 528 last year? Avoiding that question too? You were with them for 1/3 the season but managed to save over half, including species of whales they don’t catch but include in quota?

      I must have touched a nerve. Thank you for responding. I’m glad you’re listening. Your lies do nothing for whales. All you need to do is block the slipway. The rest is for a seemingly sad older man who needs drama in his life. Does Sylvia Earle act like this? And, again, why not credit given for Pete’s work with the Trinidad NGO? He may not like you but he has congratulated you on your work in the Southern Ocean. Are turtles not important to you? I wrote the same thing I did above before and didn’t initiate this last exchange, Michael did. Is it Pete’s success and my putting it here that brought you out to finally address me? Me thinks so.

      I recognized your accomplishments. If you want to insult me, then you are indirectly insulting yourself. By all means…

      Is your next comment that I am paid by the ICR? Are you going to call me a troll? Are you going to write poetry about me? You’re a public figure and a non-profit accepting and soliciting funds and lying to do so. I’m sure you’ll bring up IRS audits as proof that you are perfect but save it. After all, Greenpeace has the same designation and you accuse them of lying. Your lies and attacks on other groups are unnecessary to what you do.

    • km

      I was shot too. I have no proof but I was. There was no video of anyone near me with a gun despite cameras everywhere. I barely felt it. Luckily I had a big belt buckle on that day. It was Halloween and I was dressed as a cowboy. I have never produced any other bullet or bullet fragments or video of anyone trying to shoot me or Tonto even though I’ve been fighting these robbers forever. My friend, who was dressed as a cop, will back me up. The assassin was that good. He clearly didn’t care about all the witnesses and the fact that there were cameras anywhere or that I was the Lone Ranger and the ramifications of murdering me would be huge. Did I mention we were both on horses at the time? I was shot. I have no proof that I wasn’t so it must mean that I was. Did I get my stories mixed up? Should there be cowboys, cops and robbers? Who cares? It’s television and robbers are bad people so facts don’t matter. I need to ask Tonto.

      Sorry for the disrespect above as I guess there is a 0.00001% chance that you were shot. After all, anything is possible but to accuse someone of attempted murder is criminal and immoral, regardless of the fact that the same person may slaughter whales, which I find as awful as you do.

      I hope Michael is your judge if you ever take this to court. He keeps giving me legal advice so he must be a jurist, or play one on Ecorazzi.

      • km

        And don’t forget to tune in to next week’s show when the assassins start wielding bamboo SPEARS…not just one or two, but A SHOWER of them.

      • crumpets are yummy

        km..I have no proof that you are not Pete Bethune or one of his monkeys ..I cannot prove that you are just some crazy la la looking for attention, but hey…you never know.

        Yes MR, you do good on here.

        Always nice to have a visit from Paul Watson to shed some light on the whackos propaganda machine.

      • km

        Great comeback. Are you hoping that if you post enough that your god will acknowledge you as he has Michael? Maybe if you post less and make sense once in awhile as Michael sometimes does he would.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Thanks KM, I’m glad you were impressed with my post.

        Unlike you, I am not seeking attention, and unlike you, I still have friends on this thread.

        Where have all your buddies gone to I wonder?

        Must be sealing season, hey.

        Or perhaps they are just too ashamed to have been sticking up for such an evil industry as whaling.

        Perhaps they have woken up to themselves, had an epiphany, and decided to seek the truth and the light.

        Perhaps they have started to do Gods work, instead of being lowly sinners. We shall rejoice when they repent. They can join in doing Gods work and become like the shepherds of the fields.

        (Isaiah 58:6-11) “Is this not the fast that I have chosen: To loose the bonds of wickedness, To undo the heavy burdens, To let the oppressed go free, And that you break every yoke? {7} Is it not to share your bread with the hungry, And that you bring to your house the poor who are cast out; When you see the naked, that you cover him, And not hide yourself from your own flesh? {8} Then your light shall break forth like the morning, Your healing shall spring forth speedily, And your righteousness shall go before you; The glory of the LORD shall be your rear guard. {9} Then you shall call, and the LORD will answer; You shall cry, and He will say, ‘Here I am.’ “If you take away the yoke from your midst, The pointing of the finger, and speaking wickedness, {10} If you extend your soul to the hungry And satisfy the afflicted soul, Then your light shall dawn in the darkness, And your darkness shall be as the noonday. {11} The LORD will guide you continually, And satisfy your soul in drought, And strengthen your bones; You shall be like a watered garden, And like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.

        Thats sounds like a better plan doesn’t it km?

        Michael is doing a great job, keeping you & all the other trolls all busy on here, credit where credit is due. Nice to see him get a star. It means a lot to have your work acknowledged. It certainly beats being told that you are irrelevant and obsessed, which clearly you are.

        You might think you deserve a gold star too km?

        Sounds like you are jealous.

        Not only that but you are the weak. We are trying to shepherd you until you see the light.

        crumpets: There’s a passage I got memorized. Ezekiel 25:17. “The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.”

        I been sayin’ that sh*t for years. And if you ever heard it, it meant your ass. I never really questioned what it meant. I thought it was just a cold-blooded thing to say to a motherf**ker before you popped a cap in his ass. But I saw some sh*t this mornin’ made me think twice. Now I’m thinkin’: it could mean you’re the evil man. And I’m the righteous man. And Mr. .45 here, he’s the shepherd protecting my righteous ass in the valley of darkness. Or it could be you’re the righteous man and I’m the shepherd and it’s the world that’s evil and selfish. I’d like that. But that shit ain’t the truth. The truth is, km, you’re the weak. And I’m the tyranny of evil men. But I’m tryin, km, I’m tryin’ real hard to be the shepherd.

    • Michael Raymer

      To Admiral Watson – once again, thanx for replying and keeping in touch with us. Y’know, everything you just said had to be said by you. I understand all the points you raised, as do other dedicated posters here. I have used them myself over and over and they fall on stone deaf ears.

      That donation I promised is coming soon. It won’t be much, I’m sorry to say, but I have a feeling you won’t be hurting for contributions this year.

      To km – I’ve said it before and you keep providing me with proof: You have some particular axe to grind with SSCS and especially with Admiral Watson. Either that or your head is stuck in some pie-in-the-sky, Utopian vision where criminal organizations like the Antarctic whalers are going to be brought down by a wink and a smile. I see it from the polar opposite side of the spectrum. The whalers were only going to be brought down by getting as nasty as they are. Even if I could, I wouldn’t volunteer to go on an SSCS campaign because if I did, you would see some true eco-terrorism in action. They throw metal nuts and bolts at me, I’m winging them right back. If they throw flash-bangs at me, I’m bringing some next year. And me and bamboo-pole guy would have given the cameraman an interesting few seconds. I have other ideas that I’m not going to share publicly. But, maybe you should be thankful for having someone with the judgment and discretion that Admiral Watson uses. Instead you look for any nit-picky little thing you can throw at him. Your latest post here is just that. Nit-picking. That’s all. It doesn’t get a better title, it’s nit-picking. And you’re aiming it squarely at the only organization that has saved whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

      • km

        This is from the guy who called me out on this page. From the guy who went out of his way to try and prove me wrong and not only failed but used lies to do so? That’s precious. That’s beyond nit-picking. That’s some sick obsession. You won as you say. Did I come on here to diminish Paul’s success? No but you still tried to stick it to me. If all you cared about was the whales, then why are you trying to defeat, you know because we are at war with you, those of us who dare challenge the SSCS? Because you derive enjoyment from it. Isn’t that what I said before? You can’t be happy even as you ramble on and on about how you’ve won and been proven right. You’re like Paul in that way… so insistent on whales being all that matters and being happy with that but very obviously not. I’m not even a pro-whaler and you are going out of your way to attack me. And failing.

        What is your problem with me having a problem with Paul’s lies? He can just stop and I’d have nothing to say. But if he insists on effectively saying that as long as whales are saved I can say or do anything even if it hurts other causes and if people like you continue to give him carte blanche to do so, then I will continue to comment.

        Do you expect everyone to kiss his ass every time there is a post about the organization? What kind of world are you living in? Is it some strange utopia where Paul is a god and must be immune from criticism because he is the almighty saver of whales?

        Where did I say a wink and a smile would work? Why do you insist on lying?

        And you really see this as war, not only between SSCS and the Japanese but between those of us who don’t agree with everything SSCS does and those of you who do, as your comment to my other post proves. That’s disturbing. Those comments and your need for violence or, as you say, true eco-terrorism further confirm that. You need some serious help buddy. You’re unraveling. Calling people losers. Stating “we won.” You’re a bitter and sad man.
        What’s also fascinating is that you “won” the “whale war” and hopefully have found employment and you’re still miserable.

        By the way, the cat anecdote is very touching.

      • Michael Raymer

        “It is amusing to see people so negatively obsessed with what I say and do.” – Admiral Watson

        Obsessed is a good word and it definitely applies to you, km. If you want to take a perfectly good victory and declare defeat with it, you’re on your own.

      • km

        Keep posting Michael. I didn’t post on this page until you, who are clearly negatively obsessed with me, tried to call me out and prove me wrong. I find it sad when people lie but even more sad when they lie to themselves. In fact, it’s pathetic.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Yes we do feel sorry for you km.

        Even if you don’t mean what you say you are still a sad sack for saying it.

    • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

      two boats rocking in the ocean, going up and down. must be a hell of a sniper who can shoot somebody straight in the heart a few hunderd meters away, with one shot.

      • Michael Raymer

        Is this coming from your vast array of vegan gun handling experience? I am an expert with firearms and was a state revolver champion many moons ago. While this shot isn’t likely, it is more than possible. And you see a lot of unlikely yet possible things when you spend enough time at the shooting range. I’ve always stated the salient point yet no one has ever responded: Watson turned over the bullet to authorities for forensic examination. He is not stupid enough to hand over a planted bullet to the cops. Watch any number of cop shows, faking evidence is the best way to get caught. Watson has enough time to think things like this through. And it is on this point that I can’t take the plunge to calling him a liar. Something that seems to come easily to others around here. I think it’s also relevant that the cops never came back and slapped the cuffs on Admiral Watson for faking such evidence. Any of this ever occur to the rest of y’all? Apparantly, not. Oops, there’s more of my bitterness and inner turmoil leaking out. Or maybe this is part of my secret plot to get Watson to call me his bestest buddy and send me a free t-shirt.

      • km

        Michael, since you are an expert, how come it appears that there was no hole in Paul’s mustang suit? How come he barely felt the shot? How come if you search Paul Watson and shot and read all the posts, including those by other self-identified experts like you, none of them agree with you? I’m not a gun expert. I guess I can’t be as a vegan?

        Using your logic, why would the Japanese claim acid injuries and then prosecute Bethune for it? And how do you know Paul is telling the truth about what happened with the authorities if anything? Because he said so? If I was shot, I would have cleared the deck so my crew was safe. What kind of vest does he wear? What kind of bullet was it? Could his vest have stopped that kind of bullet? Could a badge have done so? Shouldn’t the bullet be shaped differently and have some copper? These are some things I read the other day.

        And, because you are an expert on the law, under what law would the cops be able to slap cuffs on Paul? None, so there goes that logic. Where did you go to law school? Someone school needs do lose their accreditation.

        If I were Paul, I would also maybe do an entire show with all the evidence and photographs to prove it, or at least include them on my website. Attempted murder is a big deal and if I couldn’t get get a real trial I would want one in the media.

      • Michael Raymer

        km, I’m really sorry you are so dense. Here let me help you.

        “how come it appears that there was no hole in Paul’s mustang suit?” There was a hole in the suit. Have you even watched the show?

        ” How come if you search Paul Watson and shot and read all the posts, including those by other self-identified experts like you, none of them agree with you?” Seriously?? Seriously? Are you really so naive that you use other posts on the internet to form your opinions?

        “I’m not a gun expert. I guess I can’t be as a vegan?” You tell me. How many firearms have you shot, what qualifications have you taken? I don’t care you’re a vegan, but how many guns do you own? Are you an expert or not?

        “why would the Japanese claim acid injuries and then prosecute Bethune for it?” To put him in jail. And they couldn’t pull it off, could they?

        “And how do you know Paul is telling the truth about what happened with the authorities if anything? Because he said so?” Because I have zero proof that he is lying.

        “If I was shot, I would have cleared the deck so my crew was safe.” He did clear the deck. Seriously, have you watched the show, yes or no?

        “What kind of vest does he wear?” How the hell should I know and how is it any of my business?

        “What kind of bullet was it?” How the hell should I know, I wasn’t there. Are you serious with these questions?

        “Could his vest have stopped that kind of bullet? Could a badge have done so? ” At that range and assuming that the firearm was a handgun, absolutely and absolutely. The two in combination, or the vest by itself. The badge alone, at that range, definite maybe. I mean, what’s the point in a bullet-proof vest that doesn’t stop bullets?

        “Shouldn’t the bullet be shaped differently and have some copper?” Not necessarily at all. There are plenty non-jacketed bullets available and the couple seconds it was shown weren’t enough for closer examination. I say again, it was turned over to Australian Police.

        “And, because you are an expert on the law, under what law would the cops be able to slap cuffs on Paul?” Falsification of evidence and falisification of a crime, both serious offenses. And I’m dead serious when I say, your credibility takes a nose-dive with this question. This shouldn’t have to be explained to you.

        ” None, so there goes that logic.” Nope, my logic is right there. You’re logic, however, has never come into question because you have never really used any, have you?

        “If I were Paul, I would also maybe do an entire show with all the evidence and photographs to prove it, or at least include them on my website. Attempted murder is a big deal and if I couldn’t get get a real trial I would want one in the media.”

        Well, you’re not him, and this seems to be a problem for you. Admiral Watson played by the book, and you’re still whining. He filed a police report and turned over the evidence, like he was supposed to do.

        Again, I’m going to ask and I’d like an answer. Have you actually watched the show “Whale Wars”? Yes or no. During a large part of your tenure here you have asked questions that were directly answered on the show. And much of your vitriol seems to have come from “things you’ve read” from outside sources.

      • km

        So if I go to the police in Australia and falsely claim that someone shot me in the Antarctic where they have no jurisdiction they can arrest me? Do you really want to go with that story? Think about it. You’re angry but not dumb. There is no crime if there is no jurisdiction so there can be no falsification of a crime.

        Anyway, how do you know he went to the police?
        Have you seen a copy of the police report? Can you send me a link to it? Did they even take a report as they had no jurisdiction to do so?

        I didn’t see a hole in the mustang suit and I just watched it again on youtube. I did quantify that above by saying it didn’t appear that way. I never stated it as fact.

        The type of vest he wears is very relevant because not every vest is capable of stopping every kind of bullet. What kind of bullet was it? What kind of vest?

        And I said I wasn’t a gun expert. The vegan comment was because of your comment to herwin. Did you forget? That happens with mania, I’m sorry.

        And that I use other posts on the internet to form my opinion is wrong? If it is on a forum for guns, is that so crazy? If the posts are from people both pro-SSCS and anti-SSCS? You are suggesting we use yours, from a guy on Ecorazzi who advocates violence? Moreover, you form your opinion on Paul’s word and ask for no evidence except a couple clips from an episode on television.

      • Michael Raymer

        I asked you three times in one post and you still can’t give an answer. Have you or have you not watched “Whale Wars”? Why are you ducking this?

        “So if I go to the police in Australia and falsely claim that someone shot me in the Antarctic where they have no jurisdiction they can arrest me?” Yes.

        “You’re angry but not dumb.” Y’know km, I’ll swing with you but I really don’t need you telling me what my mood is. And I have stated very clearly that, with the end of whaling this season, I’m in a very good mood.

        “I’m not a gun expert. I guess I can’t be as a vegan?” I replied to that remark. It was a stoopid remark, but I answered it anyway.

        “And that I use other posts on the internet to form my opinion is wrong? If it is on a forum for guns, is that so crazy? If the posts are from people both pro-SSCS and anti-SSCS? You are suggesting we use yours, from a guy on Ecorazzi who advocates violence? Moreover, you form your opinion on Paul’s word and ask for no evidence except a couple clips from an episode on television.”

        That your whole milieu seems to come from other people is my issue with you. I have yet to read anything that can be construed as you thinking for yourself. You seem to have adopted the role of picking up whatever trash you can find elsewhere and bringing into here. And no, I don’t suggest you use my opinions either. I’m saying that you should use your head for something other than a place to put a hat and try making up your own mind, for a change.

        I do not make up my mind on Paul’s word. I make up my mind on what I see before me and my knowledge that I have gained in close to 46 years of life. I also make up my mind on the premise that Antarctic whaling needs (needed) to come to an end. It has, for now. All this fussing is completely irrelevant. As Admiral Watson clearly stated, he doesn’t need you. He didn’t before and he sure as hell doesn’t now.

      • km

        Let me tell you that he could not be arrested and you would be best served if you stop insisting on that. You are just wrong. He knew that there was no jurisdiction for various reasons including the that he is not a citizen of Australia and neither are the whales so he can make up anything, kind of like the whole hostage deal. If there is no jurisdiction, there is no crime and therefore you cannot falsify evidence of a crime that doesn’t exist. And for all intents and purposes, a crime does not exist if authorities have no jurisdiction. Paul is very aware of the jurisdictional issue. So let me use crumpets’ oh so mature language, epic fail.

        I have watched Whale Wars but not all episodes. Are you telling me that I should judge Paul based on an edited television show? Seriously? I have read almost everything on the SSCS website. I have read articles from various independent sources about the incidents I speak of. I have read the ICR website. There are a million resources but you insist I should draw conclusions from a reality show?

        You’re the one who somehow associated being a vegan to handling guns, not me. Deal with it.

        You state that “All the fussing is irrelevant” and that you are happy yet you go out of your way to call me out on something? Kick your feet and deny deny deny all you want but no matter what you say, you showed your colors in the first post on the top of this page, first by posting and second by lying. It is funny that you have yet to address this or your lies. It’s quite telling in fact.

        To use the only language you seem to understand as offensive as I find it, having lost people to real wars, I won and, not only that, I won in a battle that you began.

      • km

        edit:
        the *fact
        neither are the *whalers.

      • crumpets are yummy

        KM…you do seem obsessed by Paul Watson and SSCS as a whole. Yet you don’t care if whales die.

        So, why the obsession?

      • Michael Raymer

        “I have watched Whale Wars but not all episodes. Are you telling me that I should judge Paul based on an edited television show?”

        “There are a million resources but you insist I should draw conclusions from a reality show?”

        I’m saying that you are ignoring the only eyewitness on the scene. And it shows. And you are judging Paul on what you can scrape together from other websites, so yes, I am criticizing you for not going directly to the source. Your credibility was already running on fumes, now it is completely gone. I think you have seen VERY few episodes.

        “Let me tell you that he could not be arrested and you would be best served if you stop insisting on that. You are just wrong.”

        No I’m not.

        “You’re the one who somehow associated being a vegan to handling guns,”

        Yes I did because the two are contradictory. And herwin continues to try to come off like someone who has knowledge about guns when it is clear that she clearly doesn’t. At this point I suspect that she isn’t old enough to own one.

        “You state that “All the fussing is irrelevant” and that you are happy yet you go out of your way to call me out on something?”

        What makes you think that there’s anything about you that would make me go out of my way in any manner whatsoever?

        ” you showed your colors in the first post”

        I have never once tried to hide my true colors.

        You were all over another thread, criticizing SSCS efforts in Taiji. You were looking for every last thing that you could nit-pick about, and now this guy (in the article) shows up. I found it amusing. And here you are, once again nit-picking about every little thing you can find. Meanwhile, the whalers are headed home. Next year SSCS will be even stronger, the whalers will have less resources than ever and public opinion is gradually changing. But that’s just not good enough for you, is it. The alleged shooting was 3 years ago and nobody cares anymore.

      • km

        You’ve completely lost it. I am not ignoring Paul statement. In fact, just the opposite, that he made it is why I question it. I, like a judge or jury, base the weight I give to it on credibility. Credibility is usually determined based on past acts. Paul lies. Not only that, Paul’s failure to show pictures or copies of reports or any other evidence is evidence in and of itself. I then go to the internet and read a ton of comments from people stating how the shot is almost impossible. And then those who comment about the vest and what kind of shot it could withstand. And then questions about the shape and type of bullet. And then questions about how anyone who is shot who feel more than a pinch. And that they would have more than a little mark. And then there being cameras everywhere yet no picture of the shooter. And then that no other bullets were found. And that the Japanese knew a camera crew was aboard but that they would still try to assassinate him. And that they went for the heart and his special badge saved him. And..

        And as for the law, you are wrong. You don’t even know what libel and slander mean but you’re going to tell me that you know about territorial and in personam jurisdiction?

        I was all over another thread. No, there was an interview posted that day from Ric and I posted it and asked what others thought. And if they responded then so did I.

        Owning a gun is contradictory to being a vegan? Really? Please tell me how that works. Are those seeking a license to hold firearms required to eat animals?

        “Alleged” shooting? Are you questioning your god? He may read this, you know.

        If you end every post with a statement about how happy you are, does that up the chances of it becoming true?

      • Michael Raymer

        “I then go to the internet and read a ton of comments from people stating how the shot is almost impossible.”

        I don’t know about other sites but you should know all about self-styled expertise. Around here, you and herwin roll around in it. I went to Netflix and played the entire scene again. The range was not prohibitive at all. In fact, as I type this, I have the scene up on my screen. Less than 50 meters (not hundreds) between the two vessels. No problem. The ships are under way, but no excessive roll or pitch. No problem. And no one is saying that it wasn’t a lucky shot. And no one is saying that the shooter was specifically aiming for the chest. I’m saying that the shot was entirely plausible given the range and conditions. It was by no means “impossible”, and anyone who says so is wrong. Period. As a matter of fact, I’ll give you something to post on your other sites. Give me a revolver with no less than a 6 inch barrel, the chambering has to be of .38 Special or above, I get to choose my factory manufactured ammunition, and set up similar conditions as the ones that existed. I can make that shot. Not necessarily to the chest, which I maintain was sheer “luck”, but I’ll hit a man size target. And I’ll put money on it.

        “And that the Japanese knew a camera crew was aboard but that they would still try to assassinate him. And that they went for the heart and his special badge saved him. And..”

        This has been covered elsewhere and, evidence to the contrary, I do get sick of endless repetition.

        “And as for the law, you are wrong.”

        No I’m not and I suggest you check with a lawyer. It doesn’t matter where the supposed crime took place, if you file a police report with anyone and they find out you lied, they can indict you. Again, I don’t give a watery crap whatever other opinions you’ve been reading. That’s the truth and nothing less. And I feel I must point out that you have not shown yourself to be particularly gifted in the intelligence department, so again, go find a free-consultation lawyer you can ask.

        “Owning a gun is contradictory to being a vegan? Really? Please tell me how that works. Are those seeking a license to hold firearms required to eat animals?”

        Go find me an avowed vegan that owns more than two firearms, makes more than one trip a year to a shooting range and/or who holds accreditation in a nationally ranked shooting sport (IPSC, IDP, NRA-Bullseye, NRA-Service Rifle, etc…..do you know what any of those initials stand for?) and I’ll print a sincere apology and shut-up about this. Until then I will hold a vegans firearms expertise under severe doubt.

        ““Alleged” shooting? Are you questioning your god? He may read this, you know.”

        Yes. You are still a relative babe-in-the-woods around here but, ask anyone. I have always questioned SSCS and Admiral Watson. I have always posted my opinions and feelings honestly and when I had a criticism, I openly posted it. Three or four weeks ago I sent an email to SSCS about something I had strong issue with. And I freely admit that, in that one case, I didn’t post my thoughts here. I didn’t want to give the pro-whalers more ammunition. They can do their own thinking. Admiral Paul Watson is not my god. But he is the guy who shut down Antarctic whaling. I’m sorry that I can jump this particular puddle but you have to get your feet wet. Whatever tactics, good, bad or indifferent brought us to this point, Antarctic whaling is done.

      • km

        I agree that it isn’t impossible but given the other information I provided as to credibility, evidence, history, lack of other bullets, television crew, Paul feeling just a simple pinch, etc, it pretty much is.

        Let’s try this legal stuff again because you seem to be an expert on everything. Then again, you probably attended the same law school as Paul and we know his interpretations of the law are laughable. If I go to a police station in Canada and say that I was shot while cruising in the in the Arctic by an Icelandic ship and I even tell them I’m lying but I want to file a report, then I will be arrested? On what grounds? They will say they have no jurisdiction and to get out. No jurisdiction, no report, no crime, no false report. In fact, I believe that if I go here to the Santa Monica police station, the result would be the same. Let’s even add this fact. Paul knew there was no jurisdiction so if no case, how can it be proved later that he was giving false information? Check out, for example, the South Australia Summary Offences Act of 1953, Part 13, Sec. 62A and keep in mind that this law assumes jurisdiction as to the filing of the report.

        Enlighten me as to what this means:
        “the representation is such as would reasonably call for investigation by the police”
        and then notice that it is one the elements needed to be accused of the crime of filing a false report.

        This may not be the exact law that would apply in Paul’s case but just an example of one in Australia that refutes what you have said.

        I’m skipping a step and saving this part because it is classic. Let’s try this because this example just proves how uninformed you are and how ironic it is that you are telling me that I may not be particularly gifted in the intelligence department. I go to the Santa Monica police and report a crime that happened when I was in San Diego for business. Will the Santa Monica police take my report?

        Now tell me if Paul even got to the stage of filing a report. That is, did he file a report? Tell me if Bethune was able to file a report in NZ even against the Shonan Maru captain for attempted murder.

      • Michael Raymer

        This has grown as ridiculous as it is boring. If you’re so pumped about this, do what I said: Talk to a lawyer.

      • km

        Let’s speak in the Michael’s language. You initiated a battle and again you lost.

    • R.Charter

      Well said Paul. Thanks

    • romika3

      Watson writes in his own book “Earthforce” that it is acceptable to lie and distort data and fact. He trains members of his organization to do so. Japan halted whaling due to a workplace safty issue and thus removed thier crews from harms way (projectiles, flares, warps etc. In the big picture the SSCS has done nothing other than shoot another series of violent TV shows that justify the use of violence and terror as a tool for change. Watson should read the children’s book “Never Cry Wolf”

      • crumpets are yummy

        Romika3…you forgot to add…

        “And if you believe that, then i have a bridge to sell you. Going cheap! “

      • boo radley

        “The decision to call back the Japanese whaling fleet is based on low whale meat consumption locally, and other evidence that shows the industry is not sustainable,”

        Prof. Toshio Katsura, marine biologist at Mie University told IPS.

      • David

        And Prof. Toshio Katsura, marine biologist at Mie University told IPS is not part of the ICR so what he is stating is his opinion.

      • boo radley

        @ David, you seem to have a problem with someone speaking from a truly scientific perspective.

        Don’t you think a marine biologist, especially one who holds a high position at a teaching institution, would have some handle on the truth of the matter?

        Isn’t Japanese whaling supposed to be all about science? Ever heard of ( so called) “scientific whaling”?

        Since when did the ICR have a handle on the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

        Do you only believe what the ICR tells you to believe?

      • Michael Raymer

        David, a few weeks back you were falling all over yourself, quoting Pete Bethune, who is not a member of SSCS. Make up a story and stick with it.

      • romika3

        “other evidence” is not evidence!

      • AnimuX

        romika should read the book – “Whaling in Japan: Power, Politics, and Diplomacy” by Jun Morikawa

        The book clearly explains Japan’s whaling programs are carried out to support entrenched bureaucrats (amakudari) who often leave their government jobs to take high paid positions with the commercial whaling industry they once oversaw (and secured tax-funded subsidies for) as public officials.

        Morikawa also explains that the “whale meat tradition” is invented and that outside of a few coastal villages whale was only ever a substitute meat during the post WWII recovery. In fact, in some parts of Japan the tradition was to worship whales, not eat them (a fact of Japanese history that is never mentioned by the ICR).

        As for Japan’s claims of safety concerns, when the whalers fired their 90mm harpoon canons sending explosive penthrite grenade tipped projectiles flying just over the heads of activists, it’s pretty clear they had no concern for anyone’s “safety”. Not to mention the Ady Gil incident (among many collisions) and throwing explosive flash-bang grenades in response to stink bombs.

      • David

        “Don’t you think a marine biologist, especially one who holds a high position at a teaching institution, would have some handle on the truth of the matter?”

        Well since in his statement he claims it is because of economic factors, then no I don’t believe a marine biologist, whether he holds a high teaching position or not, would have some handle on the matter. Or do you not understand that economics is different than marine biology?

      • boo radley

        David, he was talking about sustainability.

        It is not rocket science to know and understand that if you remove the source of the funding then businesses and companies will fall down.

      • David

        boo, the question I was asked was “Don’t you think a marine biologist…” and no I don’t think a marine biologist has any better knowledge of economics than anyone else. In fact from people I know with PhDs, many of them know almost nothing outside their own area of study.

        And with the statement we have we don’t even know what he meant by sustainable. Was he talking economically, which seems likely since the statement overall seems to be an economic argument? Because when you are talking about research, sustainable economics don’t really apply. Look at NASA, it has never been economically sustainable but it still gets funding every year. Or maybe he meant ecologically sustainable, of course the IWC’s own RMP says that it is, so there seems to be a scientific debate on that issue.

        What the article was trying to do is called argument from authority, he has a PhD and teaches at a prestigious university so he must be correct, except his statements have nothing to do with his PhD so his OPINION has no more weight than anyone else’s opinion.

      • boo radley

        For mine, just the everyday basics are enough to know that Japans commercial whaling dream is in deep trouble.

        For someone who clearly has a decent education, one would think that the main points re the future of whaling and is future economics are fairly easily understood. it is quite possible for anyone really to know and understand the fact that the economics of whaling are not looking good.

        Some points to consider, without touching on percentages, or dollars and cents.

        * Stockpiles of whale meat are at their highest.

        * Sales of whale meat are down.

        * people are becoming more aware of health issues with eating whale meat.

        * Because sales of whale meat are down, then there is less money to be injected into Japans whaling business.

        * Japans whaling fleet are catching less whales.

        * Japans whaling fleet are leaving later and returning to home base earlier.

        * Japans economy has a high degree of debt, has slow or negative growth patterns, and had its International credit rating reduced recently.

        All this means less money coming from government subsidies & whale meat sales to support the whaling business.

        Not too heard to understand.

        David, please explain to me exactly what points about Japans whaling economics & sustainability cannot be understood by a marine Biologist or someone without a PHD in economics.

      • David

        I already answered that question boo.

        Your refusal to acknowledge that or your inability to understand English is your problem, not mine.

      • Michael Raymer

        Again David, a couple weeks ago you were falling all over yourself over a quote from Pete Bethune. You kept clinging to the quote rather than acknowledge what was right there on everyones TV screen. You seemed to think that the quote was more important than the actual events. Now, someone else is quoted, and you’re taking some pretty lame paths to try to discredit him.

        BTW, did you hear that Antarctic whaling has been shut down this year? The whalers are blaming SSCS.

      • boo radley

        Hmm…I wonder if that marine biologist read that too…if he did, then I bet he understood what it meant.

        >@ David, I shall put your final, extremely lame dribble answer down to an inability on your part to answer the question

        1) * For fear of incriminating yourself and / or

        2) * Because you cannot think of a good enough comeback for that one.

      • David

        “David, please explain to me exactly what points about Japans whaling economics & sustainability cannot be understood by a marine Biologist or someone without a PHD in economics.”

        Well boohoo I never said that a marine biologist couldn’t understand anything did I? So the only question that was asked was “Don’t you think a marine biologist, especially one who holds a high position at a teaching institution, would have some handle on the truth of the matter?” And I answered that already.

        @ boo radley, I shall put your final, extremely lame dribble answer down to an inability on your part to ask a question and not lie about what other people wrote

        1) * For fear of incriminating yourself and / or

        2) * Because you cannot think of a good enough comeback for that one.

        And now you will go in the ignore file with your friends crumpet, Michael and Chris; so I won’t have to even see your inane ramblings any more.

      • boo radley

        Thats an interesting & rather pompous tactic david, why don’t you just put your hands over your ears and cry ” boo hoo boo hoo ” for five minutes. Alternatively hold your breath for ten, that should do the trick.

        You could of course simply answer the question.

        Oh I forgot, one final point.

        We all know that the Oriental Bluebird has been scrapped.

        Do you think it is economical for the Japanese whaling interests to build a new supply vessel?

        Do you think it will it pay for itself? ( I think economists call this return on investment)

        How much do you think it will cost to fit out the Nishin Maru to comply with the new heavy oil regulations coming into force soon for Antarctic voyages?

        Can Japanese whaling afford all of this?

        Do you think they will be able to pay back their debts?

        No need to flash your “PHD in economics” badge here either, just a straight forward, humble reply will suffice.

      • Michael Raymer

        Davids’ cowardice is emblematic of the people he supports.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Now that he has blocked us, we can write whatever we like.

        Perhaps I can write a poem about him, one that he will never get to read. Sad because this is rather good.

        Oh David, Oh David,

        at Tokyo sits

        with each morning, a quota of less than zero,

        Whaling is a hammer to the brain,

        our lives a bouquet of blood, you can watch

        The Nishin Maru spilling hot blood,

        Gushing forever gushing and guts into the sea….I spy a baby whale, newborn, torn asunder, mothers death.

        Carved for research, left for flotsam

        Oh David this whaling toll, no money no sense,

        Ginza, still with his harmonica

        playing elegiac tunes while

        slouching toward Nirvana and broken promises

        without expectation or grace.

        The whales left alone, there are

        as many killers as flies as we dream

        of giant sea turtles with strange words carved into
        their hard backs

        and no place for the knife to go in.

        Sushi for David, in Tokyo , mercury abounds.

        Sickeness, decay, defeat.

  • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

    Oh, and my remarks are from a guy that donated much more than thousand dollars to SSCS.
    Since i am not anonymous on this site, if there is doubt, mr Watson can easily check my donation claim.
    Here is a fact for mr Watson, it’s not the huffin and puffin from Michael and other thuggies here, but cold cash from people like me who make small donations, and people like Bob Parker who donate whole boats, that keeps your SSCS boats floating.
    Anybody with a little bit critisism or a mind of his own is an armchair activist ?? That is secte like, not what you would expect in a healthy organisation, that knows how to deal with justified critisism.

    Thomas Carlyle once said “a great man shows his greatness how he treats little people”
    Obviously you are a great man, mr watson, no doubt about that, but you have to learn to show more greatness sometime.

    • crumpets are yummy

      Herwin…who are you to criticize?

      If you want your type of organization that runs the way you think it should be run, how about you start doing something yourself. Lets see how great you are. lets see you stop Japanese whaling on your lonesome. Lets see you tackle the Norwegians next. Lets see how many people you can inspire.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        crumpets, are you too stupid to understand me and actually read my posts ? I never critised SSCS or it’s methods, in fact SSCS methods are the only methods that work, and that’s why i donated cash to SSCS, and not to Greenpeace.
        If you read my posts , i am only critical about some things Watson claims, like being shot, which is a fat and unnecesary lie.
        Does that make me anti SSCS and an enemy of you and your fellow thuggies because i doubt that Watson is being shot by a Japanese sniper at high seas from a distance of a few hunderd meters and hits bulleye ? The Japanese are trying to assasinate Paul Watson while there is a film crew filming on board ? Really ?

      • Michael Raymer

        Since I’m being called a thug (or thuggie) I’d like to go on the record that no state of hostility or animosity existed between me and herwin until she blatantly attacked me on another thread. She has also taken me to task for using insults and personal attacks. I would say that the epithet “thuggie” would fall into that category.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Herwiwn, if you were twice as smart, you’d still be stupid. So, pot calling kettle black kind of stuff coming from your corner.

        If you don’t believe what Paul Watson says then that is your right. But you don’t have to go ape on people who might hold a different opinion or who trust what Paul Watson has told us on here.

        Unless you can prove what you say then you are just spouting hot air and being both rude and insulting.

        I personally would not put anything past the whalers.

        Create a diversion with flash bombs then take aim.

        Then call if an accidental flash bomb explosion.

        Nothing far fetched in that, people get shot all the time.

        Paul Watson’s explanation makes perfect sense.

        But if you want to believe something else than go right ahead. No reason for you to go all anal on us if we think you are on the wrong track.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        @ Michael.
        big yawn for you, it’s getting boring, you did get crossed with me after i responded to a typical meateater of the wall remark from you that some animals can’t be eaten (they are too smart) and other animals like pigs are not inteligent and can be eaten. i HAD to respond and i did it with arguments.
        If you can’t take an argument, than don’t post on a public website, i would say.
        As for insults, look at yourself, one of your posts has been removed by Ecorazzi, and it wasn’t me who removed it.
        @ Crumpy.
        when did you get your lobotomy ?
        two ships on the high seas going up and down and a few hunderd meters away from eachother. It’s a miracle if any sniper could have a shot and shoot somebody straight at the heart in these cicrumstances.
        Oh, and having a sniper on board, that good, that isnt a decision from “the whalers”, that would be to have a decision from high above. And pesonally i don’t think somebody high above think Watson is that important enough to be killed.
        NOTHING fits in the whole story. It’s insulting to tell such a story and actually want us to believe it, and if anybody don’t believe it, ax off his head, or at least try. ;-)

        Its easy to see the bad influendce Watson has on you. Watson talks about “masturbation” (WTF?) and that makes you feel you gotta be equally rude so you use “anal”.
        It’s exactly this reason why many people critise Watson’s attitude like publicly dishing ex collegeuas, because it has a bad effect on little people like you who ape Watson.
        Why don’t you ape Watson on his good side ?

      • km

        herwin, I also just pointed out Paul’s use of sexual words. In one sentence below he told me I engaged in emotional masturbation, that I was impotent and that I was looking for cheap pleasures. When straight men resort to such language, it is very telling. As I said below, it says much more about the person using them than the person they are being used against.

      • AnimuX

        If anybody wants to hear excessive use of various explicit terms I refer you to the heyday of ’60s & ’70s social radicalism (of which Paul Watson is a product).

        Peace. Love. And F*** those war mongering pigs! ;-)

        Reading some of these comments is a bit like watching Sarah Palin claim David Letterman is a pedophile because he made a joke at her family’s expense.

      • Michael Raymer

        “i HAD to respond and i did it with arguments.”

        But you didn’t respond with arguments, you responded by being an overly emotional little girl and by using the same attacks and insults that you call out others for. Don’t dignify yourself or the way you come off to others.

        “As for insults, look at yourself, one of your posts has been removed by Ecorazzi, and it wasn’t me who removed it.”

        You are just going to live in that moment for the rest of your life, aren’t you? The post that was removed was directed at romika who blatantly lied about me. And I complained directly to Michael d’Estries, but it’s his website, not mine. In any case, I was not the first person to have a post deleted and I’m sure I won’t be the last.

        I say again, this state of animosity wouldn’t exist except for you. I didn’t cause it at all.

        “two ships on the high seas going up and down and a few hunderd meters away from eachother. It’s a miracle if any sniper could have a shot and shoot somebody straight at the heart in these cicrumstances.”

        One more person who has evidently not watched the show or the actual incident. The two ships weren’t even 100 meters apart, let alone “a few hunderd meters away”. I guess you can’t dredge up the memory of people throwing grenades at the “Steve Irwin”. The shot was entirely plausible. And again, please post something related to your experience with firearms if you think your views are credible. And where is this whole “sniper” thing coming from? As Watson states, and I agree, it was probably a crewmember taking a shot with a handgun from a porthole, without any authorization.

      • km

        for AnimuX because Michael’s post below calling herwin an “overly emotional girl” shows everyone what kind of person he really is. Actually, his use of that language is as offensive and as telling as Paul’s language.

        AnimuX, we can agree to disagree. I’m not challenging you even if you want to compare me to Palin. I don’t view Paul’s need to put me down by questioning my manhood as benign. I think it is the sign of something much deeper and is very sad coming from the leader of a non-profit. I’m pretty sure Sylvia Earle and many leaders of other organizations would ever resort to such language. That PETA objectifies women is also problematic to me but I don’t know if that is all Ingrid. Even if it is, she seems to be of the position that if you don’t like it, too bad because this is about the animals. She seems to believe in what she does and sticks to her point that she doesn’t care about critics. Also, unlike Paul, she seems to allow dissent. Maybe you can point me to some article she has written where she insults her critics or evidence that she removes members from groups or closes forums. I haven’t seen her post here. Again, I can’t say for sure though.

        For what it is worth, I appreciate your responses today. You obviously see things differently but the respect you’ve demonstrated in addressing my comments hasn’t gone unnoticed.

        I think that unlike your other buddies, you clearly are happy about the results this season. I’m not at all a pro-whaler so I too am happy that whales are swimmingly freely.

      • AnimuX

        Character assassination does not make for a credible argument but it does make an argument nonetheless.

        Paul Watson was out facing down Soviet whalers in 1975 in what could be called a dingy compared to the ships he manages now. (the first ever direct action against whaling)

        He followed that up with action against pirate whalers, including the infamous Sierra (which incidentally was linked to Japan’s Taiyo fisheries) that raided waters from South Africa to Portugal killing whales without regard for any regulations or protections and then smuggled the unreported meat to Japan.

        At one moment or another, year after year, he has gone out to sea to interfere with environmentally destructive and cruel industries. Some times with little money and little to no media coverage. Other times with millions in donations and a fully staffed television crew.

        When I research these events, I honestly don’t care what Watson has said to the media about it (or about Greenpeace for that matter). He stepped up to face down an extreme problem with an extreme solution.

        I don’t care whether he wears a silly uniform for the media circus or generates a little drama with commentary that some find offensive. What he’s done with Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace before that is important to the cause of marine conservation.

        Does that mean he has the responsibility to become some kind of super-human who can’t be questioned or criticized? No.

        However, once the conversation has devolved into an argument over the commentary of celebrity as opposed to the issues being addressed by such activism, any hope for reasonable or relevant discussion is lost.

      • km

        Again, I respect what you’re saying. I don’t think what I’m doing is character assassination and I don’t think I expect him to be a super-human but I do genuinely believe that his agenda has changed in recent years. I would say that in the past he was like ALF and the clients were the whales and now he’s taken on his ego as a client. And I will say this again, I have no issue with lies about the Gojira heading to port or not or the like, but lies as to no or few whales being killed or saving 528 are made for ego and to solicit donations. That people would donate even if they knew the truth might be the case but I don’t know. That supporters view the Japanese differently because they think they shot Paul in the heart or attacked his crew with spears or took them hostage, is pretty undeniable. That he uses language about war and POWs is further proof that this isn’t just about the whales. That he attacks other individuals, critics, NGOs and closes down forums, is just outright wrong and frankly childish.

        I could go on but I actually think you understand my concerns, whether you agree with them or not. In fact, I would go so far to say that I believe, and I could be wrong, that you probably wish he didn’t do the same because all you care about is that whales are being killed and that SSCS do what it can to physically stop the killing.

        I’ll take it further. I will acknowledge that some of his stunts allowed him to get more money to make this year possible (and, as an aside, Paul should be grateful to Pete because Pete’s actions and popularity were a critical part of that.) Having said that, to me Paul’s actions do not justify what he did in any way, shape or form. If you want to operate that way, then do it as a 501(c)(3). If you don’t want to operate within the rules, then get out of the game and start your own game. I would guess he would still get a lot of donations even without the exempt status and without the claims he that he is operating honorably and truthfully.

      • km

        then *don’t do it as a 501(c)(3)

      • AnimuX

        1) Saying “X number of whales were saved” is not a lie when Japanese officials publicly admit their quotas fell short because of Sea Shepherd interference. (privately too, Wiki-leaked)As for discrepancies with the numbers before any official tally is released by Japanese officials, even the news media can’t get those numbers right. The “quota” changes from one publication to the next.

        In the 2005/’06 season Japan killed 866 whales in the Southern Ocean. In the seasons following Sea Shepherd increasingly intervened and the killing declined as a result of that interference.

        2) Whether Watson was really “shot or not” is irrelevant at this point.

        Publicity-stunt? Maybe.

        If so, who cares? The issue is whaling, is it not? Publicity = raising awareness.

        Attempt on yet another activist’s life by an industry/government/criminal organization? Perhaps.

        Many environmental activists have been murdered over the last 30 years. I find it interesting that they’re rarely or never mentioned in all of the generic antagonistic rhetoric about supposedly violent eco-terrorists who have never killed anybody.

        3) When Japan stops describing the flash-bang grenades it threw at Sea Shepherd as “warning balls” and in contrast flares thrown by Sea Shepherd as “incendiary devices” everyone can have a good giggle about the words “bamboo spears” too.

        4) The WWII angle that gets played up well beyond any realistic impact by Sea Shepherd critics has a place in Japan’s whaling history. Most people don’t understand that Japan’s modern whaling industry initially expanded rapidly because of its naval power. Or that whaling ships were adapted for military use during WWII. Or that whaling became a temporary solution for food shortages in the post WWII recovery that Japan seized upon to re-assert its sovereignty.

        Also, when it comes to describing whalers as “barbaric” or some other term alleging Watson is anti-Japanese, I must point out that the same language has been used by Watson to describe white seal hunters from Canada and whalers from other countries primarily populated by people of white European descent.

        5) As for Pete Bethune and his fans, I think it’s high time that all of the Bethune and Ady Gil supporters stop and accept that they don’t run Sea Shepherd and they never will. Thankfully, the “bad break” between Watson and Bethune is also now irrelevant as SSCS has proven it can continue to deliver on the goal to stop whaling in the Southern Ocean.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        @ Michael who writes “But you didn’t respond with arguments, you responded by being an overly emotional little girl”
        hmmm, sounds to me it’s you who reacts without arguments and only with insults.
        Shortly you argumented that dolphins can’t be eaten because they are inteligent and pigs can be eaten because they are not.
        My simple argument is that
        1. pigs are inteligent just as dolphins, but that “inteligence” isn’t the right reason to excempt living creatures from torture. It’s because animals are living beings just like us, who can feel pain and experience happiness, etc.
        I don’t see which part what i write comes from an overly emotional girl. i can understand however that this argumnet makes you feel under attack. Well, bad luck for you. I guess that this guilt feeling is one of the driving forces that you have to play the whale defender the way you do.

        as for your post being removed by ecorazzi, don’t blame me that i remind you of that. As soon as you stop the verbal attacks (like calling me an overemotional girl) nobopdy will mention your little scuffle with Ecorazzi. :-)

        “As Watson states, and I agree, it was probably a crewmember taking a shot with a handgun from a porthole”
        OMG, so a simple angry seaman fired one shot from a ship to another ship on the high seas WITH A HANDGUN and hits bulls eye ?
        To use Paul’s terminology, “Michale, are you playing with my dick ?” should i believe such nonsense ?
        And, urm, it’s Paul’s ex wife and one of her friends that publicly stated in great detail that most probably a highly trained sniper did shoot Paul watson.
        http://www.all-creatures.org/hope/let-20080309.htm

      • Michael Raymer

        I wasn’t refering to the arguments you presented. I was refering to the way you went completely bat-crap on me, to include insults and attacks of your own. I copied and pasted them twice in past threads and there was no response from you. And I don’t call you and overly emotional little girl to insult you. I call you that because you are an overly emotional little girl. It’s not an insult if it’s true.

        “And, urm, it’s Paul’s ex wife and one of her friends that publicly stated in great detail that most probably a highly trained sniper did shoot Paul watson.”

        It just keeps getting better and better with you. Paul’s ex-wife and her friend? Seriously? That’s who you’re getting your news from. Could you get the guys from the corner barber shop to weigh in because I am starved for their opinion? Here you go, genius. Do you want to know why it wasn’t a sniper? Because it wasn’t a rifle that he fired. Want to know how I know? Because it wasn’t a rifle bullet that was recovered. They don’t show it for very long but that was definitely a handgun bullet. See, these are the insights that knowing what you’re talking about brings to you. Not to mention that the damage to the badge and the perceived impact at that range are consistant with with what a handgun would do.

        It just never stops with you. You’re so desparate to be right about SOMETHING around here that you’ll just plug into anything that comes along.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Thanks Michael Raymer for telling us what it was, I often wondered what kind of bullet it was.

        Now we know.

  • Captain Paul Watson

    Well Like I said, all this criticism is amusing but more to the point it is irrelevant. We achieved what we set out to do. We have driven the Japanese whaling fleet out of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and we did it without injuring anyone and without being charged with a crime. I believe the Japanese will not return next year but if they do we will be there to meet them once again. Why am I responding? Not because some disgruntled critic touched a nerve. Hardly. It’s because I’m on my way home and I’ve got some time to do so. The only point I wish to make here is that rhetoric and criticism are really a waste of time. Sea Shepherd does what it does not for people but for marine life, for whales and seals, turtles and fish. If people support us, we are thankful. If people choose not to support us, so be it. You don’t see us sending out direct mail solicitations or spending money trying to impress people to donate to us. We represent our clients and we accept support from people who wish to support our clients – not us. Our objective is to oppose poachers, we are an anti-poaching organization and our tactics and stratigies are not going to change because people disagree with us. We are what we are and people can accept that or reject that. It means little to us. I’m interested in getting results, not in appeasing people’s concerns over what we do and how we do it. Bottom line we are not breaking the law and we are not injuring anyone and we are saving lives and those are the only things I need to be concerned about. I’m not doing what I’m doing to win any popularity contests. I’m doing now what I have done effectively for over three decades and I will continue to do what I am doing until the day I die. So call me what you will if it makes some of you happy for it matters little to me. But if you want to defend the whales, the sharks and the diversity of life in our dying oceans then welcome aboard. But one final word to the critics – what is it you are trying to achieve with your ramblings and whinings? It’s a mystery really because all of your words merely reflect your utter impotence and really amounts to nothing more than verbal masterbation so if it makes you feel good, well carry on, I don’t want to deprive you of your cheap pleasures and in the end it’s all just harmless posturing and posing – so do enjoy yourselves.

    • km

      Verbal masturbation? You would now what that it is. You’re the poster boy for verbal masturbation. You never stop ranting or raving or whining or commenting or composing “poetry” or lying or attacking others or deflecting. You’re a piece of work. You can’t address anything I’ve said so you resort to putting me down and then talking about how amazing you are, while making up more lies, and then calling me impotent. Your followers here do the exact same. You’ve taught them well.

      I can see that you clearly don’t care as you’ve responded to me twice. If I have the almighty Admiral against me, I must be doing something right, ain’t that how it goes?

      RE your donations, perhaps you don’t solicit them through direct mail but how about via email and on your website? One can’t read anything on your website until closing that big donate pop up. What about almost every post on the SSCS Facebook page or at every stand at dive shows or by parking your ship at Cannes or regatta races? Perhaps you don’t use paper mail but what does that prove? I appreciate that you aren’t wasting paper but beyond that, what is your point? I don’t care if you solicit donations and understand that you need to so to operate except you lie to do so and then follow the lie with a donate now request. An example: zero whales have been killed because the Nisshin Maru is running from us (even though they really aren’t and we have seen them maybe once by chopper). In order for us to keep the number at zero and keep them running, we need more money for fuel, please donate.

      Also, I oppose the killing in Taiji and the taking of any animal for captivity but how is that poaching? You may want to consult with your brilliant legal adviser Michael, who I assume is also a scholar when it comes to Japanese law, but doesn’t poaching require that it be illegal? Please stop giving people misinformation.

      I personally don’t care about half of these things but if you insist upon introducing other lies then I will address them. I have never brought up these issues but you use lies to cover lies.

      And riddle me this. Last year, there were three harpoon ships and you engaged them for approximately 30 days. You claim to have saved 528 whales so that would mean approximately 170 per harpoon ship. This year, about one month passes and one harpoon ship and the processing ship are whaling unobstructed and you issue release after release that no or few whales have been killed. You even introduce percentages. I haven’t taken algebra in awhile so maybe things have changed but using your math, why did you always insist that zero or few whales were being killed instead of the 170? I’ll raise my hand. It’s because you lie and make up excuses that the only way it was possible is because they had more harpoons and were working 24 hours a day and killing whole pods. They weren’t doing that last year so how could they have reached the same number?

      • crumpets are yummy

        Ha ha km is going off like a friggin firecracker.

      • boo radley

        @KM, you need to go back and read Admiral Watson’s post properly. The sneaky Japanese commercial whalers placed two harpoons on one ship and worked it 24-7 in a whale slaughter frenzy.

        Thats why they killed more whales than the 30-50 or so estimated which was an estimate for one ship.

        Luckily, Sea Shepherd Conservation Society saved more whale lives this year than ever before ( 80 per cent+) and sent the Japanese poaching scum back to Tokyo with their tails between their legs and a bleak future to look forward too. A future of cutbacks and retrenchments, bad karma, poor whale meat sales and a lot of begging for money.

        Can’t you read? It was all there in black and white for the dummies. Or are you just bored of playing with yourself and wanting some more attention?

      • km

        I’m the dummy, really? If the sneaky Japanese weren’t sneaky last year, which they weren’t, then how can Paul claim to have saved 528 whales in 30 days last year? That would be saying that EACH ship with only one harpoon could have caught 170 whales in one month. You are saying above that 30-50 is the assumption with one harpoon so 30-50 times 3 ships last year equals 90-150. How did Paul get 528?

      • crumpets are yummy

        km, the ICR put out a quota each year, and also list how many whales they caught of that quota. Its not rocket science.

      • km

        I see that you do not know what a quota is. Let’s keep it simple. If bad weather prevented the whalers from whaling for two months so that they had a zero kill, are you saying because they had a quota the simple fact that they have something called a quota could magically give them some powers to slaughter more whales than is physically possible so that they would reach the 900 or so number in one month?

      • crumpets are yummy

        Obviously that would be a cyclone lasting 2-3 months, never head of such a thing mself.

        Epic fail there km.

        KM, if you do not think that SSCS saved whales then why are you so obsessed with them?

      • km

        Yes, the epic fail is on my part. Classic.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Agreed, it was a classic.

      • boo radley

        @km, You must be the arithmetic man; you add trouble, subtract pleasure, divide attention, and multiply ignorance.

      • km

        boo, your failed attempt to be witty with your words doesn’t make me any less right and you any less the fool for trying to call me out and getting proven wrong. But keep humoring yourself. That would apply to crumpy too. Y’all both came on this post telling me I’m wrong and you both were FAILED. You so want me to be wrong because even though I’m anti-whaling, I don’t support Paul and that just irks you so you try to bring me down but you can’t.

        At least Paul is smart, for the most part when it comes to stuff like this. He closes any forum he can’t control and removes posts from anyone who questions him so he has created a world where he is never wrong. And then on websites like this, he just puts down those who question them and tries to emasculate them using words with sexual connotations. Someone has an issue with their manhood or someone needs to examine their childhood. Them kind of words say a whole lot more about the one using the words then the one the words are being used against. My masculinity is still very much intact. Then again, the whales really are my clients, not my ego. From the get go, I’ve said that I think his lies and attacks hurt the movement and non-profits in general. If he just focused on the whales as his clients and not also his ego, it would be great. I genuinely feel bad for the old man.

      • imforthewhales

        km, I wouldn’t be wasting too much time feeling bad for Admiral Paul Watson. The organization which he has spent the best part of his life on has just sent the Japanese whalers packing from the Southern ocean whale sanctuary.

        As someone who enjoys seeing whales swim free, you should be happy about that, and for him.

      • km

        I am and have stated that. If you are suggesting otherwise then you need to read my comments. If you are just reminding me then thank you.

        As for feeling bad for Paul, I can only say that like with Michael if one reaches their supposed goal, especially after 30 years. and they still resort to old lies and attacks then it’s pretty clear that that person’s client is more than just whales and also a lot of ego (and that such a person will probably never be happy).

      • boo radley

        I wouldn’t say that km, Paul looks mighty pleased right at the moment. As happy as can be.

        So he should be too.

    • km

      As an FYI, I derive no enjoyment from this. In fact, I’d rather you stop with the lies so I wouldn’t feel the need to be here. You can question my need to be here and insult me all you want but I have truth on my side and the belief that a non-profit organization should be better than government and thereby always truthful. Anything less than that, other than strategic lies such as not admitting the Gojira is heading to port so the whalers will wonder where you are, is hypocrisy and makes you as bad, if not worse, than the elected officials and organizations like Greenpeace that you so often criticize for the same thing you are guilty of doing. That is, regardless of what you accomplish because I can say that our elected officials do some good and accomplish some things, lack of transparency is one of the biggest problems in the non-profit sector, in government and in the world today. If we, as those who work in the non-profit sector, cannot stand by that, we have lost before we have even begun.

      If the whales and other marine life are the only thing you care about and the above is irrelevant to you, although your attacks on Greenpeace and government suggest otherwise, then why not do as ALF does? They do what they do because the animals are their clients and it is simply about the animals. I may not agree with their tactics, but I respect that they don’t hold themselves out to be anything other than what they are.

      • boo radley

        Onward christian soldiers, marching as to war…

        Time for your medication, km.

      • km

        Because I care about transparency in the non-profit sector, I need medication? You just hate it when you have no answers. The lack of critical thinking is so sad but so not surprising.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Hey KM, I think I know who you are now.

        Aren’t you that guy that runs that website…something about cash..where you post all that BS about where people get their money from and where it goes?

        http://activistcash.com/

        Is this you?

      • km

        Because the only people who care about nonsense like transparency are the nuts at CCF. Using that logic, because Paul complains about Greenpeace and their finances and their lack of transparency, he must be Richard Berman. OMG. I work for Paul Watson aka Richard Berman. You just blew my mind.

      • AnimuX

        Sea Shepherd’s transparency is well tended to.

        Charity evaluators give SSCS high marks for putting the vast majority of its donations toward operational expenses rather than administrative costs.

        A third party (Animal Planet) films Sea Shepherd’s anti-whaling campaign in the Southern Ocean and SSCS does not have editorial control.

        The people getting obsessive about what “he said” or “she said” are on a crusade that reflects more upon themselves personally than any NGO.

        In all fairness, the bickering that goes back and forth between certain environmental organizations is not productive. Any incorrect or obfuscating statements by members of these organizations leave plenty of room for skepticism.

        However, for whales and dolphins, the results are more important than the narrative.

        Sea Shepherd has produced amazing results despite all of the criticism and controversy.

      • km

        Animux, I appreciate your input because you actually understand that transparency is an issue and I think you actually know what the word means unlike the other crumpy and his sidekick boo. However, transparency does not just go to finances although that is how Charity Navigator measures it. I never questioned Paul’s use of the money and that he was taking too much. I think a $100K salary for him is more than fair. That, in addition, to his rent and money for speaking engagements will allow him to retire very comfortably. My point is that transparency is more than just money as Paul quite clearly emphasizes when he questions Greenpeace’s campaigns and their decisions or allows attacks on hos website on other groups like Eyes on Taiji. I think you know exactly what I am talking about, as does Paul.

        With all that said, if you are trying to suggest that the Animal Planet crew is a neutral third-party, I have a bridge to sell you…

        Again, I appreciate your input AnimuX. Thank you for at least addressing the issue.

  • crumpets are yummy

    Amen.

    Its been great following the Sea Shepherd campaign this season Captain Paul Watson. Thanks for dropping by to share your thoughts.

    Just wanna say…everyone here in Australia, New Zealand and people who care for the whales around the world are just so proud of you and your great team of committed people & we are all so pleased that the whales are now living in peace. Finally!

    We thank you for doing what the powers that be were supposed to do but never did.

    You saved the whales and kicked the Japanese whalers sorry a$$es all the way back to Tokyo.

    Some of us here and elsewhere have been attacked for defending the whales in cyberspace up against all the forces the pro whalers could throw at us.

    They used every trick in the book, thats for sure, & it has been an interesting lesson in human psychology…I don’t know why they pro-whalers do what they do , some peoples brains are definitely wired in a different way. Nurture or nature? I don’t know what goes through their mind or why it does or who/ what is responsible.

    There is nothing noble about their thinking or their motives and this shines through in all their posts. They make pro-whaling arguments look outdated, thoroughly mean, short sighted, immensely cruel, selfish & greedy. Which of course is all good for those of us on the whales side.

    No-one with even a modicum of rationality or intelligence pays any credence to the pro-whaling, pro-sealing way of thinking.

    The whales won by a knockout this year.

    It’s been a long debate but a good one. A long SSCS campaign but a good one.

    Stay safe on your way home from the (real)whale sanctuary , we all look forward to hearing about the next chapter in ocean conservation from SSCS.

  • Arnie

    Over a thousand puppies and kittens were tortured and killed this season because of Paul Watson’s actions against the Japanese whaling fleet. Paul Watson could have stopped it. He was warned. But he decided not to. His anti-whaling conservation farce and the money and attention it brings are more important to him. I will be back torturing and killing puppies and kittens if the SSCS again launches a campaign of lies and violence against the Japanese whaling operations. Also if they launch campaigns of lies and violence against the legal activities of anyone else.

    You can help to end the torture of the puppies and kittens. Here is how. Contact SSCS and their major financial enablers like Bob Barker and let them know what they have to do to make me stop. Don’t donate to them and encourage other people not to. The VISA credit card company financially supports the Sea Shepherd terrorists so encourage them to stop doing so. Refuse to do any business with them until they do. There are other credit card companies out there. If you live in a country where SSCS has a ship registered contact your government and urge them to remove the registration. If you are a US citizen contact your government and urge them to remove the tax exempt status that the SSCS has. The more I see these things being done, the less the puppies and kittens will suffer.

    • don miguelo

      A thousand happy puppies and kittens are born everytime you post this crap because I set them in a room to mate. And yes, I will find happy homes for them as well, why not, since we are talking in complete fiction.

  • Captain Paul Watson

    Interesting comments. Arnie is just plain sick and non-deserving of a comment other than that he is just plain sick. Km whoever he is, is simply obsessive. This sounds like someone who has a personal issue with me, certainly not simply an objective commentator. Whatever his agenda, he is obviously a coward hiding behind initials and without the decency to say who he really is.

    I deal with such cowards all the time hiding behind their computer screens like craven jackals sniffing for a wounded animal to kill. They shoot false accusations from the dark and get all snooty if I don’t answer their silly questions like they expect me to address their issues as a priority in my life.

    I’ll debate anyone face to face or if I know who they are but I don’t answer to nameless, faceless trolls who lurk in social forums looking for attention.

    So KM, if you want me to answer any questions all you have to do is tell me who you are and why I need to respond to you in any legitimate manner.

    In the end it does not matter. What we do at sea is not influenced in any way by the opinions of those who disagree with us.

    • km

      Again, you say it doesn’t matter but here you are addressing me. You are the coward. You saw after a few posts that I had a valid point so then you brought up that you wouldn’t answer me without my name. You responded to me three times in fact and did very much respond to me but you know I’m right.

      When people on Facebook with real names ask you questions, you remove them from your group. And you know that if I give my name here, I will be harassed by you and some of your thug supporters. I visited one those pro-whaler groups on Facebook and heard what some of your supporters did to some of the people there. I read that some keep a list of people who challenge you. And you will deny any responsibility for what they do but they will attack me nonetheless.

      I am happy to send you an email with my identity on condition that you will not disclose my name to anyone. I will have my legal adviser insert language so that if you do then I have the right to take legal action and will gladly do so. The press would be great. Do you agree to those terms? I have no personal issue with you and you will see that. Also, do you think crumpets, boo and AnimuX are your supporters real names? How come you don’t attack them as you do me?

      By the way, I do support you as a citizen of the US, a country that provides you tax-exempt status. So whine all you want about your responsibilities but don’t for a second think that the public doesn’t support you. You need your status to survive or you wouldn’t have it. That there are other organizations with more serious problems with the same status, I don’t disagree, but that doesn’t change the facts as they apply to you.

      And call my questions silly, call me names (thankfully no longer sexual ones because that was kind of beyond creepy), continue with your tirades but everyone except your loyal flock sees right through you.

      Let me know if you agree to the terms above. And how I can contact you so that no one else can intercept my email.

      • AnimuX

        1) Sorry but nobody is going to take a keyboard kommando seriously when they type “coward” on the internet. This isn’t exactly a firefight in Kabul.

        There aren’t many people who have the intestinal fortitude to get into the seas Watson regularly travels in, much less use themselves as a human shield in a zodiac while Russian whalers fire harpoons just over their heads.

        2) Oh no… dropped from a FB group… over a disagreement….

        From IRC to various forums online, including Facebook, blocking people is a legitimate and often necessary management tool. In fact, most often, the administrators of a large forum system will INSTRUCT people to block others regularly if unresolvable disagreements and other personal conflicts occur.

        3) Oh noes…. not a flame war spiraling out of control into a “OH YEAH?! WHAT ABOUT ______?!” moment… Haven’t ever seen this before… Plus, I’m pretty sure someone who is unable to physically threaten anyone in any way (you know.. thru the interwebz) can not be defined as a “thug”. Was troll the word you’re looking for?

        4) You can not necessarily assert a fraternal link between two individuals because they share the same view or because one defends the other. For example: I am NOT a member of SSCS. :-P

        5) Being a U.S. citizen doesn’t mean you “support” an organization just because it is 501(c)(3). The “tax exempt” status is open to many organizations and the organization must meet certain requirements to legally retain that status. Obviously, Sea Shepherd has met the legal requirements. So it has nothing to do with you as a citizen unless you’re taking credit for every U.S. law and legal decision ever made….

        6) The Palinesque “you’re creepy because…” thing is not improving in substance with repetition. The word “masturbation” is commonly used in conversation without implying deviant “sexual” behavior. Such as the term “mental masturbation” which commonly describes intellectual activity that has no practical purpose. Therefore, “verbal masturbation” may imply pontification that has no practical purpose in this instance. People usually understand that language is not strictly literal and that ones interpretation of a statement is not necessarily the originator’s intended meaning. Then again, sometimes an insult really is just an insult. When I tell someone to go F— themselves I’m pretty sure they know what I mean.

        And loyal flock? Come on. What’s next? “Drinking the Kool-aid?” “Looking through rose-colored glasses?” “Wearing tin-foil hats?”…the list goes on and on…

      • km

        But masturbation, impotent and cheap pleasures are often used in one sentence? Okay. You keep telling yourself that’s normal.

        Say what you will about Paul managing forums. Your arguments fail. And Greenpeace and PETA don’t remove comments or members or close forums.

        Aren’t you a keyboard kommando? Are you telling me I shouldn’t be taking you seriously? Thank you but I already knew that.

        Greenpeace individuals also acted as human shields. Pete jumped off a jetski in the Antarctic waters and climbed aboard an enemy ship in the dead of night and waited until morning and then served time for what he did. What was your point again? Oh yeah, you didn’t have one but you think he deserves special treatment. If someone wants to claim special status because they did something for the whales then it is quite evident that it was not all for the whales and maybe also for the ego. There are a ton of people all over the world doing many dangerous things in the name of many admirable causes. They are doing it because they believe in it. Do you think they go around bragging about it? Do you think they believe they should be held to different standards because of it? No, most are humble and would be embarrassed that the attention is about them and not the cause.

        I do support SSCS as a US taxpayer. If a nonprofit isn’t required to pay taxes that go toward certain services that are government provided and of which they benefit, I am covering them. Does that give me standing to sue them for not doing something under the law? Nope but it doesn’t give anyone with the status the right to abuse it.

        As people call me names and insult me, you have no issue but if I use a term to describe people who blindly accept what someone says because that someone has saved whales, you question me. Would you prefer I call them idiots or fools? I was trying to refrain from that.

      • AnimuX

        1) 30 years of dedication to the cause of marine conservation is something I consider “special”.

        2) Whether or not you like Paul Watson’s persona, as it is, that does not diminish the 30 years he’s given to the cause of marine conservation.

        3) Sea Shepherd is not abusing its tax status in the USA. To my knowledge the organization continues to meet all of the legal requirements without challenge from the IRS. Although, Japan has pressured U.S. representatives to do its dirty work regarding this status…

        4) It’s not that the insults are appropriate, km. It’s that I think you’re categorically wrong and also obsessed with PW. ;-)

    • km

      I forgot to add. I agree with you on Arnie. But unlike you, I adhere to a vegan lifestyle so do not support the killing of any animal. I actually can’t wait until you find out who I am. I can almost guarantee that you’ll be pleasantly surprised. I may not like you as a person and may feel bad for you but that doesn’t mean I don’t think you can change. You may not want to but maybe you will after listening to me. And I’m not a religious or spiritual person at all so no need to worry that I am trying to push any of that. Man to man.

      • boo radley

        KM, you seem upset that SSCS has tax free status in the USA. I believe also in Australia. Why would that concern you so much?

        After all, you say you are not pro-whaling and happy to see whales swimming free.

        SSCS are a non for profit org, they are out there saving lives, with the help of their supporters and volunteers, and saving lives costs money. it costs money to buy ships and fill them with fuel, stick them up with equipment etc. A lot of this money would be spent inside Australia and the USA, keeping the wheels of the economy ticking over. The people who sell the ships and the fuel will pay more tax to the government as a result.

        Many religious groups get tax exemptions too.

      • km

        I’m not upset that SSCS has the status but getting the benefits associated with it shouldn’t be taken lightly. I already acknowledged that there are many groups out there who are much worse but does one really want to be like them? That’s not an excuse.

        Thank you for the civil post. I will say this and hope you understand but saving whales doesn’t give you a license to lie and attack others. Paul does not allow his supporters on AP or Facebook to even see that people question him. Doesn’t it make you wonder why? Why do PETA and Greenpeace keep negative comments on their website and Facebook pages? Do you agree with those crazy right wingers in Japan who were able to stop the showing of Taiji?

        Saving whales does not excuse someone from acting like a semi-moral and semi-adult person. Do you think it was appropriate for Paul to attack Greenpeace and one of their employees? Do you see Greenpeace issuing press releases about Paul? They have a page on their website that someone may or may not read. I have my own issues with them but that doesn’t mean Paul’s attacks on them are any more justified in my mind because of that. By the way, do you ever read the comments on Facebook from young kids? There is one that got so mad because the Japanese were trying to kill the SSCS crew with spears. You tell me that that is okay.

        Why is this so hard for you all to understand? I’m not saying that in a rude way but why are you so bothered by this? Why should Paul be immune from criticism? I would think that the type of people who support SSCS direct action would be the ones who support someone asking questions. This part is to some extent what transparency is about.

        I’m not disregarding your point but whales aren’t the only thing I care about and I’ve said this before but for all the good he does for whales (and know that people do question if his actions hurt the movement in the long term), he does a lot of bad in other areas. It doesn’t have to be that way. Why do you encourage it?

      • AnimuX

        Two points:

        1) Greenpeace has made plenty of poisonous public comments about Sea Shepherd.

        2) Paul Watson gets criticized all the time. The man is a magnet for criticism and controversy. Industries and governments have PR firms and front organizations contracted to demonize Watson, Sea Shepherd and other environmental organizations. So I don’t know where you get the idea that he’s considered “immune” to criticism.

      • km

        Please share with me all the times Greenpeace issued press releases or commentary about SSCS on Facebook, in the press or on their website. And who was it that whined about having his name removed as a co-founder? I’m sure the whales cared a lot and he was just acting on their behalf. As for Greenpeace, can you give me examples where hey’ve affirmatively acted, not when they have been asked about something? I’m not denying that they have affirmatively acted but let’s compare.

        Paul tries to make himself immune from criticism in forums where potential or actual supporters exist. He knows that most people don’t read activistcash and take it seriously. A grown man of 60 supposedly told Facebook fans or friends that they have to choose between him and Pete and supposedly removed some people if he saw them posting on Pete’s page. Apparently there is something called Whale Wars Unmoderated that he took over and removed all negative comments and then also removes people if they have any association with any page that may question him. Look at the Greenpeace page on Facebook. They allow posts from people with that black SSCS badge on their avatar. You can try to defend Paul’s actions all you want but there is no valid defense. Look at all the criticism about PETA on this very site. Has Ingrid ever posted on here?

        By posting on this page and in response to me, Paul has made it certain that more people will hear about his childish behavior. How ironic.

      • AnimuX

        I think this sums up GP on the matter:

        “In 1986, on being asked what he thought of being labelled an eco-terrorist by Greenpeace, Watson responded by calling them “the Avon Ladies of the environmental movement”, something he says they have never forgiven him for. Five years later they agreed to refrain from criticising each other but the truce failed to hold, with each blaming the other for violating it.”

        Eventually GP went as far as to revise its own history and write Watson’s significance out of it. Then again, “Greenpeace Foundation” doesn’t have a favorable opinion of the now corporate Greenpeace USA either.

        http://www.greenpeacefoundation.org/about/gpMovement.cfm

        As for Facebook, if you can’t handle getting blocked from a FB group then you should probably call a shrink. It’s really not as big a deal as you seem to think it is.

      • km

        You haven’t answered my question so I will assume there are no press releases or articles recently or not so recently issued by Greenpeace about Paul and that Paul just likes to whine over events that happened a long time ago.

        I haven’t been kicked out of any group on Facebook. I have gone on to the SSCS pages and the more extreme FOJ and then to the opposite end of the spectrum with the various Whale Wars sites. I have never joined any group or commented in any group. And you didn’t address my point anyway but instead tried to make me look bad. I guess my point was valid or you’d be addressing it. Same with the Greenpeace issue.

        I’m done. I know I’m right because of your response and anyone else reading your responses can see the same. If you had a rebuttal, you would include even some substance with your insults.

      • AnimuX

        Interesting. Sea Shepherd goes out into the remote reaches of the Southern Ocean to combat whalers and you find the “FOJLTWA” group on Facebook to be “extreme” because of the title.

        Hilarious. :-)

      • km

        You mean “Fu*k Off Japan” in it’s title? Isn’t the page that Paul’s ex was trying to have shut down? I wonder why…

        I actually liked the group she formed for ARAs against racism. I believe it was there that I learned of FOJLTWA.

      • km

        *its

      • AnimuX

        Uh huh. I’m sure that’s where you “learned” of FOJLTWA. ;-)

        It’s a shame that people continue to skew the subject away from an important issue, like the ongoing destruction of whales in violation of international conventions, by presenting completely unrelated topics and injecting controversy where there is none.

        Sometimes this is done out of ignorance. Some people are simply unable to make a logical connection between a phrase and a subject of protest. Instead they take a word out of context and promote hysterical opposition based on a false assumption. You see, and it’s clearly explained in the group summary for years now, FOJLTWA is not about racism.

        It’s about expressing anger at the national government of Japan which uses its economic power and geopolitical influence to support and facilitate the whaling industry. “Japan” has violated and subverted international whaling regulations since the 1930s.

        Historically, Japan is guilty of violating size limits, species protections, seasonal limits, sanctuary boundaries, all manner of quotas, and even facilitating “pirate whaling” (that’s front companies with foreign labor illegally killing whales in secret and smuggling the unreported meat to Japan).

        Currently, the government of Japan:
        * Bribes IWC officials from developing countries for votes
        * Abuses Article VIII of the ICRW in order to continue commercial whaling under the guise of science and subvert the democratic decisions of the IWC
        * Spreads propaganda to developing countries like the ridiculous “whales eat too many fish” lie
        * Keeps the failed whaling industry going with tax-funded subsidies all to preserve private sector jobs and political clout for corrupt officials.

        F— OFF JAPAN, LEAVE THE WHALES ALONE!!! is a statement of angry protest against the whalers and government of Japan. Nearly half a million people have joined the group in protest on Facebook.

        I once again, refer anyone who wants to observe explicit language in protest to the heyday of the ’60s and ’70s counter culture.

        “Peace. Love. And F— those warmongering pigs!”

        That wasn’t a racist statement either, in case you needed another explanation. :-P

      • Michael Raymer

        Animux, if you want to run for President in 2012, I’ll vote for you. You’ve always been a much better poster than I have but, everything you’ve written on this page has been pure gold. And a delight to read. A blessing on your house, my friend.

      • crumpets are yummy

        km…Greenpeace do leave most of their comments up (most, not all) on their site, however they will remove some posts on occasions.

        They have dedicated internet moderators who work in an office, and earn a wage and have the time and the inclination to moderate.

        Paul Watson is currently on a ship, rocking about in the southern ocean, and has limited time to moderate facebook.

        Do you really expect him to organize his crew of 88, look after three ships, take on Japans whale poaching, search for the Nisshin Maru, conduct a 5 day search for lost sailors on the Beserk, deal with maritime NZ, do press releases, appear on TV and do radio interviews AND moderate facebook forums all at the same time?

        Paul Watson wants to talk to his supporters, not deal with trolls. We appreciate the effort it takes to do so.

        You do not see the heads of Greenpeace talking directly to people on the internet.

        Most people could not tell you who the heads of Greenpeace even are.

        We all know Paul Watson though because he take the time to talk to us and is seen taking action.

        Greenpeace are a little like the Wizard of OZ who do all the communications from behind a big green screen. When you pull the curtain back, it is all a bit of a let down.

        As far as I am aware, there are no head honchos from Greenpeace on the ecorazzi forums talking to everyone, and I have never seen them make any personal statements to the public on their website. I have never seen them go down to the Southern Ocean in a ship to take on the whale poachers either.

        Paul Watson has made time to come on here and discuss a few issues and to have a little fun with us. If you want to read what he and SSCS are about, you can go to the SSCS website and read all about it. Paul Watson writes most of the stories on there and keeps everyone updated.

        You wont see GP doing that now will you?

        Everything that is posted under the Greenpeace banner on their site is from GREENPEACE, not from one of the heads of GP.

        There may be a piece written by a blogger or two within the movement. When you think of SSCS you think of black ships and Paul Watson.

        When you think of Greenpeace you think of the rainbow warrior and people in bear suits.

        Their names elude me right now.

        Greenpeace do not attract the ire of the pro-whalers or the pro-sealers, because they are not actively involved in either realm and are not effective. Mostly the ire directed towards them comes from people who are doing something about whaling and wondering where the hell they are and why they have not sent any ships down to the whale sanctuary to help out. Not too much to moderate!

        Greenpeace do not protest the seal hunt with ships or helicopters or people on the ice…no Greenpeacers on the ice since Paul Watson left, and they do not send their ships to the Southern Ocean to take on the might of the Japanese empire.

        Greenpeace did not send a ship with a head honcho at the command to tackle the Japanese whaling fleet this year and have not been sighted for at least three.

        They did not send the whalers home with their tails between their legs this year ( though that appear to be trying hard to claim some credit).

        So why would any pro-whalers take them on? Why would any pro-sealers take them on?

        GP are not doing anything and taking peoples money ( which could be put to better use with SSCS) so why protest? Greenpeace, as far as they are concerned, are doing a great job doing nothing.

        SSCS are active and get results, so all those people with vested interests see them as something worth taking on.

        Greenpeace conducted a ‘campaign’ recently which involved making origami paper whales to send to president Obama all the while asking for more money so that “together we can save the whales”.

        Meanwhile, Paul Watson & his crew on three ships have sent them packing.

        Who would have the time to deal with a pack of internet trolls on facebook after all of that?

      • km

        crumpets, if as you say Paul and his team don’t have time to moderate then how are they moderating more than anyone else? That is, they remove posts from people questioning them or remove posters who questions. They are obsessed with removing any one who challenges them. Paul has apparently deleted friends because he heard they posted on Pete or Ady or somebody’s page. I’m not understanding your argument. I’m not trying to be rude but their actions completely contradict what you’re saying unless I am misreading something. If so, I apologize. In fact, Paul is moderating a page that was once someone else’s and he or his people removed many if not all of the posts that were there before him. Were they trolls when they were there first or has he become the ultimate troll by his actions? He apparently had third party pages and forums like AP and the Whale Wars, not SSCS, pages either shut down or made so people can’t post. Paul can talk to his people and that is great but why take over or shut down forums that are not his? Why does he try to control any forum that is comprised of actual or potential supporters? He has twitter I believe, a Paul Watson page, an SSCS page, a Whale Wars page, myspace, and friggin television show. Again, there are plenty of outlets for his verbal masturbation.

        I don’t care about what Greenpeace has or has not done for purposes of this argument but I respect your feeling about them. I will though say that there is a lot they do that SSCS doesn’t but who cares? They are different groups and I’m not one who criticizes SSCS for not being everywhere all the time. By the same token, I don’t criticize Greenpeace for trying a different tactic in Japan. Is Oceana to be faulted for not being in the Southern Ocean? They all have their roles. Is Greenpeace anywhere on their website claiming to be in the Southern Ocean? No. I will agree with you that their release on whaling ending wasn’t great but I will also say that I think their actions and that case may have had an indirect impact and all Paul did was put it down. They both acted badly as far as I’m concerned. And to say that they shouldn’t collect money is ridiculous. Their members are contributing to a variety of campaigns, not just whaling and seals. In all of your worlds though, Greenpeace’s only purpose for existence is to steal Paul’s thunder. What is Paul doing now for seals or for that matter in the Gulf or for sharks?

        But all of this has no relevance except to say that other groups, unlike SSCS, are not trying to shut down the “trolls.” And to say that Greenpeace doesn’t attract the ire of pro-whalers or pro-sealers may be true, I don’t know, but they attract the ire of pro-SSCS and people who oppose their other campaigns. PETA gets attacked all the time. Finally, from what I have seen, Paul comes here when criticized and then attacks those criticizing him. He sure didn’t come to this page to have a friendly chat with supporters. Taking that further, is he and therefore SSCS more legitimate because he talks to people? Does Gene Baur? Do the people at Animal Acres? I don’t think so but they are just as respectable of groups.

        I don’t know if you’re purposely trying to change the focus because I made a point that can’t be disputed. Other groups leave up negative comments but he does not. I’m not going to accuse you of anything but I’m finished with this discussion. Anyone following it can see what is happening assuming anyone is following. I assume you are writing this for other people and not me. It doesn’t matter. I know what I know. I have stated it. I have backed it up. It’s done. Actually, let me add this because it does bother me. If you are saying that Greenpeace is doing nothing for whales, that is your opinion but to say they take money and do nothing, then that is ridiculous to say unless you can tell me that you know every campaign they are involved in and what they have or have not done. If not, why not just say that because they are not doing exactly what Paul is doing then you believe they are taking money for nothing? To say anything else shows just how obsessed you are with Paul unless you can back your statement to show that they are not doing any world. And it is ridiculous in fact. Essentially, you are saying that because they are not on the ice or in the Southern Ocean doing exactly what Paul did or is doing then they are not legitimate. Is Oceana not legitimate? What about Sylvia Earle? What about Cousteau?

        You can all keep trying to avoid what I’m saying by lying or putting down Greenpeace or pumping up Paul but the fact that you do not address my points as I do yours is very telling. Then again, you’re following Paul’s example and proving my original point about how his lies and attacks lead to other people doing just the same and that it’s unnecessary and just flat out bad. All of my time and your time just to prove what I’ve been saying all along.

      • crumpets are yummy

        “I’m not understanding your argument. I’m not trying to be rude but their actions completely contradict what you’re saying unless I am misreading something. If so, I apologize.”

        ———————————————

        The point is, is that Paul Watson is “out there” unlike Greenpeace. So he has a rabid pack of infidels chasing after him.

        People just want his attention..all of the time.

        Pro-sealers with their ex to grind, pro-whalers and their army of trolls have their vested interests, as do the Ginza Glen Inwood company who are on the ICR payroll , etc etc.

        I think we have all seen the evidence of their infiltrations so I probably don’t need to outline what tactics they use.

        I personally have a bit of time during a busy day to tap out replies on here, so does MR and Animux, boo etc.

        So we have a small team of people that can tackle the Ginzas. But how would you go if you were on your own? A lengthy rely on one site such as this can take twenty minutes or so…writing and editing. How many times in a day can you do that?

        Paul Watson is a busy man and is far better off removing these types of people who, lets face it, only get on there to cause trouble and to argue sh*t.

        Quite frankly, I think that Paul Watson has far more important things to do that replying to trouble makers.

        Less trouble makers= less moderation.

        Another way of looking at it is to study the old adage “a stitch in time saves nine”.

        Remove a few silly people and make your life so much easier, and this makes for a far more pleasant experience for the true whale lovers out there and means people are not constantly defending against the dills.

        No surprises to see Pete Bethune get the boot.

        He was creating a small mess of his own on the internet.

        Obviously Paul Watson doesn’t support Pete in what he was doing or saying (I suspect some of his loyal followers were also a negative part of the problem) so it makes sense to remove time wasters such as that. leaving time free for more important things such as shutting down Japanese whaling.

        Once again, Paul doesn’t have time to keep replying to what Pete Bethune has to say.

        Pete has his heart in the right place as far as wildlife is concerned, and he wants to be a whale warrior and be “out there” too.

        But he is also a bit of a monkey and highly competitive.

        Pete Bethune is a gung-ho character, who doesn’t appear to mind firing a few cheap shots and is carrying a massive chip on his shoulder.

        Unfortunately he is also passive aggressive and all of this spells trouble.

        So if he can make a few problems for Paul Watson ans his followers on the internet then he will create a bit of trouble.

        isnt it a better strategy, and remove the source of the trouble (remember, a stitch in time)?

        All makes for more time doing what needs to be done…saving whales.

    • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

      @ Paul watsom.
      Callin a poster a “coward” because he doesn’t use his real name on the internet ?
      99% of internet users don’t use their real name.

    • km

      I am not denying his dedication or his good work but there are plenty of people doing plenty of good work in this world. I think parents who are dedicated to their children are as special. Let’s take this further, what if someone spent 30 years dedicated to fighting against the captivity of animals but was beating their wife and five children? Maybe you wouldn’t care because all you may care about is animals but there are a lot of people who care about preventing abuse to women and children. No one is automatically better because they do something for a cause you support. So I really don’t get your point or why what he does means he deserves to be treated any differently, especially when he is a pretty negative person who verbally attacks others. I haven’t questioned his dedication to marine conservation. That’s what you fail to see. I have suggested that he may be also dedicated to his ego and that he engages in other negative behavior that may hurt other causes that may be just as important to someone as marine conservation is to you.

      How am I obsessed with Paul? Michael was the one who invited me to post here. Look at the first post. He also lied while doing so. I then addressed those lies and then all of you, including Paul, have continued to engage me in conversation. It kind of looks like you all may be obsessed with me.

      I am very active in animal rights but also very interested in the issue of transparency. Maybe even obsessed with it but to say I’m obsessed with Paul is just your attempt to make me look bad. There is no evidence to prove it. I have posted on maybe three or four threads here on Ecorazzi. I have definitely researched him and SSCS because I don’t make things up to prove a point.

      If you don’t care about what I care about and all you care about is marine conservation then why are you here? I’m not telling you what you should care about or insulting you because you care about marine conservation and post all over the internet about it. I think it’s great. Think about it, how dumb would it sound for someone to say there is something wrong with you because you care about marine conservation and SSCS and seem to post in every forum that you can? That’s what you’re doing to me and you just don’t see it and I haven’t posted even a fraction of what you and the others have. My issue with you and the others is that you do act like Paul is some god that deserves to be treated differently and that you are obligated to defend him. That mindset seems to override all reason.

      AnimuX, I am finished. I can’t say I’ve liked your comments before but I don’t want for this to become personal. We have been carrying on a respectable debate and maybe it is time to agree to disagree. Deal?

      • AnimuX

        The longer this goes on the loonier it gets.

        “what if someone spent 30 years dedicated to fighting against the captivity of animals but was beating their wife and five children? Maybe you wouldn’t care because all you may care about is animals but there are a lot of people who care about preventing abuse to women and children.”

        Do you know what a “straw man” argument is? LOL

        You’ve fallen into a familiar pattern of outrageous exaggerations.

        People attack me online too, km. Though not quite with the same non-stop obsessiveness they take when going after celeb-types like PW. :-P

        As previously stated, I think you’re categorically wrong AND obsessed with PW.

      • km

        Really? You are essentially saying that Paul is above reproach be he has spent 30 years dedicated to marine conservation. Where have I exaggerated? Do you know what that word means? Where in my post is this exaggeration? You so want me to act as others have that you use the same attacks against them as ridiculous as they are without even thinking before you write. I gave an example of what it means when you idolize someone. You are the one who keeps defending all of his actions with the fact that he has saved whales.

        And that all of you keep responding to me is proof of your obsession with me. You all have initiated the conversations with me and not the other way around. It’s here for anyone to see.

        And you can call me wrong but not one of you can refute my facts so say what you will but I’ve made statements and backed them up. If you are writing this for someone other than me, then those people will see the same thing.

      • AnimuX

        km, for you to type out a random comparison between what Paul Watson says and does…

        …and someone who beats women and children…

        …and then still claim you have some kind of valid argument, is worse than crazy.

        You have not presented a single coherent relevant argument amidst a laundry list of personal grievances.

        There is no “personal” here.

        You don’t know me. Or Paul Watson. Or, I imagine, anybody actually involved in anti-whaling activism who isn’t just a “friend” on Facebook.

        You’re ranting. Like a crazy person.

      • crumpets are yummy

        Let’s take this further, what if someone spent 30 years dedicated to fighting against the captivity of animals but was beating their wife and five children?

        * maybe they were keeping birds in cages?

        Ha ha.

        We defend Paul Watson because people attack him due to his success and because he is defending the defenseless. They either have a grudge against him, are jealous, are trolls, bullies or believe what the trolls say about Paul Watson (unlikely).

        We believe Paul Watson to be a good man.

        Thats different to just doing good work.

        Tiger Woods is a great golfer but I would not call him a good man. Mike Tyson is a great boxer but if he were to have ever stepped into the ring with Muhammad Ali then I would be cheering for Ali because Ali is a good man and in his day he stood up for the oppressed and went to jail because he didn’t believe in hurting others, Mike Tyson is not a good man and chews peoples ears off.

        Muhammad Ali told people how good he was…but he went out there and got the job done, often against the odds. People still liked him even though he told us what would happen and made it happen. That is no reason not to like someone.

        Paul Watson combines both great work (ie results) and being a good man.

        One thing to bear in mind is that not everyone has had everything they do and say for the past thirty years documented and out there in the public realm. Presidents don’t carry on their presidential duties for 30 years like PW has. But Paul Watson has been at the front of ocean conservation for a long time and therefore has a long and well documented history. Some out there like to go through history and point to this and that as signs of him not being a good man.

        None of it does of course, but people will still try.

        Therefore KM, no matter how much you or anyone else tries we know that Paul Watson is a good man. So we will defend him, just as he defends the defenseless ( whales, turtles etc) against those who want to destroy them.

        Paul Watson is the one setting the example!

      • km

        You believe him to be a good man. That’s great but you can’t say he is unless you’re privy to everything in his private life. Do you know how he treats his friends? Do you know how he treats all animals? Does he eat any? Do you know if he was always there for his daughter? Do you know that he never lies? Have you spoken to all of his exes? Do you know if he has ever cheated at a game or on a partner? Do you know if he has ever struck someone? Do you know if he is a good son? Do you know if he ever parks in the handicapped spot? Do you know if he gives up his seat on a train when an old(er) person comes in? Do you know if he tips waiters or bellhops?

        You’re defending a man because he defends whales and seals. That’s fair if someone is attacking him for not trying to defend whales and seals. Turtles? I think that was just Pete. Sorry, had to do that because using that measure then Pete is a good man too and a great example and you should be defending him too.

        And EVERYTHING he has done has been documented? You have read and seen footage about his home life, about his marriages, about his friendships, about his social life, about his family? I’m sorry but you have lost credibility with this discussion. I’m utterly embarrassed for you.

        By the way, Sean Penn is in Haiti doing great work. Sean Penn hit Madonna and supposedly cheated on his wife. Using your criteria, he is a good man because he is helping the people of Haiti. That he has a history of abuse and other things that a normal person would say would clearly show him to not be a good man mean nothing because he is a good man to you. Do you want more examples of famous people because I could give you plenty?

        And I live in Los Angeles and I personally know plenty of people who are activists for many causes but are not good people at all. They do some good things but that’s it.

      • crumpets are yummy

        I think my comparison of Ali vs Mike Tyson already answered most of your points.

        You could also compare him to George Foreman who was bigger and stronger than Ali and maybe a better boxer. But guess who the people followed in the “Rumble In the Jungle”? Why? Because he was a good man and fighting for recognition of his people..he wasn’t just there to win a boxing round.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebu0OBa1pus&feature=related

        There are men who are good at what they do, then there are good men who are good at what they do.

        Paul Watson is one of those men.

        Anyone who has watched “Pirate Of The Sea” has seen Paul Watson in a family environment.

        It is obvious that those closest to him all adore him. I think that tells you everything you need to know.

        He hit his father once for beating him up. Serves him right too. My own father would go off on a tangent at times too and one time I hit him on the head with a frying pan. I knocked him flat & he deserved it. That was the last time he ever tried to hit me and I’m tipping it was the last time Paul’s father tried to hit him too.

        Has Paul ever eaten an animal? Sure , he grew up in a fishing village. Has he ever eaten a whale? No, although i remember one time they tried to serve it up to him in Iceland or Norway.

        Everyone has things that would rather not have done or said in their history.

        No-one is perfect.

        Even Jesus lost his temper in the temple, and he was supposed to be God. Ghandi and the Dalai Lama have both probably swatted a mosquito or trodden on an ant. Martin Luther King may have told a lie. Ali went to jail because he didn’t want to hurt anyone…yet he was a boxer. I bet even Mother Theresa swore once and may even have sent someone away who later died…who knows…lets not forget the pope who used to belong to the Hitler youth. Doesn’t mean that they were not great people or their message worth hearing or that they were not good people.

        But if you believe Paul Watson is a good man, who loves animals, and is prepared to put his life into saving lives without hurting anyone, and stands up for what he believes in then thats going to be good enough for most people and to hold him up as their champion.

      • km

        You saw a movie and he has published some books and has a reality show and you think you know everything about the guy? Not only that, you take everything he says to be true. Everything. I’m assuming that you believe that if he didn’t include something in his writings or in the movie, then it must not have happened because he has told everyone everything. Wow. Whatever floats your boat, I actually feel bad arguing with you now knowing that I know this is how you judge people or perceive the world. I also know that reason would never work with you. You’re a sweet kid. Good luck out there.

      • Captain Paul Watson

        I’m sorry KM, we’ve reached Tasmania and I no longer have time for this. It’s also a little boring being psycho analyzed by a troll. Why would I respond to an online forum for amusement? Because it was about be and I think that gives me the right to respond. I’m not a troll because you know who I am. Who are you btw? Why do you think I should be oligated to answer questions from someone I do not know? Anyhow I have better things to do now, so have fun posting your silliness. Whatever floats your boat.

  • imforthewhales

    KM, can we guess who you might be?

    I think you may be Vladimir Putin. Am I close?

    “I can almost guarantee that you’ll be pleasantly surprised

    BTW, you cannot ‘almost’ guarantee something. A guarantee means 100 per cent, anything less that 100 per cent is merely being hopeful.

    Perhaps if you have a ship ready to hand over to SSCS for free, PW might be “pleasantly surprised”.

    If you just turn up like a religious zealot trying to get him to see things your way,I don’t think he will be surprised at all even if you are Elvis himself ready to play a tune & back in the building.

    • km

      You can guess all you want. I’m not here to fight with you.

      And I guess you are right that I cannot “almost guarantee” something. People use that expression all the time too. I have to think about it further but thank you for pointing that out.

      • Michael Raymer

        No, you are here to fight with us and right here on this page is proof positive of this sad little fact.

      • km

        First post on this page is written by you and directed at me and accusing me of saying something I never said and then trying to prove me wrong with lies. You came here to pick a battle with me and then you lost. Ouch. I hope that happiness comes your way one day. It’s really sad that you not only lie to others but to yourself. I hope you get out of the dark place you’re in some day. In the meantime anyone reading this thread can easily see that you’re spinning out of control.

      • Michael Raymer

        “First post on this page is written by you and directed at me and accusing me of saying something I never said”

        So, let me get this straight. It took you this many replies and this many column inches over a single remark that I made? And I’m the one with the problem?

        “You came here to pick a battle with me and then you lost.”

        Lost what? Please tell me what I had a couple days ago that I no longer have now. Lost what?

        Read the replies. There is not one person on here that doesn’t think you’re a fruit loop. Even herwin is putting some distance between the two of you. And if herwin thinks you’re swinging without a bat, how far off the reservation do you think you’ve wandered? It took some time to figure you out but I have lately realized that you are a new kind of troll. You claim to be anti-whaling but I think you’re just here to seek attention. You keep picking fights, knowing that you’re going to get replies. You go off half-cocked on some tangent (and I gotta say, the Sean Penn analogy was a doozy), knowing that now more time and effort is going to be expended in reply/counter-reply. And that’s what you want. This isn’t about whales or anything else to you. It’s about getting people to pay attention to you.

        I’m here to debate, not be your enabler. If you want to go out into left field, do it on your own. No one cares about what’s happening on anyone’s Facebook page, no one has time for half-cocked comparisons, no one wants to hear some half-baked metaphor that only exists in your mind.

        Should whales be hunted, yes or no? Should whaling be left to organizations like the IWC, yes or no? Are SSCS tactics legal, yes or no? Should SSCS be supported or condemned by the public? These are the overall topics that we gather to debate. Some here feel that whaling is a perfectly viable way to make use of a natural resource. Some here feel that whaling is cruel. Some feel that whaling is non-sustainable.

        And then there’s you, km. After all your posts, I still have no idea what you stand for and I certainly have no idea what your problem is. Other than the fact that your problem seems to be with just about everyone in here. I’m sorry I gave you such a willing audience when you first showed up. I almost feel responsible for what you’ve become, which is nothing more than a pain in the butt.

      • km

        You brought me here and you don’t like what has transpired. That’s the bottom line. Your fellow SSCS supporters are engaging me in conversation, not the other way around. Your fellow SSCS supporters are coming here and asking me questions or accusing me of all sorts of things. And lots of them. They must not think you did a good enough job.

        As for herwin, I have no idea who she is. To say that she is distancing herself from me means that we were at some point allies. Can you show me where we established that? Are you trying to “burn” me somehow? Did I ever even say that she was on my side? No so another failure on your part.

        And you want to suggest that I want people to pay attention to me? No one knows who I am. What a dumb thing to say. Moreover, I wasn’t posting here until you accusing me of saying something I didn’t and then started lying. Say what you will but I did not come here and just post. I came to respond to something you said. It was defensive, not affirmative and that’s why your logic fails.

        All your words and posts won’t erase what you did or your ridiculous statements of the law or comments such as being a vegan and owning a gun are somehow contradictory The list goes on. It’s almost funny that you keep engaging me in conversation because your paranoia and anger become more and more exposed with each post.

        I agree with you. You’re responsible for my being here. And with that statement you contradict yourself in saying that I am seeking attention. Unless, that is, you want to acknowledge that for me to be seeking attention, it would necessarily mean that you’re doing the same.

  • Captain Paul Watson

    Well, KM, Like I said I’m on my way home and a little bored so why not make a comment or two. I just find it very amusing that you waste so much energy on your rants. What are you trying to prove? What do you hope to gain? It is a bit of a mystery. BTW name me one person who has been assaulted or harassed for being critical of Sea Shepherd. You are simply paranoid and why so defensive over the term verbal masturbation, it has nothing to do with sex at all. It merely implies an expenditure of energy for no productive purpose. And what kind of man would be “creeped” out by that? Sounds to me like you have issues. One issue you do have for sure is this obsession with Sea Shepherd and I, verging on internet stalking. You seem to get excited by the fact that I am responding to you, you certainly stress that fact like you actually think that because I respond that your comments have “touched a nerve” as you said. Not sure what nerve you’re referring to. It’s just sort of fun poking your obsession. It’s like taking an acupuncture needle and watching you respond. Yes I know I should not be provoking your weaknesses but sometimes it’s just fun to kick a troll back under the bridge where he lurks which is usually some place in his Mom’s basement. So why don’t you surprise us as to who you really are Mystery boy? Who is that masked troll? My God, it’s super morality man whose duty it is to right the wrongs of Sea Shepherd so as to provide comfort to the whalers and sealers and poachers of the world. Really KM you must get incredible satisfaction knowing that I’ve read your comments. But then again I read the funny papers also for amusement.

    • km

      Classic. I took you up YOUR offer and you reneged. And then you called me names. That’s the best part. I take back what I said, you are very transparent.

      But really let’s not forget this comment that you made:
      “It’s a mystery really because all of your words merely reflect your utter IMPOTENCE and really amounts to nothing more than VERBAL MASTERBATION [sic] so if it makes you feel good, well carry on, I don’t want to deprive you of your CHEAP PLEASURES and in the end it’s all just harmless posturing and posing…” (emphasis added)

      Not only kind of creepy but this from the man who composes poetry about having critics and then says he doesn’t care about them. You seem to be excited that there are trolls. In fact, you were so excited that you wrote a poem about them. How many poems have you written anyway? How much commentary? Yes, the epitome of verbal masturbation: no opportunity for questions and simply written for others to read your words and tell you how great you are.

      Again, I agreed to your terms and you changed them. I was even prepared to send you pictures in case you preferred a face to face next time you’re back in the Los Angeles area.

      And internet stalking? Try research because I don’t make claims I can’t back up. What a dumb thing for you to say but not surprising as you have a history of falsely accusing people of crimes. And, let’s not forget, you responded to me on this page. I didn’t seek you out. Are you stalking me?

      • AnimuX

        Clearly no point to this other than slander.

      • km

        Like Michael, I can see that you use legal terms and have no idea what they mean. Either that or you’re hearing voices.

      • AnimuX

        km, you clearly need to work on your reading comprehension.

        “slander”, to utter slander against, defame – synonyms: malign, smear, vilify

        or

        (noun), the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations that defame and damage another’s reputation

        synonyms: defamation, vilification, character assassination

        That’s the correct use of the term, km. No “legal” implication was intended.

      • imforthewhales

        KM, even by your standards that was a rather flacid, impotent response.

        Highly reactionary.

        What is interesting about reactionaries is the way these people seem to invest so much of their personal identities in being members of a persecuted political minority such as being pro-whaling or pro-sealing.

        The major difference between a coherent political doctrine and a reactionary movement is that reactionaries don’t worry about how to reconcile competing intuitions about justice.

        Reactionaries care about defining the enemy ( eg eco-terrorists, they cry) and this makes reactionary positions very appealing to people who want to point to an enemy as the source of all trouble or injustice.

        This is dangerous not only because some of the people who are attracted to reactionary positions are already prone to paranoia or delusions but because, almost by definition, a reactionary political position can’t be altered by new evidence or rational arguments.

        A person who has decided that activists, greenies, eco-terrorists or unwashed hippies are not simply dishonest or corrupt but actually conspiring against him or his people is not someone who is likely to participate in logical discussion.

        Reactionaries think that any good argument is wrong and a sign that we are trying to trick them. They react badly to logical arguments & even worse to successes, they don’t see success as being good, rather they see it as insidious manipulation by an evil liar.

        This is the position that reactionaries hold.

      • km

        AnimuX, legally speaking, slander refers to the spoken word and libel to the written word. I think one judge did try to say that slander might apply in the context of an online bulletin board but the use of the term “utter” in your definition refers to the spoken word. Michael has been trying to teach me the law a lot on this page so I assumed you were doing the same. If you were not, my apologies.

        Regardless, how could my point, as you say, be to slander when I directly responded to comments Paul made? Moreover, want to tell me how his starting a post insulting me was not intended to “slander” but my responding to points made by him to me or about me are not only slander but serve no purpose but slander?

        And imforthwewhales, please do share what was so reactionary about what I said? And, to be honest, I read what you said and it was well written but don’t see its relevance to what I said. I’m happy though to discuss further if you don’t mind explaining or to exchange emails if you want to discuss it elsewhere. It’s interesting. I don’t fall under any of the descriptions you set out. And if you say I do, please do tell me how other people who have been posting do not. I don’t know if you have seen but you, Paul, Michael, boo, Crumpets, AnimuX are pretty much talking only to me. I know herwin and romika have posted but the majority is me. I don’t feel persecuted but I’m responding and you all keep engaging me in more debate. Finally, you can see that the first post on this page was directed at me. I initiated nothing on this page and have been away for weeks.

      • imforthewhales

        KM , I’m glad that you are here actually, i agree we are talking to you because Romika is not really joining in much, ( probably sorry about how badly this has all turned out for him) and as for Herwin…well… she sits on both sides of the fence and finds it hard to keep up.

        So that pretty much leaves you.

        What you have done is raised the level of debate.

        I thought that this thread would see maybe 25 replies before it died.

        But it is still going strong.

        If you want to be reactionary then be my guest, you can pull any trick in the book that you want, say what you want and how you want. if you want to calling into question your oppositions motives, be my guest. If you want to write a piece that has nothing to say but everything to say against another poster without providing any new information or adding to the debate but merely respond flaccidly, ( reactionary) , fine by me.

        For everything we say, you can bring up another point on which we can tackle you. You react brilliantly. I enjoy the debate myself..it keeps us all on our toes. You can provide the negative point of view and we can provide the positive.

        This helps us to provide valid arguments for the future where it might count for something.

        I don’t know if anyone else other than us enjoy this entertainment, I suspect not considering the amount of replies to the other threads. No doubt that sea Shepherd are the most popular threads on this site but there may not be too many people watching.

        But on the off chance that someone out there is reading this and forming an opinion on whaling, then hopefully the debate will provide them with some insight or information and provide those of us who might be heard some time in the future, gives us good practice for for when the time comes.

        So, congratulations!

      • Captain Paul Watson

        Yes Km,
        It’s all about you. Your opinions are so valued, so appreciated, and so worthy that the very fact that we respond to you validates your self importance. Km, I’m responding to you because it amuses me to do so. I like seeing your histrionic reaction to everything said and your silly belief that your opinions actually mean something to me. I owe you nothing. You are not entitled to any explanation from me nor do I have any reason to justify Sea Shepherd to you or anyone else. We do what we do for our clients – not for you. As long as we operate within the context of the law and as long as we do not injure any persons, that is all we need to be concerned about. Do you think I’m paranoid or angry because of you? Really, you do flatter yourself. I have no idea who you are. You’re a nameless entity and how could I possibly be angry with or paranoid about an non-entity like yourself. You spew a few words onto this forum and I spew a few words back – that’s all it is. I do it because it’s amusing, you do it for whatever reasons you choose, all of which are irrelevant to me. I appreciate that you have a need to validate yourself by citing that I have responded to you and yes I agree that the best course of action with trolls like yourself is to ignore them, but every once in a while I just feel like being slap happy with characters like yourself because it’s fun, nothing more and nothing less. My priorities are saving the lives of marine creatures of the wild and defending biodiversity in our oceans. I have been doing what I have been doing for nearly 40 years and I will continue to do what I’m doing until the day I die and there is absolutely nothing you can do about that. I have entire governments trying to destroy me so KM, really why would I possibly be paranoid about some unknown shadow luring behind a computer screen? I do think you have issues however, your sensitivity to anything suggestive of sexuality is really quite bizarre and abnormal but that’s your problem, not mine. Anyhow KM whoever you are – knock yourself out with a response, if I have time before we get into port on Sunday, I’ll read it. After Sunday, I’ll be too busy with important things to be bothered.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        Paul Watson having a catfight with a cheap troll. priceless.

      • Michael Raymer

        ” I like seeing your histrionic reaction to everything said”

        HISTRIONIC…that’s the #*^@# word I’ve been trying to think of! One again, Admiral Watson to the rescue.

      • boo radley

        “Paul Watson having a catfight with a cheap troll. priceless”.

        Nothing wrong with that Herwin.

        Its all good fun.

        You are pretty cheap by anyones standards & seem to get pretty catty at times…..yet we still respond to your claptrap.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        this is a gossipy website and ordinary people can leave a comment, just their simple and honest opinion on the matter.
        we make childish pokes at Alicia Silverstone, we talk about Mike Tyson and about his racing pigeons, darn, we have an opinion about all the celebs and we aint afraid to post it !
        It’s however the first time that one of the celebs comes down to our humble earth and starts fussing and puffing with a not so bright troll, and starts declaring that anonymous posters are “cowards” and that our opinions are just “mental masturbation”.
        I would expect from a guy that just did win an epic battle, saved around 800 whales lives, is hailed in all the media for it, and returns from the pristine and beautiful antarctic seas, could ignore just one simple internet troll, and avoid of making a spectacle of himself.
        I would expect, if Paul watson has some time to post on the Ecorazzi, that he shares some of his undoubtedly exciting stories, instead we have to read this nonsense.
        It’s like Charly Sheen, i would say.
        Anyway, priceless.
        And thanks for reading my comment.

      • boo radley

        I disagree.

        I think that Paul Watson has every right to respond to whomever he likes & have a little fun doing it along with us commoners.

        If PW he wants to make a spectacle of himself, whats wrong with that? Seems OK for you to do it?

        One lowly troll?

        Trolls are like cockroaches.

        Where you find one you find twenty.

        I think its obvious by now that Paul Watson is not your average joe blow.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        @ Boo.
        PW has every right to comment, i don’t question that, but he doesn’t look like he is having fun.

        And no, i don’t think it’s Okay that PW makes a spectacle out of himself. If Charly Sheen wants to be a spectacle, that’s fine with me, but PW represents the anti whaling movement so only the trolls like it when he gets all emo.

        and if you read unbiased, you can see that PW is replying to just one troll in his latest posts.

        oh, you did catch up, eh, and you did find out that PW isn’t the average Joe Blow..
        Well, that’s something that me and most of us, including the Japanese governement and the whalers know since decades.

        I wonder if all this e-cat fight will be part of Whale Wars ; part 11 : a shot of PW behind his computer fighting the internet trolls. Hilarious.

        Imagine making a silly comment on Mike Tyson here on the Ecorazzi and Mike Tyson would actually RESPOND and get all serious and personal with silly little people like us ? :-P

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        @ Boo,
        You know, it’s all so bizar, PW calling a troll a “coward” because the troll doesn’t uses his real name, while most of his apple polishers (that’s a nice word for c.ck s.ck.rs) like you are also anonymous.
        By PW standards, you are a …..(fill in the blanks)

        Anything to comment on that ?

      • km

        So Paul agreed to talk with me if I disclosed my identity to him. I agreed to do so and he reneged on his offer. It’s disheartening really to observe a person who doesn’t stand behind their words and instead attacks others and lies to themselves. And does it over and over again.

        I’m sure he’ll come back with more insults or comments about how I’m somehow getting off by him replying to me. It’s fine because it doesn’t change what transpired on this page and who initiated any of the discussions above (not me). I would hate to be in a place where he is emotionally because he has such a deep need to amuse himself by being so negative and trying to put others down. In fact, in the context of an online community, someone who posts on an online community simply for their amusement and contributes nothing of substance is by definition a troll. That would make him a self-confessed troll. With that said, I do think he can contribute a lot to a dialogue about non-profits and can do a great deal of good, even beyond what he has done or is trying to do for the whales.

        I will leave you all to the happiness you keep claiming over and over again you’re feeling even as you contradict yourself by attacking me, making up lies about me and calling me names. AnimuX, in spite of your later attacks, thank you again for initially addressing what I was saying.

        There is nothing less manly than a man calling a woman an “overly emotional little girl.” No man who is in or ever has been in a relationship would ever consider using those words. I guess cats are good company.

        If any of you are still reading, I do hope in a few months time you will read my former colleagues’ article about non-profits and transparency. It’s an issue that anybody who claims to to be an activist or to promote social justice or to protect the environment or defend the animals should care about. If you don’t, you’re not only a hypocrite but part of the problem.

        Cheers, km

      • boo radley

        Sure Herwin, those who support Paul Watson…not the fence sitters or those who merely pretend to support Paul Watson one minute (then plant seeds of doubt against him personally the next in a sly underhanded manner), but those who are supporters of Paul Watson adn what he does are not the ones making accusations against SSCS.

        Paul Watson comes on here as himself, so is under public scrutiny, as you have observed. We know who he is.

        But you and your mates KM, david, seacumbers, and all the other assorted fishwives remain anonymous.

        If I talk to you, then we are at least on equal terms. So there is no problem.

        I wont complain about you being anonymous but when you take a crack at Paul Watson, then you are playing an underdog due to your anonymity.

        So you call me an apple polisher and a c*ck s**ker, fine by me, is that the worst thing you can think of or something you think will raise a smirk from your troll buddies?

        At least we are all even on here …you call yourself herwin , I call myself boo radley.

        BTW I don’t know what Herwin means but I think if you ever studied english at school you would know who boo radley is. He is the quiet one who defends Atticus Finch’s children against someone who is trying to molest them and the man who blames an innocent black man in jail.

        Mr Ewell…the who told lies in court against someone who did not deserve it, to disguise the fact that he is a brutal man and molested his daughter.

        Thats what I do on here, I’ll defend anyone who has their hearts in the right place ( the Atticus Finches of the world)and if people like you want to string up innocent people and spit in the eyes of those who defend them, then eventually someone like boo radley will turn the tables on those people.

        Atticus Finch will turn the tables on what is wrong with the world and expose it for what it is.

        You can drop anonymous comments against Paul Watason , you can call me and everyone else who defends whales anything you like, Herwin, you can spit in the eye of those who defend the whales, as Mr Ewell did to Atticus Finch, but you know what Herwin?

        As long as the whalers are returning from whence they came, and as long as the pro whaling trolls make themselves look like the Mr Ewells of the world, and fall on their own knives, I couldn’t give a flying fig.

        Because you know what Herwin?

        What is true yesterday is still true today.

        It is a SIN to kill a mockingbird.

      • Michael Raymer

        “while most of his apple polishers (that’s a nice word for c.ck s.ck.rs) like you are also anonymous.”

        This is from herwin, who doesn’t like personal attacks and name calling.

      • boo radley

        Yes MR, this is so right.

        The hypocrisy would be laughable if it wasn’t so astounding.

      • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

        “But you and your mates KM, david, seacumbers, and all the other assorted fishwives remain anonymous.

        If I talk to you, then we are at least on equal terms. So there is no problem.

        I wont complain about you being anonymous but when you take a crack at Paul Watson, then you are playing an underdog due to your anonymity.”

        @ Boo :

        i am not anonymous, you even can click to my website :-P . As i told before, i have made donations to SSCS well over a 1000us$ and if i could financially, i certainly would do it again because it is money well spend with great results.

        Just because you don’t agree with me, you try to toss me in the same room with KM and the other trolls.

        And yes, i take a crack at PW because he visits this website just to tell some sneaky anonymous troll that he is “mentally masturbaring”.
        It’s a Charly Sheen act, to take a ranting shot at anybody who critises you.

      • boo radley

        Just because you don’t agree with me, you try to toss me in the same room with KM and the other trolls.

        Just because i do agree with Paul Watson you call me an apple polisher and a co*&su*&er.

        nice

        I would like to visit the herwin website though, do u have a link?

        “And yes, i take a crack at PW because he visits this website just to tell some sneaky anonymous troll that he is “mentally masturbaring”.”

        and you come on here to call everyone co*&su*&ers…

        so why are you having a crack at PW again?

        “It’s a Charly Sheen act, to take a ranting shot at anybody who critises you.”

        pot/ kettle/ black

    • romika3

      “name me one person who has been assaulted or harassed for being critical of Sea Shepherd. ” this statment supports the fact the members of the SSCS have assaulted and harassed. The fact the they have assaulted opens up the potential for charges to be laid against the SSCS, an eco-terrorist organization that uses terror and terror tactics to acheive their goals and as mentioned by Watson, selects issues that that have the greatest media and fundraising potential.

      • AnimuX

        Throwing stink bombs at a boat is not terrorism.

        Unfortunately, romika continues to represent his very brutal seal killing industry in Canada by repeatedly attacking environmental organizations with this very common and false allegation.

        Sea Shepherd has been intervening against destructive and cruel industries and poachers for 30 years and in that time has NEVER beaten up, taken hostage or killed anyone (and never threatened to). They throw stink bombs, not grenades. They shoot cameras, not machine guns.

        Anti-environmentalist antagonists like to make allegations that SSCS will be charged and prosecuted for any number of invented crimes. These antagonists continue to use emotionally charged words like “terrorist” in order to demonize activists, who never killed anyone, by comparing them to Al Qaida and other murderous groups.

        To my knowledge, there has never been a single incident where an environmental activist has killed someone for an environmental cause.

        In contrast, many environmental activists have been murdered by poachers, industry thugs, and governments since the beginning of the environmental movement…

      • imforthewhales

        Romika, you are going over old ground here. You have repeatedly been shown that SSCS is a non violent organization that protects life, not endangers it. Yet you keep repeating the same old lies.

        Just who do you think is going to proceed with charges against SSCS that are so clearly false?

        It wont be the Australians or New Zealanders & obviously America, the home port of SSCS, is not getting involved in something so ridiculous.

        We know you are trying hard to turn the Sea Shepherd success this year hard over to port, but the argument, and SSCS, remain on track dead ahead full speed.

      • boo radley

        Romika, are you going to name that person?

        You are acting as if you know what you are talking about? The question is, do you really?

        I think we are all thinking that that person does not exist.

        Prove us wrong.

      • romika3

        “Prove us wrong” ask Waston, or better still ask those who have been involved with the SSCS and left because Watson doesn’t tell the truth about anything.

      • boo radley

        Come on romika3, I want YOU to back up what you claim is true, not I.

        Epic fail so far on your part.

        Either you know what you are talking about or you are just spouting hot air all over the place.

      • Das Boot

        — “name me one person who has been assaulted or harassed for being critical of Sea Shepherd. ” this statment supports the fact the members of the SSCS have assaulted and harassed. —

        You fail at logic. Try again?

    • romike3

      The fact that Watson and his organization puts some much time into the message that they haven’t hurt some one and that they do not use terror tactics is a red flag. It’s like the three year old constantly saying they never stold the candy, when thier fingers are all sticky.

      • boo radley

        Thats because trolls like you keep spouting the same rubbish and people such as myself will keep refuting your rubbish.

        All that matters….

        with SSCS on their side, the whales won this war.

      • romika3

        What war?? I thought the SSCS was a conservation organization, so are you saying they are at war, they use terror and violence.

    • km

      Sorry to interject but do any of you know what a troll is? If someone disagrees with you, they are not by definition a troll. If someone directly answers a question with something of substance, they are not a troll. So if Michael says “km, …” and I respond directly to that then I am by definition not a troll. While Michael’s initial comment could possibly be seen as trolling, any follow up he makes, as long as it is relevant and of some substance, is not trolling. If I say “boo,…” and boo responds then boo is not a troll. Even if I say something and do not directly address boo but boo responds to what I said with something of substance or relevance, even if it is challenging me, then boo is not a troll.

      This is not a forum devoted only to people who support Paul or those who support SSCS, which, by the way, are very different things. As we saw a month or so ago, the editors here interviewed Ady and Pete so they welcome opposing views. Even the pro-whalers are not trolls just by virtue of them being pro-whaling.

      If someone is here purely for their own amusement, contributes little of substance but a lot in the way of ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with him or her then that person is arguably a troll, especially if they admit their motivations.

  • http://www.herwinsvegancafe.com herwin

    this has been a historic moment in history and a victory for the whales, the antarctic sea, the anti whalers, for Sea Shepherd, even for japan itself it’s a victory because now freed from this barbaric butchery they will gain respect from the world for this decision. The only loosers are a few businesmen who can’t profit anymore from these outdated whale killings, Greenpeace undoubtedly will loose some donations, and maybe the biggest loosers are the PR guy from New Zealand (i forgot his name) and his paid trolls.
    The whole world , friend and enemy alike, knows what caused this historic moment, it was Sea Shepherd and them alone with their direct actions and their perseverence, under the command of Paul Watson, the one and only original Whale Warrior, and people like Bob Parker who donated a whole boat.
    I would like to say to Charly Sheen, instead of wasting your money on cocaine, donate a ship to Sea Shepherd, sharing in their victory will be a longer lasting good feeling.
    And to all the trolls i like to say, oh well, never mind, you will be forgoten within two weeks.
    And to the other anti whaling posters, it was fun to bust our little potato heads with eachother and the trolls, many times in a rather childish way ;-) but at the end the whales have been saved and that’s what counts. :-)

  • boo radley

    The Minister for the Environment of Tahiti, Georges Handerson, and his daughter dropped by the Gojira to greet Captain Locky MacLean and express his support for Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

    “On behalf of all Tahitians, we welcome you to our islands…keep up the good fight,” said Mr. Handerson.

    Captain Paul Watson spoke to the minister on Skype during the minister’s visit to the Gojira. “The last time we were in Tahiti was in 2005, and we were warmly welcomed then as well. I am happy to see that French Polynesia continues to support Sea Shepherd’s efforts to defend life in our oceans,” said Captain Watson from the Steve Irwin.

    The Steve Irwin and Bob Barker are scheduled to arrive in Hobart, Tasmania on the morning of March 6th AEST. Their arrival will mark the end of their campaign, Operation No Compromise, during which Sea Shepherd made history by forcing the Japanese whalers to an early retreat from the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, saving the lives of over 800 whales in the process.

    http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/news-110304-1.html

  • Mark Lavelle

    Someone claimed that Sea Sheperd brought Ric O’Barry, the star of the documentary, “The Cove” in 2003 to Taiji for the first time.

    I would like to set the record straight on that point because it is inaccurate.

    O’Barry first visited Taiji on September 13, 1976. He met with the then-Mayor (a very different kind of man, friendly, open, and honest in contrast to the present Mayor Sangen who is now totally under the control of several of the ultranationalist organizations that tried to stop the showing of “The Cove” in Japanese movie theaters by threats and intimidation.), fishermen engaged in dolphin and whale hunting, and other concerned citzens of the Taiji village. O’Barry stayed at a small Japanese minshuku Inn owned by an ex-whaling ship spotter who got out of the business because he and all of the men on the ships could see that the numer if whales were rapidly decreasing while the Japanese Fisheries Agency was telling the world that “the whale resource is still increasing.” That Inn in Taiji is still there run by his widow and was pointed out to the Japanese and international media “mob”
    by O’Barry when he “boycotted” the Nov. 2, 2010 “Conference to Discuss the Dolphin Hunt”.

    It should also be known that the person who organized that “farce”, as O’Barry termed it, for Mayor Sangen was a member of one of the ultranationalist groups referred to earlier. That man and others from his organization later screamed epithets directed at O’Barry with bullhorns at the Cove, threatened to murder him, and were hauled away by the police. Lincoln O’Barry recorded all of this on film for Animal Planet. O’Barry had to be escorted out of Taiji under a heavy police escort.

    Mr. West of SS elected to attend the Nov. 2 “conference” and take part in the “dialogue” even though Mayor Sangen had told the media that the dolphin hunt would be held as scheduled during his event.

    Mr. West of Sea Sheperd, O’Barry noted, decided to attend the “

  • Mark Lavelle

    A further comment in O’Barry’s presence in the Cove and the mistaken assertion that he had been taken there in 2003 by Sea Sheperd on it’s behalf.
    The Mayor and the dolphin-hunting fishermen’s union were trying to convince the local police that he was a member of Sea Sheperd and an eco-terrorist. This was in Septemer, 2003.

    I was employed by O’Barry’s organization to go to Taiji to interpret for him with the police at that time. He wished to make it clear to the police that he was not a member of SS, and would never break the law or do anything to injure anyone. I recall him telling the police and detectives that “…it is wrong to try to protect dolphins and whales while hurting people.”

    O’Barry showed them photos and namecards, including that of the mayor’s, from 27 years earlier, and explained how he had opposed the “Boycott Japan, Save The Whales” campaign then, just as he has denounced the “Save Taiji Dolphins, Boycott Japan” campaign that SS and other groups have been waging now.

    At that time, I can testfy that O’Barry was down there in Taiji all by himself, save for a couple of journalists from Europe. He was waving his arms trying to get attention to what was happening at the Cove, as well as the toxic mercury in the dolphin meat being fed to Japanese schoolchildren in their school lunch programs as later documented in “The Cove”.

    Ric was all alone then, vulnerable. He would head out to the Cove in the early morning when it was still dark. I went with him. The cops warned him that it was dangerous.
    There was nobody from Sea Sheperd, Greenpeace, or anyone else there then.

    Ric gave me a DVD made by his group several years earlier that showed he and his wife Helene being harrassed and threatened by the thug fishermen, including “My Space” who later became famous worldwide in “The Cove”.
    They were all alone.

    Hope this sets the record straight for all the Johnny-come-lately’s who gave parachuted into Taiji in droves once “The Cove” came out and made it popular and lucrative to do so.

    Ric O’Barry stood alone in Taiji. He went there first when Paul Watson was still riding aboard The James Bay with Greenpeace whose whale-saving tactics he then heartily approved.

    “The Shadow” knows, for he was there.