Why we should allow whaling:
http://www.ozpolitic.com/sustainability-party/why-allow-whaling.html

freediver wrote on Jan 5^th, 2011 at 9:49am:


Darn tootin, exactly what i was thinking and more.

Australia backed whalers in sinking


AUSTRALIAN diplomats were quick to absolve Japanese whalers of blame for the collision that sank the anti-whaling vessel Ady Gil a year ago, telling the US embassy in Canberra the Japanese would ''come away clean'' from any investigation.

Leaked US embassy cables reveal the Foreign Affairs Department did not hesitate to blame anti-whaling protesters for the collision on January 6 last year between the Ady Gil and the Japanese whaler Shonan Maru No 2 .

An initial report by the US embassy on the day of the collision noted that while there were no reported casualties, the incident was ''a major escalation of the confrontation over whaling in the Southern Ocean'' that would ''increase public and opposition pressure on the [Australian] government to more actively confront Japan''.
Advertisement: Story continues below

Against the backdrop of the Rudd government's efforts to reach a settlement with Japan that would allow a limited continuation of whaling, the embassy said that ''if Japan is at fault, [the incident] will further chill Australia's diplomatic engagement on whaling''. The embassy cables, obtained by WikiLeaks and provided exclusively to The Age, also show that New Zealand was at odds with Australia in its initial assessment of the collision.

New Zealand Foreign Ministry officials told the US embassy in Wellington that it was not clear which vessel was to blame for the incident that resulted in the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's Ady Gil being scuttled.

The officials said the New Zealand government was ''not making any judgment as to who was at fault for the collision, regardless of the public accusations and finger-pointing in the press that both sides in the incident are currently engaged in''.

As the Ady Gil was a New Zealand-flagged vessel, the NZ government conducted a preliminary investigation but the initial assessment was that ''it is not clear which party is at fault''.

However, in Canberra, on the day after the collision, the Foreign Affairs Department did not hesitate to attribute blame.

Following discussions with Australian diplomats, the US embassy in Canberra reported to Washington: ''The initial video evidence of the collision between a Japanese whaling ship and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society vessel Ady Gil strongly suggests that the Ady Gil stopped or slowed significantly in the path of the Japanese whaling vessel Shonan Maru at close range and that the Japanese vessel's actions could be consistent with trying to avoid a collision.''

Paula Watt, director of Foreign Affairs' marine environment section, told the US embassy that while a final determination of fault would be made by maritime safety authorities, she was confident the Japanese would ''come away clean''.

The US embassy suggested that the Australian public would find such a result ''hard to swallow''.

"Already frustrated with the inability of the Rudd government to stop or reduce whaling in the Southern Ocean, public outcry over the incident has been heavily one-sided and stoked by the opposition,'' it said.

The embassy did not doubt that Australian authorities would conduct a careful inquiry into the collision and any potential violations of international or Australian law.

''Given the pressure they are already under on this issue in an election year, any determination of the facts by Australian authorities will be scrutinised by all sides,'' the embassy's cable said.

''The truth about the collision is unlikely to emerge quickly, and the inquiry could be hard pressed to avoid influence by foreign policy or domestic political calculus.''

A subsequent investigation into the collision by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority was inconclusive and unable to assign blame.

AMSA could not verify claims made by Sea Shepherd that the Shonan Maru had steered deliberately into the Ady Gil, while the Japanese government declined to participate in the investigation, saying any information it had might be needed for an inquiry by its own authorities.

New Zealand maritime authorities eventually found both vessels were at fault.

Maritime New Zealand found that the Shonan Maru should have kept clear of the Ady Gil under international collision regulations, and had ample opportunity to avoid hitting it.

It also found that the Ady Gil had failed to take evasive action, and its helmsman had not seen the Japanese ship bearing down until a few moments before the impact.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/australia-backed-whalers-in-sinking-20110107-1...

____ wrote on Jan 8^th, 2011 at 10:19am:


Who would believe the helmsman had not seen the Japanese ship bearing down until a few moments before the impact.....Do Maritime New Zealand expect people to believe this crap???

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2011 at 11:31am:



The Adi Gill could have done bog laps around the Japanese ship, as it was a high powered speed boat.....to claim the Adi Gil was just sitting in the ocean oblivious to the approaching Japanese ship is ludicrous......Do you honestly believe they could not see the Japanese ship until the last minute and were taken by surprise.....rubbish???

Fish are food......I can see no reason why the Japanese should not eat whales that are not endangered......I eat steak and would be a hypocrite to deny the Japanese the right to eat Whale.....all meat comes from dead animals......ok!!!

My favorite animal is steak.
Fran Lebowitz (1950 - )

philperth2010 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2011 at 11:50am:



Fact is that if you watch the extended film from the Ady Gill you see it sitting in position under no power with the Maru not even in sight.

The Maru approaches clearly on a path which will miss by 50 to 100 mtrs with still nobody at the helm or concerned.

In the last 100 mtrs or so the Maru drastically changes direction at high speed turning straight towards the Ady Gill which is stationary with no power up and no driver in position.

By the time someone got into position it was too late.

Yes they could have done laps around the Maru had they been under power with a helmsman in position.

The way I would see it the fault lays with the party who deliberatly put his ship on a collision course and not the party who could not get out of the way.

(Newser) – Verbal harpoons are flying in a public feud between the leader of the Sea Shepherd conservation group and the former skipper of the group's high-tech "Batmobile" boat the Ady Gil, which sank after a collision with a Japanese ship earlier this year. Skipper Peter Bethune says the boat was salvageable after the collision but he was ordered to scuttle it by Sea Shepherd head Paul Watson, AP reports.


Watson wanted the boat sunk to "garner sympathy with the public and to create better TV," Bethune said. "Paul Watson was my admiral. He gave me an order and I carried it out. I was ashamed of it at the time and I'm ashamed of it now." Watson gives a very different version of events, saying the sinking was Bethune's decision. The skipper spent 5 months in a Japanese jail this year for boarding a whaling ship, and Watson says he was expelled from the group for giving Japanese authorities false information in exchange for leniency.


http://www.newser.com/story/102451/skipper-whaling-protesters-deliberately-sank-own-boat.html

The Sea Shepherd head Paul Watson ordered Bethune to scuttle the Adi Gil despite the fact it could be salvaged.....this is a dispute of the facts between two of the conservationists not the Japanese......either way the Sea Shepherd organization has lost all credibility.....lying bastards!!!