Hot Topics | |
---|---|
james wrote:SYDNEY (Reuters) - A hardline environmentalist group chasing Japanese whalers near Antarctica said on Saturday it would do its utmost to disrupt the hunt although bad weather had thwarted a stink bomb attack on one vessel..link
Tengu Kid wrote:(the line `Id bang her harder than a screen door in a hurricane` stood out recently)
Tengu Kid wrote:Hey folks, what do you all think about whaling?
;)"Yeah, I've been always awkward toward women and have spent pathetic life so far but I could graduate from being a cherry boy by using geisha's pussy at last! Yeah!! And off course I have an account in Fuckedgaijin.com. Yeah!!!"
AlbertSiegel wrote:I really hope someone sinks every ship the Sea Shepherd has and its crew of pot-head hippies to the bottom of the sea. Nothing but a bunch of eco-terrorists that should be treated no different than any other terrorists.
Yokohammer wrote:Nice rational response there.
And you think the whalers' total disregard for international opinion as well as an agreement to which they are party, plus their dishonest tactics, are excusable?
Samurai_Jerk wrote:What's irrational about it? He's anti-terrorism and the Sea Shepards are terrorists and pirates who use illegal tactics, lies, and progaganda to further a radical cause. Their fat fuck pussy of a leader has a very extreme worldview and is so far out there that even those assholes at Greenpeace kicked him out.
... etc ...
Yokohammer wrote:I'm not condoning the Sea Shepherd approach at all, SJ. They are extremists. Totally over the top. But the whalers are extremists as well, only in a more organized, government-subsidized way. To simply say that the Sea Shepherd ships and their pot-smoking hippie crews (how does he know that?) should be sunk is an extremist view in itself. It is an unbalanced, irrational response.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:I completely disagree. Most legal experts say that the Japanese are not breaking the law, whereas the Sea Sheps are. I think sinking a pirates' ship and hunting them down are totally justified. They are no better than the guys in Somalia. Actually, I'd say they're worse. The guys in Somalia are at least doing it because they and their people need money to survive.
Samurai_Jerk wrote: ...some guy who probably spent a year getting drunk on a NOVA working holiday and picking up bits and pieces of the language with his gaijin kabure bar whore girlfriend...
Yokohammer wrote:Nice rational response there.
And you think the whalers' total disregard for international opinion as well as an agreement to which they are party, plus their dishonest tactics, are excusable?
Regardless of whether the Sea Shepherd people are breaking the law or not (they probably are)
, the fact that the J-whalers aren't doesn't make what they're doing right. The letter of the law is no guarantee of righteousness.
The way I see it the whalers are pushing the law right up to the limit. They are using a loophole in a moratorium to which they are bound to do whatever they please.
It's not illegal, but it's wrong.
They are killing whales in an internationally recognized marine sanctuary that is halfway around the world from their own territorial waters. That's not illegal either, but it is morally wrong in my view.
Skirting the law with middle finger extended towards a majority who vehemently disagree is not honorable at all.
And making it a Sea Shepherd issue totally misses the point.
AlbertSiegel wrote:I'm sorry, but I just can't support the tactics of the Sea Shepherd. You simply do not go around sinking ships and injuring people because you have a point of view that is a 'total disregard for international opinion' on international law. The Japanese are not doing anything illegal according to most legal experts and even if they were, it's not up to a group of eco-terrorists to go after them.
No question that they are... have you seen or read about their tactics? They have used extreme methods of violence and have sunk ships. They even posted a video of them ramming a ship with pride. It's quite clear that they are breaking the law.
AlbertSiegel wrote:And your opinion is right? They hunt an animal for food. How is this any different than beef or pork? A life is a life. Unless you only eat grass and ignore the entire history of life on this planet, you cannot judge one society's diet as wrong.
AlbertSiegel wrote:Of the three whaling countries, Japan is the only one bound to this law and they do comply within the limits of it.
AlbertSiegel wrote:According to who? Again, life is life. What's so special about a whale versus a cow or a fish?
AlbertSiegel wrote:Every person in every country in the world does this. Please tell me of one group of people or one country that is honorable.
AlbertSiegel wrote:The Sea Shepherd is the point! They are what I have an issue with. I'm fine with green peace and other non-violent organizations. I am not fine with terrorists such as the members of Sea Shepherd.
Tengu Kid wrote:Good stuff good stuff!
Does anyone know any facts and figures about endangered whales? Is the whole issue simply one of morality (its wrong/right to eat whale) or is there also an issue of extinction?
kusai Jijii wrote:And your point is?
Been there, got the T-shirt!
Yokohammer wrote:Regardless of whether the Sea Shepherd people are breaking the law or not (they probably are), the fact that the J-whalers aren't doesn't make what they're doing right. The letter of the law is no guarantee of righteousness. The way I see it the whalers are pushing the law right up to the limit. They are using a loophole in a moratorium to which they are bound to do whatever they please. It's not illegal, but it's wrong. They are killing whales in an internationally recognized marine sanctuary that is halfway around the world from their own territorial waters. That's not illegal either, but it is morally wrong in my view. Skirting the law with middle finger extended towards a majority who vehemently disagree is not honorable at all.
And making it a Sea Shepherd issue totally misses the point.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:I'm not arguing morality or honor. The law is there to keep us compliant to the law not the make us honorable or moral.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:What you have is one group who's not breaking the law and one group who is. Unless it's a military or law enforcement action, forcefully boarding a ship is an act of piracy.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Making "it" a Sea Shepherd issue is the point. The first post in this thread was a link to an article about Sea Shepherd.
Yokohammer wrote:Hey this is fun ... some wuss coward just called me a "commie" via the reputation thing ... anonymously.
A perfect demonstration of "dishonorable."
Obviously you know who you are: If you can't discuss issues in a forthright manner without back-door name-calling there's no point in continuing.
Forget it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests