I\’m a little confused here:
For two days now, two crew members of a Sea Shepherd Conservation Society vessel have been held on a Japanese whaling ship, which they boarded in the Southern Ocean. They were delivering a letter informing the captain that his ship was in violation of both Australian and international conservation law.
Using violence to board a ship on the high seas. Don\’t we have a name for that?
Piracy?
“They were delivering a letter informing the captain that his ship was in violation of both Australian and international conservation law.”
Yeah, whenever he needs to deliver a letter, my postman climbs in through a window and drops it on the dining room table…
Haven’t Greenpeace caught up with the technological revolution? They could probably have e-mailed it to the captain, and tagged it ‘read receipt’ to make sure he got it.
If I had been captain of that Japanese whaler and hostiles had invaded my vessel I would have thrown them overboard to be picked up by their accomplices.
The Japanese are getting soft and this weakness will encourage further acts of violence against their vessels and crew.
How about a vote?
a: Hang ’em from the yardarm.
b: Keelhaul them.
c: Make them walk the plank.
I could just about understand supporting the whale-slaughterers on the grounds of rule-of-law, despite their horrible actions.
Since they were breaking the law at the time, however, the comments here surprise me a little…
Oh, well, since they were ‘breaking the law at the time’, I guess they have no rights to defend their property…?
I look forward to the next johnb comment praising Tony Martin’s actions because the burglars were ‘breaking the law at the time’.
I believe in the use of reasonable force to stop criminals. Not using any force, like the greenies here, is a bit different from shooting someone in the back as they run away…
“Not using any force, like the greenies here…”
Oh, so you can break the law as long as you don’t use force to do it…?
Well, I suppose at least you didn’t argue that the whalers had probably stolen precious environmental resources from the Greenpeace members, so if they wanted to rape a few Japanese fishermen and pour bleach down their throats to remove DNA evidence, that it wouldn’t be a cause for concern for ‘innocent’ fishermen.
You know, like you did on the gang rape discussion in this thread:
http://pubphilosopher.blogs.com/pub_philosopher/2008/01/running-away-fr.html#comment-97533500
No, the point is that the *fishermen* were breaking the law; the greenies boarded their boat to advise them of this fact, and without using any force. The greenies were acting not only within, but *to enforce* the law – hence I’m surprised that people here seem to want to keel-haul them for piracy.
Re the other point, you are a clueless lying idiot.
Tim adds: Not sure about the boarding John: I think they were in international waters. Australia’s invocation of the law is in itself terribly suspect.
“the point is that the *fishermen* were breaking the law; the greenies boarded their boat to advise them of this fact, and without using any force”
Remind me: just when were Greenpeace granted the power to board vessels on the high seas regardless of the captain’s wishes?
“Re the other point, you are a clueless lying idiot.”
Oh, that wasn’t you…? Someone else posted in your name then..?
If that’s not the case, what, precisely, was I lying about?
1. There was no need to board the ship to deliver any information. All vessels maintain a radio watch. This was a publicity stunt from start to finish and just as illegal as what the Japanese were doing.
2. I thought international agreements prevented any nation from claiming territory on the Antartic continent. If that’s the case how do they get away with establishing a marine preserve along its coast – outside of their territory?
3. If Australia is not going to stand by “international law” why should they expect the Japanese to?
4. I’m pretty sure that Australia looks poorly on attempts by its citizens at enforcing laws – especially if you have to break others to do so.
To even things up for the whales and for the purpose of scientific research, couldn’t the Royal Navy test fire a few of its old Mk 8 or Mk 24 torpedoes at the Japanese fleet? We have to make sure they still work. Oh, all right then, the warheads would be removed beforehand.