March 2008
30/03/2008
Irresponsible Canadian Coast Guard Ship Accused Of Incompetence & Ramming
The Canadian Coast Guard Ice Breaker, CCGS Des Groseilliers, rammed the conservation Anti-Seal killing ship, the Farley Mowat today, causing damage. The incident was videoed.
The irresponsible Canadian coast guard ship, has already cost the lives of 4 Magdalen seal killers, by towing their small 12 meter sealing boat. The boat capsized whilst being towed by the Canadian coast guard ice breaker. Apparently, the crew of the small killer sealing boat, should have been taken on board the powerful coast guard ship and not left on their small boat to sleep whilst being towed behind the coast guard ship in dangerous heavy ice waters, just north of Cape Breton Nova Scotia.
Beware cruel seal slaughters, nature never forgets!
Go home or face the wrath of nature.
People and boats will be lost and it could be you, who will never see your loved ones again.
Your life or blood money, is it worth it?
28/03/2008
Cruel Seal Killing & Skinning Alive Of Seals Is Underway Canadian Government Hiding Truth
On 28th March 2008 the Canadian Commercial Seal Hunt Began. Between 275,000 and 325,000 seals will be killed, mostly baby seals, for their virgin white fur. The baby seals are just days or weeks old.
The United States, Belgium, the Netherlands, Croatia & Mexico have already banned the import of seal products, but the UK, has not banned the import of seal products, even though they are against seal killing. The European Union is currently considering a comprehensive ban on all seal products, a move that could end Canada's commercial seal hunt.
The seal hunt, takes place in the North West Atlantic Ocean, over a vast area the size of France where the cruel slaughtering of the seals cannot be monitored, as there are thousands of seal killers pouring into the area, on hundreds of vessels.
The sealers greedily compete with each other to slaughter as many seals as they can and the speed in which they kill and the sealers couldn't care less attitude, increases massively the suffering of the seals, as the ruthless seal killers fail to take the time to ensure that each seal is dead before ripping off their skins.
These seal killers are so evil, that they don't even hear the seals crying plea's.
Many seals are constantly smashed in the jaw, face and body (see our video) and they are still conscious. The live seals are then dragged across the ice bleeding, by evil looking gaff hooks, they are then cruelly hoisted onto a seal slaughter vessel to be skinned alive.
The Canadian Government, from video's, knows exactly what goes on, but refuses to do anything about it.
Email to the Canadian Government, see our main menu, click on seals, as soon as you can.
Thank you so much.
21/03/2008
Serious Setback Iceland's Minke Whaling Association Requests Whale Killing Quota
Iceland is intent upon the resumption of whaling, and the whalers have requested a quota from the Icelandic Government of 100 piked (Minke) whales and 150 endangered fin whales.
"We're hoping for a quota for Minke - we've been talking about taking 100 whales", the head of Iceland's Minke whaling association, Gunnar Bergmann Jonsson, told BBC News.
Stefan Asmundsson, a senior official in Iceland's fisheries ministry and its commissioner to the International Whaling commission (IWC), confirmed that the hunt was likely to go ahead. "We are not expecting any big quota's, but we are likely to see in the relatively near future some quota's for Minke Whales".
Hvalur Inc, an Icelandic whaling company, is hoping to set up an export trade to Japan. Trade in whale meat between Iceland and Japan is currently illegal.
Icelandic environmental groups were critical of the announcement. "It's meaningless, it's useless, it's futile, it's against the spirit of the whaling regime that Iceland says it wants internationally, "said Arnl Finnsson of the Iceland Nature Conservation Association (INCA).
Fisheries Minister Elnar Gudfinnsson is likely to make the final announcement within a month.
16/03/2008
Canada Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn Applauds Newfoundland's Seal Killing Celebrations
On 15th March 2008 the Canadian Government, Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn issued a statement applauding the Seal Killing Celebrations of Newfoundland.
The celebrations were to celebrate the slaughtering and inflicting violent pain and the skinning alive of defenceless baby seals, because that's what the Newfoundland fishermen do.
This year Canada will cruelly kill between 275,000 and 325,000 innocent, defenceless seals.
The minister of Canadian fisheries is nothing but a mass murderer, from the point of view of an innocent seal pup and its parents.
The seal cubs and their parents say, "you are a disgrace Loyola Hearn, Canadian Fisheries Minister, just like your Government, who authorise the killing, then ask you to carry out their dirty work".
15/03/2008
GreenEcoPeace Joins Forces In UK To Help Save Canadian Seals
GreenEcoPeace joined forces today with other campaign groups, outside the Canadian Embassy No 5 Trafalgar Square, London. We all had one thing in common, to try and save over 275,000 mother and baby seals and male seals from merciless slaughter, many being skinned alive.
The seals are killed with the full authority of the Canadian Government and if anyone interferes with the killing and skinning scene, or gets anywhere near, they are instantly and brutally arrested and face a huge fine, or are jailed, or both, or beaten up by the seal killers.
Seal killing is not transparent, it's bloody dirty and done behind a so called closed door system. "See the seal slaughter and your seized and put in jail." As the seals are brutally man handled, a seal campaigner on the ice, will be brutally man handled by the authorities, suffer injuries and be then dragged off. A campaigner risks his or her life to save Canadian Seals and their babies from death, seals which have hardly had time, to experience life or our world.
Canadian seal killers come to rip off the fur of baby seals and they don't care whether they are dead or alive and if you try to prevent them, ripping off of the baby seals fur, the cruel Canadian fishermen, come seal skinners and the Canadian Authorities, will come at you with full force.
Over 275,000 seals massacred by Canada, is like killing a human population the size of a city like Oxford. Could you imagine if that happened. What an out cry there would be!
The seals don't eat too much fish, it's the Canadian fishermen's greed, they take too much fish. That's the problem.
Share the stocks, take a sensible quota and leave some fish for the seals. The ice and the sea belongs to the seals and not the Canadian Government or fishermen. The sea is the seals world, it's man who interferes with their world. That's a very serious problem, along with the Canadian Government, who subsidize the seal killer/fishermen.
Shame on the Canadian Government and Canadian fishermen. Remember nature never forgets!
12 seal killer fishermen's sea going ships, were crushed by the ice last year 2007.
14/03/2008
Nature Produces A Storm To Protect Its Whales Against The Japanese Whale Killers
Japanese whalers are being tormented by huge waves and winds, off Porpoise Bay Antarctica.
The campaigners who have risked their lives saving whales in the Antarctic and have had sadly to return back to port in their ships because of low fuel, are now being helped by nature.
Massive waves and winds are stopping the sham Japanese whalers from destroying the lives of our mammal whale friends, in the Antarctic Southern Ocean Sanctuary for Whales. There are less than 7 day's left, in the so called Antarctic Whaling Season.
Remember Mr Japanese Whaler, NATURE NEVER FORGETS!
11/03/2008
Conservation Ship Steve Irwin Returning, Greenpeace Sad Not To Go Back To The Antarctic
The Conservation Ship the Steve Irwin, one of the Antarctic Whale Protectors, sadly returns because of low fuel.
It has been anounced today, that the Steve Irwin conservation ship, Captained by Paul Watson, is having to return back to port in Australia because of dangerously low fuel levels.
Overall it has been estimated that over 500 whales, have been saved in the Antarctic Southern Ocean Sanctuary for Whales. 100 of those whales, were saved by Greenpeace's crew and their Captain who we know as Frank, on board their ship the Esperanza. The remainder of the whales were saved by bad weather, Governments intervention, (50 humpback whales) and Paul Watson captain of the Steve Irwin and leader of the Sea Shepherd conservation group and crew. Paul Watson and crew stood by the whales, in the most dangerous of conditions and we thank them for all the dedicated work that they have done.
Heart breaking, there are still possibly 10 days left, to which the Japanese whalers can gun down and torture whales under the pretence of Scientific Whaling. Whether they be male whales, mother whales or mother and her baby whale, the Japanese whalers don't care. They are hard, barbaric and they must evil people to want to do the job that they do.
The Japanese guards or whalers are even prepared to use stun grenades and will even shoot people, with an aim to kill, (as in the case of Captain Paul Watson who was saved from a bullet going through into his chest by a Kevlar bullet proof vest), to get people out of the way, so that they can kill whales with no intervention.
Our hearts at GreenEcoPeace, go out to the Captain and all the crew of the Steve Irwin. It must be very sad, leaving those whales behind, for the Japanese whalers to now mercilessly and cowardly kill them.
Our hearts also go out to the Capatin and crew of the Esperanza, Greenpeace, who also must be thanked, for originally finding and following the Nisshin Maru factory slaughter house whale ship. Their courageous efforts in trying in small boats, (ribs) to come between the Nisshin Maru and the Oriental Bluebird, to try and stop the refuelling of the Nisshin Maru was dangerous and must be commended. The crew also of the Esperanza must be very sad that they did not have another chance to go out to save the whales in the Antarctic Southern Ocean Sanctuary for Whales.
Well done to both ships that were out there saving whales, in some of the most dangerous and icy seas in the world.
On returning to port in Australia, Paul Watson will continue his fight to save whales, dolphins and seals and Greenpeace from their Japan office, will be continually putting pressure on the Japanese Government to end whaling.
10/03/2008
Serious Words From The Australian Government To The International Whaling Commission
For whale lovers, See important full summary from the Australian Government, under the heading of Whales. Click on Whales on main menu.
Australia regards the IWC as the primary international body with the responsibility to conserve and manage cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) on a global basis and to ensure their recovery. As cetaceans can travel thousands of kilometres annually, they are truly a global concern and demand responsible collective management.
Australia is strongly committed to addressing complex global problems through multilateral form and has a long record of contributing to modern ocean conservation and management. These commitments guide Australia’s continuing support for the IWC and underpin our willingness to work with all members of the Commission to make the IWC a more effective organisation.
Although the IWC in its initial decades presided over the systematic over-exploitation of cetaceans, the modern era has brought successes that include:
• a moratorium on commercial whaling;
• establishment of whale sanctuaries;
• better management of aboriginal subsistence whaling quotas; and
• consideration of emerging environmental issues.
IWC members need to build on these successes to bring the IWC into line with modern ocean management practices, equipping the Commission to effectively address contemporary environmental challenges.
The Commission’s current challenges include:
• the capacity for countries to ‘opt-out’ of responsible collective management;
• dramatic expansion of special permit scientific whaling;
• lack of a robust compliance and enforcement framework;
• lack of a coordinated mechanism to fill gaps in scientific knowledge; and
• disagreement over the competency of the IWC on issues such as animal welfare and the management of small cetaceans.
Any discussion of the future of the IWC must acknowledge these failures and in turn respond to the major changes in oceans management, human uses and the conservation status of whales since the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) was concluded.
Most crucially, unilateral decisions to grant scientific whaling permits, and attempts to justify these permits under Article VIII of the Convention, undermine the collective work of the Commission and its members. The result is significant tension and procedural difficulties that hamper constructive moves towards modernising the IWC.
If the Commission is to work more cooperatively and effectively, the issue of special permit scientific whaling needs to be addressed.
Whilst the Commission has developed approaches for the management of whales through whaling quotas, management options under the ICRW are not sufficient for contemporary needs. At present the IWC’s management approaches do not include objectives other than hunting whales, and there is no framework in which to address non-consumptive uses. Action to address specific non-whaling threats to vulnerable populations has been inadequate. Action to address real emerging threats to cetaceans such as climate change, fishery activities, marine pollution, poorly regulated whale watching industries, ship strikes and habitat disturbance remains aspirational.
Australia suggests that the IWC can begin to address these shortfalls by:
• developing internationally-agreed, cooperative conservation management plans, taking into account all whale-related issues and threats;
• launching regional, non-lethal, collaborative research programs to improve management and conservation outcomes for cetaceans; and
• reforming the management of science conducted under ICRW and IWC auspices, including agreed priorities and criteria for research, and an end to unilateral ‘special permit’ scientific whaling.
A reformed approach to science
Special permit scientific whaling is currently the most controversial issue within the IWC. Under Article VIII of the Convention, Contracting Governments may grant permits to their nationals to kill, take and treat whales for scientific purposes. Current practice requires a government to submit plans for scientific whaling permits to the IWC Scientific Committee for review (with participation from the proponents) however there is no basis on which the IWC can prohibit a take under special permit.
Since the commencement of the moratorium on commercial whaling, over 10,500 whales have been taken under the provisions of Article VIII. Whale kills under scientific permits are now occurring at ten times the rate of scientific whaling kills prior to the moratorium.
The IWC has adopted over 30 resolutions calling for an end to scientific whaling and for all further scientific research to be conducted using non-lethal techniques. These resolutions reflect an understanding that the information required for managing and conserving whale species can be gained using non-lethal techniques.
A majority of the current members of the International Whaling Commission oppose the use of Article VIII in the form of commercial-scale ‘scientific whaling’ and most of these would not support an immediate resumption of any form of commercial whaling. However, this majority does not necessarily translate into a capacity to amend Article VIII of the Convention. To amend the Convention requires the convening of a diplomatic conference and the agreement of all parties to any changes to make them effective. This is unlikely to occur in the short to medium term.
At IWC 59 the Scientific Committee agreed a new procedure for the review of new proposals for lethal scientific research, and in principle, for the periodic and final review of data from existing permits. Key features of the new procedure are a specialist workshop to review proposals for and results from ‘special permit’ research, which would include an independent panel to review the research against specific criteria.
The Commission adopted this new procedure, agreeing that the report from the specialist workshop would be discussed at the Scientific Committee, with a report provided to the Commission. This is considered a significant step toward the proper review and assessment of scientific whaling programs. However, it does not yet provide for appropriate actions following recommendations of the specialist workshop.
Australia proposes that scientific research under ICRW and IWC auspices should be brought under the direct scrutiny and authority of the Commission.
Firstly, all such scientific research should be linked to agreed priority research needs of the Commission, ensuring a coordinated international effort to address those knowledge gaps and scientific questions that most urgently require answers.
Secondly, the IWC should agree criteria to which all such scientific research should conform. These criteria might include:
• quantifiable measures of success;
• use and availability of non-lethal methodologies;
• peer review; and
• a transparent and open process.
Thirdly, all governments should commit not to issue special permits under Article VIII except with the approval of the Commission. The Commission should assess all permit proposals from governments and decide whether the Commission approves the proposal, in strict accordance with agreed research priorities and criteria for the conduct of research.
These measures would ensure that any scientific activity under ICRW and IWC auspices would be agreed, would have strong scientific underpinnings, and would respect the other conservation and management measures which have been adopted in the Commission.
While Australia will continue to support amendment of Article VIII of the Convention in the long run, the measures outlined above could be undertaken immediately by agreement of governments within the Commission. This would be a practical first step towards ending the loophole under which special permit whaling can proceed without agreement in the Commission, without rigorous scientific review and without due regard for the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. These measures would strengthen the Commission by increasing collaboration on science and would remove the most serious source of tension that presently impedes the Commission’s work.
09/03/2008
International Meeting Future Of International Whaling Commission 6-8 March 2008 London
The primary aim of the Intersessional Meeting on the Future of IWC being held from 6-8 March 2008 is to consider a process to determine a way forward for IWC rather to consider matters of substance.
Some of the wordings of Interest from the Response Sections.
1. Why do you think that discussions to date within the IWC have not led to a more consensus-based resolution of IWC’s problems? Is the negotiating process itself a factor?
The whaling dispute has undergone transition over its history. In the early stage, the issue had been mainly that of economic interests and resource management. IWC members were striving to establish an effective resource management system to conserve and sustainably utilize whale resources. However, at least since the early 1970s, the whaling issue has become a conflict over the different views about whales. Countries supporting the sustainable utilization of whales regard them as resources valuable as food, while anti-whaling countries grant a special status to whales different from other animals and consider whales as an icon of environmental consciousness. As anti-whaling countries tend to ignore the current status of whale stocks, the nature of the dispute has changed from a conservation and management issue to an issue of conflicting values. Discourse at the IWC reflects this misunderstanding or a confusion of the resource management issues with "ethical" issues.
Anti-whaling NGOs and some politicians take advantage of this situation and make resolution of whaling issues more difficult. Many anti-whaling countries bear no domestic political cost in opposing whaling, since they no longer have a domestic whaling constituency. By opposing whaling in anti-whaling countries, such politicians and governments obtain political points on environmental issues without losing anything.
Under this political climate, the anti-whaling movement has been able to achieve tremendous success in many countries and further spread to other countries, as the result, the general public of these countries accepted and became fixated on the view that whales are special animals and that they should not be harvested even if they are abundant.
As scientific data on the whale stocks has been accumulated, it is widely accepted by experts that sustainable whaling is possible for some abundant species. However, because of the intensive lobbying from anti-whaling NGOs, the public are led to believe that all whales are endangered, politicians and anti-whaling IWC member countries maintain their anti-whaling policy. This has rendered the IWC dysfunctional as an international resource management organization.
Since 1982, the normal rules of debate and treaty interpretation, as well as the globally accepted principles of science-based conservation and management and mutual respect for cultural diversity, have often been put aside in the IWC.
To sum up this, the following 8 situations contribute to the current "impasse" or "dysfunctional nature" of the IWC:
- Disrespect for international law (the ICRW and treaty interpretation). (Particularly meaning that the current discussion in the IWC tends to disrespect the core principle of the ICRW which is "orderly development of the whaling industry" as referred in the preamble of the ICRW.)
- Disrespect for the principle of science-based policy.
- Excluding whales from the principle of sustainable use of resources.
- Disrespect of cultural diversity related to food and ethics.
- Fuelling emotionalism concerning whales.
- Institutionalized combative/confrontational discourse that discourages cooperation.
- Lack of good faith negotiations.
- Pressure on scientists which results in a lack of consensus scientific advice from the Scientific Committee.
With these situations mentioned above, it is the negotiating environment rather than the process that is the primary factor which has rendered the current impasse in the IWC. This environment has failed to offer a common ground on which its contracting parties can discuss and negotiate the issues.
2. What are your initial thoughts on how future discussions and negotiations should be organised and conducted, taking into account the need to rebuild trust?
As the first step, mutual respect for differences, not political coercion, is the solution to facilitate constructive discussion and negotiation in the IWC. It is most important to carefully consider if the IWC can
function with two fundamentally different views between pro- and anti-whaling interests as to the value of whales - whether whales can be regarded as food or not. From a pragmatic perspective, whaling is existing and will continue to exist in many regions of the world. The question then is whether or not anti-whaling countries want some roles in the management of this whaling.
Next step will be the establishment of common rules applicable to discussion and negotiations of the IWC which will change the negotiating environment. These rules might include; respect of international law, science-based policy, sustainable use of marine living resources, respect of cultural diversity related to food and ethics, and spirit of good faith.
As Dr. Hogarth stated in his letter of 20 December 2007IWC.CCG.657, it is very important to "include discussion of many issues, including small type coastal whaling and non-lethal use of cetaceans" to the process he initiated in Anchorage. We contracting parties have to find solutions for these substantial issues as soon as possible to restore credibility of the IWC as an international organization responsible for conservation and management of whales.
1. Why do you think that discussions to date within the IWC have not led to a more consensus-based resolution of IWC’s problems? Is the negotiating process itself a factor?
The management and conservation of large, long lived, highly migratory marine mammals such as cetaceans is a complex issue. The IWC was established for both the proper conservation of whale stocks and the orderly development of a whaling industry. However to date, the majority of its management tools have objectives and controls that are entirely limited to adjustments in the number of whales killed in whaling operations. The limitations of this approach have seen the IWC preside over the systematic over-exploitation of one cetacean species after another.
The modern era has brought successes in whale management that include the declaration of the moratorium on commercial whaling; the establishment of sanctuaries; consensus-based management of aboriginal subsistence whaling quotas; and consideration of emerging environmental issues. These measures have brought about the partial recovery of the world’s whale populations but they are only the first steps to successful long-term management.
No one who participates in the IWC would deny that the Commission is currently split between states that fundamentally support non-consumptive use of cetaceans and seek their full protection, and states that could support a resumption of some form of commercial whaling. With such fundamental differences on key positions held by parties to a multilateral organisation, consensus will be difficult to achieve. But that is not the same as instability or an inability to make and hold to decisions. The characterisation that the IWC is at an ‘impasse’ appears in itself to be accepting the view of those countries that would measure progress solely in terms of steps the Commission is making towards lifting its current ban on commercial whaling. The moratorium on commercial whaling has not been lifted and a Revised Management Scheme has not been agreed because three quarters of the members have not voted to do so. This reflects the legitimate decision-making procedures of the Commission.
It is appropriate for the Commission to reflect the views of its Parties. As the number of adherents to the Convention increases, the Parties become more closely representative of the international community. The polarisation currently experienced in the Commission would be reflected by any Conference of the Parties, UN conference or debate, or similar representative forum. It would be unrealistic to expect any representative international gathering to arrive at consensus, for instance, on the maintenance of the moratorium, or the resumption of commercial whaling.
The primary issues preventing the Commission moving forward relate more to a lack of recognition of contemporary oceans management principles and Parties’ ability to ‘opt-out’ of Commission decisions. For the IWC to move into the future the key challenges that need to be addressed are: the capacity for countries to ‘opt-out’ of collective management decisions; the dramatic expansion of special permit scientific whaling; and disagreement over the competency of the IWC on issues such as animal welfare and the management of small cetaceans.
09/03/2008
Whales Japanese Lies Videotapes & IWC Commentary by Captain Paul Watson
On Board the Conservation ship the Steve Irwin
Japan has consistently lied throughout its entire history of whaling.
In the mid-1980s, information was released that both the former Soviet Union and Japan had routinely under-reported their whaling catch statistics. In fact, each country had taken thousands of whales more than they reported between 1960 and 1980. In Japan, DNA analysis of whale meat purchased at random has revealed endangered species, including fins, blues, humpbacks, and orcas, being sold in supermarkets.
For years, Japan has denied bribing nations to vote its way at the annual meetings of the International Whaling Commission (IWC). Just this week, proof was revealed that Japan has been paying the way for the Solomon Islands to participate in these meetings. Solomon Islands Prime Minister Derek Sikua confirmed what had long been suspected: Japan bought support in the IWC for its so-called "scientific" whaling program.
Speaking in Honiara in a joint press conference with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, Sikua said the South Pacific country had not sent a representative to the IWC meeting currently underway in London. "We are not attending because usually Japan pays for our attendance, but we refused their assistance and therefore we have not gone because we can't afford it," he said.
Japan has been paying the membership fees and travel expenses and providing aid packages to Mongolia, Chad, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Grenada, and numerous other nations.
On January 15, when two Sea Shepherd Conservation Society crew members were tied with ropes to the railings and the mast of the Yushin Maru No. 2, the spokesperson for the Japanese whalers said this was a lie and that the crew members were never tied to the railings or the mast. However, the video and photographic images released by Sea Shepherd quickly demonstrated that Sea Shepherd was telling the truth.
In February 2007, the Japanese whaling vessel Keiko Maru rammed the Sea Shepherd ship Robert Hunter and then accused Sea Shepherd of having rammed it instead. The Australian Federal Police conducted a forensic examination of our ship. The results, although not officially released, back up our version of the incident. If not, we would have been charged. We were not. Of course neither were the Japanese.
After throwing--and admitting to throwing--flash grenades at the crew of the Steve Irwin, the Japanese changed their story and called the devices harmless warning balls. They said the balls were harmless despite the fact that they injured two of our crew members.
The same day, the Japanese reported that they had fired warning shots at the Steve Irwin, but then after it was reported that Captain Paul Watson, Founder and President of Sea Shepherd, had been shot in the chest, they changed their story and denied that any warning shots had been fired.
The very same Japanese whalers who slaughter whales in the most brutal ways imaginable, and who shoot at and throw concussion grenades at whale defenders, scream eco-terrorism when some rotten butter is tossed onto their decks.
But the biggest lie of all is Japan's claim that its whaling program is legal. How can whalers target endangered whales in a whale sanctuary in violation of a global moratorium on whaling and in contempt of an Australian Federal Court ruling and continue to insist that what they are doing is legal? The audacity of these poachers is amazing.
Then again, this is the nation that still denies the Rape of Nanking, that still denies enslaving Korean and Chinese women as "comfort women," that still denies torturing POW's during the war, that still denies destroying the rainforests of Indonesia and over-fishing the world's oceans. Japanese history is a chronicle of deceptions.
All Sea Shepherd campaigns are videotaped, and all of our actions are recorded. The Japanese can say what they like about our tactics, but the truth is in the tapes. We don't ask people to believe what we say, we ask people to judge the events by what they see.
This year, our campaigns have been documented independently by the Animal Planet Network. Sea Shepherd trusts that Animal Planet's presentation will be impartial and will convey the confrontations in the Southern Ocean accurately.
08/03/2008
Japanese Armed Guards Shoot Conservation Ship Captain Whilst He Was Protecting Whales
At approximately 3.45 pm. on the 7th March 2008 Australian Eastern Standard Time, in the Australian exclusive economic zone of Antarctica an attempt was made on the life of conservationist and Captain of the Steve Irwin ship, Paul Watson.
A single bullet was fired by what appears to be a Japanese marksman. The bullets were fired from the Nisshin Maru, the worlds largest whale factory slaughter house ship.
The bullet embeded itself in his Kevlar bullet proof protection vest, which was fortunately worn by Captain Watson. Without the vest, the ships doctor said, 'that the bullet would have probably been fatal'. There were also other bullet shots fired, along with dangerous flash grenades. Some other members of the crew of the Steve Irwin, were injured by the explosions.
Captain Watson is reported to be comfortable.
This report is from Steve Brown 1st Officer of the Steve Irwin.
There were video recordings in place.
It appears that the Japanese guards or whalers, would try to kill people to get to and kill whales.
07/03/2008
Conservationists Their Ships Anti-Whaling Governments & The Public Reduce Whale Killings
Actions speak louder than words! But words have helped too! to save Whales
The Japanese whale killing crew and ships left Shimonoseki Japan on the 19th November 2007. The Japanese whale killing program started on 15th December 2007. The Japanese whale killers were able to kill whales with deadly explosives attached to blunt ended harpoons, from the 15th December 2007 to 8th January 2008, a total of 23 days, as there were no conservation ships tailing them. There would probably have been the Steve Irwin conservation ship in the area, but sadly the Steve Irwin had to return to port with engine problems. It came back out, as soon as repairs were completed and eventually was just 24 hours behind Greenpeace's Esperanza conservation ship.
On the 10th January 2008, with Greenpeace's Esperanza and Sea Shepherds Steve Irwin around the Japanese whale killing fleet, the Japanese whalers were unable to kill any whales from 11th January 2008 to 1st February 2008. The resumption of whale killing again, commenced, because the conservation ships Esperanza and the Steve Irwin, were running out of fuel and had to return back to port.
On 2nd February 2008, the Japanese whale killing fleet, started their merciless slaughtering operations, which included, dragging up the slopes at the rear of the Nisshin Maru, the world's largest Japanese slaughter ship, a mother and her baby whale. This caused world out rage and was reported in Newspapers, Radio and TV, world wide.
These killings, continued until the 23rd February 2008.
On 23rd February 2008, after refuelling and taking on board crew and provisions and after a long journey at sea, the Steve Irwin conservation ship captained by Paul Watson, arrived back in the whale killing area. The Japanese knew on the arrival of the Steve Irwin, that it would be better if they ran, and ran they did! No whales were slaughtered from 23rd February to the 4th March 2008.
On the 4th March 2008, the Sea Shepherd conservation ship and crew found the Nisshin Maru Japanese slaughter house ship coming out of the Antarctic mist. They had been chasing the Nisshin Maru for eight days and a 12 hour fast pursuit. They have continued closely to trail it.
It is estimated that the merciless coward Japanese whale killers, shooting whales in their backs, have killed already approximately 440 whales. The whale killers and the cetacean research society Japan, originally wanted to kill 985 piked whales, 50 fin whales and originally 50 humpback whales. The humpback whales they had to withdraw, because of pressure from the public, campaigners and from anti-whaling Governments, such as the UK.
The Japanese Cetacean Research Society (the so called deceitful scientific research organisation, Japan), originally wanted over 1080 whales, to date they have killed and taken from the Antarctic Southern Ocean Sanctuary for Whales, approximately 440 human being trusting innocent whales. Still 440 too many. 440 that should still be swimming, with their families, in the Antarctic Southern Ocean Sanctuary for Whales and should not be packed into kilo packs, much of it ending up as pet meat and as waste in landfills, as unwanted meat! The whales are to beautiful for this treatment.
There is only a few more whale killing weeks left, due to the frozen ice, somewhere around mid March to the end of March. If the conservation ship the Steve Irwin and crew, can keep with the Japanese whale killing fleet, then no more whales should be slaughtered. The Japanese whale killing crew and ships, will then be forced back to Japan, where they belong.
The Institute for the Cetacean (marketing and product development) Research Japan, is behind all killing of whales in the Antarctic Southern Ocean Sanctuary for Whales. They execute whales to eat, under the deceit of and using the name Scientific Research. Meaning death to over 1080 whales.
04/03/2008
The Nisshin Maru The Worlds Largest Whale Slaughter House Ship Is Found In The Antarctic
GreenEcoPeace, continually reporting news, about our conservation colleagues saving whales in the Antarctic.
The Nisshin Maru the worlds largest whale slaughter house ship, has been found by Paul Watson, captain of the Steve Irwin conservation ship after a eight day pursuit and a 12 hour fast chase off the Banzare coast and inside the Australian Antarctic Territorial waters.
Captain Paul Watson, radioed the Nisshin Maru and informed them that they had no authority in the Australian Antarctic territory. The captain of the Steve Irwin conservation ship ordered the Japanese captain of the Nisshin Maru to cease all whaling operations and to comply with the Australian Federal Court Ruling that Prohibits the Japanese whaling fleet from killing whales in the Australian Antarctic territorial waters, even under the deceitful name of Scientific Research.
The captain of the Nisshin Maru played a tape over and over again through loud speakers, with a woman's voice saying, "warning warning this is the Nisshin Maru captain, stop your destructive actions immediately". "If you dare to board this vessel, you will be taken into custody and restrained immediately, as illegal intruders under Japanese law".
The Steve Irwin is now tailing and keeping half a mile behind the Nisshin Maru, because as long as the conservation ship keeps close to the Nisshin Maru, there will be no whales slaughtered.
The seas in the Antarctic at the moment, are very dangerous, with fog, sleet, frozen rain and hidden and exposed large icebergs.
These people on the Steve Irwin are hero's and should receive world acknowledgement, for what they do, even though, probably not one of the Steve Irwin crew would want this.
We are thankful to the captain and crew of approximately 40, and there little fast ship the Steve Irwin, in the middle of a big and dangerous sea, full of icebergs and surrounded by 8 Japanese ships, some armed with explosive harpoons and even uniformed armed guards.
It is illegal to carry explosives in the Southern Antarctic Whale Sanctuary according to the Antarctic Treaty, to which Japan signed up to! It is also illegal to fill up a vessel from another vessel with fuel, whilst at sea in the protected Antarctic zone. Japanese whalers have broken both these rulings and have no regard for anyone except themselves!
Just go Japanese Whalers, just get out of the Antarctic and go home!
01/03/2008
Swans Killed & Eaten On Olympic Site
It has been found that Polish and Eastern European's have been camping on the Olympic site now being prepared for the Olympics' in 2012.
People and Environmentalists were horrified to find on the site, tents, cooking pans and ripped off wings from swans. There were also carcasis and piles of feathers everywhere.
People were shocked to find that imigrants were killing and eating our treasured swans which have special royal protection status and carries upto a £6000.00 fine or six months in prison if you harm them.
People approached the Eastern European's but they were not co-operative in any way. A major news paper was called to the scene. But by the time they got there the imigrants had fled.
Watch out for tents on the new Olympic site. If you see anything strange phone or email GreenEcoPeace, the Police and the RSPCA immediately.
Thank you.
We need your consent to load the translations
We use a third-party service to translate the website content that may collect data about your activity. Please review the details and accept the service to view the translations.