What can I say? | Home | Our new best friends

I think that if anybody from Greenpeace was hurt by a whaler harpoon, the whalers would have to face tremendous indignation and anger from the whole world. The pourcentage of peoples involved or having interest in whaling among the whole world population is ridiculous. The whales (and you) have infinitely more support in the population than they have.

My thoughts are with you, all day long.

The answer to your question must be yes. If you conduct a risk assessment from the Nissui, Maruha and other companies, who participate in the whale killing, perspective, then there is only one conclusion which can be drawn.

They have concluded that despite the presence of people near their line of fire, they will go ahead.

In any risk assessment you have to conclude there is a chance of people getting killed. There is no doubt about the expertise of the harpoonist.

Nevertheless there is a risk of harpoon failure.
There is a risk of harpoonist fatigue, given the circumstances of near zero temperatures, the mist from the water spray, the constant movement of the vessel and pressure to have a hit.

This is all calculated into the operation.

So the answer to your quation is yes

Hang in there, your very brave people, who risk their lives knowingly and still prepared to stand up in a nonviolent matter against this slaughter.

Andrew, many thanks to you and your mates for putting yourselves in harm's way- and getting soppy wet in the freezing conditions of the Southern Ocean.

There's simply no justifiable cause for the slaughter of endangered species as Nissui does. It's not like modern technology runs on whale oil, for pete's sake.

If Nissui & Gortons want to study whales, great... but I won't believe that's what they are up to until the harpoon cannons are melted down for scrap metal.

Hi,

I guess that, in a way, you're longing for this kind of accident, because it would be good publicity for Greenpeace and would give an even more bad image of whaling.

But then, the reponsibility is mainly yours. You don't have to put yourself between the whale and the whaler boat, since you do know what is the risk. It's not like the whalers and whales were having you in between them, isn't it?

I understand your will to protest against whaling (although I don't adhere to it), but you have to take the responsibility for the risks you take. To put it on the gunner's shoulders is not a responsible way of behaving.

I hope that, once again, you will publish and answer my comment. Thank you in advance.

Anyway, take care of yourself.
(I do mean it)

Seen footage on dutch television. Freezed. My fribillating heart is with you folks. To all my fellow readers of this weblog: although we can't all be there supporting the activists, become one yourself and, above all, spread the word. Peace.

To all the amazing people in the Southern Ocean fighting to protect our whales: you are truly wonderful,inspirational heroes, and you have the support of millions of us on this planet. You must have incredible strength to survive witnessing these creatures die a horrible slow death right in front of your eyes, my heart could not cope. In the name of research? Absolute rubbish but they are allowed to get away with it because the governments don't want to upset Japan. Feel free to pass them my own conclusion to their research: Question: What happens when we kill all the whales for our own consumption? Answer: The whales are extinct. Congratulations Japan, now you can all go home and start eating something else not meant for human comsumption, maybe dirt, your own waste, or even eachother?
I was lucky enough to be raised by animal lovers, surrounded by many pets and attending regular protests concerning the welfare of animals. I, and many others, would gladly put my life on the line to save an animal; they need a voice and that's what people like us are here for.
Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for your dedicated and passionate fight for these beautiful whales, and for exposing the truth of what's really happening down there.
Best wishes for your safety and peace be with you.

A far more interesting question would be:

Would you kill to save a whale?

Would you, say... place C-4 charges on the side of a whaling ship all the while knowing that it may, and probably will, kill someone on that ship?

I would answer that yes, I would.

After seeing the video clip of the minke whale thrashing to death under the whaling ship, I felt sick. But how would I feel if I had seen it first hand? Murderous. And I would not hesitate.

I would like to ask a question myself, of the Greenpeace supporters:

Which scenario is better:

A) Preventing the deaths of a certain number of whales, but contributing to increased time-to-death's for those whales that are killed, due to Greenpeace's obstructive tactics (preventing the ICR harpooners from taking their shots clearly and cleanly in some cases).

B) ICR meets it's target of 765 - 935 minkes, and those individual animals are killed as humanely as possible.

As a compassionate human being, I much prefer option B.

RESPONSE FROM ADELE, GREENPEACE WEB EDITOR:

Hi David,

The best scenario would be non-lethal research.

I find your logic flawed here. Greenpeace is not causing these whales to die inhumanely, the whalers are! I also don't think it's Greenpeace who are preventing the whalers from taking accurate shots - as you will see from the video below, this happens regardless. No Greenpeace inflatable was on the water during this video. The footage shows a whale taking over 30 minutes to die, which was shot at innacurately 6 times, and eventually drowned in its own blood while thrashing itself to death. It's a disturbing piece of footage which destroyed the humane argument for me once and for all.

Watch the video here (and note - this was while the whalers were aware that Greenpeace was filming, imagine how often this happens when no-one is watching):

Click on "Death of a Minke Whale"

Adele

To Melissa,

It is not because "governments don't want to upset Japan", it is because those government's recognise that they do not have a legal leg to stand on. New Zealand's IWC rep Sir Geoffrey Palmer has been quoted in New Zealand media admitting this fact. Japan does have the law on it's side. If you disagree with the law, that's fine. But make no mistake about what the law actually says.

You also ask "Question: What happens when we kill all the whales for our own consumption?"

Japan isn't killing all the whales - only a small number of stocks that are recognised as abundant. Not even anti-whaling scientists seriously believe that Japan's minke catch will in any way contribute to the depletion of this stock. The last stock estimate was 760,000 - even if it was an overestimation and there were only 500,000, Japan's quota would amount to %0.17 of the entire population. It's important to recognise that the goal of Japan is sustainable whaling, not unsustainable whaling.

Please see more at my blog if you are interested.

Wonderful,kind,inspirational. These are only a few of the words I would use to describe the amazing human beings that are out on the Southern Ocean defending our beautiful whales. If only the world was filled with more people like you.
To those that frown on your courageous expedition, OPEN YOUR EYES. Obviously the government and the whalers have not listened to our cries to have this great crime against these beautiful animals stopped. If we sit back and do nothing, we are turning a blind eye on the destruction of innocent creatures. What would the world be like without whales.
Thank you Ocean Defenders, and good luck, I wish I could be out there with you.

I think Greenpeace is doing a great public serve exposing the hypocrisy of the Japanese "scientific" whaling. However, I think I have a more effective solution.

Instead of risking your lives in front of a harpoon, why not simply inject poison into the dead whale after it has been shot? It would allow most scientific data to be collected, but prevent anyone from eating the meat. Of course the Japanese would stop killing the whales as a consequence, and we would see that they have been lying.

History has proven the greed of many countries over centuries, and with all respect I thought that Japan had progressed into a more focused and AWARE nation. For a country to claim that whaling in the Southern Ocean is in the name of research when it is blatantly a disregard for the welfare of life on this planet, for the sake of harvesting a commercial product for commercial gain is unacceptable. Unacceptable in the sense that we need to lead by example if we are to change this course of destruction and depletion of the planet.

Go well Greenpeace with all my blessing and support,... and Japan ... consider your integrity, the world is watching, and it is your agressive action, and inaction to sail away and call whaling history, that is the key issue.

I just watched the video of one of the crew falling into the freezing ocean between the dying whale and the Japanese ship.

Now I am a Greenpeace Supporter thru and thru, but am just wondering why the clip showed him hanging on to the harpoon line?? Could he not have ducked out the way?? Any chance of seeing an unedited version??

Regardless of what happened out there during that incident, you guys are out there standing up for what you believe in and I admire your courage.

Peace out

i still can't believe this - i saw the most hypocritcal sign of my life shown from one of the whaling boats - it was titled, 'GREENPEACE ARE MISLEADING' - and what... they're doing 'research'.... hmmmmm

it really sickens me, not only from seeing the whalers harpooning these beautiful defeceless creatures - but to the scum whom pay top dollar to eat whale as a delicacy.

in the words of rene dubos, 'the humanness of life depends above all on the quality of man's relationships to the rest of the creations'. and a quick look at not only this scenario, but all the other problems around the world (ie pollution, global warming).. it doesn't give me much pleasure in being a human being. my deepest wish is that i was out there with all the activits trying to stop whaling. not only protesting for the survival of a truly innocent creature, but also believing in the good of man (as hard as it seems) to be able to stop doing this.

seeing what is happening deeply sadens me, to the point of crying. not only how they kill these whales - but killing them out of greed. they are not human, and calling them animals will be an insult to every living thing. they're much worse than that.

to all you at Greenpeace. i thank you, it's because of you i still believe there is some good left in this world. and if you ever need me to help against these multi-national scum, fueled on greed and wanting more. i'm an email away and i'm there. thanks.

Isanatori: "longing for this kind of accident, because it would be good publicity for Greenpeace and would give an even more bad image of whaling."

I have to disagree. I've been an environmental and political activist, have done many protests and actions, although not as life-threatening as being in front of an harpoon, but let's say quite stressful. Even if above you there's an organisation, big or small, you are the one on the field and you don't think: "I wonder how I'll look like in tomorrow's papers". You can't do it, because you're too motivated, adrenaline's rushing, and that is the moment you, not the press, will remember all your life as the day you've done something good.

I saw the footage on the news! So lucky that the harpoon missed the greenpeace person!!! It would have been soooooooooo yuck swimming in that water with all the whale blood. :( I'm starting to think you guys are crazy doing what you do, it's such a risk! But then again if you guys weren't protesting whaling would basically go un-noticed.

Keep up the good work and STAY SAFE!
Maybe you should think about what is more important, a whale's life or a human life? It's GREAT what you are doing but please just be careful! It's seriously only a matter of time before there is a worse tragedy than the killing of whales.

All the best! xoxo

Good morning, Isanatori! I was hoping you would submit another blog entry, because there is something I would like to address to you in this public forum; but before I do, I find that what you have submitted presses upon me for response in such a teasing way that for the sake of my own peace of mind, I'd like to respond.


In my country, people who go into woods and fields where, for example, deer hunting is permitted, are encouraged to don bright orange clothing: vests and jackets and hats, precisely so that any shooters in their vicinity will refrain from pulling their triggers on sighting the brilliant warning color. The mandate does not change if prey is present. The presumption is that people with weapons are in control of their limbs and fingers and can voluntarily hold their fire. There is neither law nor urban legend that relieves the gunner of responsibility for the behavior of his weapon. In your opinion, why would a marine environment be any different? The presence or absence of corporate employment, a required corporate quota of killed animals, or corporate pressure to kill has no effect when it comes to weapons use. Is this not also true in Japan? Or in your country, if you are not, as you appear to be, Japanese?

The second issue I want to address comes in the context of conscious respect for you as a fellow human being, with all the innate dignity and capacity for compassion and empathic action that our nature includes. I am not so naive as to expect you to speak for an entire culture, but you have yourself chosen the role of whalers' advocate in this blog, and so I do feel justified in asking you the following questions.

In the United States, there are many corporations, such as Kimberly-Clark, ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, and Coca-Cola that commit egregious crimes against humanity and the natural world, of which we all are a part. These companies pursue their heinous acts under cover of secrecy and a professed corporate image of responsible and even admirable behavior. They do this because public attitudes include an a priori care for the Earth, for fellow creatures, and for one's fellow man. The very last thing they want is for their actions to be publicized and widely known; and historically, once they are broadcast, these companies are forced for the sake of their profits to change their ruinous ways.


Speaking to you as if you were truly an advocate for the whalers, I would like seriously to hear your own personal take on the seeming absence of that empathic identification with fellow creatures that makes Japanese whaling possible. Although it might be obvious that I know little of Japanese culture, and I would be the first to profess my ignorance, what I do know includes profound admiration for spiritual traditions such as the way of Zen, and Shinto Buddhism; and for aesthetic traditions like ikebana. These approaches manifest the most awe-inspiring attunement with the natural world; a mastery of understanding and a wisdom at which the West can only wonder; and a sensitivity that expresses profound compassion for all living things.


Yet there is, apparently, real support for whaling in Japan, and so to the outsider it seems as if a line is drawn, some kind of boundary or threshold beyond which human compassion is forbidden to extend. Can you tell me your thoughts on this? Would you share with us, first, why it is that this prohibition exists; and next, what, in your opinion, would open the hearts of whalers and others to the aesthetic and empathetic appreciation of whales, whose intelligence, complexity, and sentience is so thoroughly proven before all the world?


What kind of insight or observation would lead you, for example, to connect your heart, as a human being, to this particular non-human but enormously sophisticated creature? --such that it would cause you a brother's pain to see him hurt in any way?


I thank you in advance for your just attention to these heartfelt questions. Perhaps you may do us all a service by interpreting for non-Japanese something that plagues Americans like myself, or perhaps all foreigners, about the practice of Japanese whaling. And I do sincerely hope that you will not only reply on this blog, but also receive the respectful tone my words are seeking to express.


With best wishes for the rapid enlightenment of the whole world,



Arianne

David At Tokyo, dear, you are evidently privy to Laws of which the rest of the world is entirely ignorant. Please instruct us.
To what laws are you referring when you assert that Japan's otherwise-illegal poaching of baleen whales in the internationally-acclaimed Southern Ocean Sanctuary is legal?
To quote a statement from another conservation website, as repetition becomes tiresome in capitulation to the seemingly fathomless ignorance of the willfully uninformed:


[quote]

It is Japan that is violating international conservation law. The following list summarizes their violations:

1. The Japanese are whaling in violation of the International Whaling Commission's global moratorium on commercial whaling. The IWC scientific committee does not recognize this bogus research that the Japanese are using as an excuse.

2. The Japanese are killing whales in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary for whales.

3. The Japanese are killing whales unlawfully in the Australian Antarctic Territory

4. The Japanese are targeting fin whales this year and humpback whales next year. These are endangered species and thus this is a violation of CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

5. The Japanese are in violation of IWC regulation 19. (a) The IWC regulations in the Schedule to the Convention forbid the use of factory ships to process any protected stock: 19. (a) It is forbidden to use a factory ship or a land station for the purpose of treating any whales which are classified as Protection Stocks in paragraph 10. Paragraph 10(c) provides a definition of Protection Stocks and states that Protection Stocks are listed in the Tables of the Schedule. Table 1 lists all the baleen whales, including minke, fin and humpback whales and states that all of them are Protection Stocks.

6. In addition the IWC regulations specifically ban the use of factory ships to process any whales except minke whales: Paragraph 10(d) provides: (d) Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10 there shall be a moratorium on the taking, killing or treating of whales, except minke whales, by factory ships or whale catchers attached to factory ships. This moratorium applies to sperm whales, killer whales and baleen whales, except minke whales.
[endquote]


Do read the past entries of which this weblog is comprised, David At Tokyo. Many submissions rephrase the crystal-clear illegality of the Japanese' actions in other words.


Arianne, wearying

Peter Dunn - to answer your poison question - take a look at Adele's response to the same question here .

"I think that's not really Greenpeace's style - a bit too close to violence considering someone could get harmed. Not to mention the environmental impacts of putting poison into a marine ecosystem! So thanks for the attempt at a creative tactic but erm .. probably not the best idea!"

Keep up the good work people.

Glad to see that you and Sea Shepherd have supressed your differences over this.

Both campaigns are held high in my regard. I see Shepherd have dropped the reports on their direct action. I assume for legal reasons

Stay safe.

Dear Arianne,

I read your comment with much interest. First of all, I must tell you I am not Japanese. I speak the language, have lived in the country and studied a bit about the culture, including Japanese whaling, so I will try to tell you what I know on the subject.

I agree that the gunner has a part of responsibility in what he does with his weapon. But you cannot take away the responsibility of peoples who put themselves purposedly between the hunter and the animal at the most critical moment.
Fortunately, the whalers are aware of the risks, and their spokesperson said many times that they were taking care not to hurt Greenpeace activists.

However, they have a job to do. The research whaling is prefectly legal. I let David @ Tokyo explaining you why, but you should avoid referring to Paul Watson as he's certainly not the best of references. (The guy and his NGO, Sea Shepherd, have lost their observer status to the IWC beacuse of their violent and illegal actions)

The Japanese may not have the same emphathic identification with whales as you, but they have been doing buddhist funeral services (kuyô) dedicated to whales they have hunted, for centuries. They also have raised many funeral monuments (kuyô-tô, haka) for these animals, and peoples in whaling communities have strong feelings of gratitude toward whales, in the same way as toward their ancestors.

These feelings make the link between hunters and preys an important one. Whaling is thus a way, as much as funeral services and festivals (matsuri) where whale meat is generally offered or/and consumed, to keep alive the interaction (both physically and spiritually) between humans and whales in these parts of Japan.

If you have the occasion, I would recommand you to visit places such as Taiji, Nagato or the Goto archipelago where the old traditions related to whaling are still alive.

I hope my answer will have responded to your questions. Please, let me know.

I WOULD KILL TO SAVE A WHALE

A MILLION humans TO PUT AN END TO THE SLAUGHTER.

thats what i would do no doubt.

To the crew at the ESPERANZA TAKE CARE!! dont give up. do all you can to protect the whales.

Allow me to be blunt.
The government of Japan, like the governments of the USA and Canada, consistently promotes the wanton destruction of nonhuman life for economic gain. This attitude is what led them to war 65 years ago, and this is what leads them to alliance in rapacious complicity with their own large conglomerates (holding corporations) and corporations, in continuing the impoverishment of the earth, death of species, and transformation of ecosystems which do not serve human economics.
While individuals such as the Greenpeace activists attempt to counter and mitigate the losses to the earth’s life, others will make decisions reducing the effectiveness of sacrifices which such individuals have and are willing to make.
Japan is one of the whaling nations, and along with a number of other nations, licenses and legalizes these huge freezer/processor and very similar ships trawlers like the Nisshin Maru, which have been clearly implicated in stripping species from the world’s oceans. Fisheries and marine populations have collapsed all over the world primarily due to the ability to harvest more in days that was previously possible in years.
Nippon Suisan Kaisha, Maruha, and Kyokuyo are clearly implicated in these practices, aside from together owning over 95% of the present whaling company killing whales in the Antarctic.
Japan has allowed and encouraged the killing of 2/3 of the Dall’s porpoises in its 200 mile limit of economic sovereignty in 3 years. Dall’s Porpoises are a fast-swimming migratory species, and this unsustainable destruction is being perpetrated on another population about which we know far too little.
All marine mammals in Japanese inshore waters are herded together to be butchered because they either “compete” with or are eaten, no matter their intelligence, brain size, pain, or rarity.
Japan wiped out the population of blue whales which seasonally occupied ocean areas within their limits before 1950. The blue whale population south of the Aleutian Islands underwent a disappearing act in those stormy and foggy seas without anyone knowing anything except that marine biologists knew it could only be due to unobserved illegal whaling.
Once-rich salmon populations that spawned in Japan are completely gone. Only hatchery-supplied salmon exist in Japanese streams. Japan conglomerates now own fish processors in Alaska and on the 3 coasts of the USA as well as in Canada and elsewhere, although these keep their previous folksy names.
Canada and the USA both have sold their publicly-owned forests – more wild lands to be stripped of life - at great financial loss to Japan, who remains the primary consumer of trees from the North American continent.
Japanese corporations owned and have newly acquired pulp mills on the US Pacific coast. Government agencies in the USA have consistently granted variances from laws which are intended to prevent air, water, and environmental pollution.
USA and Canada have been willing accomplices in their own self-destruction, and citizens from these nations who voted for, and do not speak or lobby against those in their governments who are supporting this, also have their fingers on the triggers of the harpoon guns.
Japanese corporations, which actually pioneered less environmentally destructive automobiles, have since eagerly pandered to and assisted in the hugely damaging trend toward larger and more polluting personal vehicles of all types, whether oversized pickup trucks, SUVs, All-terrain vehicles and motocross motorcycles scarring the little remaining wild country, or “personal watercraft” and snowmobiles which scare numerous species from their ancestral living and breeding places, use petroleum, and are the primary cause of air pollution and contribute massively to global warming. These same corporations that claim to be “green”, are spending large monies and lobbying against environmental protections in nations all over.
While Japan holds no monopoly on human greed, these practices make it by far the most environmentally destructive nation for its size in the world. Japan externalizes its environmental destruction, and the world is more diminished by practices of its government and its corporations. I see Japanese apologists for whaling writing to you here. Where are any Japanese people who may be concerned with health of the wider world? Why do they not speak?

Isanatori - This is simply a personal observation, not an official Greenpeace comment, but this statement from the Nisshin Maru doesn't imply to me that the whalers are "taking care not to hurt Greenpeace activists". It sounds to me like those school yard games where you play "anybody in the way gets knocked over". How can you say all responsibility for an accident, if it is really an accident, lies with the victim?


Extract from Nisshin Maru statement (see Andrew's blog They Said, We Said - my emphasis in bold):



"As long as you continue such dangerous obstructive actions it can be easily imagined that more serious accidents involving personnel will take place at some point. I repeat: All the responsibility for any accidents that originate in dangerous obstructive actions lie with you. We strongly demand that Greenpeace cease your obstruction of our legitimate survey and leave the survey area immediately."

David -

You have missed, or chose to deliberately ignore, the substance of this update. The whalers are not automatons. They are people that make choices, and their bosses are people that make choices. The point of this update is that the harpooners in many cases have been choosing to endanger the lives of my crewmates by firing close to our boats.

Thank you for, like the whalers, showing a total lack of concern for the safety of my crewmates and myself.

Leaving that aside. I have also said before that I think it is impossible to reliably kill these whales humanely. By the whaler's own estimate, almost half of the whales harpooned take several minute to die. And based on what I have seen, their numbers are prone to fudging.

So how about these alternate choices:

A) Seeing fellow human beings in or near the line of fire, the harpooner chooses not to fire his explosive tipped weapon. His captain praises him for choosing to error on the side of safety and respect for human life. The bosses back at Kyodo Senpaku, Nissiu, etc. agree that whales aren't worth killing for.

B) Under pressure from his captain, who is in turn under extreme pressure from above, the harpooner botches a shot. Everybody makes mistakes sometimes. An activist who chose to put him or herself in the way (lets call her Yuko since she happens to be sitting next to me while I type this) is hit by shrapnel or the harpoon.

C) There are no activists. No one is here to protect the whales, or even independently monitor the hunt. Some whales die instantly, some whales take five minutes to die, some suffer for twenty minutes and more - because the sea is choppy or the harpooner has a cold or is just having an off day or he's a new trainee or the whale or ship moves unexpectedly or whatever.

In my three trips down here to the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary I have seen enough of option "C" to not let it happen again while I can peacefully prevent it.

Seeing on TV, footage of these beautiful, spiritual animals being slaughtered is sickening.
Japan has no respect and I wish the AUSt Govt had the balls to do something about this and help you

You are truely passionate, courageous , wonderful people. It means so very much even if you only save 1.

I read last year in a Norwegian paper that whaling nations ( at least Norway, which BTW has better killing methods than Japan) are not in the least intersted in to improve whale killing methods. " We have developed already the most effective way to kill a whale" stated the newspaper. No more many is going to be invested in new improved methods!

Scary statement!!

I think the other side of this coin needs to be examined:

Would YOU kill to SAVE a whale?

Take a human life, that is.

I am sure that you guys out there on the front line must consider this side of it as well, and I don't envy you. It is the great human dilemma.

Should your boat steer wrong, and cause casualties, are the dead of both sides casualties of war?

I'm not trying to troll here: hence, I won't post anonymously.
For what it's worth, living in Norway and seeing the disregard, contempt even, for this majestic life form, I can honestly say I formed my own conclusions some time ago:

It takes more than good intentions to save life, and sometimes self-sacrifice is not enough. We very seldom are asked to take that selfless path by those we come into conflict with, but are forced instead to the very actions of those who oppose us.

As humanity debases itself further with inhuman methods, how many of us are prepared to follow it down, and oppose it blow for blow?

I believe in what you are doing. There are no words.
I pray your conscience rests easy through all the trials ahead.

Mike -

No. None of us out here would. We will risk our own safety, but not anyone else's.

The world is full of people killing other people to make it a "better" place. History is full of examples, and in almost every case it is a shame and a waste and brings on nothing but more tragedy.

In response to your specific example, our small boats - made from rubber, plastic and aluminum - pose no risk whatsoever to their much larger steel ships. This was graphically demonstrated the">http://weblog.greenpeace.org/oceandefenders/archive/2006/01/billy_g_takes_o.html">the other day when something did go badly wrong while Cat was trying to keep the Billy G in position at the bow of the Kyo Maru.

One of the big reasons I work with Greenpeace is to help show that peaceful action is the solution. As an American, this is more important to me right now than ever.

Mike, Andrew, and Adele: you have brilliantly exonerated me from the need to respond point by point to my friend Isanatori's most recent post on this page. I had arguments lined up like
a flotilla of Zodiacs, ready to buzz between verbal harpoons and our beloved whales. I see there is no need; the more cogent facts you have set before us all. While, as I wrote in a personal email, "There is something obscene, I feel, in debating the relative
merits of horror voluntarily inflicted; rather like discussing torture techniques and their possible degrees of
'legality.' One is tainted if only by association, or by having engaged in the debate in the first place. One feels ashamed," I must acknowledge the tragic need. But I could never have, so succinctly and comprehensively, presented the case for our precious cetacean brethren.Thanks!

Isanatori and David At Tokyo: I rest my case.


Arianne

How about cutting the harpoon cabling ?

What is the harpoon cable made of ? Wouldn't it be a sensible idea to cut the cable if you have the opertunity ?

The problem with the japs is they never forget their whele eating culture.No possible to stop the ship in different ways?
For example shoot at the bottom of the boat to make an hole or something like that.
BTW thanks guys , you are so brave.