The odd, yet strangely boring, Normalisation Meeting | Home | Anything but Normal

"I am a human being, and I get frustrated. I want to see the resumption of whaling as soon as possible." – the Chair of the meeting.

How could a man with such approach and reasoning get into the position of chair?

Thanks for this insider look at how these folks talk amongst themselves. Thank god this was just a brainstorming meeting only. Now we can only hope that when the IWC meets they get firmer with the current rules and regulations and start to really pressure member governments to penalize those who break the current laws. The ridiculous "scientific research" loophole that allows whalers to slaughter these creatures has GOT to get closed already! Seal up that hole, IWC! Where's the firm hand?

It was interesting on the news in NZ last night how the spokesperson in Japan for the whaling company said that "We are committed to resuming whaling and that the sale of whale meat is up with 75% of people supporting whaling (in Japan)." HA! He didn't even say a 'return to our research' he straight out said "Whaling" and that it is so people eat the meat! And I'm sure you know Greenpeace... But do 75% of Japanese really support whaling? And is eating whale meat really on the rise?

Dave on the Esperanza: No Heidi - according to polls, 69% of people DO NOT support whaling!

"A recent public survey in Japan showed some interesting results; firstly that 92% of the public were not aware that their government even had a whaling programme that was about to kill more than 850 whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary; and also that 69% of Japanese people did not support whaling on the high seas."
Source »

I don't understand why they want to continue whaling when there is no market for it and it has such a high disapproval rating with the rest of the world.

What is their main argument for CONTINUING whaling?

I hope Greenpeace's reaction to Switzerland is not too vicious and vindictive:
http://www.nzz.ch/2007/02/15/eng/article7532555.html

D@T - Luckily, we aren't vindictive types. We're rainbow flag waving, flower loving types. And we are sometimes blunt speaking types. Hope you don't mistake that for meanness.

But to address your point, this "compromise" talk is pure spin and hogwash. Their idea of compromise is just more whaling.

To quote the chair of the meeting:

"I am a human being, and I get frustrated. I want to see the resumption of whaling as soon as possible."

There's some refreshing honesty at least.

This character david from Tokyo is a paid shill of the whaling industry. He has been allowed to usurp Greenpeace's message for far too long. It is the reason why I no longer visit this site on a regular basis to find news.
Because he and his employers win in this small case (I send my money to, and visit the Sea Shepherd site to see what is really going on), it is past time for Greenpeace to remove such distortions, lies, and advertisement for the whaling industry. Let such people speak through their media, rather than creating propaganda for their dealing death to larger brains than humans via Greenpeace.

Well, mates, it's no surprise--the fix is in. What do you expect to hear from these people other than the straight party line? Sadly, some things about human nature are immutable, and where there's money to be made, false representations will be made. There's a huge difference between real community whaling (Inuit, Neah Bay, etc.) and commercial whaling with a fleet of ships. Obviously, the Japanese/IWC have hired a slick PR firm who've already focus group-tested what cute phrases and market positioning will hoodwink the unwitting public.

For what exactly are they using the whales that are captured? I understand that the IWC is claiming scientific study, but what types of research are they citing? And are there still international markets that utilize whale by-products?