It is now official. the Sea Shepherds are pirates1

Page 2 of 4 [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Roxas_XIII
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jan 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217
Location: Laramie, WY

01 Mar 2013, 1:18 am

eric76 wrote:
The Sea Shepherds lie with impunity. The truth means nothing to them. It is all spin.

For example, they willingly ram Japanese ships and then claim that the Japanese ship rammed them.

The history of the Sea Shepherds includes their sinking ships.

1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaling vessel “Sierra”, causing considerable damage. “Sierra” survives attack.

1980: The IWC at its meeting in Brighton, United Kingdom, assigns high-level protection to two Canadian Government delegates after Watson threatened to kill them for voting against a moratorium on sperm whales. Delegates given Royal Canadian Mounted Police protection until their return home to Canada.

1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility. Investigation shows limpet mines used to blow up the vessel.

1981: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga.

...

1986: Sea Shepherd attempts to stop Faroe Islands pilot whale harvest. Using rifles, Sea Shepherd activists shoot at Faroe Islands police in an attempt to sink their rubber dinghies. The vessel “Sea Shepherd” was ordered to leave Faroese territorial waters. The police report of 7 October 1986 states: “One of the rubber dinghies was attacked directly by a “Speed Line” line rifle. The attack … endangered the lives of the police crewmembers ... and signal flares containing phosphorous was thrown at the police. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used “toads” (rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends) against the rubber dinghies … petrol was poured over the side of the ship and signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in an attempt to set the petrol on fire.”

1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to a whaling station. (This act of violence was carried out after Iceland stopped whaling in line with the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling.) Attack carried out by Sea Shepherd members Rodney A. Coronado and David Howitt. (Coronado linked to Animal Liberation Front and arrested eight years later by United States FBI for his part in an ALF attack on Michigan State University research laboratory. Charges included use of an explosive device, theft and arson.)

...

1991: A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports that Sea Shepherd, some of whose crew were armed with rifles, rammed his vessel causing considerable damage.

1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing.” Outside magazine (Sept. 1991). Paul Watson admits there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” Watson tells the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempts at ramming three Costa Rican fishing vessels. In a written complaint to the local authorities the fishermen report that the Sea Shepherd crew shot at them with bullets containing a red substance, hitting two of them and causing them great pain.

1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempt at scuttling the whaling and fishing vessel “Nybræna” at her moorings in the Lofoten Islands, northern Norway. Attack committed by Paul Watson, girlfriend Lisa DiStefano and one other Sea Shepherd member. Watson later states: “The scuttling of the Nybræna was not a terrorist or criminal act. We were responsible for removing an instrument of death and destruction without causing death or injury.” Charges laid against Watson, who fails to turn up in court. Watson convicted in absentia and sentenced to 120 days in prison.

1992: Sea Shepherd vessel “Whales Forever” collides with Norwegian Coast Guard vessel “Andenes” on July 4. Charges against Paul Watson include negligent navigation, refusal to leave Norwegian waters on orders of the Coast Guard and transmitting false distress signals. (Tape supplied)

1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel. Sea Shepherd crew do not carry out the order, but instead fire a shot across the bow of the Japanese vessel. The Japanese vessel does not stop. (Recorded by Yorkshire Television Documentary “Defenders of the Wild – Ocean Rider”.)

1993: Paul Watson claims in an open letter to the people of Norway that Sea Shepherd has sunk eight ships and rammed and damaged a further six vessels. In the same letter, he states: “The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is a law abiding organization. We rigidly adhere to and respect the laws of nature or lex natura. We hold the position that the laws of ecology take precedence over the laws designed by nation states to protect corporate interests … the smell of guilt is already a stench in the nostrils of God.”

...

2002: Watson tells Animal Rights 2002 Conference in Washington DC that if a person dies from one of his actions, he would consider it “collateral damage”. He believes it is not possible to “commit violence against non-sentient objects. Property damage is not violence.”


Watson and the crews involved and those funding these activities have no respect for the law or for others. If life was fair, they would all rot in jail.



That bastard. Seriously, that pisses me off. Sorry to say this Watson, but you're wrong. If I took a Stinger anti-air missile to an airliner as it passed overhead, it wouldn't matter if I was intending to damage the plane or kill the people inside, because regardless of which outcome was my goal, I'd still be responsible for the death of the passengers as well as the property damage to the plane.

So yeah, there is no way you can justify that. Or perhaps you were referring to the crew of the Japanese vessels as non-sentient? Or perhaps even the entirety of the Japanese themselves? That's even worse at that point. I can't say I know much about whales - for all I know they may be sentient - but humans are too, and trying to paint them as non-sentient to justify violence against them is like trying to paint African-Americans as lower forms of life to justify slavery, or Jews as such to justify the Holocaust. Oh, and did I mention that viewpoint is totally racist? Well, I'm sure I don't need to, because EVERYONE ELSE CAN SEE THAT.

I'm still surprised the Japanese government is putting up with this BS. Here's what they need to do. They need to have some kind of naval vessel on standby, one preferably matched to the average class of ships that the Sea Shepards use (anything bigger than a destroyer would probably be unable to do any damage.) The warships stay out in international waters while the fishing vessels do their thing. If the Sea Shepards attack, the naval vessel will intervene and tell them to stand down. If they refuse, then the naval vessel blows up their s**t and sends every last one of them to Davy Jones' locker where they belong.

If they're worried about Australia's response to this, they shouldn't be. The fact of the matter is, no self-respecting 1st world country would want to freely admit that they're consorting with terrorists. Just because they're flying an Australian flag does not mean they necessarily answer to their government, and if the Sea Shepards are going to declare war on the Japanese Maritime SDF, then I'm pretty sure that gives Japan the right to bypass Article 9 of their constitution and respond in kind. And if Australia had any sense in their heads, they'd stay the f**k out of it. The Sea Shepards are terrorists, their actions violate international and maritime law, and seeing as they're based out of Australia, it is Australia's responsibility to handle these violations, and if they refuse to do so then other countries will. I'm sure they may make a big fuss about it at the next UN summit, but there is nothing really more than that they can do, and Goddess help them if they have the audacity to declare war on Japan, because not only does that give Japan the right to temporarily forego Article 9 and tend to their defense, but they also happen to be allied to the most powerful nation on Earth, both militarily and economically, the motherfucking U S of A. And it doesn't seem like America is too sympathetic to the Sea Shepards so trying to justify military action against one of their allies as retaliation for military action against a group that has all but been declared unlawful bordering on terrorist, is not gonna fly. And let's not forget that the US still maintains a sizable military presence in Japanese waters out of their bases in Okinawa, etc. Mess with the eagle, you're gonna get the talons.


_________________
"Yeah, so this one time, I tried playing poker with tarot cards... got a full house, and about four people died." ~ Unknown comedian

Happy New Year from WP's resident fortune-teller! May the cards be ever in your favor.


opal
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,118
Location: Australia

01 Mar 2013, 2:42 am

Shepherd, not SHEPARD.

Ummmm. The Japanese are ILLEGALLY killing PROTECTED whales in AUSTRALIAN waters, they have been doing it in international waters for lord knows how long under the loophole that it is "Scientific research." Everyone knows it is killing for human consumption, but the Japs just like to flick the bird at everyone else.

And Roxas, Aussies are Allies with the good old US of A aLTHOUGH THE US DIDN'T WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN WWII UNTIL THAT OLD PEARL HARBOUR INCIDENT DID THEY? Who was that? The Japanese I think.



awesomeautist
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 124

01 Mar 2013, 4:25 am

opal wrote:
Shepherd, not SHEPARD.

Ummmm. The Japanese are ILLEGALLY killing PROTECTED whales in AUSTRALIAN waters, they have been doing it in international waters for lord knows how long under the loophole that it is "Scientific research." Everyone knows it is killing for human consumption, but the Japs just like to flick the bird at everyone else.

And Roxas, Aussies are Allies with the good old US of A aLTHOUGH THE US DIDN'T WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN WWII UNTIL THAT OLD PEARL HARBOUR INCIDENT DID THEY? Who was that? The Japanese I think.


'Japs?' Wow, way to use a bigoted ethnic slur. If you did a little research you'd find most Japanese are opposed to whaling these days so maybe next time think a little before you start making offensive generalisations.

http://www.celsias.com/article/economic ... ic-and-it/



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

01 Mar 2013, 4:32 am

awesomeautist wrote:
opal wrote:
Shepherd, not SHEPARD.

Ummmm. The Japanese are ILLEGALLY killing PROTECTED whales in AUSTRALIAN waters, they have been doing it in international waters for lord knows how long under the loophole that it is "Scientific research." Everyone knows it is killing for human consumption, but the Japs just like to flick the bird at everyone else.

And Roxas, Aussies are Allies with the good old US of A aLTHOUGH THE US DIDN'T WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN WWII UNTIL THAT OLD PEARL HARBOUR INCIDENT DID THEY? Who was that? The Japanese I think.


'Japs?' Wow, way to use a bigoted ethnic slur. If you did a little research you'd find most Japanese are opposed to whaling these days so maybe next time think a little before you start making offensive generalisations.

http://www.celsias.com/article/economic ... ic-and-it/


That's a good point. I remember reading in the past that they have a huge amount of whale meat stored up because it doesn't really sell that well.

I wonder if one reason they keep whaling is to preserve the right to do so in case they need to do so in the future.

As far as impact, it is quite possible that whaling is far from the largest impact on the oceans from Japan. Their deep sea fishing boats apparently use enormous drift nets that can be nearly two miles long that indiscriminately catch everything around have drawn enormous amounts of criticism.



awesomeautist
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 124

01 Mar 2013, 4:56 am

Roxas_XIII wrote:
eric76 wrote:
The Sea Shepherds lie with impunity. The truth means nothing to them. It is all spin.

For example, they willingly ram Japanese ships and then claim that the Japanese ship rammed them.

The history of the Sea Shepherds includes their sinking ships.

1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaling vessel “Sierra”, causing considerable damage. “Sierra” survives attack.

1980: The IWC at its meeting in Brighton, United Kingdom, assigns high-level protection to two Canadian Government delegates after Watson threatened to kill them for voting against a moratorium on sperm whales. Delegates given Royal Canadian Mounted Police protection until their return home to Canada.

1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility. Investigation shows limpet mines used to blow up the vessel.

1981: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga.

...

1986: Sea Shepherd attempts to stop Faroe Islands pilot whale harvest. Using rifles, Sea Shepherd activists shoot at Faroe Islands police in an attempt to sink their rubber dinghies. The vessel “Sea Shepherd” was ordered to leave Faroese territorial waters. The police report of 7 October 1986 states: “One of the rubber dinghies was attacked directly by a “Speed Line” line rifle. The attack … endangered the lives of the police crewmembers ... and signal flares containing phosphorous was thrown at the police. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used “toads” (rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends) against the rubber dinghies … petrol was poured over the side of the ship and signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in an attempt to set the petrol on fire.”

1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to a whaling station. (This act of violence was carried out after Iceland stopped whaling in line with the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling.) Attack carried out by Sea Shepherd members Rodney A. Coronado and David Howitt. (Coronado linked to Animal Liberation Front and arrested eight years later by United States FBI for his part in an ALF attack on Michigan State University research laboratory. Charges included use of an explosive device, theft and arson.)

...

1991: A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports that Sea Shepherd, some of whose crew were armed with rifles, rammed his vessel causing considerable damage.

1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing.” Outside magazine (Sept. 1991). Paul Watson admits there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” Watson tells the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempts at ramming three Costa Rican fishing vessels. In a written complaint to the local authorities the fishermen report that the Sea Shepherd crew shot at them with bullets containing a red substance, hitting two of them and causing them great pain.

1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempt at scuttling the whaling and fishing vessel “Nybræna” at her moorings in the Lofoten Islands, northern Norway. Attack committed by Paul Watson, girlfriend Lisa DiStefano and one other Sea Shepherd member. Watson later states: “The scuttling of the Nybræna was not a terrorist or criminal act. We were responsible for removing an instrument of death and destruction without causing death or injury.” Charges laid against Watson, who fails to turn up in court. Watson convicted in absentia and sentenced to 120 days in prison.

1992: Sea Shepherd vessel “Whales Forever” collides with Norwegian Coast Guard vessel “Andenes” on July 4. Charges against Paul Watson include negligent navigation, refusal to leave Norwegian waters on orders of the Coast Guard and transmitting false distress signals. (Tape supplied)

1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel. Sea Shepherd crew do not carry out the order, but instead fire a shot across the bow of the Japanese vessel. The Japanese vessel does not stop. (Recorded by Yorkshire Television Documentary “Defenders of the Wild – Ocean Rider”.)

1993: Paul Watson claims in an open letter to the people of Norway that Sea Shepherd has sunk eight ships and rammed and damaged a further six vessels. In the same letter, he states: “The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is a law abiding organization. We rigidly adhere to and respect the laws of nature or lex natura. We hold the position that the laws of ecology take precedence over the laws designed by nation states to protect corporate interests … the smell of guilt is already a stench in the nostrils of God.”

...

2002: Watson tells Animal Rights 2002 Conference in Washington DC that if a person dies from one of his actions, he would consider it “collateral damage”. He believes it is not possible to “commit violence against non-sentient objects. Property damage is not violence.”


Watson and the crews involved and those funding these activities have no respect for the law or for others. If life was fair, they would all rot in jail.



That bastard. Seriously, that pisses me off. Sorry to say this Watson, but you're wrong. If I took a Stinger anti-air missile to an airliner as it passed overhead, it wouldn't matter if I was intending to damage the plane or kill the people inside, because regardless of which outcome was my goal, I'd still be responsible for the death of the passengers as well as the property damage to the plane.

So yeah, there is no way you can justify that. Or perhaps you were referring to the crew of the Japanese vessels as non-sentient? Or perhaps even the entirety of the Japanese themselves? That's even worse at that point. I can't say I know much about whales - for all I know they may be sentient - but humans are too, and trying to paint them as non-sentient to justify violence against them is like trying to paint African-Americans as lower forms of life to justify slavery, or Jews as such to justify the Holocaust. Oh, and did I mention that viewpoint is totally racist? Well, I'm sure I don't need to, because EVERYONE ELSE CAN SEE THAT.

I'm still surprised the Japanese government is putting up with this BS. Here's what they need to do. They need to have some kind of naval vessel on standby, one preferably matched to the average class of ships that the Sea Shepards use (anything bigger than a destroyer would probably be unable to do any damage.) The warships stay out in international waters while the fishing vessels do their thing. If the Sea Shepards attack, the naval vessel will intervene and tell them to stand down. If they refuse, then the naval vessel blows up their sh** and sends every last one of them to Davy Jones' locker where they belong.

If they're worried about Australia's response to this, they shouldn't be. The fact of the matter is, no self-respecting 1st world country would want to freely admit that they're consorting with terrorists. Just because they're flying an Australian flag does not mean they necessarily answer to their government, and if the Sea Shepards are going to declare war on the Japanese Maritime SDF, then I'm pretty sure that gives Japan the right to bypass Article 9 of their constitution and respond in kind. And if Australia had any sense in their heads, they'd stay the f**k out of it. The Sea Shepards are terrorists, their actions violate international and maritime law, and seeing as they're based out of Australia, it is Australia's responsibility to handle these violations, and if they refuse to do so then other countries will. I'm sure they may make a big fuss about it at the next UN summit, but there is nothing really more than that they can do, and Goddess help them if they have the audacity to declare war on Japan, because not only does that give Japan the right to temporarily forego Article 9 and tend to their defense, but they also happen to be allied to the most powerful nation on Earth, both militarily and economically, the f**** U S of A. And it doesn't seem like America is too sympathetic to the Sea Shepards so trying to justify military action against one of their allies as retaliation for military action against a group that has all but been declared unlawful bordering on terrorist, is not gonna fly. And let's not forget that the US still maintains a sizable military presence in Japanese waters out of their bases in Okinawa, etc. Mess with the eagle, you're gonna get the talons.


Exactly. As far as I'm concerned the Australian government needs to pull its collective finger out and do something about these pirates/terrorists. They shouldn't be flying the Australian flag and they shouldn't be operating out of Australian ports. Funny how the Australian government does everything it can to prevent refugees entering its waters yet allows terrorists to operate with impunity on the high seas.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,254
Location: Seattle-ish

01 Mar 2013, 5:21 am

I wonder if they'll offer a bounty? They do live in my neck of the woods, and I occasionally see them around, since the tattoos they sport make them kind of noticeable.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Wrackspurt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 733

01 Mar 2013, 5:30 am

"Pirates", someones been watching too many Disney movies or simply needs to realize its 2013... that's ridiculous. A grown man and judge.. Are they supposed to pretend they are insulted or just laugh hysterically?

Either way the protected whales swimming in protected waters are still being slaughtered. jap whalers haven't lost one single crew member to the Sea Shepherd. The Sea Shepherd are the only ones with the balls to protect and stand up for them and highlight the laws protecting them.



Roxas_XIII
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jan 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217
Location: Laramie, WY

01 Mar 2013, 5:39 am

opal wrote:
Shepherd, not SHEPARD.

Ummmm. The Japanese are ILLEGALLY killing PROTECTED whales in AUSTRALIAN waters, they have been doing it in international waters for lord knows how long under the loophole that it is "Scientific research." Everyone knows it is killing for human consumption, but the Japs just like to flick the bird at everyone else.

And Roxas, Aussies are Allies with the good old US of A aLTHOUGH THE US DIDN'T WANT TO GET INVOLVED IN WWII UNTIL THAT OLD PEARL HARBOUR INCIDENT DID THEY? Who was that? The Japanese I think.


Um, opal, I don't know what your f*****g problem is, but for the record I have an aunt and cousin who are Japanese, and even despite that, I have a thing against racism in general. And seeing as you just dropped a racial slur against the Japanese, I will afford you this one warning. If you say that word again in my presence, I WILL HUNT YOU DOWN.

With that out of the way, I will say this... I'm not going to argue about the legality or morality of whaling, because that is not the issue here. What the issue is, is you have a group of militant extremists that are attacking civilian vessels with what can be considered lethal force, and you have a country that refuses to act to prosecute these terrorists despite their having full knowledge of the illegality of their actions. That is the main problem, and we need to address this issue first and foremost. Hunting whales is both morally and legally a gray area, seeing as there are certain allowances written into international treaties that allow for a small number of whales to be taken annually, and when you consider Japan is an island nation whose primary agricultural resource is seafood, and that their culture has a long history of using sea creatures as a food source, is it really that big of a deal? I think attacking civilian ships with the intent to destroy property, and without any consideration for the lives of the crew, and justifying casualties in the name of some idealistic crusade, is a far worse crime than hunting whales.

As far as Australia is concerned, my point I was trying to make was that they ARE allies with the US, and so they know better than to stir up s**t as far as diplomatic relationships go. Australia refuses to prosecute the Sea Sheperds, no doubt because they're getting some manner of benefit from letting them do their thing. However, if Japan sends their SDF ships, or if the US sends naval forces on their behalf, to quell potential acts of terrorism by Sea Sheperd ships, even if they end up crossing Australian waters I doubt Australia will have much of a case against them, diplomatically speaking, and they know better than to go with the military option.

But regardless, I refuse to debate with someone who criticizes their opponent for simple spelling mistakes and drops racial slurs at the slightest provocation, so I'll be exiting this thread now. Feel free to argue your case with me some other time, once you can actually do so in a proper manner. And remember what I said about that word, I don't ever want to hear that from you again.


_________________
"Yeah, so this one time, I tried playing poker with tarot cards... got a full house, and about four people died." ~ Unknown comedian

Happy New Year from WP's resident fortune-teller! May the cards be ever in your favor.


awesomeautist
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 124

01 Mar 2013, 7:26 am

Wrackspurt wrote:
"Pirates", someones been watching too many Disney movies or simply needs to realize its 2013... that's ridiculous. A grown man and judge.. Are they supposed to pretend they are insulted or just laugh hysterically?

Either way the protected whales swimming in protected waters are still being slaughtered. jap whalers haven't lost one single crew member to the Sea Shepherd. The Sea Shepherd are the only ones with the balls to protect and stand up for them and highlight the laws protecting them.


Great, another racist. 'Jap' is an offensive racial slur and the Sea Shepherd terrorists are engaged in violent illegal activities on the high seas. Next time, if you want to be taken seriously, keep your racist tendencies under wraps.



trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

01 Mar 2013, 8:00 am

About the word 'Jap', I looked it up on wikipedia and it says it is not offensive everywhere. Perhaps the Australian poster did not mean to cause offense? I don't know how it is in Australia, but apparently a news service over there uses the term.
In Dutch it is used to refer to the Japanese concentration camps in Asia, 'jappenkampen'.



Yuzu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,169
Location: Bay area, California

01 Mar 2013, 9:24 am

trollcatman wrote:
About the word 'Jap', I looked it up on wikipedia and it says it is not offensive everywhere. Perhaps the Australian poster did not mean to cause offense? I don't know how it is in Australia, but apparently a news service over there uses the term.
In Dutch it is used to refer to the Japanese concentration camps in Asia, 'jappenkampen'.


Did you really read her post? Only the people with ill feeling towards the Japanese use that word. I am Japanese and it is very offensive to me. I guess Wikipedia is not always right.

There is at least one other Australian poster who made racist comments about the Japanese. What's up with that? The Japanese people in general love Australia. And Japan is Australia's biggest beef export market. Why all this hate?

I know there is one Japanese poster on this site who lives in Australia but he never explicitly says that he is Japanese. I wonder if that's because having lived in Australia, he's learned that it is better to hide his background to avoid racists.



trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

01 Mar 2013, 10:22 am

Yuzu wrote:
trollcatman wrote:
About the word 'Jap', I looked it up on wikipedia and it says it is not offensive everywhere. Perhaps the Australian poster did not mean to cause offense? I don't know how it is in Australia, but apparently a news service over there uses the term.
In Dutch it is used to refer to the Japanese concentration camps in Asia, 'jappenkampen'.


Did you really read her post? Only the people with ill feeling towards the Japanese use that word. I am Japanese and it is very offensive to me. I guess Wikipedia is not always right.

There is at least one other Australian poster who made racist comments about the Japanese. What's up with that? The Japanese people in general love Australia. And Japan is Australia's biggest beef export market. Why all this hate?

I know there is one Japanese poster on this site who lives in Australia but he never explicitly says that he is Japanese. I wonder if that's because having lived in Australia, he's learned that it is better to hide his background to avoid racists.


Yeah, the rest of her post wasn't very friendly either. She could have critized the whalers without bashing the Japanese.

Perhaps the hate is from the war? Not a good reason to hate the Japanese of today, but it might be an explanation. There is also anti-Japanese sentiment in China. I knew a Dutch man who had been in a Japanese concentration camp as a kid and he would not buy any Japanese products. Aside from that, attitudes towards Japanese are fairly positive here.



awesomeautist
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 124

01 Mar 2013, 10:40 am

trollcatman wrote:
Yuzu wrote:
trollcatman wrote:
About the word 'Jap', I looked it up on wikipedia and it says it is not offensive everywhere. Perhaps the Australian poster did not mean to cause offense? I don't know how it is in Australia, but apparently a news service over there uses the term.
In Dutch it is used to refer to the Japanese concentration camps in Asia, 'jappenkampen'.


Did you really read her post? Only the people with ill feeling towards the Japanese use that word. I am Japanese and it is very offensive to me. I guess Wikipedia is not always right.

There is at least one other Australian poster who made racist comments about the Japanese. What's up with that? The Japanese people in general love Australia. And Japan is Australia's biggest beef export market. Why all this hate?

I know there is one Japanese poster on this site who lives in Australia but he never explicitly says that he is Japanese. I wonder if that's because having lived in Australia, he's learned that it is better to hide his background to avoid racists.


Yeah, the rest of her post wasn't very friendly either. She could have critized the whalers without bashing the Japanese.

Perhaps the hate is from the war? Not a good reason to hate the Japanese of today, but it might be an explanation. There is also anti-Japanese sentiment in China. I knew a Dutch man who had been in a Japanese concentration camp as a kid and he would not buy any Japanese products. Aside from that, attitudes towards Japanese are fairly positive here.


I doubt she knows very much about 'The War.' Just a bigoted Aussie redneck. And lets be honest here, the word 'Jap' was meant in a derogatory way so lets not pretend that she was doing anything other than being deliberately offensive.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 86
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Mar 2013, 11:08 am

Dillogic wrote:
You ain't a pirate if you don't roll out the cannons and board the enemy vessel with pistol and cutlass.



Au contraire! A judge has ruled that the Sea Shepherds -are- pirates. They are (in the legal sense) pirates and they can be dealth with as pirates. Keel-hauled and then hanged from the highest yardarm. Or at least shot dead or harpooned.

ruveyn



awesomeautist
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 124

01 Mar 2013, 11:27 am

ruveyn wrote:
Dillogic wrote:
You ain't a pirate if you don't roll out the cannons and board the enemy vessel with pistol and cutlass.



Au contraire! A judge has ruled that the Sea Shepherds -are- pirates. They are (in the legal sense) pirates and they can be dealth with as pirates. Keel-hauled and then hanged from the highest yardarm. Or at least shot dead or harpooned.

ruveyn


Cue Captain Pugwash Theme Music...



trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

01 Mar 2013, 11:44 am

awesomeautist wrote:
I doubt she knows very much about 'The War.' Just a bigoted Aussie redneck. And lets be honest here, the word 'Jap' was meant in a derogatory way so lets not pretend that she was doing anything other than being deliberately offensive.


I think you're right. But she did mention Pearl Harbor for some reason.