Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sundowner on January 06, 2010, 01:13:06 PM
-
Looks to me like the batboat cut in front of the whaler bow.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3961607/protest-ship-smashed-in-whaling-clash
SYDNEY — A conservation group's boat had its bow sheared off and was in danger of sinking as it took on water Wednesday after it was struck by a Japanese whaling ship in the frigid waters of Antarctica, the group said.
The boat's six crew members were safely transferred to another of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's vessels, the newly commissioned Bob Barker. The boat is named for the American game show host who donated $5 million to buy it.
The clash was the most serious in the past several years, during which the Sea Shepherd has sent vessels into far-southern waters to try to harass the Japanese fleet into ceasing its annual whale hunt.....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582115,00.html?test=latestnews
Regards,
Sun
-
Those people are endangering lives. PITA is full of mental midgets like that.
-
Holy Hotards Batman! I swear if not for the black tights and cape. I would've thought they were pirates arrr. Very piss poor driving there Robin. Your fired!
-
I just had to :rofl when I saw this.They tried to say that the ship wasnt moving but you can CLEARLY see the engines pumping water out the back. Epic Fail.
-
Haha they got exactly what they deserved. They are throwing stink bombs and getting ropes wrapped in propellers. So the fishing vessel has every right to do what it needs to stop them.
:rofl :rofl :banana:
-
The claim is that the fishing boat rammed them. That makes as much sense as the chinese claiming a turbo prop plane caught and rammed a supersonic fighter.
I hope that frickin speed boat sank.
-
How can the bigger boat ram the smaller one? Law on the water is the bigger boat always has the right of way. This is just an example of why. The smaller boat will almost always loose.
It sucks that the Earthrace had to be the one getting crushed though.
-
Looked to me like the batboat was idling and the whale boat turned in and rammed it.
-
The 'Sea Shepherd' people have a history of intentionally injuring themselves and blaming it on the whalers...
-
Looked to me like the batboat was idling and the whale boat turned in and rammed it.
yup, either that or the protest boat pulled the ol' "ill stop infront of you and your not supposed to run me over" trick
besides they hav to save the whales..........WTF! is that unicorn doin there
(http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u149/dolphindeb_1956/Dolphindeb%20Yuwie/Dolphin20Unicorn.jpg)
-
Yeah...like that one episode where the captain "got shot" or the one where they boarded a boat and then claimed the Whalers captured them and were holding them unlawfully. God bless South Park for making this show funny to watch.
-
The 'Sea Shepherd' people have a history of intentionally injuring themselves and blaming it on the whalers...
See the southpark episode on the subject :lol
In any event, at first it looked like the "batboat" was dead in the water, but close to the collision you can see that its moving forward, more or less matching the course of the whaling ship but at a slightly slower speed. Then they came together. It seems to me its only not the environmentalists fault if they had no steering. Otherwise the collision is avoided if they merely veer right.
Hopefully Whale Wars won't make me watch 10 episodes of boredom before they get to this episode.
Edit: after watching it 3 more times, they were clearly on a collision course, but the environmentalist boat was moving forward and failed to steer out of the way. They may have even been steering slightly left. Regardless of who intended to collide, it was a perfectly executed crash in that no one got hurt and the small boat was disabled. Either the whalers wanted to ram them to stop the harassment or the environmentalists wanted some free pub and managed to get it without anyone getting hurt. Good clean high seas drama either way imo.
-
Rules of the Sea
Right of way
Boats Overtaking – A power boat overtaking another power boat is the “burdened” boat and must take evasive action
keeping clear astern of the “privileged” boat to avoid collision. If there is room the overtaking boat may pass to port of the
“privileged” boat and call out “passing to port.”
The batboat is clearly overtaking another powered boat. It should have passed on the port side. The batboat was on the starboard side.
-
Looked to me like the batboat was idling and the whale boat turned in and rammed it.
Watch the video carefully, the batboat moved slowly in on starboard, at the end of the video you can see the whaler was turning hard to port, the batboat then accelerated into it's path.
Clearly staged by the greenies. So now we have bat guano polluting our southern oceans.
-
The whalers still suck.
-
Looked to me like the batboat was idling and the whale boat turned in and rammed it.
No way can that huge whaling boat turn that fast. The batboat was idling right in it's path. Those whalers need to grind up some smelly whale guts and feed it through those water cannons.
-
I don't condone or like what those ecofools are doing down there but the Japanese are abusing loopholes in international law to conduct there whale fishing. Course the ecofools are also violating international maritime law so whatever.
-
:lol
Only took a few episodes of Whale Wars for me to start rooting for the whalers.
I don't agree with what the whalers are doing but I definitely have to crack a smile when something like this happens.
-
Whaler ship cuts USS PETA Batboat in two
All i can say to that is :aok :aok :aok :rofl :rofl :rofl
I truly hate what the Japanese are doing, but i dislike these jokers even more
-
Who should I cheer for? The Japanese fishing illegally or the terrorists? Did I ever mention my dream to build a midget sub and torpedo the Rainbow Warrior?
-
:rofl :rofl
Japaneses pwn
-
I would venture to say the acts of these so called activists is pure terrorism. They're purposefully endangering the lives of others in order to force the japanese government to succumb to their demands. They are pointing lasers at the crew, throwing liquids on the decks to make them extremely slippery, crashing with the whalers and so on forth.
I've seen two videos of the crash: one from the whaler and another from an another ecoterrorist boat. By judging from the other terrorist ship's footage they were trying to stage the accident on the whaler and present their video as the single proof of the crash. It's silly to use a million dollar carbon boat for that though, you'd think a cheaper dinghy would've done the same; perhaps they wanted to cash in million bucks from the whaler's company to make a dent on the business.
When looking at the video by the terrorists you may get the impression that the whaler was turning to right to ram the batboat, because the left side of the whaler becomes constantly more exposed. I've also heard that the terrorists have said it turned right to ram their boat. However, the other terrorist ship was crossing the whaler's path from right to left while the whaler was still going straight, until the batboat suddenly throttled up and ran in front of the whaler.
As to why aren't these terrorists jailed is beyond me. They're endangering everyone's life out there with their stunts and besides that also inept seamen. Instead they're nearly hailed as heroes by the press.
-
2 words
RAMMING SPEED
-
5 words
RAMMING SPEED DONT LOOK BACK!! :rofl
-
Looked to me like the batboat was idling and the whale boat turned in and rammed it.
You must've been experiencing lag. :noid
-
(http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m141/Drs109/failboat.jpg)
-
Who should I cheer for? The Japanese fishing illegally or the terrorists? Did I ever mention my dream to build a midget sub and torpedo the Rainbow Warrior?
Let's not forget how the last Rainbow Warrior met it's end- limpet mines on the hull planted by French special forces. :banana:
Say what you will about the French, but because of that they shall always have my respect.
-
Those eco terrorists need to all be executed.
Whaling does suck though.
-
Whilst I agree that something should be done in regards to the "research" being done by the Japanese (I couldn't imagine Steve Irwin Killing a crocodile in order to see how sharp its teeth at). I think the crew of the Sea Shepherd (especially the Captain) are rather stupid in both their tactics and practices.
-
We need to start pumping out hunting permits for PETA members and then feed them to the polar bears.
-
Let's not forget how the last Rainbow Warrior met it's end- limpet mines on the hull planted by French special forces. :banana:
Say what you will about the French, but because of that they shall always have my respect.
While it was moored in a harbour, killing one engineer. At the time greenpeace were using her to protest the use of the south pacific for nuclear testing. TBH it's one of the few times I support them, from an age when they weren't the corporate entity they are now.
The french agents also got caught very quickly, and it was an embarrassment for the french government for committing an act of terrorism on foreign soil.
So you support murdering terrorists? You think taking a life of a engineer protesting the open testing of nuclear weapons was a good thing? I think the term for supporting this begins with the letter A and finishes with hole.
-
Do you think the USM Air Wing could accidently loose off a Maverick AGM at what looks like "a suspicsous vessel". They would be doing the world a favour, I am all for wildlife conservation but when a group of sweetheartbag wannabes want to turn it into a political statement or a press storm they should be taught a very hard and rather terminal lesson.
:mad:
-
While it was moored in a harbour, killing one engineer. At the time greenpeace were using her to protest the use of the south pacific for nuclear testing. TBH it's one of the few times I support them, from an age when they weren't the corporate entity they are now.
The french agents also got caught very quickly, and it was an embarrassment for the french government for committing an act of terrorism on foreign soil.
So you support murdering terrorists? You think taking a life of a engineer protesting the open testing of nuclear weapons was a good thing? I think the term for supporting this begins with the letter A and finishes with hole.
Nuclear testing is a dangerous buisness and it is true that the protest was valid. However when they were planning on violating a military installation and holding up important military resources and research of a country under constant threat of invasion (NATO Soviet Invasion Scenario) you can see the logic supporting the removal of the Rainbow Warrior.
Their intention was to sink a boat, not murder someone. Although I do not condone or accept the death of an innocent man I think the French were within their rights and showed tactical sense in their actions.
-
What the french did was illegal and wrong from the beginning, let alone the murder. The activists should have been apprehended if they were planning to commit a crime, or when caught doing so. Surely they could have tracked a single vessel, which was such a threat that they had to covertly sink it.
However these SS activists are terrorists and they should be jailed. With constant harrassing of other ships at sea with life threatening consequences there shouldn't be any problem to convict them. I would be really interested to know why they're still free to go as they please. Are the officials afraid of touching them due to the negative media attention it would cause? It's even worse if so - terrorists having an influence on the enforcement of law.
-
Whaler ship cuts USS PETA Batboat in two
All i can say to that is :aok :aok :aok :rofl :rofl :rofl
I truly hate what the Japanese are doing, but i dislike these jokers even more
Word.
And they now got what exactly what they deserved.
-
yup, either that or the protest boat pulled the ol' "ill stop infront of you and your not supposed to run me over" trick
besides they hav to save the whales..........WTF! is that unicorn doin there
(http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u149/dolphindeb_1956/Dolphindeb%20Yuwie/Dolphin20Unicorn.jpg)
They probably think it's a horse with a seat on it's head. :rolleyes: :O
-
Those eco terrorists need to all be executed.
Whaling does suck though.
+1
-
Death to ALL terrorist! Foreign or Domestic, Muslim or PETA, if you can't control yourself and act with some decency then you need to think over your plans. I ponder this, the leader of the PETA group is a diabetic, so for all of you diabetics out there, and I am sure there are a few that play the game, where does insulin come from?
Another thought, they want us to treat animals "humanely" right, well first it has to be a human to be treated humanely.
Don't get me wrong I am all for severely beating anyone who abuses animals, whether it be dog fighting, or malnourished horses or other animals, but don't tell me I can't eat meat because of they way it is killed, the spotted white owl taste like chicken! :neener:
-
people still hunt whales because..................?
-
The Japanese hunt them for "research", but the are hunting them for meat.
Ingrid Newkirk doesn't have diabetes. You are thinking of Mary Beth Sweetland(Director of Research & Rescue, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and yes she uses insulin that is derived from animals. PETA needs to be declared as a terrorist organization since they have close ties to the ALF and ELF.
-
Watch the video carefully, the batboat moved slowly in on starboard, at the end of the video you can see the whaler was turning hard to port, the batboat then accelerated into it's path.
After watching it a few times I agree. At first the batboat was idling, but then you can see it accellerates into the path of the whaling ship. Not a very smart thing to do. (Edit: I just saw the other video on CNN showing the collision from a distance. The Japanese whaling ship appears to turn into the batboat. So maybe both parties here have some fault)
Reminds me of the guy protesting nucs in California who laid down in front of the train. Train couldn't stop in time, protester loses legs. Or the protester in Isreal laying down in front of a bulldozer, then got crushed to death.
As far as calling these protesters 'terrorists' I think is a stretch, morons yes, but terrorists not so much. That term is best saved for the bombers and head choppers.
These ubergreenies throw stink bombs and foul ship propellers, but don't use lethal force. I havn't heard a report of one Japanese whaler getting so much as a stubbed toe. For that matter, they don't seem very successful at stopping the whaling either.
Speaking of the Japanese, doesn't anyone have a problem with them commercial whaling under the guise of 'research?' I mean lets call a spade a spade here right?
-
After watching it a few times I agree. At first the batboat was idling, but then you can see it accellerates into the path of the whaling ship. Not a very smart thing to do. (Edit: I just saw the other video on CNN showing the collision from a distance. The Japanese whaling ship appears to turn into the batboat. So maybe both parties here have some fault)
Read my post about the whaler "turning right": http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,281370.msg3549459.html#msg3549459
The right turn is an illusion caused by the perspective changing due to diagonally moving platform. The other video is from a ship Bob Barker, which is also owned by Sea Shepherd. I suspect it was staged to look like the whaler intentionally rammed the other ship.
As far as calling these protesters 'terrorists' I think is a stretch, morons yes, but terrorists not so much. That term is best saved for the bombers and head choppers.
They are not just throwing stink bombs or fouling ship propellers, but constantly causing life threatening situations. They are also throwing slicky liquids on the decks of the whalers so the crew couldn't operate on the decks. Losing propulsion at sea can be extremely hazardous to the lives of the crew. Seashepherds are also known to have crashed at least once before on a whaler and they did so intentionally - also back then claiming it was the whaler's fault.
As long as they're putting lives at dangers they are terrorists. Terrorism isn't simply to restricted to the direct act or threats of killing of people, but also includes other violence and the threat of death or violence. The constant close by harrassing and the other acts of the activists puts them all in very real danger.
What the japanese do may not be right by our standards, but that does not right the wrong. On top of that the japanese are not exactly breaking the law or treaties either. They're only breaking our morals. How would you like if the japanese would come over to tell us how to do things and excuse their activist terrorism with it?
-
So you support murdering terrorists? You think taking a life of a engineer protesting the open testing of nuclear weapons was a good thing? I think the term for supporting this begins with the letter A and finishes with hole.
From Wikipedia:
"One of the twelve people on board, photographer Fernando Pereira, returned to the ship after the first explosion to attempt to retrieve his equipment, and was killed when the ship was sunk by the second larger explosion."
Returning to - and going below decks on - a holed ship taking on water is as pants-on-head retarded as running back into a burning building to save your pet parakeet, and I have no sympathy for somebody who got themselves killed through such stupidity.
I did my research before I posted, I suggest you do the same in the future.
-
I ponder this, the leader of the PETA group is a diabetic, so for all of you diabetics out there, and I am sure there are a few that play the game, where does insulin come from?
He's probably like me and uses synthetic insulin.
ack-ack
-
So... when are they gonna sack up, stop messing with the Japanese, and start harassing your average American farmers for their brutal treatment of chickens & cows? :)
-
Looked to me like the batboat was idling and the whale boat turned in and rammed it.
look closer at the engine pumping water and the wake behind the batboat
i still want to cook a steak on the steps of PETA HQ. That is one of my dreams
-
So you support murdering terrorists?
Yessir. Not only that I think we ought to put it on pay-per-view, and make sure the terrorist is defiled in the most cruel manner so as to serve as a warning to others.
Something about a bacon-wrapped 0.50 cal round and burial inside a pig carcass that just makes me believe the percieved "rewards" would no longer outweigh the sacrifice.
That being said, I don't think these "eco-terrorists" are on the same level and should really be considered "terrorists, they're mostly just morons and criminals. Perhaps a long stay in prison, hard labor, no parole. Unless they directly cause physical harm or loss of life, then the deserve whatever they are dealt.
-
I'm against all forms of protest, I just don't know how to express it. :headscratch:
-
These idiots are no better than the guys that were spikeing trees.Sooner or later someone is gonna get killed.
-
I'm against all forms of protest, I just don't know how to express it. :headscratch:
sit back :cheers: and watch the idiots kill each other
-
sit back :cheers: and watch the idiots kill each other
Pretty much. What I replied first is an old Mitch Hedburg joke. I don't condone what the Whaler's are doing, but the protesters, well... :huh
-
From Wikipedia:
"One of the twelve people on board, photographer Fernando Pereira, returned to the ship after the first explosion to attempt to retrieve his equipment, and was killed when the ship was sunk by the second larger explosion."
Returning to - and going below decks on - a holed ship taking on water is as pants-on-head retarded as running back into a burning building to save your pet parakeet, and I have no sympathy for somebody who got themselves killed through such stupidity.
I did my research before I posted, I suggest you do the same in the future.
So you think 911 was a good effort then and all those NYFD firefighters deserved to die.
-
So you think 911 was a good effort then and all those NYFD firefighters deserved to die.
so your saying the NYFD gentlemen that died on 911 was "retarded"?
re red his post then edit yours <facepalm>
-
so your saying the NYFD gentlemen that died on 911 was "retarded"?
re red his post then edit yours <facepalm>
I'm not, I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to support a clear act of terrorism sponsored by a government that cost someone their life.
-
I'm not, I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to support a clear act of terrorism sponsored by a government that cost someone their life.
ok im done. face meet palm, wall hear words
-
Unless they directly cause physical harm or loss of life, then the deserve whatever they are dealt.
Well, they try to throw nets into the props of the whalers to immobilize them. If you get immobilized in heavy swells, you may just be in some serious danger in a hurry. That right there should allow the japanese ships to light them up with automatic weapons.
-
He's probably like me and uses synthetic insulin.
ack-ack
but where did the synthetic originate?
-
Read my post about the whaler "turning right": http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,281370.msg3549459.html#msg3549459
The right turn is an illusion caused by the perspective changing due to diagonally moving platform. The other video is from a ship Bob Barker, which is also owned by Sea Shepherd. I suspect it was staged to look like the whaler intentionally rammed the other ship.
Yeah I read your post. You identify the batboat guys as 'terrorists' like 9 times. Completely objective it is not.
If you look at the second video, shot from the third ship filming the collision, you can see the whaling boat makes are hard turn to starboard then rams. You can even see the bow spray from the whaler along the port side, indicating a sharp turn to starboard. Your explaination for this is that the film was 'staged'.
Whether or not the hard turn with intent to collide by the whaler is appropriate or not is another debate.
Clearly though, ramming a smaller ship on purpose is using deadly force.
-
but where did the synthetic originate?
Not from animals, that is why I use synthetic insulin. It's created using recombinant DNA techniques and not derived at all from animals, in fact most insulin used by diabetics today is 'synthetic insulin' as it is much more of a closer match to 'human insulin' than animal based insulin. The synthetic insulin I use, Humulin, is derived from the E coli bacteria.
Using synthetic insulin also solves the problems that some diabetics like me have that have allergic reactions to animal based insulin.
ack-ack
-
LOL ... too funny ... If one cannot tell that the Japanese ship deliberately turned into the Ady Gil after looking at both film viewpoints ... you should go see an eye doctor.
The Ady Gil did appear to move into the Japanese boat ... ONLY when it realized that it was going to be rammed and tried to gun it to possibly get out of the way.
Those Japanese researchers (yeah right ... I got a bridge for sale too) are destroying one of the most valuable resources on the planet and yes they are breaking laws doing it ... they are researching (hunting) in an internationally defined conservation zone ... but it is only the Sea Shepards that give a rats arse.
I watched the whole Whale Wars series last year and came out with the conclusion that the members on those ships are comical and incompetent at best when trying to accomplish their task.
Terrorist ... OMFGz ... they are far from terrorist ... they only people that got hurt during the Whale Wars series was Sea Shepard members and it was by their own hand ... allowing that Japanese ship to even get that close to ram them is just another example of what a Fluster Cluck these guys are ... Never the less, throwing stink bombs and trying to foul the props of the whale killers hardly scratches the surface of the definition of terrorist.
I don't find it incredible that some don't agree with what the Sea Shepards are trying to do, but rather find it incredible that most that have posted seem to condone what the Japanese are doing to the Whale population.
-
Clearly though, ramming a smaller ship on purpose is using deadly force.
And actively trying to leave crews stranded in the middle of the Pacific is not.. ?
-
LOL ... too funny ... If one cannot tell that the Japanese ship deliberately turned into the Ady Gil after looking at both film viewpoints ... you should go see an eye doctor.
The Ady Gil did appear to move into the Japanese boat ... ONLY when it realized that it was going to be rammed and tried to gun it to possibly get out of the way.
My eyes are just fine for the video, but you need to also think three dimensionally to figure out what's actually going on. The camera (on the video from ahead) is not sitting still on the ocean, but moving diagonally across the path of the whaler. If there'd be anything in the background you would see it's simply the constant change of perspective giving the illusion of the whaler turning to right.
Towards the end of the whaler's video you can see there's no zig-zaging in the wake. Any intentional turn to right would have been visible on the wake before the wake begins to turn left.
-
they are researching (hunting) in an internationally defined conservation zone ... but it is only the Sea Shepards that give a rats arse.
and what happens when sea shepherd create an accident that ends up spilling pollutants into the southern ocean?
-
The camera (on the video from ahead) is not sitting still on the ocean, but moving diagonally across the path of the whaler. If there'd be anything in the background you would see it's simply the constant change of perspective giving the illusion of the whaler turning to right.
I know what you are trying to say but you're incorrect. When looking at the video from ahead, you see the whaler make a turn to starboard, then straighten out, then ram, then continue straight.
If this turn was an optical illusion due to the camera moving from left to right (relative to camera), you would not see the whale boat straighten out, you would continue to see the port side of the whale boat.
This, in conjunction with the camera on the whaler, shows an intentional turn to port in order to ram the batboat by the whaler.
One can argue that these batboat guys had it coming, I've got to admit I snickered at the video myself. :x
But it is intellectually disengenuous to claim it was anything other than an intentional ram only because you empathize with the whalers.
-
I do not agree with the what the whalers are doing, they are destroying a resorce and killing endangered animals. Shame on them. On the other hand there has to be a better way to stop it than to have these P.E.T.A. incompitent idots out there endangering lives, and littering the seas with their sunken boats. I do not like PETA when they start painting Fur coats because they dont agree with someone for buying one they are infringing on the rites of the common person, and THAT is going to get one of them shot. Then they have a Soap box to get on and HARP about how eveil meat eaters and fur wears are. I guarentee that if they spray paint my moms full length mink coat, she will drop that PETA person in their tracks, with 2 well placed rounds. The group PETA is gaining members, and support it will not be long before they level their sights on the Beef industry, they have already tried to attack the chicken industry.
My .02
-
Any one who takes the video that was shot from the other Sea Shepherd's boats as fact are deluded. If you think that these extremist wouldn't endanger lives to save the precious animals, then you need to have a reality check. As others have said watch the rear of the batboat. You will see that the gun their engines. But you say they were trying to avoid getting rammed, well since the boat was basically still in the water why did they not put the engines in reverse or cut hard to starboard then try to not get hit. The fact of the matter is that some of these nuckleheads are members of ALF, or just don't give a rat's fart about human life as long as the precious animals are ok then they are in the right.
As for the Japanese doing something we find morally wrong. They are whaling using a loophole in international laws and treaties, which is that you can take whales for research only. The Japanese are whaling under the guise of research and once they are done with their "research" they move the carcass to processing ship so they don't have to dump it. How nice that they aren't polluting the ocean with dead whales.
I don't like what the Japanese whalers are doing but I absolutely despise what the ecoterrorist are doing. Below is a video of the oh so noble animal rights "activists" trying to "avoid" another collision.
Video of the Steve Irwin ramming one of the Japanese vessels.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_b_IYQMSvM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_b_IYQMSvM)
-
Those Japanese researchers (yeah right ... I got a bridge for sale too) are destroying one of the most valuable resources on the planet
How are whales a "resource" if they cannot be harvested? It seems to me, that if you are going to consider the animals a resource... Well... They're worthless as long as they are swimming and only become valuable when killed and turned into products...
I can understand protecting the animals simply for the sake of preventing extinction... But resource implies harvest... Just saying...
-
If this turn was an optical illusion due to the camera moving from left to right (relative to camera), you would not see the whale boat straighten out, you would continue to see the port side of the whale boat.
This, in conjunction with the camera on the whaler, shows an intentional turn to port in order to ram the batboat by the whaler.
Exactly ... nor would you see that wave explode on the port side of the whaler as it turned hard to starboard for a collision course ... had it been going straight, that wave would have dispersed on both sides of the boat.
-
As others have said watch the rear of the batboat. You will see that the gun their engines. But you say they were trying to avoid getting rammed, well since the boat was basically still in the water why did they not put the engines in reverse or cut hard to starboard then try to not get hit.
LOL ... the Ady Gil is 75 ft long ... boats that size don't turn on a dime like a Boston Whaler ... the Sea Shepards are a bunch of incompetent fools playing in an arena in which they are not very good at. Yes, throwing it in reverse would have been the better decision, but as you can see they gun the engines forward and try to turn to the starboard side ... but getting a 78 ft boat (a trimaran at that) to turn that quick just ain't gonna happen ... it will go straight before the thrust and the rudders take effect to start a coordinated turn.
It was an incident caused by two incompetent captains who should never be allowed to captain a boat ever again.
-
How are whales a "resource" if they cannot be harvested? It seems to me, that if you are going to consider the animals a resource... Well... They're worthless as long as they are swimming and only become valuable when killed and turned into products...
I can understand protecting the animals simply for the sake of preventing extinction... But resource implies harvest... Just saying...
They are a resource to the world's oceans ... they cause balance within the oceans.
I'm sure your boss considers you a resource to the company ... let me know when I can come and harvest you.
-
Just to keep things in perspective, the sea shepherd guys had a habit of failing to obey the right of way rules and appear to have regularly cut across the bows of the whalers fairly close towing ropes:
(http://www.gpforums.co.nz/attachment.php?s=&postid=6700962)
So this may have been another one of those attempts but poorly judged.
Sure the whalers sailed close, but the SS guys kept putting themselves there and aggressively attacked the whalers (I'd count trying to disable to props of a ship in the southern ocean as an attack, it's the last place you'd want to find yourself with no power).
-
Nuclear testing is a dangerous buisness and it is true that the protest was valid. However when they were planning on violating a military installation and holding up important military resources and research of a country under constant threat of invasion (NATO Soviet Invasion Scenario) you can see the logic supporting the removal of the Rainbow Warrior.
Their intention was to sink a boat, not murder someone. Although I do not condone or accept the death of an innocent man I think the French were within their rights and showed tactical sense in their actions.
They (The French) were not at war with anyone. What they did was tantamount to invading a Neutral, if not friendly (Western, Democratic) Country.
-
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fwNvIM2W9Aw/0.jpg)
diddly YOU DOLFEEEEEN AND WHHHAAALLEEEE!
-
If this turn was an optical illusion due to the camera moving from left to right (relative to camera), you would not see the whale boat straighten out, you would continue to see the port side of the whale boat.
The ship ahead is not moving fast enough to keep directly ahead of the turning whaler, once it actually turns. Regardless of the movement of the camera the left turn appears much harder than the alleged right turn. The movement of the camera makes the left turn look even less hard than it is.
-
If you cant see the morons werent looking to get a you tube clip your a bigger moron than they are. Wow. Talk about colossal failure.
-
If you cant see the morons werent looking to get a you tube clip your a bigger moron than they are. Wow. Talk about colossal failure.
:rofl :rofl
-
So you think 911 was a good effort then and all those NYFD firefighters deserved to die.
Oh, look, a false comparision, wrapping yourself in the flag, and calling me a terrorist sympathizer to boot. ("So you think 911 was a good effort," etc.) You might wanna throttle back your righteous indignation there friend, before you say something you don't mean.
As for the discussion of if the whaler rammed the Sea Shepard's boat, I posit that the weight of evidence points to a staged event by Sea Shepard: (Sources taken from a well sourced Wikipedia article: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_shepherd#Japan)
1. Sea Shepard has a well-documented history of actively seeking violent confrontation, including using ramming as a technique:
a. Sea Shepherd spent part of 1979 hunting for the whaling ship Sierra which was notorious for having undetermined ownership, ignoring whaling agreements, hunting indiscriminately, and using non-explosive harpoons.[78] To increase the effect of a ramming the bow of the Sea Shepherd was filled with approximately 100 tonnes of cement. In July, the Sierra was found off the port of Oporto, Portugal. Sea Shepherd put non-essential crew ashore and manned by three crew (Paul Watson, Peter Woof, and Jerry Doran), returned to ram and cripple the Sierra.
b. While in Lisbon in February 1980, the Sierra was sunk with limpet mines.[81] The Sierra's chief engineer, Luis Mendes, told reporters that he believed "the blast was set by crew members of the Sea Shepherd."[81] In a 2004 interview Paul Watson said, "Meanwhile, the Sierra had been repaired and was ready to return to sea. It never did so: on February 6, 1980, my crew blew the bottom out of her and permanently ended her career. We traded a ship for a ship, but it was a great trade because we also traded our ship for the lives of hundreds of whales."[82]
I want you to take SPECIAL NOTE of Paul Watson claiming responsibility for the LIMPET MINING OF A SHIP IN HARBOR TO ENSURE IT'S DESTRUCTION. Apparently they learned from the French.
c. In April 1980, explosives were used to sink the whalers Isba I and Isba II in Vigo, Spain. Watson said that the boats were "victims of magnetic mines, one of them homemade, which had been planted by the same trio that destroyed the Sierra."[83] Sea Shepherd does show these vessels on the tally of vessels "sunk" on the side of the Farley Mowat and the back of some Sea Shepherd shirts. The whalers Susan and Theresa are also shown on these tallies. No one was injured during the attacks.[33]
TWO MORE INCIDENTS of self-admittedly using explosives to sink civilian fishing vessels.
d. In the summer of 1982, Watson offered a reporter an exclusive story on the group's plan to ram a Russian vessel. The reporter informed authorities and the ramming did not take place.
e. Between December 2005 and January 2006, a crew of 43 aboard the Farley Mowat attempted to stop the Japanese whaling fleet in the Southern Ocean. During the campaign, the Farley Mowat 'sideswiped' a Japanese supply ship called the Oriental Bluebird. No damage or injuries were reported.[119] New Zealand Conservation Minister Chris Carter criticized Sea Shepherd as irresponsible for using tactics such as running into the other vessel with a "can opener" device, a seven-foot steel blade on the starboard bow designed to damage the hull of an enemy ship.
2. Despite the above, Sea Shepard has a history of blaming others for trying to attack them to stir up media sympathy:
a. Watson's public relations savvy is shown in an episode of Whale Wars when he creates an international media "storm" after two crewmembers are detained on a Japanese whaling vessel.[31] In his book, Earthforce!, Watson advises readers to make up facts and figures when they need to, and to deliver them to reporters confidently.[5] He also states that the "truth is irrelevant" due the nature of mass media.[32]
b. On January 15, 2008, after attempting to entangle the whaling vessel's propeller and throwing containers of butyric acid onto the decks,[123] two Sea Shepherd members, Benjamin Potts and Giles Lane, from the Sea Shepherd vessel MV Steve Irwin boarded the Japanese whaling vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 from a rigid-hulled inflatable boat. The pair were delivering a letter advising the Japanese that they were "whaling illegally"[124] with the hope of creating an international incident.[125] The Japanese responded by saying that the men would be held until Sea Shepherd stopped what they called "dangerous and illegal activities."[126]... The crew of the Yushin Maru No. 2 detained the men for two days, before turning them over to the Australian customs vessel MV Oceanic Viking on the orders of Japanese authorities[124]; subsequently, the Steve Irwin rendezvoused with the Oceanic Viking and the two crewmembers were returned to Sea Shepherd.[123][127][128] On April 9, first mate Peter Brown was described in a newspaper article as saying that the incident only became a hostage situation because the Sea Shepherd vessel left the scene, so the Japanese would be forced to hold the two crewmen longer. He was quoted as saying, "It's all giant street theater."[129]
c. On 29 March 2008 the MV Farley Mowat and a Canadian Coast Guard ship collided.[73] The coast guard icebreaker had put itself between the Farley Mowat and a smaller seal hunter's boat. The group says their vessel was rammed while the Canadian Fisheries and Oceans department says the coast guard ship was grazed by the Farley Mowat.[74]
Note, accusation of a ramming. Does anybody here want to accuse the Canadian Coast Guard of deliberately trying to ram an unarmed vessel?
3. Sea Shepard has engaged in multiple acts of sabotage.
a. In late December 1992, O.R.C.A Force (Sea Shepherd) sabotaged the whaler Nybraena in response to Norway's decision to resume commercial whaling of minke whales in 1993. Police found the vessel's engine room nearly full of water at her moorings in the Lofoten Islands but were able to keep it afloat.[91]
b. In November 1986, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society claimed responsibility for actions against a whaling station in Hvalfjörđur, Iceland. Computers were destroyed with sledgehammers and records were doused with acid. The Hvalur 6 and Hvalur 7, two of the nation's four whaling ships, were sunk by opening their seaaxles while they were moored in Reykjavík harbour.[104][105][106]
This is, of course, in addition to the SINKINGS OF VESSELS WITH EXPLOSIVE CHARGES.
Given all of this... do you really think the Whaler is at fault in this latest incident?
-
Pirates at sea should be hung or shot dead. :aok
-
Why in half? Why not quarters!
-
Oh, look, a false comparision, wrapping yourself in the flag, and calling me a terrorist sympathizer to boot. ("So you think 911 was a good effort," etc.) You might wanna throttle back your righteous indignation there friend, before you say something you don't mean.
...
Given all of this... do you really think the Whaler is at fault in this latest incident?
That is totally irrelevant, I was referring to your comments support the terrorist bombing by french agents of a civilian ship in a NZ port. That ship was involved in protesting the testing of nuclear weapons in the south pacific. One of the few causes I actually support greenpeace on (if the french want to test their nukes test em in their own back yard). Note that greenpeaces activities during these protests were non-violent.
So, do you support terrorist bombings of civilians when that countries citizens disagree with your countries policies? If you support the french government in such an action then you must support the Taliban's (govt of afghanistan at the time) involvement in 911. Or the bombing the the 747 over Lockerbie by Libyan agents?
p.s. if you took some literacy classes instead of cut'n'paste classes you might have observed I believe this was both their fault.
-
The whalers still suck.
Dude:
The Japanese have been eating Whale meat for over 900 years.
What would you do if someone told you that you could not eat at McDonald's anymore?? Would you not consider that to be un-American?
.
-
That is totally irrelevant... if you took some literacy classes instead of cut'n'paste classes you might have observed I believe this was both their fault.
I was addressing the topic of the thread in general, not this side argument.
-
The video from the Japanese ship after the collision shows its wake - it was turning to port to avoid the (now sunken) terrorist ship. The Japanese whalers are doing nothing "illegal." Their whale take is allowed under international agreements, being done in international waters and they are taking minke whales, which are not an endangered species.
It's seems like hypocrisy to not be similarly outraged at all of the illegal harvesting of lamb chops, rib eyes, plump pork sausages, prancing deer steaks, jumpy trout fillets, perky perch fish & chips, luscious lobsters, seasoned crabs, buttery shrimp, savory salmon, tasty tuna salad and chubby chicken breasts devoured by criminal humans every day. Outraged!
I'm hungry now . . .
-
:rofl :rofl
nice vid of sea shepherds boat ramming and than get stuck on an iceberg...
-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8&feature=related
Regards
SF
-
meh send an Australian warship down to arrest and detain Japanese whalers illegally fishing in our sovereign waters and there wouldn't have been a problem...at least there
Tronsky
-
:rofl :rofl
nice vid of sea shepherds boat ramming and than get stuck on an iceberg...
-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8&feature=related
Regards
SF
Must be the reincarnated Captain Edward John Smith.
-
They are a resource to the world's oceans ... they cause balance within the oceans.
I'm sure your boss considers you a resource to the company ... let me know when I can come and harvest you.
Poppycock!
The boss that considers an employee as an asset does reap a "harvest" from the work done by that employee. By your argument, the boss/company should not be allowed to benefit from the employees work, but said employee should be allowed to show up for work everyday anyway simply so the same number of doughnuts would be eaten in the employee break room every morning.
I've always wondered what role whales supposedly play in the ecology of the ocean? Is their primary role the reduction of plankton? Or are they a primary food source for a predator species? Are there enough of them left to actually affect either? Precisely what balance would be upset if they were extinct?
Don't mistake me, I'm not saying that we should allow them to be hunted to extinction in an way shape or form... I just don't see any real evidence that whales play an important role in this mysterious "balance" of which you speak.
-
Looks to me like the batboat cut in front of the whaler bow.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3961607/protest-ship-smashed-in-whaling-clash
SYDNEY — A conservation group's boat had its bow sheared off and was in danger of sinking as it took on water Wednesday after it was struck by a Japanese whaling ship in the frigid waters of Antarctica, the group said.
The boat's six crew members were safely transferred to another of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's vessels, the newly commissioned Bob Barker. The boat is named for the American game show host who donated $5 million to buy it.
The clash was the most serious in the past several years, during which the Sea Shepherd has sent vessels into far-southern waters to try to harass the Japanese fleet into ceasing its annual whale hunt.....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582115,00.html?test=latestnews
Regards,
Sun
I laughed 'til I peed my rubber suit. If you've watched "Whale Wars" at all, you know these little roostersuckers have had it coming for some time. They harass the Japanese vessels and then get upset when they screw themselves up.
The Japanese vessels are whaling legally. Regard for any form of rules doesn't seem to feature in the little communist Sea Shepherd's conduct.
I hope they all die down there.
Further, the little ankle-holding pillow-biters LIED about the cause, claiming their boat was at idle when "rammed". Happily, the Japanese videotaped the whole thing, clearly showing the commie cadre of little rimdrivers cutting off the Japanese vessel.
Standing there with soiled Grampers holding his deeeck is Bob Barker, who paid for the "Ady Gil" (a granola-munching collective-farmer name if ever there was one, it probably stinks of old birks) and now regrets it. I guess he didn't realize that Paul T*Watson is a puffy-drunken old fat slob, bent on destroying a legal and productive venture.
meh send an Australian warship down to arrest and detain Japanese whalers illegally fishing in our sovereign waters and there wouldn't have been a problem...at least there
Tronsky
The Japanese vessel wasn't in Australian sovereign waters, merely waters over which Aus/NZ have safety authority. The Aus government's statement was pretty limp-wristed:
"The government is very concerned at this collision," Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett said. "We condemn any dangerous or violent activity that takes place in the southern oceans. Safety at sea is an absolute priority in this dangerous and inhospitable ocean area."
In any case, imj, enviros and animal right's activists are today's luddite religious zealots. There is no reasoning mit zese subhumans. They should be rounded up und slaughtered in zee arbeitslageren. Das ist der endlosung!
-
Dude:
The Japanese have been eating Whale meat for over 900 years.
What would you do if someone told you that you could not eat at McDonald's anymore?? Would you not consider that to be un-American?
.
We have Mcdonalds? All I see is KFC.
-
Poppycock!
The boss that considers an employee as an asset does reap a "harvest" from the work done by that employee. By your argument, the boss/company should not be allowed to benefit from the employees work, but said employee should be allowed to show up for work everyday anyway simply so the same number of doughnuts would be eaten in the employee break room every morning.
I've always wondered what role whales supposedly play in the ecology of the ocean? Is their primary role the reduction of plankton? Or are they a primary food source for a predator species? Are there enough of them left to actually affect either? Precisely what balance would be upset if they were extinct?
Don't mistake me, I'm not saying that we should allow them to be hunted to extinction in an way shape or form... I just don't see any real evidence that whales play an important role in this mysterious "balance" of which you speak.
I'd like to see a good answer to that one as well. I always hear some exceedingly fuzzy argument regarding that and some canary in the coal mine argument. I doubt either would survive serious scrutiny.
I'd also like to see the means by which these eco-chupadores estimate the size of the whale population. It's probably as shammy as East Anglia's climate "data". Part of the reason I say as much is because of direct experience with both Mountain Lions and Golden Eagles in Southeast Michigan. Neither are officially here per the DNR and Audubon societies, respectively, yet there is ample evidence (including, in the case of the Golden Eagle, an unmistakeable encounter I had with one just outside of Ann Arbor) that both still exist here in the lower peninsula of Michigan.
-
We have Mcdonalds? All I see is KFC.
Eating at KFC is even worse in the eyes of PETA, as the poor chickens are abused and mistreated their entire life, before we eat them.
Pamela Anderson is now KFC's top celebrity helping to lead the protests against KFC:
(http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200807/r270342_1135804.jpg)
The Reverend Al Sharpton has also joined her in calling for a nation-wide boycott of eating at KFC:
(http://img1.ganges.com/data/videos/2009/07/27/177/1254376017229.jpg)
Sadly, though, the Chinese are totally ignoring Sharpton's pleas. Instead, KFC is currently the fastest growing restaurant chain in China:
(http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/634555/1/60398391.IMG_6402_1.jpg)
-
I didn't watch the video (saw couple pictures), the vessel of least maneuverability has right of way period, and if the fishing vessel has nets in the water even more so does it have right of way in this case. They were both underway making way meaning they were both under thier own power and not adrift.
-
:rofl :rofl
nice vid of sea shepherds boat ramming and than get stuck on an iceberg...
-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8&feature=related
Regards
SF
:rofl Anything flying a pirate flag should be fired apon.
-
I'd like to see a good answer to that one as well. I always hear some exceedingly fuzzy argument regarding that and some canary in the coal mine argument. I doubt either would survive serious scrutiny.
I'd also like to see the means by which these eco-chupadores estimate the size of the whale population. It's probably as shammy as East Anglia's climate "data". Part of the reason I say as much is because of direct experience with both Mountain Lions and Golden Eagles in Southeast Michigan. Neither are officially here per the DNR and Audubon societies, respectively, yet there is ample evidence (including, in the case of the Golden Eagle, an unmistakeable encounter I had with one just outside of Ann Arbor) that both still exist here in the lower peninsula of Michigan.
Well the Golden Eagle are in Indiana. We had one land on the top of the post which housed our bird feeder next to our deck. I thought the Basset Hounds were going to have a heart attack. Biggest darn bird I had ever seen that close.
-
:rofl :rofl
nice vid of sea shepherds boat ramming and than get stuck on an iceberg...
-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8&feature=related
Regards
SF
Now that is funny. Idiots were more worried about scraping hulls and ended up in.........FAIL. :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
It's plain to see that the whalers intentionally rammed the batboat on both videos and that Tank Town Island must be captured. :bolt:
-
It's plain to see that the whalers intentionally rammed the batboat on both videos and that Tank Town Island must be captured. :bolt:
You obviously don't understand the rules of the road in navigating the ocean.
Smaller, faster, and more maneuverable boats don't have the right of way. There was no way that the boat should have been anywhere even remotely near the Japanese whaler in the first place.
If they want to violate basic rules of navigation and put themselves at grave risk by taking dangerous maneuvers in close, then tell me this: Whose fault is it then that a collision occurred?
It is pretty obvious that these are Whale Jihadists seeking Martyrdom in their cause. What reward they might get once they get to Paradise, is unknown.
Perhaps they will get to swim with dolphins?
It would be most ironic if God instead threw them into the water with a pod of hungry Killer Whales.
BTW, here is a photo of a group of whale loving tourists off Norway snorkeling with a pod of Killer Whales, trying to make friends with them:
(http://www.visitnorway.com/ImageVault/Images/conversionFormat_13/id_118/ImageVaultHandler.aspx)
Some people really are fanatic about loving whales.
.
-
I think dredger was being a little sarcastic there. The tank town kinda gave it away :aok
-
You obviously don't understand the rules of the road in navigating the ocean.
Smaller, faster, and more maneuverable boats don't have the right of way.
In point of fact you do not understand the rules of navigation on the ocean. A boat approaching from your starboard (right) side has right of way. If you are approaching another boat from its starboard side, you have right of way. That is maritime 101, look it up if you don't believe me.
This applies to powered boats (not sailboats). The reason this law is universally applied is to avoid two ships captains getting in an argument over who is more manoeuvrable and faster, and thus should yield to the other. Can you imagine how ludicrous such a situation would be.
It can clearly be seen from both videos that the whaling vessel made a hard turn to starboard (right) with the intention of ramming the batboat.
Maybe the batboat guys had it coming, but you can't discount the plain visual evidence just because you empathize with the whalers.
-
It doesnt look that clear cut to me. They sure werent trying to get out of the way of that whaler by any stretch of the imagination. All I see is a smaller craft trying to be a pain in the bellybutton and getting caught with their pants down. Sorry about their luck.
-
It doesnt look that clear cut to me. They sure werent trying to get out of the way of that whaler by any stretch of the imagination. All I see is a smaller craft trying to be a pain in the bellybutton and getting caught with their pants down. Sorry about their luck.
Clearly the whalers thought they were in the right... Otherwise, why would they release the video taken from their perspective. We all know why the Batboat people would want to release video. For them, the media attention is golden. They have every motivation to get the video out, and every motivation to stage their video in such a way that their agendas are served.
You have to ask yourself why, if they swerved to strike the batboat, would the whalers release video footage that would be damning to them?
-
Then again if ya screw with a dog enough your gonna get bit.
-
In point of fact you do not understand the rules of navigation on the ocean. A boat approaching from your starboard (right) side has right of way. If you are approaching another boat from its starboard side, you have right of way. That is maritime 101, look it up if you don't believe me.
This applies to powered boats (not sailboats). The reason this law is universally applied is to avoid two ships captains getting in an argument over who is more manoeuvrable and faster, and thus should yield to the other. Can you imagine how ludicrous such a situation would be.
That's not... really logical. If I hop out on the bay in a Sea-Doo sportster, and approach a tanker from the starboard side... do you honestly think you have the right of way? Or is it your responsibility to keep your toy out of the tanker's path?
-
That's not... really logical. If I hop out on the bay in a Sea-Doo sportster, and approach a tanker from the starboard side... do you honestly think you have the right of way? Or is it your responsibility to keep your toy out of the tanker's path?
Well, each country has it's rules governing what are known as 'inland waters'. Those are narrow channels, western rivers, bays, harbors, etc. Large ships for example in harbors are classified as 'vessels constrained by the draught', and are afforded more right of way.
In open sea, the rules are governed by the 'International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS)'. For the most part, a ship to the right has the right of way. There are some caveats to that, for example fishing vessels and ships classified as 'vessels restricted in her ability to manoeuvre”
What is apparent though, is the whaling vessel makes a hard turn to starboard in order the ram the batboat.
In other words, the whaling boat deliberately changes path in order to affect a collision. That is a use of deadly force, luckily for the greenies no one got killed.
-
There are some caveats to that, for example fishing vessels and ships classified as 'vessels restricted in her ability to manoeuvre”
So it is the activists responsibility to get out of the way.
I don't know who rammed who, and I don't want to make a judgement call on it based on just some videos... but by what you just said, the greenies are at fault for the entire situation to begin with for getting too close to an un-maneuverable ship in open waters.
-
So it is the activists responsibility to get out of the way.
I don't know who rammed who, and I don't want to make a judgement call on it based on just some videos... but by what you just said, the greenies are at fault for the entire situation to begin with for getting too close to an un-maneuverable ship in open waters.
Well it's not quite that simple. Here is a cut and paste:
The term “vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre” means a vessel which from the nature of her work is restricted in her ability to manoeuvre as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. The term “vessels restricted in their ability to manoeuvre” shall include:
(i) a vessel engaged in laying, servicing or picking up a navigation mark, submarine cable or pipeline;
(ii) a vessel engaged in dredging, surveying or underwater operations;
(iii) a vessel engaged in replenishment or transferring persons, provisions or cargo while underway;
(iv) a vessel engaged in the launching or recovery of aircraft;
(v) a vessel engaged in mine clearance operations;
(vi) a vessel engaged in a towing operation such as severely restricts the towing vessel and her tow in their ability to deviate from their course.
The whaling vessel isn't considered as restricted in this case. Clearly with the hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, she has fair manoeuvre capablity. The whaling ship is even smaller than a destroyer, and those turn on a dime.
Whaling vessel at fault.
-
The whaling vessel isn't considered as restricted in this case. Clearly with the hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, she has fair manoeuvre capablity. The whaling ship is even smaller than a destroyer, and those turn on a dime.
Whaling vessel at fault.
Maritime safety experts here consider both at fault, the whaler for getting too close, the the sea shepherd for accelerating into the whalers path. Best video too watch is the japanese one, the ss one is from a 3rd vessel - in heavy seas (pretty hard to keep things relative).
-
Clearly with the hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, she has fair manoeuvre capablity. The whaling ship is even smaller than a destroyer, and those turn on a dime.
Whaling vessel at fault.
Clearly with the batboats hard turn to port its the fault of said morons for even BEING in that area. I dont know what film your watching and getting a clearly out of any of it. I clearly see the batboat throttle up and shoot right into it. Just like they have a history of. To blame the whale boat just shows very little comprehensive ability. The whaleing boat has business being there. The bat boat has only the business of trying to hinder.They screwed up and got run over.
Batboat at fault.
-
BS the 'bat boat' isnt navigating anything its there for purely harassment purposes and yes they have even gone to the trouble of playing up the part of being pirates on a pirate vessel dressed as common thieves and with nothing on their minds but pranks and skullduggery... hang them as hazards to navigation if nothing else but pirates of decency.
-
I know most of you figure these eco zealots had it coming. To a large degree I agree with that sentiment.
But both video's corroborate a hard turn to starboard by the whaling ship to intentionally ram. That is a direct use of deadly force. Granted, what the eco zealots do in fouling prop blades and tossing stinkbombs could be construed as an indirect use of deadly force.
Whaling 'security' ship can evade, use water cannons, high pitched sirens, that's all fine. But an intentional act of ramming a smaller ship crosses the line. That is tantamount to mounting a cannon and firing it at the smaller ship.
Whaling security ship in the wrong.
-
Maritime safety experts here consider both at fault, the whaler for getting too close, the the sea shepherd for accelerating into the whalers path. Best video too watch is the japanese one, the ss one is from a 3rd vessel - in heavy seas (pretty hard to keep things relative).
How can the whaler avoid from getting too close to a speed boat with maximum speed of 45 knt and which is intentionally trying to come too close over and over again? Such harassing must be illegal. It's hard to imagine that the law would allow you to constantly block another ship by restricting it's movement. It's not the only time the SS came that close to the whaler.
-
But both video's corroborate a hard turn to starboard by the whaling ship to intentionally ram. That is a direct use of deadly force. Granted, what the eco zealots do in fouling prop blades and tossing stinkbombs could be construed as an indirect use of deadly force.
Exactly how does the whaler's video corroborate a hard turn to starboard? Only Bob Barker's video has some indications of it and that is not the whaler turning, but the camera perspective.
-
System: you have collided.
Pm. Hey you ace pilot I was diving in for the pick when you turned in front of me ramming me.
I think these guys have played AH.
A deliberate collision and the cry they got RAMMED. OH the irony of it all to end up on a AH bb of all things. :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :bolt:
-
System: you have collided.
Pm. Hey you ace pilot I was diving in for the pick when you turned in front of me ramming me.
I think these guys have played AH.
A deliberate collision and the cry they got RAMMED. OH the irony of it all to end up on a AH bb of all things. :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :bolt:
At least they didnt get rammed for behind.
-
In point of fact you do not understand the rules of navigation on the ocean. A boat approaching from your starboard (right) side has right of way. If you are approaching another boat from its starboard side, you have right of way. That is maritime 101, look it up if you don't believe me.
This applies to powered boats (not sailboats). The reason this law is universally applied is to avoid two ships captains getting in an argument over who is more manoeuvrable and faster, and thus should yield to the other. Can you imagine how ludicrous such a situation would be.
It can clearly be seen from both videos that the whaling vessel made a hard turn to starboard (right) with the intention of ramming the batboat.
Maybe the batboat guys had it coming, but you can't discount the plain visual evidence just because you empathize with the whalers.
You are technically correct, of course, and that's why you mount green to starboard, red to port. However, there's an implicit malice in the use of that right of way by a smaller, faster boat to restrict the navigation of the larger vessel. It's navigation in bad faith, for want of a better term - use of the rules to force an untenable navigation situation on the larger vessel.
-
The law of gross tonnage has been applied i'd say. Both vessels are ignoring the nav rules. It's what they do. The japanese think whales taste like chicken and the SS guys think whale lives are more important then human lives. The SS boat drivers and coordination with the Irwin is laughable at best. They almost take themselves out just launching a small boat let alone using one on the stink bomb attack lol.
-
Right of way does not apply. The Japanese vessel is clearly under attack from a pirate vessel, and they have every right to defend themselves.
What the sea scum is doing is violating international law. Maybe they should try spending the money to change the laws instead of buying boats.
-
that's why you mount green to starboard, red to port.
Interesting, thanks for posting that. I hadn't thought about that in terms of traffic lights. So someone to your starboard see's a green light, they know they have the 'go' light, or right of way.
However, there's an implicit malice in the use of that right of way by a smaller, faster boat to restrict the navigation of the larger vessel. It's navigation in bad faith, for want of a better term - use of the rules to force an untenable navigation situation on the larger vessel.
I have to agree with that. The batboat could probably flip its direction as fast as any waterskiing boat on any lake in the usa.
The whaling boat did make an obvious turn to starboard in order to ram though, that is plain enough.
-
"Aye i loves them wenches with their low cut tops..
Coz I really treasures their chests..
Muhahahaha hahaha"
-greybeard
Harrrrrrr!!
Sun
Anti-Whaling Group Files Piracy Complaint Against Japanese Whalers
SYDNEY — A conservationist group that lost one of its ships in a clash with Japanese whalers off Antarctica has filed a piracy complaint in the Netherlands against the captain and crew of the whaling vessel, one of the group's leaders said Saturday.
The filing comes after the bow of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's Ady Gil was sheared off in a collision Wednesday with the far larger Japanese ship — the most serious clash in what has become an annual confrontation off the frozen continent. A Sea Shepherd volunteer suffered cracked ribs.
The whaler, Shonan Maru No. 2, suffered no apparent damage. Both sides blame the other for the crash, which occurred as the Ady Gil harassed the Japanese fleet.
On Friday, Sea Shepherd lodged a piracy complaint with the Dutch prosecuting authority, Sea Shepherd Deputy CEO Chuck Swift told The Associated Press by satellite phone from his ship, the Bob Barker. The ship is named for the former TV game show host, who donated $5 million to buy it.
A copy of the complaint translated from Dutch to English by Sea Shepherd officials was provided to the AP. It argues the whalers are guilty of piracy because they served on a vessel that was used to commit an act of violence. The complaint urges Dutch authorities to take action within two weeks......
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582666,00.html
-
lol, and SS is the one with the pirate flag.
-
lol, and SS is the one with the pirate flag.
Yes, and they are the ones committing the acts of violence as well.
-
Well it's not quite that simple. Here is a cut and paste:
The term “vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre” means a vessel which from the nature of her work is restricted in her ability to manoeuvre as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. The term “vessels restricted in their ability to manoeuvre” shall include:
(i) a vessel engaged in laying, servicing or picking up a navigation mark, submarine cable or pipeline;
(ii) a vessel engaged in dredging, surveying or underwater operations;
(iii) a vessel engaged in replenishment or transferring persons, provisions or cargo while underway;
(iv) a vessel engaged in the launching or recovery of aircraft;
(v) a vessel engaged in mine clearance operations;
(vi) a vessel engaged in a towing operation such as severely restricts the towing vessel and her tow in their ability to deviate from their course.
The whaling vessel isn't considered as restricted in this case. Clearly with the hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, she has fair manoeuvre capablity. The whaling ship is even smaller than a destroyer, and those turn on a dime.
Whaling vessel at fault.
That is not at all true. Any power driven boat is supposed to give way to a fishing boat that engaged in fishing. That is right there in the Maritime rules.
Your analysis is clearly both bogus and biased.
.
-
That is not at all true. Any power driven boat is supposed to give way to a fishing boat that engaged in fishing. That is right there in the Maritime rules.
That is true, however a boat engaged in fishing is defined as follows:
The term “vessel engaged in fishing” means any vessel fishing with nets, lines, trawls or other fishing apparatus which restrict manoeuvrability, but does not include a vessel fishing with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict manoeuvrability.
The whaling ship was actually a security ship, and not engaged in any fishing activity at time of collision.
The whaling ship intentionally rammed the batboat, that is evident from both videos
-
What seems evident is your bias in this.Looking at the films is obvious to anyone with a clue that the bat boat was looking for trouble and they found it in spades. Now they want to cry foul.
-
What seems evident is your bias in this.Looking at the films is obvious to anyone with a clue that the bat boat was looking for trouble and they found it in spades. Now they want to cry foul.
If you want to talk about bias, lets refer to your post here. I have an opinion on the matter but I draw the line at casting disparaging remarks against others:
If you cant see the morons werent looking to get a you tube clip your a bigger moron than they are. Wow. Talk about colossal failure.
The whaling ship intentionally rammed the batboat, it is evident from the videos. Whether the batboat guys deserved it is another matter. Ramminga smaller boat is a use of deadly force.
-
Rules of the Sea
Right of way
Boats Overtaking – A power boat overtaking another power boat is the “burdened” boat and must take evasive action
keeping clear astern of the “privileged” boat to avoid collision. If there is room the overtaking boat may pass to port of the
“privileged” boat and call out “passing to port.”
The batboat is clearly overtaking another powered boat. It should have passed on the port side. The batboat was on the starboard side.
Maybe I missunderstood the post but right of way means the boat on the "right" has the right of way. and the whaling ship did ram them and violated the rules. However the small boat's captain should be jailed for intentionally putting peoples lives at risk. There was no excuse for getting that close to a large ship and expecting them to be able to avoid them.
-
I am so much looking forward to the next Whale Wars series. Putting a bunch of undisciplined, birkenstock-wearing, vegan, granola-head, hippies on a boat in the Southern Ocean and pitting them against experienced, disciplined seamen is some of the best entertainment I have witnessed in my life. I watch it purely for the purpose of seeing what idiots they can make out of themselves.
(The whales are in no danger of becoming extinct, the best way to control and ensure the whale's existence is for them to be managed to guarantee profitability.)
-
They put themselves in the path of the whaler. From the film,you can see it was NOT just sitting there idleing. Now you can believe that that batboat couldnt get out of the way if it wanted to,and you can spout off all the right of way bs you want.The batboat was there to hinder the whaler,it failed. These are people that fly a pirate flag when they ram ships. You DID see that film didnt you dredger? Where they sideswiped a whaler,that was on their right?
-
From Bob Barker himself.
"This will probably get more notice for what they're trying to do out there than anything in a long time, so it has a bright side," Barker said. "I absolutely continue to support them, more so than ever, in good times and bad."
http://blog.al.com/scenesource/2010/01/bob_barkers_namesake_boat_resc.html
They got their attention.Thats what this was all about. A big viewer YouTube video.
-
(The whales are in no danger of becoming extinct, the best way to control and ensure the whale's existence is for them to be managed to guarantee profitability.)
That's been tried before. ;)
-
30 seconds into this clip,you can see the boat filming is going right to left. If anything,and its next to impossible to tell from this video,the whaler looks to be going slightly to the left at the moment of impact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycyCfK14axw
Again,its hard to tell from these videos what was going on but what is clear is the batboat put its crew in a dangerous position and it bit them in the ass.
-
That's been tried before. ;)
Yep. And the fact that you can drive to the store and buy fish is a testament to the fact that it works. ;)
-
Yep. And the fact that you can drive to the store and buy fish is a testament to the fact that it works. ;)
Give it a few more decades. The United States generally imposes responsible management on our own fisheries, usually with decisions that no one is happy with, but the vast majority of fish we eat come from international waters (or from countries that don't give a damn) that are being raped and violated every day. The upshot is that our own fishermen find it harder and harder to make a living... Is salmon season going to open on the west coast this Spring?
Sorry for the hijack.
-
Lets look at this a different way with a hypothetical.
Lets say a group of protesters is against a farmer harvesting tomatoes for whatever reason. The protesters trespass, they try to interfere with harvesting, they even go so far as to vandalize the farmers combines.
Now, does the farmer now have the right to run over this group of protesters with his pickup truck?
If you don't believe the whaling ship made a hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, then there is no point in discussing. Because with this belief, then of course the whalers are not at fault for anything, the batboat purposely 'jumped' in front of them.
I don't see it that way. To me it appears the batboat was placing itself close, then the whaler purposely turned starboard to facilitate a ram. While the batboat 'greenies' are undoubtedly guilty of all sorts of maritime violations, including using speedboats to violate the 'spirit' of maritime rights of way, the whalers are guilty of using their vessel in a purposeful act of deadly force.
-
We also don't know what happened before hand. Watching the previous episodes they use to cut in front of the whale boats all the time and the
whaling ship would turn hard to avoid them. It could have been a accident maybe thinking that the batboat was going to keep moving instead of
stopping in front of them. Also how many times has the sea shepperd rammed a whaling boat? to me they got what they had coming.
-
I watched the videos and it is possible it rammed them, it is possible they went to avoid thinking the batboat would speed up.
IN any case the batboat played games and lost, and also vessle of least maneurvability has right away.
I read and mabe wrong the whales they are hunting are not endagered
-
Better yet, if it hasn't already been mentioned, when are we bombarding the PETA boards again like days of old? That was priceless. Some of the CPIDs we came up with... :cool:
-
Better yet, if it hasn't already been mentioned, when are we bombarding the PETA boards again like days of old? That was priceless. Some of the CPIDs we came up with... :cool:
No doubt.
Estes won hands down in that dept. "Shivermetimbers" and his "Deer Story" was funnier than Hangtime's "furball" story, which is a classic in itself.
-
Better yet, if it hasn't already been mentioned, when are we bombarding the PETA boards again like days of old? That was priceless. Some of the CPIDs we came up with... :cool:
LOL.But that was a kids board.We had some good stories going.I forget who ended up sleeping with the injuried deer and having "sex" with it but nobody on that board even blinked at that. :rofl :rofl
-
LOL.But that was a kids board.We had some good stories going.I forget who ended up sleeping with the injuried deer and having "sex" with it but nobody on that board even blinked at that. :rofl :rofl
Read my post above yers. :rofl :rofl
-
Well - I think his story ended like - "She was delicious" - and after the initial shock and awe of that - we all scattered - LOL
-
I was Sandstar on that.Story went deer were tearing up the garden.I got all kinds of try this try that stuff and my dad was going to shoot the deer.Ended up trying to get the gun from him and accidently shot him. Said I was running away from home and that ended it.
-
Lets look at this a different way with a hypothetical.
Lets say a group of protesters is against a farmer harvesting tomatoes for whatever reason. The protesters trespass, they try to interfere with harvesting, they even go so far as to vandalize the farmers combines.
Now, does the farmer now have the right to run over this group of protesters with his pickup truck?
If you don't believe the whaling ship made a hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, then there is no point in discussing. Because with this belief, then of course the whalers are not at fault for anything, the batboat purposely 'jumped' in front of them.
I don't see it that way. To me it appears the batboat was placing itself close, then the whaler purposely turned starboard to facilitate a ram. While the batboat 'greenies' are undoubtedly guilty of all sorts of maritime violations, including using speedboats to violate the 'spirit' of maritime rights of way, the whalers are guilty of using their vessel in a purposeful act of deadly force.
Let's make your hypothetical scenario more believable, Dredger.
Let's say this group of tomato harvest protesters trespass, try to interfere with harvesting, and as you said, even go so far as to vandalize the farmer's harvesting equipment.
For a more like comparison, and because you went way too extreme with your scenario......let's say the farmer is in his TRUCK that he hauls his harvest to the market with, say a GMC 6500 series for fun, and while he is on the way out of his field, the protesters have entered onto his land again and are harassing him, pacing him in......a 2006 VW Beetle.
They get up beside him, pull a little ahead, then suddenly cut in front of him, maybe just a swerve to test his nerve, then pull ahead far enough to stop and turn sideways, partially blocking his path ahead.
You now have a 25,000 pound truck traveling at whatever speed, let's say it's 30 miles per hour, and the Beetle, all 2900 pounds of it, is stopped only 30 yards ahead. The farmer tries his best to slow or stop his truck in the distance allowed, and at the last minute swerves to the left and hits the left front fender of the Beetle, smashing it in.
Who is to blame? Who is at fault?
The hypothetical comparison you left us with isn't even applicable, mainly because you are talking about an incident that occurred in international waters and trying to compare it to one taking place on private property.
Sadly, some parts of the country would take the side of the tomato protesters. Private property seems to be an evil thing anymore, and the rights of said owners are secondary to those who subscribe to the belief that "what's yours is mine".........thank God I live in a place where common sense would prevail even in the hypothetical scenarios you and I laid out.
First the sheriff would be notified, trespass warnings issued, and after the regrettable incident, caused by the tomato harvesters themselves, transpired, not only would they have a smashed vehicle, they would be spending time behind bars (at least in the part of the country where I live).
After watching just about every link to the videos regarding this incident, the only conclusion I've come to is that the protesters, despite all the donations and nice toys they've received to fight this little "war" of theirs, are idiots. They take a much more nimble craft and place it in close proximity to a much larger vessel, practically in it's path, and try to convince the world that they were intentionally rammed.
Even a landlubber such as myself knows that a ship the size of the Japanese vessel takes forever to stop, and responds slowly to rudder commands.....even in the video posted on their own website, one can see the smaller boat easing forward into the path of the oncoming reseach/whaling ship. The "hard starboard" turn could just easily be the ship hitting a swell......the attempt to turn to port and not overrun the smaller boat directly (and strike it right where the crew was) is crystal clear.
My opinion is that a) the Japanese vessel is in international waters and not violating any of the treaties; 2) the protesters, despite all their funding and donations, look like fools, not possessing the basic seasmanship skills needed to conduct their protest in a manner that anyone but the weakminded would take seriously; and 3) eventually, probably sooner than later, someone affiliated with the protesters, is gonna get killed, "thrown under the bus" as it were, sacrificed in an effort to make more headlines.
The fault for the incident, in my opinion, lies clearly with the "captain" of the Adi Gill, or whatever the boat was called. He placed his smaller, more nimble vessel, in harm's way, and could have easily moved his craft out of danger. He chose not to........all a part of the propaganda program you will find on the protesters' own website.
-
Lets look at this a different way with a hypothetical.
Lets say a group of protesters is against a farmer harvesting tomatoes for whatever reason. The protesters trespass, they try to interfere with harvesting, they even go so far as to vandalize the farmers combines.
Now, does the farmer now have the right to run over this group of protesters with his pickup truck?
If you don't believe the whaling ship made a hard turn to starboard to ram the batboat, then there is no point in discussing. Because with this belief, then of course the whalers are not at fault for anything, the batboat purposely 'jumped' in front of them.
I don't see it that way. To me it appears the batboat was placing itself close, then the whaler purposely turned starboard to facilitate a ram. While the batboat 'greenies' are undoubtedly guilty of all sorts of maritime violations, including using speedboats to violate the 'spirit' of maritime rights of way, the whalers are guilty of using their vessel in a purposeful act of deadly force.
Isn't legal in some states to shoot trespassers that intend to do harm to you and/or property? If so, why get your truck all dirty?
-
Give it a few more decades. The United States generally imposes responsible management on our own fisheries, usually with decisions that no one is happy with, but the vast majority of fish we eat come from international waters (or from countries that don't give a damn) that are being raped and violated every day. The upshot is that our own fishermen find it harder and harder to make a living... Is salmon season going to open on the west coast this Spring?
Sorry for the hijack.
Errr, sorry, but the USA left it's fish stocks unmanaged for so long they got hammered. NZ has managed it's fisheries heavily for some time now, hence they aren't being raped. Here the stocks come first, if something endangers them we ban fishing them even if it hurts the industry.
Here is one example: http://seafoodindustry.co.nz/hoki (the fish that McDonalds buy for Fillet of Fish burgers).
-
Errr, sorry, but the USA left it's fish stocks unmanaged for so long they got hammered.
True in the past, but today regulation has improved dramatically. If you ever scan a seafood watch card from the monterey bay aquarium, 90% of the time products from the USA receive a better rating for sustainability than what is imported.
-
This needs to be repeated every so often in this thread:
Minke whales are not, and have never been, endangered.
The Japanese whalers are not taking more than the allowed amount of Minke whales.
Tiny Norway and Iceland catch more whales than Japan. Where is the outrage?
It's my opinion that the Japanese whalers have shown remarkable restraint, and the Sea Shepherd people know this. If they used the same tactics against the ships of other whaling nations, they would likely be dead.
-
You have watched the south park episode about this topic, right? If you haven't, do so right now:
http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/251888/ (http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/251888/)
-
It's my opinion that the Japanese whalers have shown remarkable restraint, and the Sea Shepherd people know this. If they used the same tactics against the ships of other whaling nations, they would likely be dead.
I think you are entirely correct on this point, Rolex. :aok
-
True in the past, but today regulation has improved dramatically. If you ever scan a seafood watch card from the monterey bay aquarium, 90% of the time products from the USA receive a better rating for sustainability than what is imported.
Perhaps because we pump everything full of preservatives? Nobody receives real milk unless they go straight to the source.
-
I watched the videos and it is possible it rammed them, it is possible they went to avoid thinking the batboat would speed up.
IN any case the batboat played games and lost, and also vessle of least maneurvability has right away.
I read and mabe wrong the whales they are hunting are not endagered
I agree with cattb on this.
Finally someone got it right with the right of way thing. Big vessel that cannot turn and burn has the right of way.
When you and your little 60' fishing boat cuts across say a large tanker and said tanker splits your rowboat in half it is YOUR fault. SS got exactly what they deserved for that mistake.
-
I think you are entirely correct on this point, Rolex. :aok
Thank gawd somone put it so even the brain dead can get it.Or maybe they wont.
-
Perhaps because we pump everything full of preservatives? Nobody receives real milk unless they go straight to the source.
WTF your milk has preservatives in it? Ewww.
-
I think when you hear the Japanese whalers laughing in hysterics after they ram sortof shows it wasn't inadvertent.
Whaler purposely made a hard turn to starboard to ram. That crosses the line.
-
Still refusing the legible point that the larger vessel has the right-of-way?
-
It ceases to amaze me how "someone" can drag this thread out to 11 pages.
The PETAboi's are at fault. The larger craft has the right-of-way. "Laughing at stupidity", the Japanese were doing just that. Those PETAboi's might as well have been in a Zodiac. Only a complete idiot would "play chicken" with a ship "at least 20 times the displacement as yours".
-
Still refusing the legible point that the larger vessel has the right-of-way?
Less maneurverable has right of way at least on western rivers it does. International and Western Rivers rules of the road should be about the same.
The black boat had a whole ocean to navigate did it have to navigate infront of the Japaneseboat,no.
-
Sorry, used the wrong word. It was what I was trying to imply. Thank you for the correction.
-
It ceases to amaze me how "someone" can drag this thread out to 11 pages.
The PETAboi's are at fault. The larger craft has the right-of-way. "Laughing at stupidity", the Japanese were doing just that. Those PETAboi's might as well have been in a Zodiac. Only a complete idiot would "play chicken" with a ship "at least 20 times the displacement as yours".
An idiot or someone who wants to die... I contend that that's a subliminal wish of many zero-impact enviros.
Otherwise, I agree with you completely but think you meant that it never ceases to amaze you that a dead horse can be beaten so thoroughly.
BTW, that assklown Captain of the SS almost sank his vessel colliding it with one of the whaler tenders last season. http://earthblips.dailyradar.com/video/sea_shepherd_captain_lies_about_collision_with_whaling/
Then he lied about it.
I don't know what the Dredger sees on that vid (http://ecopolitology.org/2010/01/06/whale-wars-japanese-whalers-slice-sea-shepherd-boat-in-half-video/), either, that makes him think the Japanese caused this. The vid taken from the deck of the whaler looks pretty convincing - the Ady Gil accels (watch the wake) to cut right across their path.
In the other vid, (http://ecopolitology.org/2010/01/06/whale-wars-japanese-whalers-slice-sea-shepherd-boat-in-half-video/) it apears that the whaler is turning to starboard initally, then away after the impact. given the latency in response of a ship of that size, (I've helmed a 154' schooner when much younger) they may just as well have been seeking to avoid the Ady, only a bit late. My own thinking was that the Japanese were playing chicken and didn't expect the Ady to slowly accel into their path.
In fact, it almost looks like an error on the part of the Ady helmsman to me, compounded by the bluff of the Japanese helmsman. I'd still weigh this in favor of the Japanese, since the only reason that two such errors added up to a wreck was the fact that the Ady created the situation.
Either way, I hope at least a few of those kids die down there. I'm going to take a few minutes and go write some more hate messages on the TV site. I can't wait for that bloated turd dispenser Captain to die.
Scratch that... they used to have online posts. They now direct you, via the "let your voice be heard" link, to write elsewhere.
DIE SEA SHEPHERD, DIE!!!!
-
I don't know what the Dredger sees on that vid
Here is the video I am talking about. It shows the whaling ship make a hard turn to starboard in order to ram against the batboat. In particular, the video time between 06-09 seconds. You can see the whaling ship make a hard turn, you can even see the bow wave to port created due to the hard starboard turn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bbuq0YEIPNU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bbuq0YEIPNU)
In conjunction with the video shown on the whaling ship, where the batboat is some distance off to the starboard side idling. Then that gap narrows until the collision happens.
That's why the whaling boat is at fault, it was a purposeful ram.
-
I don't know why the terrorist are allowed to go in any port. They even show on film their terrorist acts at sea. Do they port in somalia with others of their ilk?
-
In conjunction with the video shown on the whaling ship, where the batboat is some distance off to the starboard side idling. Then that gap narrows until the collision happens.
That's why the whaling boat is at fault, it was a purposeful ram.
And in the other videos you can clearly see the batboat accelerate into the path of the whaler. If the batboat had not done so no collision would've occurred.
It may have been the whaler expected them to cross, and was moving to starboard to either avoid them or avoid the rope they may have been towing. The batboat had been doing this move a lot recently, sitting waiting til the whalers go close, then whizzing across their bow with a rope behind it trying to entangle the whalers props.
Also under maritime law the whaler has to give right of way to the vessel on his starboard moving to his port. Now, if the whaler thought the batboat had right of way and was moving starboard->port across his bow would it not be natural to turn to starboard to yield to them?
-
Here is the video I am talking about. It shows the whaling ship make a hard turn to starboard in order to ram against the batboat. In particular, the video time between 06-09 seconds. You can see the whaling ship make a hard turn, you can even see the bow wave to port created due to the hard starboard turn.
I still only see the perspective changing because of the Bob Barker's diagonal path. The whaler clearly can turn much faster than it appears on the video (the left turn was alot faster)
-
they were just initiating a rolling scissor.
:bolt:
-
It's very clear that the kill ship purposely collide with the Batboat. You can see said Batboat start up and gain momentum to try and steer away from the killship, but they had no chance.
I bet it's the most exciting thing to happen on that lame arse reality T.V show "Whale Wars" to date. The most overhyped show in history.
-
It's very clear that the kill ship purposely collide with the Batboat. You can see said Batboat start up and gain momentum to try and steer away from the killship, but they had no chance.
I bet it's the most exciting thing to happen on that lame arse reality T.V show "Whale Wars" to date. The most overhyped show in history.
If it was a ram by the Japenese ship, next year I guess with bob barker's or whoever donation to build a new boat they will have to make new stragety.
Humm mabe it will be not to sit in water near front of ship :)
-
Just so everyone knows the Ady Gil formerly named Earthrace was purchased for Sea Scum by Ady Gil. Bob Barker gave them money for another vessel named strangely enough Bob Barker. Seems like these animal activist are a bit narcissistic.
-
And in the other videos you can clearly see the batboat accelerate into the path of the whaler. If the batboat had not done so no collision would've occurred.
It may have been the whaler expected them to cross, and was moving to starboard to either avoid them or avoid the rope they may have been towing. The batboat had been doing this move a lot recently, sitting waiting til the whalers go close, then whizzing across their bow with a rope behind it trying to entangle the whalers props.
Also under maritime law the whaler has to give right of way to the vessel on his starboard moving to his port. Now, if the whaler thought the batboat had right of way and was moving starboard->port across his bow would it not be natural to turn to starboard to yield to them?
I agree. Dredger cites the same vid I analyzed and I find it anything but conclusive. Further, I find his claim that the batboat was powerless to avoid the larger boat laughable. I also stand by my earlier claim that the wake from the batboat is telling - they DO accel into the past of the whaler AFTER the whaler has made the helm correction.
-
Just so everyone knows the Ady Gil formerly named Earthrace was purchased for Sea Scum by Ady Gil. Bob Barker gave them money for another vessel named strangely enough Bob Barker. Seems like these animal activist are a bit narcissistic.
Of course. I hope the new POS gets cut in half as well.
What do you call a bunch of dead whale activists in the southern ocean?
A good start...
-
you know instead of throwing stink bombs and ramming ships they should throw their petiole oil. That would scare everyone away...even the whales. :bolt:
-
Just so everyone knows the Ady Gil formerly named Earthrace was purchased for Sea Scum by Ady Gil. Bob Barker gave them money for another vessel named strangely enough Bob Barker. Seems like these animal activist are a bit narcissistic.
That's what activism is about - getting an ego orgasm by being goody two-shoes for a good cause.
-
AND getting it on Youtube :aok
-
It is apparent to me that the whaling ship purposely rammed the batboat. You can see it in two separate videos showing the hard turn to starboard to hit the idling batboat.
There is even a third video shot from the batboat, showing the whaling ship waaaay off in the distance closing in on the idling batboat.
The only question that remains for me is whether the batboat guys DESERVED it. :x
Frankly I think they had it coming, since no one actually got killed or seriously hurt, and their batboat <snicker> got sunk. :lol
Protesting on open water, or even gathering evidence is one thing. Purposely fouling propellers with rope is another and constant harassment is another.
-
Did you consider the option that the batboat kept leapfrogging ahead of the whaler and stopping untill they got the "money shot"? Losing a boat to these guys means nothing to them.They have enough deluded worshipers to get another.
-
New video , Holy Sharks with frakn laser beams!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7dHbUOAqMo
-
Hehe I want some of the repellent. Thanks ToeTag for giving the eww shivers with the remembered hippy aroma.
-
The latest in the ongoing saga at sea...It's the Bob Barker VS the Nisshin Maru — the Japanese factory ship and four harpoon ships.
There's bound to be video of this soon.
Regards,
Sun
Anti-Whaling Ship Collides With Japanese Boat Off Antarctica
SYDNEY — Anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd's ship the Bob Barker and a Japanese harpoon boat collided in the icy waters off Antarctica on Saturday — the second major clash this year in the increasingly aggressive confrontations between the two sides.
No one was reportedly injured in the latest strike. Sea Shepherd said a small hole was torn in the hull of its ship, but it was above the water line and the vessel was not in danger of sinking.
Sea Shepherd founder Captain Paul Watson said by satellite telephone that the Japanese ship rammed the Bob Barker — named after the U.S. game show host who donated millions to buy it — as it blocked the slipway of the Japanese fleet's factory ship.
Japanese officials were not immediately available to comment on the incident, and Watson's claim that the Bob Barker was deliberately hit could not be independently verified.
Saturday's collision was the second between a Sea Shepherd boat and the Japanese fleet.
On Jan. 6, a Japanese whaler struck Sea Shepherd's high-tech speed boat Ady Gil and sheared off its nose. The Ady Gil sank a day later.
Sea Shepherd and the whalers have faced off in Antarctic waters for the past few years over Japan's annual whale hunt, with each side accusing the other of acting in increasingly dangerous ways.
Sea Shepherd activists try to block the whalers from firing harpoons, and they dangle ropes in the water to try to snarl the Japanese ships' propellers. They also hurl packets of stinking rancid butter at their rivals. The whalers have responded by firing water cannons and sonar devices meant to disorient the activists.
Japan aims to take hundreds of whales each year under a program that is allowed despite the international moratorium on killing whales because it is done in the name of science. Critics say the scientific program is a front for commercial whaling, and much of the meat is eaten.
On Saturday, the Bob Barker found the whaling fleet for the first time since the time of the Ady Gil clash, Watson said.
The Bob Barker took up a position behind the Nisshin Maru — the Japanese factory ship where dead whales are hauled aboard and butchered — so the four harpoon vessels could not reach it, he said.
"The harpoon ships started circling like sharks," Watson said. "They were making near passes to the stern and the bow of the Bob Barker, then the Yushin Maru 3 intentionally rammed the Bob Barker."
The Bob Barker sustained a 3-ft. long, 4-inch wide gash in its hull. Welders aboard the ship were already working on patching the hole, and the Bob Barker would resume its pursuit of the whalers, Watson said.
Watson said the Yushin Maru 3 appeared to stop moving after the collision and had not been seen by the Bob Barker's crew to have moved since, suggesting it also may have been damaged.
The governments of Australia and New Zealand, which have responsibility for maritime rescue in the area where the hunt is usually conducted, say the fight between the two sides is becoming increasingly dangerous and have repeatedly urged them to tone it down.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584988,00.html?test=latestnews
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYHfJks15jY
-
I think the tactics used by these guys are not very helpful, but I really do wonder at the venom you guys here display in your posts. It isn't like any of us have any personal stake in anything that is happening between those guys and the Japanese down there, yet the tone of your posts makes it sound like they are taking food off of your table or money out of your wallet.
-
I think the tactics used by these guys are not very helpful, but I really do wonder at the venom you guys here display in your posts. It isn't like any of us have any personal stake in anything that is happening between those guys and the Japanese down there, yet the tone of your posts makes it sound like they are taking food off of your table or money out of your wallet.
I think it's because of the attempts to "pull the wool" over on those watching the show. Take the captain getting shot. Me and a couple of buddies were watching it for S&G's and we saw that episode. One of our guys was a Corpsman in Falujah (pardon any spelling please) and first thing out of his mouth was "bulls****." He said the captains reaction was all wrong, couple that with a shot @ 100 yards with high seas. And the bullet get's stopped by a badge over the heart? The other thing is if you look at the frame by frame you'll notice no deformity in the jacket he was wearing. Only the badge underneath it. Now you have these guys claiming to have been rammed. If you look at the wake behind the "batboat" you'll see the wake start up and the boat makes a turn directly into the whaler. You couple that with the "Japanese kidnapped us!" cry when they forcibly boarded the ships, it gets to the point where I'm sitting here saying "now what?" These stunts make them lose credibility, and the repeated attempts just make people angry instead of garnering the sympathy they want. These people are asking for it, sooner or later someone is going to oblige them.
Personally I believe whaling is horrible. I am a big conservationist and believe that humanity should be stewards to the land. Use of smart hunting practices and stewardship can accomplish this. Doing stunts like this hurt their cause more then it helps them.
-
Here's the video of it.
http://www.comcast.net/video/raw-video-activists-vessel-whaler-collide/1406469991/Comcast/1405765602/ (http://www.comcast.net/video/raw-video-activists-vessel-whaler-collide/1406469991/Comcast/1405765602/)
-
Here's the video of it.
http://www.comcast.net/video/raw-video-activists-vessel-whaler-collide/1406469991/Comcast/1405765602/ (http://www.comcast.net/video/raw-video-activists-vessel-whaler-collide/1406469991/Comcast/1405765602/)
With that one you can see the research vessel turn away. The ship rolls towards the idiots and swings away, the Barker or whatever it was keeps in the turn. Again these guys are trying to cause accidents and situations to garner sympathy for their cause. They're acting like some kid who gives himself a black eye then says the school bully did it.
-
Here's the video of it.
http://www.comcast.net/video/raw-video-activists-vessel-whaler-collide/1406469991/Comcast/1405765602/ (http://www.comcast.net/video/raw-video-activists-vessel-whaler-collide/1406469991/Comcast/1405765602/)
"This content is currently unavailable", bastards.
-
"This content is currently unavailable", bastards.
Still working when I click on it.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GosClBN6rzk
-
I think it's because of the attempts to "pull the wool" over on those watching the show. Take the captain getting shot. Me and a couple of buddies were watching it for S&G's and we saw that episode. One of our guys was a Corpsman in Falujah (pardon any spelling please) and first thing out of his mouth was "bulls****." He said the captains reaction was all wrong, couple that with a shot @ 100 yards with high seas. And the bullet get's stopped by a badge over the heart? The other thing is if you look at the frame by frame you'll notice no deformity in the jacket he was wearing. Only the badge underneath it. Now you have these guys claiming to have been rammed. If you look at the wake behind the "batboat" you'll see the wake start up and the boat makes a turn directly into the whaler. You couple that with the "Japanese kidnapped us!" cry when they forcibly boarded the ships, it gets to the point where I'm sitting here saying "now what?" These stunts make them lose credibility, and the repeated attempts just make people angry instead of garnering the sympathy they want. These people are asking for it, sooner or later someone is going to oblige them.
Personally I believe whaling is horrible. I am a big conservationist and believe that humanity should be stewards to the land. Use of smart hunting practices and stewardship can accomplish this. Doing stunts like this hurt their cause more then it helps them.
Oh, I most definitely agree that their tactics are counter productive to their stated goal. It just seems some of the posts here are wishing things on them as though they are actual terrorists rather than a silly nuisance. Well, a fanatical nuisance.
Just seemed to me that some people are going overboard a bit in the comments. Not that that is anything out of the ordinary on a message board. I will admit that I have never seen the show, so I can't comment on any of that, though I would be pretty surprised if the Japanese were actually shooting at them.
-
Still working when I click on it.
Most likely Comcast just doesn't like foreigners.
-
Most likely Comcast just doesn't like foreigners.
Try this, it's straight from the AP.
http://video.ap.org/?f=KSTOP&pid=mzXl1_9tUST3By8_EJzjIWFTfEg_fI_a (http://video.ap.org/?f=KSTOP&pid=mzXl1_9tUST3By8_EJzjIWFTfEg_fI_a)
-
I think the tactics used by these guys are not very helpful, but I really do wonder at the venom you guys here display in your posts. It isn't like any of us have any personal stake in anything that is happening between those guys and the Japanese down there, yet the tone of your posts makes it sound like they are taking food off of your table or money out of your wallet.
Actually some of us do. Those waters are fisheries, and if there is a significant accident between boats it could cause a major oil spill and an evironmental disaster.
-
Actually some of us do. Those waters are fisheries, and if there is a significant accident between boats it could cause a major oil spill and an evironmental disaster.
None of those boats carry that quantity of fuel. We're not talking about large ships or oil tankers here.
-
Actually some of us do. Those waters are fisheries, and if there is a significant accident between boats it could cause a major oil spill and an evironmental disaster.
Just what Antarctic fish are you eating...Krill?
-
Just what Antarctic fish are you eating...Krill?
If I remember correctly, Vulcan is from New Zealand, so his fish would be coming from that area I think.
-
Just what Antarctic fish are you eating...Krill?
Correct NZ, and this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_cod is a very popular fish (among others). Where'd you go to school? (or did you?) - the oceans around the antarctic are thriving with life... not just krill.
-
Most likely Comcast just doesn't like foreigners.
Just to set the record straight... I am white... Very white... As far as we can trace, my family comes from England and Ireland... Nowhere else... With my high level of anglo american whiteness, I can attest that the service provided by Comcast Cable still sucks... ahem... buttocks...
I can't blame Comcast for that kind of discrimination, unless of course, they are discriminating against us white anglo americans!
:rofl
-
Just to set the record straight... I am white... Very white... As far as we can trace, my family comes from England and Ireland... Nowhere else... With my high level of anglo american whiteness, I can attest that the service provided by Comcast Cable still sucks... ahem... buttocks...
I can't blame Comcast for that kind of discrimination, unless of course, they are discriminating against us white anglo americans!
:rofl
I think he's talking about himself seeing as he's from Finland. Also seeing he's from Finland I bet he's whiter than you are too. :D
-
I think he's talking about himself seeing as he's from Finland. Also seeing he's from Finland I bet he's whiter than you are too.
Perhaps! Maybe Comcast only hates Finns!
-
It's not uncommon for US based companies to restrict access to their content from outside the N.America. However they do usually notify the user of the restrictions, instead of putting up an ambiguous message.