Sea Shepherd Should go Down in Flames

Haha, if I knew that I would be quoted I would have elaborated it a bit more.

To be honest I quite admire Nakagawa for being so honest, not many politicians would dare to say that even when that is what they think. That is another reason why I love Japan as whole and not just its rich history and the otaku culture.
They strongly believe in their own country and have pride for it, compared to many other worthless countries where one would be called a racist for loving your own country.
The whale fishing is a prime example where Japan couldn’t care less about the rest of the world and don’t let anyone stop them from doing what they have done for a long time. Another good example is the strict customs to get into the country, I personally love that they take fingerprints and do a runthrough check of the people coming to their country so that they can keep out the scum and continue with their safe lives in the great society (with it own flaws, of course, but nothing compared to most other countries) which they have built.

And why would you miss the lives of some activists? They are an eyesore to society and don’t contribute to anything. If I had a button here that I could press that would instantly kill every single terrorist and extreme activist, I would press it without thinking for a second. It would make the world a much better place.

Japan really needs to spend more money on public relations development. They just blunder from one event to the other, and they are somewhere in the negative point range on a world PR scale. This is slightly off topic from the whaling issue, but I don’t understand why they put the least charismatic characters in front of the camera and hope to make any progress.
If they dealt with the Sea Shepard through the proper legal channels, as others have mentioned, and had someone with actual speaking skills, the government would probably be surprised with the results.
I may not have liked Koizumi’s policies, but his success was partly attributable to having charisma that was off the charts. I’m surprised people haven’t started putting two and two together yet. The country doesn’t need a simple pretty-boy, but Fukuda and Abe are pretty sad in this category.

Posted on the wrong damn article…sorry James!

Glad I wasn’t quoted. Way to attack your trusty readers Mr. Claytonian. All things read on the internet should be taken with a salt shaker. Ne?

I always get a kick out of this whole “It’s our culture!” whine that I get from Japanese associates who have never, and would not go out of their way to, eat whale. You’d think the Japanese have been engaged in deep water whaling for centuries. Fact is, they have not had ships that could get out of their own back yard, geographically speaking, until little more than a hundred years ago. The United States has MUCH more of a claim to a culture of whaling than does Japan, but America has been trying hard to develop a mature and responsible stance in the world (they have certainly screwed up over the last several years, but I am sure America will correct itself).

There wouldn’t be so much debate if Japan were restricting itself to traditional whaling methods in Japan’s own EEZ. Chasing whales in dugout canoes, however, takes the sort of fortitude that modern Japanese no longer possess.

Speaking of sinking ships, however, I wouldn’t mind see the Nishin Maru hit with a harpoon. . .an RGM-84 Harpoon SLAM, that is! Given the state of the whaling industry in Japan and the fact that it is completely reliant upon subsidies from the taxpayer, if anything were to happen to the Nishin Maru, it seems unlikely that a new whale processing factory ship would ever be built.

So, it’s ok for the Japanese to break international law (ban on commercial whaling), but not the environmentalists? Perhaps not a separate issue. Slippery slopes….

So, you’re suggesting that two wrongs make a right?

No, no, I wasn’t addressing you.

Yes. I was merely responding to JiminJapan that Japan’s claim to Okinotori is valid while Australia, bounded by the Antarctic Treaty in which it states “does not recognize, dispute, or establish territorial sovereignty claims and no new claims shall be asserted while the treaty is in force; ” has no ground to exercize their EEZ whatsoever.

I thought the Aussies are citing their Australian Whale Sanctuary which in part includes the 200 nautical miles across the coastline of Antarctic Territory.

However, my position is that the said Antarcic Territory EEZ which Australia claims conflicts with the Antarctic Treaty System which they signed states ““does not recognize, dispute, or establish territorial sovereignty claims and no new claims shall be asserted while the treaty is in force; ”

Hence, comparing Okinotori which the only addresses the controversy of whether it’s an “island or not” is not comparable Australia’s claim since it doesn’t conflict with other international agreements to date.

Shouldn’t it be “Today’s culture, if continued, is tomorrow’s tradition”?