Thomas Jefferson wrote in the United States Declaration of Independence, “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Meanwhile, a fugitive of justice, Captain Paul Watson, contends that we should have a “human right” to commit acts of eco-terrorism. A German court has issued a warrant for his arrest on the grounds that he is accused of attacking Japanese whaling ships, which enjoy a legal right to hunt for whales for scientific purposes.
Captain Watson is founder of the Sea Shepherd ship, which sails the ocean blue to terrorize whaling boats. He announced that he will file a lawsuit with the “Human Rights Commission” and confront the European Parliament to declare that he has a “human right” to attack Japanese whaling ships.
A person claiming to speak on behalf of Captain Watson issued this statement, “the case of Paul Watson would also be presented to the pertinent Human Rights commission and organizations and shall be placed on the agenda of the European Parliament, the international agreements shall be respected and it is clear that Germany might need to explain to the European Parliament the reason to accept the extradition request from a Caribbean country without an extradition agreement.”
... written by LGreene , August 01, 2012
"A German court has issued a warrant for his arrest on the grounds that he is accused of attacking Japanese whaling ships, which enjoy a legal right to hunt for whales for scientific purposes."
No, a Germany court has issued a warrant for his arrest because he violated the terms of his bail.
And even if committing acts of eco-terrorism where a human right, skipping on bail is not eco-terrorism.
... written by AnimuX , August 01, 2012
Civil disobedience is a legitimate form of protest. Watson and Sea Shepherd don't commit acts of terror. In over 30 years of direct action campaigns the organization has never killed anybody and never attempted to.
Also, the whalers in this case are effectively poachers. The International Whaling Commission (with the full support of the USA) in 1986 set all commercial whaling quotas to zero. The IWC also later established the waters around Antarctica as a sanctuary for whales.
Japan continued killing whales anyway -- which was predictable considering decades of previous regulatory violations by Japanese whalers. And the IWC, governments all over the world (including the USA), conservation groups, and scientists have called on Japan to stop killing whales.
Unfortunately, the only people doing anything about this are eco-activists -- and so the government of Japan is abusing international extradition treaties to reach out and arrest activists over incidents for which it has no national jurisdiction.
Imagine if the Syrian or Iranian governments requested extradition for a political dissident for something he said or did against their governments in international waters. That's why it's become a human rights issue.
Freedoms of speech, assembly, and legitimate protest in the form of civil disobedience are being threatened by this misuse of international agreements for a nationally (corrupt officials) supported poaching operation.
... written by MikeMcDavis , August 01, 2012
[ In over 30 years of direct action campaigns the organization has never killed anybody and never attempted to]
Except those two guys in Costa Rica, right? And that poor logger with the tree spiking event?
And it's Australia that claims that where the Japanese is whaling is a sanctuary. It's not recognized by anyone else. And the IWC has a special provision that says the Japanese are ALLOWED to whale, so it's hardly poaching.
Toss the terrorist in jail. I can't believe that people continue to support this con-man after he tried to kill two men for no reason.
... written by Rob , August 01, 2012
Damage to property. threats of violence and actual use of violent acts are not legitimate forms of protest. Demonstrate, hold rallies and offer up oratory but when you begin infringing on the rights of others while holding some of those same aspects of your own human rights above others...you'll wind up having a legal issue won't you?
... written by ROBERT H , August 02, 2012
Anismuck, if watson and the sscs have a human right to attack the Japanese and anyone else they feel like terrorizing. Then the Japanese and others have every right to retaliate! with as much force as they see fit , since they ARE doing research under the rules and review of the ICR! As for the last thirty years of not injuring anyone , you seem to forget the myriad of sscs crew members that have suffered injuries and caused the of several Japanese and two Maltese Divers that watsons crew nearly killed! watson is an Eco-terrorist and nothing less, along with being a conman and colossal COWARD! Remember watson faked being shot, and ordered Bethune to board the Japanese ship and sink the Ady Gil.
... written by Peter Williams , August 02, 2012
Civil disobedience is indeed a form of protest, but you usually associate being willing to take your lumps along with that disobedience. Simply fleeing a jurisdiction is not civil disobedience.
Unless the poster is referring to the illegal acts committed upon the high seas against ships. In that case, I would hardly associate ramming ships and tossing glass bottles of chemicals as civil disobedience either. I would call that thuggery at the least. Attacking ships is not a form of civil disobedience. Watson does not protest a law he feels is unjust; he attempts to enforce his notion of what he interprets the law to be. He cloaks himself in a UN Charter and takes matters into his own hands. That is the root of his problems in Costa Rica from years back.
It is also at the root of his problems wrt Japan in the Southern Ocean. Ramming ships, attempting to disable them at sea, and illegally boarding those ship is not a lawful form of protest. It is neither a freedom of speech nor a freedom of assembly. It is simply wrong. Japan's past regulatory issues have nothing to do with the current situation and, even if they did, they certainly would not grant Watson an open license to behave in any way as he so chooses.
... written by LGreene , August 02, 2012
The whalers aren't 'effectively poachers'. The IWC regulations allow their whaling, they even allow their whaling in the sanctuary. So doing legally allowed hunting is hardly 'effectively poaching'. I suppose driving the speed limit is 'effectively speeding'?
The SSCS actions Japanese vessels in international waters. Perhaps you should read the UNCLOS, because it specifically gives a nation jurisdiction over such actions against their flagged vessels.
If a political dissident committed a crime against a Syrian or Iranian flagged vessel in international waters then I would expect and support them to request extradition.
People who commit crimes are criminals and should expect to have warrants and be persued. It is not a human right issue. It is not like he is being accused of saying the Japanese are poachers, he is being accused of direct action in violation of UNCLOS.
Freedoms of speech, assembly, and legitimate protest are being perverted by a self proclaimed eco-terrorist for his own self aggrandizement.
... written by AnimuX , August 02, 2012
UNCLoS also specifically states that nations shall cooperate for conservation of marine mammals through the appropriate international body -- which in this case is the IWC -- and the IWC has set all commercial whaling quotas to zero since 1986.
Japan did not magically get accused of illegally killing whales by random sea hippies.
It's historical fact that Japan's whaling industry blatantly violated and subverted IWC regulations long before the moratorium. Including setting up illegal poaching operations (pirate whaling) all over the world in the 1970s and 80s that hunted without following IWC restrictions and smuggled the ill gotten meat to Japan.
Even Reagan recognized this and condemned Japan's whaling in 1988 just as JARPA began by pretending to kill whales for "research".
Is this a conservative website? We're talking about a 'nationalized' big government funded whale poaching program run by a foreign country -- in direct opposition to over 20 years of U.S. policy -- killing endangered and protected species -- many of them in an internationally established wildlife sanctuary -- all while the IWC, conservation groups, scientists, and nations including the USA repeatedly call on Japan to stop.
Labeling someone a terrorist who has never killed anybody and never attempted to kill anybody in over 30 years of activism is far fetched. Especially considering how many non-violent protesters and activists have been murdered in the same span of time -- many killed by poachers, criminals, and tyrannical governments.
If Paul Watson is a terrorist then every man who participated in the Boston Tea Party -- a celebrated act of protest in U.S. history -- is a terrorist too.
... written by LGreene , August 03, 2012
"It's historical fact that Japan's whaling industry blatantly violated and subverted IWC regulations long before the moratorium."
Yawn. It is also historical fact that Most early US contact with Japan was by whalers, but so what?
"all while the IWC, conservation groups, scientists, and nations including the USA repeatedly call on Japan to stop."
If it was illegal why don'y they tell them to stop and call it illegal rather than asking them not to do it? And hasn't the IWC and nations including the USA repeatedly called on the SSCS to stop?
... written by Knight , August 03, 2012
AnimuX blindly supports Watson in whatever he does.
... written by EX Crew , August 12, 2012
AnimuX more than likely is the fake captain, that or he is paid to trawl every forum on the net looking for anti Watson posts then bellowing 'your all liars and conspiracists out to get my beloved self proclaimed misanthropic pirate'. The pay must be good. Watson also pays a feral looking greenie reporter tree hugger in Australia to write what Watson dictates to him. Scum bag.
... written by ccarroll , August 19, 2012
if is in not illegal then why does japan feel the need to rationalize it with their research signs on their boats and have the government protect them,,
... written by LGreene , August 20, 2012
If it is illegal then pray tell us what laws they are breaking.
Where do you get the BS that they are rationalizing it by the research signs? Maybe there are research signs because they are doing research.
And one function of governments is to protect their citizens. Why are so many governments protecting their merchant ships off the coast of Somalia? Also you do realize the research is being paid for by the government, right? And maybe they are protecting their interests.
... written by Sea shepperds are gay , October 18, 2012
Stop calling him captain, the man is as much a captain as catain kangaroo. He's nothing more than a cult leader praying on young ignorant rich kids who don't have a clue. I've never seen him risk his own life only the lives of his newest followers.