Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzone
I'm only talking about what that particular video shows. I obviously left it up to others to post "fair and balanced" links full of backstory opinion quotes.
|
So you purposely posted a one-sided link? I am a little lost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzone
But the events in the incident are obvious; who is to blame is another story.
|
Nothing about the event is obvious to me. Including who is to blame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzone
But for example, you see that video, then some are trying to say that it's obvious the batman boat got in the bigger ship's way, when no such thing is so. That sort of argumentation makes that side look very weak.
|
If you saw in my second link there are pics of people from the "Batman" boat holding bazooka looking projectile devices. The Japanese boat said it was being attacked. If that were to be true, are their actions not merited?
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzone
My main question remains, is whaling lucrative enough to spit in the face of conservationist efforts? Does it compare to the oil and coal industries or is it an isolated case of a little town somewhere making a living? Wouldn't it be easier enough (or at least less violent) for a whaling industry to spin out some pseudo-science a la climate denial?
|
I wish I knew the answers to these questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyororin
The Japanese video shows the SMALLER, much more maneuverable boat coming up and basically stopping in the way of the LARGER, much less maneuverable ship... And surprise surprise, the Japanese ship is unable to swerve out of the way in time.
|
Do you have a link to the Japanese video?
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzone
These whalers are ignoring international discourse and are not in waters they have dominion over. The conservationists believe they're protecting something. So is it a free for all? Because to argue the security boat was provoked by preceding incidents certainly isn't citing a case of innocent party vs attack.
|
Interesting you use the word "discourse" rather than "law".