American Politics XXI

[TrueMetis]

Fuck the Japanese whalers and their illegal bullshit.

Show me were it says what they're doing is illegal. The only person who says that is Watson. If it really was illegal they would be stopped by people with the authority and sanctioned by the UN.

I am a little out of touch on the whaling thing, but I think the International Convention on Whaling is the legal apparatus to regulate whaling on the high seas.

If I recall correctly, there are exceptions allowed for certain purposes.

And scientific research is one of those thing which is what the Japanese are doing. It's a little thin but currently there are multiple whale populations that could be used for a commercial hunt and have it be sustainable.

Sariel,

In your opinion is it okay to hunt species that are on the verge of extinction?

The species of whale the Japanese hunt is not on the verge of extinction. Most whale species are well on there way to recovery actually, give it a few decades and we may see more hunting. There's actually a indian tribe in America trying to get rights to hunt a few whales a year not sure what species though. Here is something that talks about it.

Interesting fact Watson thinks he can speak to whales.

ETA The Canadian government finnaly sold Watson's boat the Farley Mowat. Story

ETA2 I was kind of hoping someone would buy the Farley Mowat and turn it into a sealing vessal.

[Shryke]

Who's in the mood for some laughs?

Turns out the RNC Health Care Plan covered Elective Abortions for it's Employees up until ... today.

Oops.

A chagrined GOP Chairman Michael Steele has told Republican National Committee staff to immediately stop providing RNC employees with insurance for elective abortions — an option that Republicans strongly oppose as Democrats try to pass a health care overhaul bill.

:rofl:

[Shryke]

Show me were it says what they're doing is illegal. The only person who says that is Watson. If it really was illegal they would be stopped by people with the authority and sanctioned by the UN.

Yup. The UN is a strict policeman of the high seas.....

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Australia did find that the Japanese vessels that were hunting inside of Australia's Antarctic whale reserve were doing so illegally. That's the 2008 case Watson refers to -- or at least the case that most articles attribute to him as his basis for these actions.

However, the Japanese apparently don't (or didn't) recognise Australia's claim to the waters, so that's where things start to get murky, even aside from the loophole of whaling-as-research.

[Lord O' Bones]

If you were a major media outlet and made all of the "errors" we see from Fox Noise, I'd expect you to apologize all year.

Fine then. You have reasonable outrage and unreasonable expectations. Fair enough.

[Sariel]

Yup. The UN is a strict policeman of the high seas.....

But it's not illegal to begin with!

[Starkimus]

Starkimus, buddy, you need to understand that a majority of people feel the exact same way most of the time you post in this thread.

Yes, I realize this. The majority of the people that populate this board here do. That is why I clash so badly. However...well, nm. Just say that the majority of people I know (barring my liberal relatives from ILLIONIS! whom I love but are so much misguided) think very much like I do on National Policy that is being formed at the moment.

Anyway, expected a few more reactions than this, dont know if that is good or bad. Carry on board...I got a party to get ready for tomorrow!

Hasta!

Stark Out!

[Mya Stone]

I just can't get over the Seacrestian signouts by Starkimus to actually read the content of what is being said. Anyone else with me?

[Lord O' Bones]

I just can't get over the Seacrestian signouts by Starkimus to actually read the content of what is being said. Anyone else with me?

Seacrestian? That's just cruel.

[The Iceman of the North]

Australia did find that the Japanese vessels that were hunting inside of Australia's Antarctic whale reserve were doing so illegally. That's the 2008 case Watson refers to -- or at least the case that most articles attribute to him as his basis for these actions.

However, the Japanese apparently don't (or didn't) recognise Australia's claim to the waters, so that's where things start to get murky, even aside from the loophole of whaling-as-research.

There's two issues here, the Antarctic treaty include a clause on "freedom of scientific investigation", and the Japanese claims that their whale hunt is "scientific". This of course is debatable.

More pertinent are the fact that the Antarctic claims are just that, claims. The treaty does not "recognize, dispute, nor establish territorial sovereignty claims; no new claims shall be asserted while the treaty is in force". Until the international community recognizes the Antarctic claims, and solve the problem of the overlapping claims, the Japanese can ignore Australia.

[sologdin]

heh. my favorite thing about the international whaling commission is that japan likes to bribe up such seafaring powers as mongolia and mali to vote with the pro-whaling bloc.

[The Iceman of the North]

heh. my favorite thing about the international whaling commission is that japan likes to bribe up such seafaring powers as mongolia and mali to vote with the pro-whaling bloc.

I'm sure that anti-whaling nations like the US and UK (or anti-whaling organisations) never does something similar. ;)

My main problem with the IWC is that it has turned into a popularity contest, while the scientific committee is largely ignored.

[mcbigski]

Or if you must be a meddler, use persuasion, create awareness, start a website, go to Japan and shout from the rooftops, make a documentary. But don't use intimidation and force to impose your morality on someone. That's never justified.

Dude, when did you start to get all multicultural? In some extreme cases, it's perfectly justified to bash some heads in. Intimidation and force should be a last resort with the truly intractable, but sometimes it's justified.

As for the whales, I don't know who to believe. Pro whaling and anti whaling folks are all going to tell their own slanted stories about sustainable population versus extinctions. I'm not aware of any species of whales actually going extinct from modern whaling, which in my mind lends some slight weight to the sustainable side of the ledger but it's not big on my radar either way.

[Guy Kilmore]

I just can't get over the Seacrestian signouts by Starkimus to actually read the content of what is being said. Anyone else with me?

Sorry Starkimus, but yeah, I do the same thing Mya

[sologdin]

never does something similar

oh, no, never! the seafaring powers of austria and switzerland vote with the anti-whalers out of principle, where that principle is profitability, rather than because of bribery.

[LCOTNW]

The species of whale the Japanese hunt is not on the verge of extinction. Most whale species are well on there way to recovery actually, give it a few decades and we may see more hunting. There's actually a indian tribe in America trying to get rights to hunt a few whales a year not sure what species though. Here is something that talks about it.

The EPA de-listed the California Grey Whale back in the mid-90s and that is why the Makah sought permission to exercise their treaty rights to hunt whales. Traditionally, the whales were hunted for subsistence, but there was a long period where they were not allowed to do so because the population was endangered (mind you, not because of the miniscule take of indigenous people). So, when the species was no longer endangered according to ESA criteria, the Makah got support from the Clinton administration to petition the IWC for a schedule that allowed them to take some whales each year. The Russians have supported the right of indigenous Chukotka to harvest whales and have obtained permission from the IWC for a subsistance take for those people. In support of the Makah, the US worked out a deal through the IWC that allowed the Makah a piece of that action. Technically, the Makah were not reliant on whales for subsistence like the Chukotka, but they did have a treaty right, and the IWC recognised the cultural need of the Makah for whom the whale plays a central role. The Makah did harvest some whales under this agreement, but that was several years ago, and I have lost track of the current situation.

[Annelise]

This about covers it for me:

"We're too scared to have real trials in our country" is a level of cowardice unmatched in the world.

By Glenn Greenwald

Understanding and Combatting Terrorism, USMC Major S.M. Grass, 1989:

Terrorism is a psychological weapon and is directed to create a general climate of fear. As one definition cogently notes, "terror is a natural phenomenon, terrorism is the conscious exploitation of it." Terrorism utilizes violence to coerce governments and their people by inducing fear.

William Josiger, Fear Factor: The Impact of Terrorism on Public Opinion in the United States and Great Britain, 2006:

At its heart terrorism is about fear. While terrorist attacks destroy, maim and kill, the intended audience for these attacks is almost always the whole body politic and the terrorist's goal is to strike fear into their hearts.

GOP House Leader John Boehner, condemning Obama's decision to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to New York for trial, yesterday:

The Obama Administration’s irresponsible decision to prosecute the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks in New York City puts the interests of liberal special interest groups before the safety and security of the American people.

This is literally true: the Right's reaction to yesterday's announcement -- we're too afraid to allow trials and due process in our country -- is the textbook definition of "surrendering to terrorists." It's the same fear they've been spewing for years. As always, the Right's tough-guy leaders wallow in a combination of pitiful fear and cynical manipulation of the fear of their followers. Indeed, it's hard to find any group of people on the globe who exude this sort of weakness and fear more than the American Right.

People in capitals all over the world have hosted trials of high-level terrorist suspects using their normal justice system. They didn't allow fear to drive them to build island-prisons or create special commissions to depart from their rules of justice. Spain held an open trial in Madrid for the individuals accused of that country's 2004 train bombings. The British put those accused of perpetrating the London subway bombings on trial right in their normal courthouse in London. Indonesia gave public trials using standard court procedures to the individuals who bombed a nightclub in Bali. India used a Mumbai courtroom to try the sole surviving terrorist who participated in the 2008 massacre of hundreds of residents. In Argentina, the Israelis captured Adolf Eichmann, one of the most notorious Nazi war criminals, and brought him to Jerusalem to stand trial for his crimes.

It's only America's Right that is too scared of the Terrorists -- or which exploits the fears of their followers -- to insist that no regular trials can be held and that "the safety and security of the American people" mean that we cannot even have them in our country to give them trials.

http://salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenw...3d643cc0f3b65c7

[Annelise]

But for people like Dick Cheney and a fucking hapless moron like John Boehner (seriously GOP, was Denny Hastert not a lesson?) to be coming out and trying to politicize this blows my mind.

Don't forget Giuliani. I believe he's hitting all the shows tomorrow. At least Bloomberg said they're up for it, thank god.

[The_BlauerDragon]

Since this is the politics thread, I thought I'd stop in and see if anyone has discussed this yet. Personally, I find it hilarious. I've already ordered a T-Shirt... and I'm trying to find a bumper sticker or window decal.

[TerraPrime]

Since this is the politics thread, I thought I'd stop in and see if anyone has discussed this yet. Personally, I find it hilarious. I've already ordered a T-Shirt... and I'm trying to find a bumper sticker or window decal.

Which aspect is hilarious to you, precisely?

That your president is being compared to an egomaniac who established a cult of personality?

That you agree with the above assessment and then someone else across the world made a series of merchandise to express that sentiment?

That the Chinese business entrepreneurs are making money off of an American President?

That Obama is likened to a cultural-historical icon force-fed to the populace who are now less than subtle about their ambivalent evaluation of that icon?