The Institute for Cetacean Research has now uploaded two videos of the ramming by Greenpeace of their ship the Nisshin-Maru in the Antartic last Sunday, click here. The videos taken from the Nisshin-Maru show Greenpeace's Arctic Sunrise heading for, and ramming the Japanese boat.
There are now at least three videos and two photographs that contradict the Greenpeace media release and in particular the claim by Greenpeace Southern Ocean Expedition Leader Shane Rattenbury that
"...the Nisshin Mura suddenly disengaged from the supply vessel coming around a full 360 degrees before making for the Arctic Sunrise and striking it on the port side."
When will Greenpeace stand Rattenbury aside and relieve the captain of the Arctic Sunrise of his command?
Rog is a norty boy, Rog is a norty boy, Rog is a norty boy Arkkkk !!! Polly want a sustainable outcome . ARRRkkkk ~!
The parrot thing...it suits you Phil, hang on to it.
You really have to giggle at these precious tirades of piracy. Come on.
Arrrr me hearties. We might board you, take your booty, and then make you walk the plank. And we'll keel haul ya.
But today you're lucky - we going to stop you "fishing" by buzzing around under your bow in a rubber boat and painting a slogan on your vessel.
Arrr.. .. pieces of eight, pieces of eight.
Sorry, but even these pictures show that the Greenpeace vessel is in reverse.
Also an expert in maritime has said that this was the whalers fault:
"By executing a 360-degree turn at exactly the moment he [Nisshin Maru Captain] did, he created a situation where the Greenpeace vessel could not but strike the Japanese vessel."
People who want to all the evidence should also check this blog in witch the blogger changed his mind after about who was to blame after reviewing the evidence: http://dontgointothelight.com/2006/01/a_greenpeace_member_responds.php
I personally believe Greenpeace is doing a vital job by protecting whales witch are endangered. It is also putting a global spotlight on the fluting of laws designed to protect the ecosystem.
Seeing as you may wish to know this, I am an active member of Greenpeace; however I have never been employed by it or any other environmental or political organisation. I would like you to note that both links I have sent come from independent sources, in fact the blog is conservative.
If I believed Greenpeace were to blame for this I would give up my membership, the passive protest Greenpeace do is part of their philosophy and mine. In fact, it is due to this philosophy that Paul Watson set up the more militant Sea Shepard that Greenpeace regularly distances itself from.
The skipper of the Green Peace Vessel failed to comply with the rules of the sea and should be relieved of his ticket.
1)This Green peace vesel went to the area to specifically harass these vessels when and where it could, thereby legally providing motive for such an altercation.
2) The rules of the sea are that when a person in charge of a vessel has right of way they maintain course and speed until such time as a collision appears to be imminent and at that time takes the appropriate action to avoid a collision if possible.
3)The Japanese vessel was larger, slower, less manouverable and in the process of carrying out its business with another large vessel to the starboard and forrard, with small vessels also in the water.
It is clear, that with the known intention of harrassment by the Greenpeace vessel by virtue of its presence in the area, although it was to starboard of the japanese ship, that the Captain of the Greenpeace vessel, firstly placed his vessel intentionally and unecessarily in a dangerous position by course, and although he approached from the starboard, clearly failed to take the necesary actions any competent skipper would have taken to avoid a collision until the very last instance.
There is no doubt that a court of enquiry will find that the Green peace skipper not only negligent to the rules of the high seas, but will almost certainly find this skipper intentionaly caused such an incident to come about.
Greenpeace might like to have the world's anti whaling fraternity emotionally on their side, but this is an instance of high seas recklessness and the international courts will not consider this in their deliberations and nor should
they.
Once again Green peace has oer stepped the mark and I hope they pay dearly for this high seas piracy act.
NEWSFLASH: John Howard again expresses his disagreement with Japan's whaling and he thinks that Greenpeace have the right to express their views. From the SMH:
When asked if he supported Greenpeace's presence in the area Mr Howard said: "I think the people have the right to express their view providing it is lawful, providing it is not provocative, providing it is not dangerous.
"Our views on Japanese whaling are well known. We don't agree with it. We think the scientific justification lacks substance and we are very critical."
He also said "this suggestion that the Australian navy vessel be sent there is quite absurd and won't happen." and the Defence Minister declared that it is a civil matter.
http://smh.com.au/news/NATIONAL/PM-warns-both-sides-in-whaling-row/2006/01/12/1136956274337.html
So, the australian government doesn't agree that GP are engaging in illegal activities, yet they disagree with the whaling.