Greenpeace Japan gets support from Japanese [Archive]

Chi65

Jan 25, 2008, 01:58

Some addition from an article, thats generally interesting:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/whale-watch/spy-v-spy-as-airbus-joins-the-fight-against-whaling/2008/01/21/1200764171935.html

Spy v spy as Airbus joins the fight against whaling

January 22, 2008

AUSTRALIA has flown its first whaling surveillance mission as forces opposing the Japanese fleet in the Antarctic are stepped up.

The flight by an extended range Airbus, along with the sighting of a Japanese fishing boat said to be shadowing Sea Shepherd, raise spying over the "scientific" whaling program to a new level.

There are also signs that international attention on the program is creating unrest in Tokyo.

The Airbus A319, fitted with surveillance and imaging equipment, is being used by the Rudd Government, with the Customs patrol ship Oceanic Viking, to gather evidence for potential international legal action against the whaling.

The aircraft performed well on a six-hour low-level search out of Hobart on Sunday, locating two foreign fishing vessels in Antarctic seas, a spokeswoman for the Home Affairs Minister, Bob Debus, said yesterday.

Bad weather prevented it from flying into its original search area but, depending on the weather and the activities of the whaling fleet, the A319 would fly another mission again soon, the spokeswoman said.

Greenpeace International's whales campaign co-ordinator, Sara Holden, said the vessel Esperanza was still following the Nisshin Maru and in turn was being tailed by the Yushin Maru No. 2, the catcher ship at the centre of last week's detention crisis involving Sea Shepherd activists.

Sea Shepherd's leader, Paul Watson, said his vessel, the Steve Irwin, had been followed for three days by a Japanese trawler.

"The Fukuyoshi Maru No. 68 is a large drag trawler," Captain Watson said. "It's a fast ship and can easily stay out of reach of the Steve Irwin. The Sea Shepherd helicopter has flown over and it is not equipped with any fishing gear. There is evidence of electronic surveillance gear."

A Japanese Government spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Ms Holden said: "So long as they are not whaling, that's the point. The fact we are in day 10 without any whales being taken is fantastic. We suspect that the orders from Tokyo are for nobody to see them whaling. This is a delicate time for them politically."

She said Japanese people were raising doubts about whaling.

Greenpeace's Japanese language website had leapt in popularity. The number of page views jumped last week from 10,000 a day to 10,000 in one hour.

"Visitors to the website are also signing up to a online petition asking Japanese ministers to stop squandering taxpayers' money on whaling," said Dave Walsh, a Greenpeace spokesman.

Sarapva

Jan 25, 2008, 07:58

This is getting to be like a spy movie! The spies are being spied on .....

This is an interesting article by Junichi Sato from Greenpeace Japan:

http://www.greenpeace.org/australia/news-and-events/opinion/truths-hit-home

Until very recently, the whaling issue had been almost non-existent in the Japanese news media, due to the self-censorship within its ranks.

This was created because of the nature of the whaling debate.

Taking the anti-whaling position was considered to be taking a position that was anti-Japanese culture.

The anonymous anti-Australian video on YouTube implies exactly that. It is incorrect, a misreading of the anti-whaling campaign.

It is an attempt to divert the whaling debate towards something else.

To counteract any such perceptions in Japan, Greenpeace's key message is "We love Japan, but whaling breaks our hearts".

Linking whaling with nationalism in Japan has made it very difficult for the media to criticise the country's whaling policy.

Mr. Sato also says that there is what's called a "whaler's sanctuary" in Japan that protects politicians and whalers who have money in whaling. They have been able to control media access to what they're doing. He also says that the Democratic Party of Japan is gaining popularity and might be able to take more action against whaling if they can win the next election.

Chi65

Jan 25, 2008, 08:50

Yep, thanks, and the controllers underrate the powers of the internet immensely ...
and those Japanese, who are already able to read a lot more than just japanese languages. . .

I am not surprised about the media control at all, nor about leading to false paths. We had enough of those here already to know their games. Only, who lies, has shorter legs, as we say in Germany. Sooner or later it will come out anyhow.

And the fanatic racist-section is too close to already known structures of the past.

Once this is known, certain parts will loose a lot of credibility. The usual Japanese is not silly at all, in fact, I always adored their quick understandings, once it was on the table, which is a case of information, and that can be found worldwide nowadays. And they will find it for sure.

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 25, 2008, 09:00

Excllent article form the man, Sato san himself.

And the Greenpeace anti whaling lobby's motto:

We love Japan, but whaling breaks our hearts:cool:

Pretty much puts the misconceptions straight for the forum members who are claiming this is about racism, not whaling, although I note, their statements appear totally ignorant.

As far as I'm concerned, YouTube doesn't play into my hands, as let's face it, any Tom, Dick or Harry can make and post a video claiming what they like, willy nilly, simply expressing their own democratic opinion, just as they do on this forum.
:souka:
I enjoyed the article.

Thanks Sara for posting:-)

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 00:40

Most of you are over-optimistic about some Japanese being against whaling. Japan is a democratic country so there are always people for and against every issue. As for whaling, even the Green Peace sponsored poll indicates that Japanese who oppose commercial whaling is a minority.

If you really know the Japanese sentiment about whaling, you would realize that those who are reluctant to commercial whaling are so because they don't think it's worth the effort to fight the outside pressure. Japan has traditionally been very weak against foreign pressure, especially from the US. A lot of people still think that if they get so angry about whaling, let's just give up and avoid the trouble. The anti-whaling sentiment coming from the resentment of the whaling act itself is rather rare in Japan.

This mentality still exist in Japanese for many other issues, like the BSE testing issue on imported beef, but Japan and its government have been unusually resilient against the foreign pressure on whaling. I believe there are lots of reasons for that which I am not going into here, but for Japan to take such a stand in a issue like whaling shows how important whaling still is to the Japanese culture.

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 00:49

Largely thanks to the dangerous protests against whaling fleets televised in Japan, Green Peace has garnered more negative impression than positive from Japanese people. They must be totally ignorant of the docile nature of the Japanese public to understand that physical protests are frowned upon in Japan, or they do it anyway for PR overseas.

If you ask average Japanese, most of them will tell you that GP is too radical and they actually have negative impression on them. If the goal is to change the mind of Japanese public, I would not count on GP which is already labeled environmental nut-heads in Japan.

Chi65

Jan 26, 2008, 03:14

Sorry, but I don't believe this, and the latest raise in visitors on the greenpeace pages show other signs.
The whaling-PR machinery in Japan runs, we know about the control and manipulations, but there are also people driving around peacefully to film and ask the public about their opinion and tradition, and the answers are more in the direction, that they had a time, when whaling was necessary and the meat cheap and available (while it is expensive now and thus not really a question to wish to keep it up forever), and they were very concerned about keeping the traditional balance. If so, like just hunting a few whales (under 10!) a year or so and only the near by ones.
And the hunting tradition is not that old at all (16th century), it is in contrary believed, that once before that they only used the stranded ones! So you can see in several museums even.
One must not talk them into something, thats not the theme nor tradition, they know very well, how it really is, and say it openly at enough places. They are not silly, as expected.
For those I have a lot of respect and understanding and thanks for telling the visitors in a friendly way, which also reaches the public.

The radical whalers are blinded by commerce, and its very interesting, that this is very well understood.

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 13:39

Chi, believe what you want, but you obviously lack the ability to assess the true Japanese sentiment on the whaling issue, only listening to what you want to hear. If you observe Japanese media or are familiar with the current atmosphere in Japan, it's pretty clear that there's little momentum in anti-whaling sentiment within Japan. I suspect the increase in access to the GP website is purely due to the increased attention to the issue itself, especially after the recent outrageous Sea Shepard's act of terrorism.

The physical protest tactics employed by GP and Sea Shepard are never received well by the Japanese culture. In fact, it triggers negative impression on the issues they protest. If they haven't realized that, their PR is pathetically in need of overhaul.

A better explanation, however, is that their media stunts are intended for the audience outside Japan to get people like you excited so that they can attract more money and resources. They've been successful in that regard, but if you really want to change the sentiment of the Japanese people, GP/Sea Shepards are doing exactly opposite. After all, those organizations don't really want anti-whaling campaign to come to an end.

Chi65

Jan 26, 2008, 13:48

I have not been talking about sea shepherds.
And if there are considerably many more coming also for signing a wish/petition etc., its not just curiosity. I think, the blindness is on anther side, also transferring the PR methods from the whalers, which is not new here.

Their "stunts" are not for getting people excited, but for the whales and making people aware of the false game, that is played, which was clear for me even before I knew about them, nor knew, that greenpeace came to the same conclusions... if you would have read backthreads, you would know this now.

You can of course make up your own stories, but they are not mine.

Goldiegirl

Jan 26, 2008, 13:48

Chi65

Jan 26, 2008, 13:50

Which is what I mean with false game. . .

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 14:20

I searched for Japanese blog entries on whaling by Google. I clicked on the first couple of dozen blogs that showed up and tallied according to the writers' opinions regarding whaling. 20 of them were clearly in support of whaling, many of them disgusted with the recent Sea Shepard and Green Peace protests (as I imagined). 4 of them were anti-whaling in nature of which two of the writers were living outside Japan (one in Australia, complaining how Australians accuse the author about whaling).

You may not see it through the filtered foreign media and your desire to not see what you don't want, the current anti-whaling protests are not changing how Japanese feel about whaling.

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 14:27

Their "stunts" are not for getting people excited, but for the whales and making people aware of the false game, that is played, which was clear for me even before I knew about them, nor knew, that greenpeace came to the same conclusions...

Yes, GP does understand their stunts would get to you, anti-whaling generous donors outside Japan. I am saying that their stunts do little to change the opinion of the Japanese public, but rather serve to fuel the pro-whaling sentiment based on nationalistic arguments. If GP didn't see that by now, their PR people are blind. But again, they want this to continue.

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 14:41

The Japanese censor tv programs that are against whaling. When I was at the hotel watching CNN-J the topic of whaling came up and the screen went black. Hmm, then when the show was repeated later that night it went black just for the anti-whaling piece again. I don't think most Japanese get to see what whaling really looks like.

I've been living in the US for a while but I've never seen cows, pigs, or kangaroos getting slaughtered on national TV. For Japanese, whales are essentially the same as these animals we kill for food, so there's really no motivation to watch how whales are killed on 7 o'clock news. Everybody (not only Japanese) knows it's ugly to kill animals we eat, but we choose to close our eyes, at least keep it away from TV screens.

You can accuse the Japanese TV for not showing enough whale hunting scenes on prime time TV after the American networks start airing what's going on in the slaughterhouses in California.

kame

Jan 26, 2008, 15:34

I cross searched Japanese blogs using keywords "whaling" and "Green Peace" (in Japanese) using Google. Out of the first dozen hits in which the writers discussed Green Peace in this context, not a single entry praised or said anything positive about Green Peace.

This cursory observation is consistent with my previous argument that the anti-whaling tactics of GP is not working if their goal is to change the attitudes of Japanese people toward whaling. It may puzzle you, but this is nothing difficult to predict if you knew Japan and its culture. Could the giant international environmental organization be stupid enough to overlook such an obvious marketing strategy? I don't think so.

Goldiegirl

Jan 26, 2008, 21:54

There's no reason to watch theory sounds very scary to me. And I live in Wisconsin where cows and other animals are slaughtered and it is shown on tv, especially when they are abusing the animals before slaughter. As for changing the attitudes of Japanese people I think it's hard. I was amazed while in Guam, that all these Japanese paid 70 dollars to go and watch whales and dolphins and were ohhing and ahhing over their beauty, but they are the same people who will tell you that Japan needs to kill them for science and they eat them. I just can't figure that one out.

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 26, 2008, 23:00

There's nor reason to watch theory sounds very scary to me. And I live in Wisconsin where cows and other animals are slaughtered and it is shown on tv, especially when they are abusing the animals before slaughter. As for changing the attitudes of Japanese people I think it's hard. I was amazed while in Guam, that all these Japanese paid 70 dollars to go and watch whales and dolphins and were ohhing and ahhing over their beauty, but they are the same people who will tell you that Japan needs to kill them for science and they eat them. I just can't figure that one out.

Well said and that also always had me perplexed.

Howabout a dog being tied to a 50cm lead oustisde it's kennel at the front of a hosue 24/7.

I used to see this in Japan all the time, the dog had usually gone mentally insane, and yet, people would pass everyday, the people that think dogs are "Kawaii". Who are they trying to kid!

Chi65

Jan 26, 2008, 23:35

Thats the shizophrenia these days, pretty much like the nazi, who went on killing kids alike as a job to feed his own kids. . .
If you have seen the videos, that I posted (and thats only the beginning of such actions), there is this former whaler, who was in the Olympic project and then stepped out of the company to do his whale-watching job to consciously "give it back", as he clearly says. Thats the way to come to own balance and mental health. And it also pays off for him. No need to worry about other ways. They are very well possible, in case, there are questions about how else to survive.
And he is an insider, which says it all!

People like him do more for the Japan's reputation than loads of fighters for killings (1000 for science? What a bad joke, still, no need to go to Greenpeace, to understand that, people can think themselves, but then may join others).
Don't anyone tell a German, we had it all to the extreme in our own past, and the cinema was packed when the film about scientific killings of the Japanese in older times came here, many have seen this during a Berlinale film festival! It was plain horror...such an argument wakes up such memories, very vividly, surely not only in me.

It will be like digging their own holes, as we say in Germany. We did this too, if anyone remembers. . .once you start in this direction. . .

It may need more time to inform people about all this, but it will come. No matter, what.

Now the censoring issue too, fine, just go on whalers, we know, who needs such censorings, those who have to hide something. Its kind of naive.

And, Kame, as I said before, there are many Japanese, that can read english, thus all the english pages in the internet, that are related, from all over the world. Its open and free for everyone to see. And whoever can read english, can also translate and spread around, any which way.
Without controls. . .no way back to old dictatorships in the end.

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 00:28

And as long as no one can explain in depth, why any whale has to be killed for scientific reasons, nor what these scientific reasons imply, and why they are so necessary, when the meat is highly toxic, yet sold after such a research, even as health food (another big dangerous lie, and bluff, that shows, how little they care about the people, and reminds on "soylent green" again) etc. etc., I do not buy this reason at all.
The whaling commision's reputation isn't good anyhow, nor is it a global master above all.
One should really rather do a research about them and the reasons for those many (how many within all these years?), who stepped out. . .

I am sure, enough of this is known to Greenpeace, by the way.

Who cares about people?
Obviously only those, who care about whales.

(And one should not try to fool synaesthetes, we can "see", where the "wrong colours" in an argument appear. . .)

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 02:33

As for changing the attitudes of Japanese people I think it's hard. I was amazed while in Guam, that all these Japanese paid 70 dollars to go and watch whales and dolphins and were ohhing and ahhing over their beauty, but they are the same people who will tell you that Japan needs to kill them for science and they eat them. I just can't figure that one out.

I don't see why it's so hard. There are petting zoos in the US where kids cuddle pigs, sheeps, and cows, and they eat burgers like nothing happened very next day. People go watch kangaroos 'cause they are cute and they are killed in millions and most of them are eaten. What's the difference?

People can and do admire, love, and eat same animal. They do it all the time.

Goldiegirl

Jan 27, 2008, 02:40

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 03:05

We know that we eat animals...we don't do it in the name of science. I don't believe tht petting zoo's are humane and wouldn't subject any animal to that environment. Just as I don't think zoo's are in the best interest of animals. The Japanese I know are just not informed on whaling and how it's done. The sheer lack of knowledge is amazing. My 8 year old nephews know where hot dogs come from...my 40 year old husband thinks Japan kills whales for science. Go Greenpeace!

My point was that people can admire and eat whales at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive.

As for scientific whaling, I can understand your argument. My answer is that if you don't like it, you should agree to compromise and let them hunt limited number of whales commercially. The irrational pressure of few anti-whaling countries is what's creating the current situation.

And again, if you want Japanese people to stop eating whales, GP is certainly not doing a good job. All they are doing well is to cultivate anti-whaling sentiment outside Japan that result in more bucks in their pocket.

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 03:21

And, Kame, as I said before, there are many Japanese, that can read english, thus all the english pages in the internet, that are related, from all over the world. Its open and free for everyone to see. And whoever can read english, can also translate and spread around, any which way.
Without controls. . .no way back to old dictatorships in the end.

It's true that many Japanese can read English news on the Internet. In fact, many of the blogs I browsed yesterday directly referenced the news from BBC and other foreign media that reported on whaling. Japanese media also report the overseas reactions quite well. Don't just stereotypically assume there's "censorship" or bias without even reading what Japanese media are reporting (can you even read Japanese?).

Back to those blogs, many Japanese (not newspaper writers) fully understand the foreign (especially Australian) reactions and express their disgust in the way anti-whaling organizations/governments pressure Japan. If you really want to know if the current anti-whaling campaign is doing any good to change the public opinion in Japan, you should try to read these articles written by average Japanese. It's not just the government and a couple of companies fighting for whaling.

If you think it's the few hundred million dollar worth of money (which is nothing compared to other interests) that drive the Japanese whaling, there's more at stake in terms of donations for Green Peace in this campaign. They sure suck in achieving the goal to stop whaling, but as a profit maker, they are pretty damn good.

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 04:33

The irrational pressure of few anti-whaling countries is what's creating the current situation.

You have obviuosly troubles in seeing see cause and effects. Which has happened before (wrong target etc.). . .
Its called scapegoating, from your side. If there would not have been an issue with effects for more than just the Japanese, others would not have invented.
Even I was baffled by the unfair scapegoatings of "your side" (which includes other pro whalers as well). . .not just to me, but I watched it happening to others too. You even target peacefull ones, thus are creating according echoes yourself.

This way you will not find the truth nor balance.

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 04:50

It's true that many Japanese can read English news on the Internet. In fact, many of the blogs I browsed yesterday directly referenced the news from BBC and other foreign media that reported on whaling. Japanese media also report the overseas reactions quite well. Don't just stereotypically assume there's "censorship" or bias without even reading what Japanese media are reporting (can you even read Japanese?).

Back to those blogs, many Japanese (not newspaper writers) fully understand the foreign (especially Australian) reactions and express their disgust in the way anti-whaling organizations/governments pressure Japan. If you really want to know if the current anti-whaling campaign is doing any good to change the public opinion in Japan, you should try to read these articles written by average Japanese. It's not just the government and a couple of companies fighting for whaling.

If you think it's the few hundred million dollar worth of money (which is nothing compared to other interests) that drive the Japanese whaling, there's more at stake in terms of donations for Green Peace in this campaign. They sure suck in achieving the goal to stop whaling, but as a profit maker, they are pretty damn good.

Just look into the stick in your own eye. . .any hate towards Greenpeace is once more wrong target. . .

and you obviously only see those, who support your case. Who tells you, for example, that those bloggers are the average of the japanese? They could as well be parts of the PR machinery, you sound like one of them, for example. . .
for pay they would do anything, I know. Who pays you for this??

You must not fool a culture manager of my age and experience about marketing methods. . .I have been "backstage" more than enough.

What counts much more indeed is a sudden huge raise of other "average ones", who sign in for Greenpeace.
And I hope so for other equal forums as well. They will find out to be handled with understanding and respect, as also can be seen with the whale love wagon project.

Its not about eating habits, as you and others of the "machinery" constantly wish to show, thats such a worn out and misused term now, that it only makes me laugh. Go for Cannibalism then too, as a consequence, please, thats an even older "habit".;-)

I already said at the beginning, if it happens with respect and right proportions, I would not say anything at all. But you choose not even to search nor ask for this statement and constantly(or stubbornly) project other things, exactly like your forrunners. This is very typical for your kind and says it all once more. Its plain provable blind scapegoating from you and your kind and nothing else.

Why don't you just see the simple truth?

By the way, there is a new thread about the scientific whaling story. . .

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 27, 2008, 08:26

Don't just stereotypically assume there's "censorship" or bias without even reading what Japanese media are reporting (can you even read Japanese?).

A few good Japanese sites with English news. No need to read Japanese, unless of course you go onto a site with Japanese text only.

The Japanese media are not reporting the truth as we saw from Junichi Sato from GREENPEACE Japan.

Please read his article entitled: THE TRUTH HITS HOME
http://www.greenpeace.org/australia/news-and-events/opinion/truths-hit-home
I think it was Chi or Sara that posted it and is really does echo the truth. Great stuff as always..

Hopefully we can save the whales from mass murder this time around.

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 09:25

Green Peace is not a journalistic organization. Of course they want to promote that their campaign is getting support from Japan, so that they continue to draw donations from those anti-whalers outside Japan. Don't attempt to accuse media bias without even reading/watching them. As far as the bias is concerned, the US/Australian/BBC reports are far more unfair than anything I've seen.

If you have lived in Japan long enough and understand how Japanese would perceive the aggressive style of the organizations protests, it's not a matter of question that their tactics will only antagonize average Japanese.

I guess that the agressive protesting like those practiced by Sea Shepard and GP are actually popular in Western cultures. It just doesn't work in Japan and probably not in other Asian countries as well.

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 09:36

You once more mix different sources, blind hate does not see right. . .

Sea shepherd is not Greenpeace!

And if Greenpeace wishes to get support from Japan, to help Japan coming back to proportions and real roots, there is nothing wrong about it.

What do you call your fake "scientific" hunting then? Non-agressive?. . .
Don't you see, that the rest of the world is already wondering about that japanese view, if not laughing? When such obviously unnecessary mass-killings appear (is THAT popular in Japan?), politeness is maybe not possible any more. It was tried other ways before, more than enough, by the way. Also by me and others here, actually. But who chooses not to read this, is no polite partner either. Facts.

And that works nowhere, as can be seen.

But the Wagon project shows very well, that japanese people are in no way "antagonizied", for example, nor the museums etc.

Sounds like wishfull thinking from the whaler's side after all, to see it upside down.

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 09:46

J
and you obviously only see those, who support your case. Who tells you, for example, that those bloggers are the average of the japanese? They could as well be parts of the PR machinery, you sound like one of them, for example. . .
for pay they would do anything, I know. Who pays you for this??.

Please don't make false accusations without any basis. I am not paid to do this. If I were, I'd be more careful and thorough. You have no basis on your conspiracy theory either. GP people are paid pretty well to do their promotions, by the way, through your donations.

For some reason, Japanese really like blogs. Today's nikkei reports that there are 13.5 million blogs written by Japanese (over 1 in 10 Japanese). If you know how popular blogs are in Japan and read some of them (which you don't) I think it's fair to say that they capture a good part of average Japanese population. Definitely more representative of Japanese public opinions than Green Peace's press releases that you seem to like.

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 10:01

Please don't make false accusations without any basis. I am not paid to do this. If I were, I'd be more careful and thorough. You have no basis on your conspiracy theory either. GP people are paid pretty well to do their promotions, by the way, through your donations.
For some reason, Japanese really like blogs. Today's nikkei reports that there are 13.5 million blogs written by Japanese (over 1 in 10 Japanese). If you know how popular blogs are in Japan and read some of them (which you don't) I think it's fair to say that they capture a good part of average Japanese population. Definitely more representative of Japanese public opinions than Green Peace's press releases that you seem to like.

I can make as many false accusations as you, by the way, and you make a lot.
I am completely independant and have not yet donated, thats as much a false claim.
Oh, yes, we have bases, who is advised by certain people and in which way, says it all, and everybody can read this. Its not me, making this up. Nor do I make up the blackouts in the TV etc. And since we know the real reasons for the killings now, it explains itself.
I don't need to read the Greenpeace press, to know, whats going on there (I can think for myself and find own sources, good man), and we had many other sources already. But we had such discussions already on another thread, bla bla.
Blogs are as popular elsewhere in the world, by the way, thats not a japanese speciality, nor representative. It may also show, how uninformed many are, by the way.
I know the rule of the press, and who is behind those advisors for it or behind.
We all know this by now.
It spreads by itself, once the can is open.

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 10:20

I don't need to read the Greenpeace press, to know, whats going on there (I can think for myself and find own sources, good man), and we had many other sources already. But we had such discussions already on another thread, bla bla.
Blogs are as popular elsewhere in the world, by the way, thats not a japanese speciality, nor representative. It may also show, how uninformed many are, by the way.
I know the rule of the press, and who is behind those advisors for it or behind.
We all know this by now.
It spreads by itself, once the can is open.

I have been talking about how Greenpeace's tactics are perceived by Japanese people and how they are reported by Japanese media.

Your statements have been based on your limited sources that feed you what you want to hear, without any attempt to understand how real Japanese people are reacting to the recent turn of events. I am just pointing to alternative sources of information and perspective that doesn't get much attention here.

You are free to keep ignoring the fact that the current anti-whaling tactics represented by GP is NOT working. In fact, it's disgusting the majority of Japanese who were rather neutral (or you can call uninterested) to take supportive sentiment for whaling (which pro-whalers welcome).

It's in GP's best interest to perform sensational physical protests that are given free advertisement in prime-time TV, which brings in more bucks to feed the huge organization.

Well, it appears to me that the people who give money to GP don't really care about the cause either, because GP isn't really doing their job right as far as anti-whaling campaign is concerned. They just like to feel good about themselves thinking that they are helping to save whales.

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 10:45

What do you call your fake "scientific" hunting then? Non-agressive?. . .

I think there's case for both sides with regard to "scientific" whaling. They do obtain useful data out of killing 1000 whales, but I don't think they would collect the same amount of data if they were allowed to hunt the same number of whales commercially.

I don't really care what they call the whaling operation, be it scientific or commercial. What's important is how many and which whales are hunted, and whether or not the hunting is done sustainably. In the political climate surrounding whaling over the past few decades, this was the political compromise that both sides of whaling at IWC reached, at least for the last few years.

Australia and GP seem to want to open the door to tip the balance again. It could very well result in more whales hunted than status quo. Well, GP will have more reason to bash Japan to attract more money, good for them. If governments like Australia really want to pressure Japan out of whaling, it's going to cost a lot on both sides iboth politically and econonically. Are they ready to take the heat?

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 11:23

I think there's case for both sides with regard to "scientific" whaling. They do obtain useful data out of killing 1000 whales, but I don't think they would collect the same amount of data if they were allowed to hunt the same number of whales commercially.

I don't really care what they call the whaling operation, be it scientific or commercial. What's important is how many and which whales are hunted, and whether or not the hunting is done sustainably. In the political climate surrounding whaling over the past few decades, this was the political compromise that both sides of whaling at IWC reached, at least for the last few years.

Australia and GP seem to want to open the door to tip the balance again. It could very well result in more whales hunted than status quo. Well, GP will have more reason to bash Japan to attract more money, good for them. If governments like Australia really want to pressure Japan out of whaling, it's going to cost a lot on both sides iboth politically and econonically. Are they ready to take the heat?

Well, we have our informations now about "scientific whaling", and that its not necessary to kill any whale for this, and this is very well important and out of balance, if you ignore it or not. And it is the main reason for protests worldwide. You are very fixed on GP, shall I give you some more names??

For example, what WDCS is doing? Or other alike and cooperative working specialists?
I may come to it piece by piece. It is partly already mentioned before.
They also have their ways, also to the japanese press, as well as to the international one, with very inside informations, because attending the IWC activities with specialists, and also spread the informations, maybe even more vivid and authorized than GP.
And they have very detailed reports, that confirm a lot! For example, that there are in fact enough ways without killings. GP and others are not making anything up at all. Its clearly a fake label from Japan.

It has little to do with Australia in the end, thats another fixed idea, as becomes more and more clear.
You are hooking onto the wrong parts. The problem is Japan itself and it's (most probably suggested, by someone, that we know already) scapegoatings (for which you are a good example).
But facts are facts, particularly real scientific ones. . .thus not limited sources at all.

Its really not difficult to get the whole picture, slowly, but surely.

The rest is unimportant, because the wheels are turning aready.
I feel very sorry for Japan's reputation.

And siding with Bush now does not make it better at all. . .

kame

Jan 27, 2008, 11:32

You are very fixed on GP, shall I give you some more names??

I thought this was a thread about Greenpeace. If not, please make your thread titles clearer in the future.

Goldiegirl

Jan 27, 2008, 11:33

I hate the whole culture issue as well as the scientific issue that Japanese claim. It is not preserving Japanese culture, just as they don't walk around in Kimono as daily clothing anymore. There is not a cultural need for whaling in Japan on a commercial level. It's just because they can get away with it.

Chi65

Jan 27, 2008, 11:42

I thought this was a thread about Greenpeace. If not, please make your thread titles clearer in the future.

It was not "my thread", you often have problems with readings. . .

And the other parts were very well GP related, because they have the same informations for sure, thus.

I hate the whole culture issue as well as the scientific issue that Japanese claim. It is not preserving Japanese culture, just as they don't walk around in Kimono as daily clothing anymore. There is not a cultural need for whaling in Japan on a commercial level. It's just because they can get away with it.

Its a blown up Promotion trick, Goldiegirl. Once you can see the real puppetmasters, its obvious, right. :-)
Its a kind of misuse, feels as bad to me.

Good night! xx

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 27, 2008, 13:11

Chi65

Jan 28, 2008, 10:00

Or the UN etc.. . . . . . .

Taiko666

Jan 28, 2008, 11:23

especially after the recent outrageous Sea Shepard's act of terrorism.

It amazes me that some people equate two guys in a dinghy delivering a letter to a whaling ship 'terrorism'. Illegal boarding, assault even, but not terrorism. It gives the impression that you're far too divorced from reality to have any credible opinions on this issue.

Chi65

Jan 28, 2008, 11:26

He just repeats what the press in Japan is also saying, sad, isn't it? There are many out of proportion at the moment. . .

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 28, 2008, 18:17

It amazes me that some people equate two guys in a dinghy delivering a letter to a whaling ship 'terrorism'. Illegal boarding, assault even, but not terrorism. It gives the impression that you're far too divorced from reality to have any credible opinions on this issue.

Well said . . . . . .

It's not as if the whalers wouldn't have expected something down those lines.

It's turned into a game the whole thing..

Sarapva

Jan 29, 2008, 01:45

I think harpooning, shooting, cutting, drowning and dragging with ropes are more of an act of terrorism than jumping aboard a ship and not leaving.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 02:08

. . .and they can't talk us into the opposite, particularly not violently. . .its getting very absurd at some places.
...also the way they feed their own children with poison and even wish to extend that.
What worries me is their minds and children.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 02:25

the culutre impiralists and the imperialistic vegeterians are trying to set a new world order. eating whales is no worse or better than eating pigs and cows. infact it is much more energy efficient and ecological sound to eat whales than cows and from a buddhist perspective it is better to kill 1 big animal tha 10 small. there is not one reason to why western imperialists and other closet racists should deny japanese from eating whale meat.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 03:08

See this and read carefully and exact, its from www.sciencedirect.com, and its long!:

It’s not just poor science – Japan’s ‘‘scientific’’ whaling may
be a human health risk too:

http://www.hsus.org/web-files/PDF/whale-meat-health-risks-article.pdf

in short:
Whale meat products from several species often contain pollutants such as PCBs, mercury, and dioxins, also found in research whaling meat.

and this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamata_disease

Minamata disease (水俣病, Minamata-byō?), sometimes referred to as Chisso-Minamata disease (チッソ水俣病, Chisso-Minamata-byō?), is a neurological syndrome caused by severe mercury poisoning. Symptoms include ataxia, numbness in the hands and feet, general muscle weakness, narrowing of the field of vision and damage to hearing and speech. In extreme cases, insanity, paralysis, coma and death follow within weeks of the onset of symptoms. A congenital form of the disease can also affect fetuses in the womb.

:-(

It needs another thread and was touched as theme before already.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 03:10

if you speak english stop projecting links.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 03:17

No, why?. . . . . . . . .its provable facts.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 03:27

my buttocks is bigger than easter. that is a fact. please explain why it is a fact instead of projecting links.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 03:31

Please explain, why it is a projection instead of facts.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 03:38

write in your own words. we are readers and writers.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 07:37

I did already. . . . .

and see this one on top of the section, please:

"Articles, statistical data and personal opinions"

Taiko666

Jan 29, 2008, 17:13

Your offensive rants just show that you're losing the plot.

You've said on another thread that being racist is a 'right.'

So accusing opposers of whaling of racism is not only a completely unjustified, obscene slur, it's also going against your own stated principles.

Taiko666

Jan 29, 2008, 17:34

Well, I know that Greenpeace has at least some support in Japan: my Japanese partner abhors whaling and supports Greenpeace wholeheartedly :-)

As I've said before, I'm firmly convinced the whole whaling issue is being cynically used by the J-Gov to keep the J-media and public in the nationalistic camp.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 17:44

Boohoo. Taiko666. You sound like one of those grumpy gaijins who is stuck in Japan but hates being in Japan therefore you are against whaling simply because the Japanese do it. If that is not racism then that word has no meaning.

It is no worse to eat whales than cows. This non event is becoming politicalised due to white folks imperialistic racist mind set.

Taiko666

Jan 29, 2008, 18:17

Boohoo. Taiko666. You sound like one of those grumpy gaijins who is stuck in Japan but hates being in Japan therefore you are against whaling simply because the Japanese do it. If that is not racism then that word has no meaning.

centrajapan, you've just proved my point. As I knew you would! You think anti-whaling = anti-Japan. The J-Gov has harpooned you as surely as if you'd been a minke in a whale sanctuary.

Now please, centrajapan, make some valid points, not pointless speculation wrapped up in infantile insults.

Oh, and as my Japanese partner hates whaling, does that make her an honorary 'racist grumpy gaijin?'

It is no worse to eat whales than cows. This non event is becoming politicalised due to white folks imperialistic racist mind set.

*sigh* You've just harpooned yourself in the foot again.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 18:22

why is it more wrong to kill whales than cows? i just dont understand that thinking. the minke whales are not endangered. a sustainable hunt of a natural renweable resources in the natural habitat is the most environmental friendly form of food production for human conspumption. energy is low in relation to yield the natural habitat remains unaffected. there are no fertilizers or pesticides.

whale meat is ecological and energy efficient. anti whalers are stuck in the 70s with their out dated arguments.

you still sound like one those grumpy gaijins though. very racist.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 21:20

whale meat is ecological and energy efficient. anti whalers are stuck in the 70s with their out dated arguments.

What a bad joke, its not a all efficient, its proven dangerous!
You obviously did not read the science report with plenty examples, or you prefer to stay blind.
What that has to do with the 70ties, is beyond my understandings.
The science report for example is from 2006, and a new one is sure on the way and not much different.

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 21:43

What a bad joke, its not a all efficient, its proven dangerous!

What whale speicies what part of the whale? Mercury varies from each whale and what part of the whale and from different whale speicies and where the whale has been swimming. You simply cannot say there is mercury in whales.
There is no such thing as a whale but many different whale speicies.

Thinking about all the mercury initself is worse and will probably lead to stress which is even worse.

However. The mercury debate is a different debate to why Japan should or should nothunt whales. It is up to Japan to decide if they want to hunt whales. And then this should be a debate among Japanese people and scientists and other scientists among people who eat whales. Greenlanders eat alot of whales and it is said that traditional Greenland food is healthy. Icelanders live longer than most EUropeans and they eat whale too and it also happens to be the country in the world with the highest standard of living in the world.

If there is mercury in whales and in all sea food then this is an issue which needs further reseacrh. There is mercury in all sea food as there is organic mercury. It is not possible to not have any mercury it is more how much mercury is dangerous is what the scientists are discussing.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 21:55

I suggest, that you read the report, its done already. . .which includes japanese research whaling meat. . .for example 200% above accepted contains of toxics.

Some koreans lately had to face a police raid concerning packed whale meat in supermarkets etc., in general.
Reason: dangerous and forbidden meat.
Some wake up.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 22:12

(double posting, sorry)

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 29, 2008, 22:30

you still sound like one those grumpy gaijins though. very racist.

Is it OK to call foreigners in Japan "Gaijin" or does it sound racist?

centrajapan

Jan 29, 2008, 22:36

gaijin is not a racist word. besides i am a gaijin.:) half gaijin. half human. haha.

Chi65

Jan 29, 2008, 23:17

In addition to some former infos, based on the science article above:
http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/save_whales_not_whaling/learn_more/fact_sheets_on_whaling/human_health_concerns_of_whale_meat.html
Human Health Concerns of Whale Meat
There is no doubt that whaling isn't good for whales. What most people don't know—and what pro-whaling nations such as Japan and Norway don't want to consider—is that eating whale meat may be a human health hazard.
Top of the Food Chain Marine Pollution Bulletin
"It's not just poor science—Japan's 'scientific' whaling may be a human health risk too." Article by E.C.M. Parsons; published in Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2006. Download in PDF.
Pro-whaling nations insist that whale meat is healthier than beef. But the truth is that whales are particularly vulnerable to environmental contaminants, including organochlorines—such as polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs), dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and dioxin—and heavy metals, such as methylmercury.
Each of these environmental contaminants tends to accumulate in the bodies of top predators, including sperm whales, orcas, pilot whales, and false killer whales. For these animals, each step up the food chain results in a greater concentration of these poisons in fewer and fewer individuals.
In some whale species, contaminants have been found in blubber at levels far in excess of what is considered safe. The most contaminated whale meat has come from those species that are fish or mammal eaters such as dolphins, porpoises, sperm whales, and beaked whales.
Baleen whales, such as minkes, feed lower on the food chain. As a result, their tissues generally contain lower levels of contaminants. Nonetheless, tests of the blubber of minke whales from the north Pacific have shown unsafe levels of pesticides and PCBs.
Effects on Humans
Whale meat or blubber is consumed in Norway, Japan, some Caribbean nations, Russia, Canada, and the state of Alaska—either for subsistence, cultural, or commercial reasons. A few aboriginal cultures rely heavily on whale meat as a source of protein, while others consume only small amounts commercially.
Although not dependent on it as a source of protein, the Japanese are one of the world's largest consumers of whale meat. In Japanese markets, generic whale meat or "kujira" is said to come from the minke whales killed as part of the so-called scientific whaling program. This meat should contain relatively low levels of contaminants. However, tests have shown that not all kujira is minke whale meat. Some of it is dolphin, porpoise, or beaked whale meat. People who eat kujira, thinking they are avoiding unsafe levels of contaminants, may in fact be eating meat that contains very high levels of toxic substances.
The effects of environmental contaminants in humans are serious. PCBs can cause neurotoxicity (nerve damage), reproductive (hey, men, its said, less sperm etc! C.) and developmental disorders, immune system suppression, liver damage, skin irritation, and endocrine disruption. DDT exposure is associated with certain cancer risks and neurological and reproductive disorders. Dioxins, among the most toxic substances known, can cause cancer, metabolic dysfunction, and immune system disorders. Methylmercury consumption can cause neurological and developmental problems. The contaminants are often highly concentrated in blubber because they are lipophilic, meaning they bond easily and even preferentially to fat.
Relying on whale meat as a source of protein is not just dangerous for adults, it may also be unhealthy for their future offspring. One study of Faroe Islanders detected developmental disorders in children with prenatal exposure to PCBs, children whose mothers consumed pilot whale meat and blubber regularly during pregnancy—versus those without exposure to PCBs, whose mothers did not consume pilot whale meat and blubber or consumed them in very small quantities during pregnancy. In addition, some Inuit communities in the Canadian and Alaskan Arctic—where mothers regularly consume beluga whale meat and blubber (as well as meat from bowhead whales, seals, and polar bears)—have detected health problems in children who were exposed to contaminants in utero and through breast milk.
Whales no longer live in a pristine environment; we have polluted their habitat with poisons that concentrate in their tissues. Regardless of the amount, the consumption of whale meat can expose humans to dangerous contaminants.

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 29, 2008, 23:55

gaijin is not a racist word. besides i am a gaijin.:) half gaijin. half human. haha.

I f e e l better now:-p

kame

Jan 30, 2008, 00:52

Although the article is way out of proportion considering how much and how whales are consumed in Japan, I'm not against using safety concern as an argument to discourage Japanese people from eating whales. After all, Japanese are very sensitive about food safety.

In fact, if Greenpeace were to just focus their propaganda on how dangerous whale meats are and give up their unwelcomed media stunts, I think they would be much more effective and persuasive in dampening the enthusiam to eat whales in Japan. But of course such a low profile campaign won't bring in as much money...

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 06:58

Greenpeace does mention the health aspect, and did for long, same with other organisations.
Its just, that the whalers prefer to distract this all the time, in order to get their often ridiculous and antique racist etc. points through and sell their meat.. . .and also that is wellknown in the international press and does not have to be repeated all the time. But once you do research about it, you find more than enough. Thats for instance, where the Asbest (selling) relation example comes from. . .not so far from the truth indeed. . .
The facts, that many people in the world care a lot about their japanese friends and families and children, also makes them very opposed to the whole campaign, and they are all as far as can be from any racist or whatsoever made up argument.
Under this light, there are no stunts, but very well thought of actions, if others are not heard or willingly ignored by pro whalers, in order to make money from whaling, even if Japan and other nations will be suffering under the consequences.

Watchers are not blind, many even watch, BECAUSE they care for and LOVE Japan!

Taiko666

Jan 30, 2008, 10:27

why is it more wrong to kill whales than cows?

Sorry, I wasn't referring to the above quote.

this non event is becoming politicalised due to white folks imperialistic racist mind set.

This quote was the ridiculous one.

The cows/whales issue is of course a valid point for debate, and as you can see, several people are happy to discuss it with you... but...

you still sound like one those grumpy gaijins though. very racist.

...it really is time you dropped this offensive line of attack.

kame

Jan 30, 2008, 11:05

Greenpeace does mention the health aspect, and did for long, same with other organisations.

Well, first of all, health argument is not compelling enough to argue. That's why it hasn't become a major issue in whaling debate. If it really is as bad as some anti-whaling organizations try to portray, they are golden. There is no market in the world that is more sensitive to food safety than Japan.

For example, Japanese test every single cattle for BSE and track beef marketed in Japan. People are overly scared of imported Chinese food. If anti-whalers have scientifically compelling data to prove that whale meat is more dangeous than tuna sashimis, they have no need to resort to media stunts. Japanese will stop eating whales like they stopped buying American beef after the mad cow debacle.

If they have a case, that is...

The facts, that many people in the world care a lot about their japanese friends and families and children, also makes them very opposed to the whole campaign, and they are all as far as can be from any racist or whatsoever made up argument.

That's laughable. Any idiot can sense that Greenpeace, Sea Shepard, and most people in this forum care far more about whales than Japanese. Don't need to pretend to be a saint.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 12:34

Well, first of all, health argument is not compelling enough to argue. That's why it hasn't become a major issue in whaling debate. If it really is as bad as some anti-whaling organizations try to portray, they are golden. There is no market in the world that is more sensitive to food safety than Japan.

Not true, because it was clearly ignored. I once more suggest, that some read the according article from sciencedirect, before writing this. I am 100% sure, you didn't.
Also, the last year, according to such informations, the official message was given out once more, in that case concerning dolphins as well as whales. Even from Taiji came the informations, that the meat was not bought or sold anymore and immediately taken out of schools and markets. If you wish, I can provide with the according link.
See the next post. . . .
It has been said before, and you once more ignored it, the very same way, others ignored the information. Do not say, it was not said nor written!
This may explain, which way it really goes, and who cares and who does not by ignoring.
We also had bad meat here (not whales and dolphins though), and had according trials even, but it took some time to find its place and judge. But then it was a big issue. Some wheels run slow, to avoid unnecessary panic. But they run, and sooner or later the truth does come through. You also may remember the BSE case hereabout.
At first, some humans had to become seriously ill too, before actions were taken. . .

For example, Japanese test every single cattle for BSE and track beef marketed in Japan. People are overly scared of imported Chinese food. If anti-whalers have scientifically compelling data to prove that whale meat is more dangeous than tuna sashimis, they have no need to resort to media stunts. Japanese will stop eating whales like they stopped buying American beef after the mad cow debacle.

If they have a case, that is...

See above. We did the first work about BSE before you, its easy then for Japan. As for the whale and dolphin meat, Japan is the first one to take action here.
And some do already (last year, around Taiji, as mentioned).

That's laughable. Any idiot can sense that Greenpeace, Sea Shepard, and most people in this forum care far more about whales than Japanese. Don't need to pretend to be a saint.

Its up to you to laugh about what you don't wish to understand. Its many facts, that come together. And no one pretends to be a saint, thats what you project. I am doing nothing but reminding on some important aspects like about already out of date "asbestos".
(It as much took years, until a law was even made to forbid to use this after lots of pros and antis. Nothing new.)

If loving and caring for my friends is something for you to laugh about, I feel very sorrry for you indeed. And I am not even Greenpeace, who sure also has similar reasons involved, the toxic is very well also mentioned there for long, it never dissappeared, by the way, to be even more correct..also repeated any times (and why should they not care about whales themselves? I see nothing wrong about this either)
I would thus probably not wish to stop you from eating that poison, why should I care, if you so dearly wish to be poisoned and damage your sperms etc.? Thats really not my problem. Do as you like, but don't you ever say again, you did not know.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 13:05

OK, I decided to post this now:

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2007/2007-08-30-04.asp

TAIJI, Japan, August 30, 2007

Councilmen From Japanese Whaling Town Break Code of Silence

(ENS) - Two town council members from the whaling town of Taiji have come out publicly against the feeding of dolphin meat contaminated with mercury to children in Japan’s school lunch programs. It is the first time that Japanese elected officials have broken the unwritten rule against criticizing whaling and the consumption of whale meat that prevails across the country.
Independents Junichiro Yamashita and Hisato Ryono will be holding a news conference on Monday to announce laboratory test results of samples taken from dolphin meat purchased at local supermarkets. The meat was found to contain over 10 times the government's limit for both mercury and methyl mercury.
The news conference comes as the annual dolphin drive hunt begins in Taiji. Conservationists around the world oppose the hunt, the largest kill of dolphins anywhere in the world, which takes place over six months beginning in September.
From left, Taiji City Assemblymen Junichiro Yamashita and Hisato Ryono (Photo by Boyd Harnell courtesy Save Japan Dolphins)
Yamashita said, "We're not against traditional whaling, but we heard claims that pilot whales are poisoned with mercury, and we discovered that some of this meat from the drive fisheries was fed to kids in school lunches."
The assemblymen described the dolphin meat as "toxic waste" and are attempting to persuade other elected officials in Taiji and surrounding towns to take it off school lunch menus.
Although the supermarkets immediately removed dolphin meat from their shelves after they were informed of the test results, the town of Taiji is moving ahead with plans to build a new dolphin processing facility while expanding the dolphin meat lunch programs to surrounding school districts, says Ric O'Barry of the advocacy group Save Japan Dolphins.
A former trainer of dolphin TV star Flipper, O'Barry is an American who travels to Taiji to oppose the annual dolphin hunt.
O'Barry is attempting to draw the attention of the Japanese media to the efforts of Yamashita and Ryono to stop the feeding of mercury-laced dolphin meat to children at school, but he says "the complete stonewalling by Japanese government agencies and the media on the issue now prompts Yamashita to bring his case to the attention of the foreign press."
A notice of Yamashita's news conference is listed on the website of the Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan.
One Japanese newspaper has published an article about Yamashita and Ryono's lab tests. On August 1, the "Japan Times" ran an article quoting Yamashita as saying the two council members at first did not believe the reports of contaminated meat, which came from western conservation organizations.
"We tested some samples purchased at the Gyoko supermarket in Taiji and Super Center Okuwa in the nearby city of Shingu," Yamashita said. The councilmen were "shocked" by the results.
Dolphin meat for sale in a Japanese supermarket. (Photo courtesy Sea Shepherd Conservation Society)
"One dolphin sample had a mercury content 10 times above the health ministry’s advisory level of 0.4 parts per million, with a methylmercury readout 10.33 times over the ministry’s own advisory level of 0.3 ppm," the article states.
"Another dolphin sample tested 15.97 times and 12 times above advisory levels of total mercury and methylmercury, respectively."
The nervous system is very sensitive to all forms of mercury. Methylmercury and metallic mercury vapors are more harmful than other forms, because more mercury in these forms reaches the brain.
Exposure to high levels of metallic, inorganic, or organic mercury can permanently damage the brain, kidneys, and developing fetus. Children poisoned by mercury may develop problems of their nervous and digestive systems, and kidney damage. Effects on brain functioning may result in irritability, shyness, tremors, changes in vision or hearing, and memory problems.
Mercury poisoning received worldwide attention during the 1950s when hundreds died and thousands more were injured in the city of Minamata, Japan after a corporation polluted the waters of Minamata Bay with mercury compounds. Local residents who ate fish from the bay were poisoned.
Many governments now issue health bulletins advising pregnant women and children to avoid eating fish known to contain high levels of mercury.
etc.etc.

You need more??
How about this then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning

and thats only one too high content of more. . .

The same applies to whales, also Scientific whaling meat.

With according effects, for example:

http://www.bhopal.net/otherbhopals/archives/smith_minimata.jpg

Here we see an image of an outwardly healthy mother bathing her fetal-poisoned 16 year old daughter, Tomoko Uemura, physically crippled since birth

. . . . . . .no theme??

kame

Jan 30, 2008, 15:00

If loving and caring for my friends is something for you to laugh about, I feel very sorrry for you indeed. And I am not even Greenpeace, who sure also has similar reasons involved, the toxic is very well also mentioned there for long, it never dissappeared, by the way, to be even more correct..also repeated any times (and why should they not care about whales themselves? I see nothing wrong about this either)
I would thus probably not wish to stop you from eating that poison, why should I care, if you so dearly wish to be poisoned and damage your sperms etc.? Thats really not my problem. Do as you like, but don't you ever say again, you did not know.

Exactly. You should leave us alone if you really "care" or "love" Japanese friends, because friends don't impose their cultural or moral values on another friend. I don't know about Germany, but we don't call those people friends in Japan.

If there is really a compelling case in whale meat toxicity, then the anti-whalers should focus their entire energy on informing that fact to Japanese public without chasing and harassing whaling ships which actually distracts the issue from Japanese public. I'm saying that's the single huge bullet that anti-whaling campaign could have. If they have the bullet and still fail to shoot it, they must be way too stupid to promote anything, or they really aren't interested in the cause in the first place (they're just interested in money as well).

Taiko666

Jan 30, 2008, 15:36

Exactly. You should leave us alone if you really "care" or "love" Japanese friends, because friends don't impose their cultural or moral values on another friend. I don't know about Germany, but we don't call those people friends in Japan.

"You don't like whaling! You must HATE us!!! You're not our friends!!!!" (cue sounds of toys being hurled from prams.)

When will Japan grow out of that argument? (Or rather the Japanese pro-whalers... there are Japanese who detest the J-Gov's stance.)

As for the toxicity issue: the J-Gov already knows about it (ditto the toxicity in dolphins) BUT fails to communicate it to the J-public. Why? (=rhetorical question)

So you're now relying on the anti-whalers to save you from the neglect of the J-Gov? Happy to oblige I'm sure.

kame

Jan 30, 2008, 15:43

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 16:25

Is the Minke whale what they hunt in Taiji? No, it is Pilot Whales. Is there more mercury in the blubber than the meat? You see there are all these things you have to know about.

WHALE IS NOT DANGEROUS There is no such thing as a whale.

Chi still has not answered me what whale spiecies and what part of the whale etc and then distorts facts with half truths. For instance in Minamata the fish was taken just outside of a chemical plant where as whales are not. There are 80 differtent whale speicies and since they have different diet the mercury level is different from whale spiecies to whale spieces not to mention where the whale has been swimming etc.

These cultural imperialists like CHi ANd Tako666 are practicing severe racial discrimination and culture imperialism by trying to impose their eating habits onto Japan or denying Japanese what they want to eat. That is the defenition of cultural imperialism. I am not telling them what not to eat but they are telling me what not to eat this makes them racists and not me.

If the minke whale was an endangered spiecies and if the hunt was not sustainable then they would have had a point but since it isnt they do not have any point at all.

INstead of pastintg pictures of Minamata victims why do not you in your own words tell me what whale speicies have mercury and what does not.

Anti whalers are driven mostly by ignorance and a lack of understandment of whales and cultures who have been eating whale meat for centuries.

If you compare whale meat to for instance beef you would be suprised to see how much filth there is in beef not to mention do you guys know how sausage is made and what is in them? Id choose an ecological whale beef over sausage any day thank you very much.

Taiko666

Jan 30, 2008, 16:43

It's the western diet that's causing health problems in Japan today. If you are really concerned for the health of Japanese people, please stop exporting cheap beef, German beer, and fat-loaded fastfood franchizes. That will save million times more Japanese compared to denying whale meat.

I agree. But instead of 'us' ceasing exports, why don't 'you' just stop eating it? Or are you waiting for somebody to tell/force you to stop eating it?

We don't need your concerns.

So there! There goes another flying toy.
If you ask for nothing, you'll receive it in abundance.

I notice you use 'we/us' and 'you' thoughout. Can you ever entertain the idea that it's not a 'ware ware nihonjin against the big bad world' issue?

Taiko666

Jan 30, 2008, 16:53

These cultural imperialists like CHi ANd Tako666 are practicing severe racial discrimination and culture imperialism

Why do you have to punctuate what legitimate discussion points you may have with ridiculous slurs and insults? Can't you keep calm even for the duration of one post?

Good luck with your future rants.

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 16:54

Why do you have to punctuate what legitimate discussion points you may have with ridiculous slurs and insults? Can't you keep calm even for the duration of one post?

I am calm. I am stating something very clear and obvious. I try to explain in my own words as simple as possible so that you can understand. Just what part of the cultural imperialism that I accuse you for do you not understand?

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 30, 2008, 18:26

Centrajapan, I think you would be better served to refrain from using the term "racist" here, as race doesn't seem to be an issue. "Cultural Imperialism" is fair play, I suppose, though, as long as there is an explanation of what you mean and not just an accusation, though.

I think that the idea of cultural imperialism is worth discussion, certainly.

Taiko666

Jan 30, 2008, 18:38

I haven't actually addressed the issue of Japan whaling in principle. (Obviously I disapprove of it, but that's another matter.)

I've talked about the the J-Gov whipping up nationalistic sentiment in Japan by sailing into internationally protected antarctic waters to kill large numbers of whales on the pretext of a blatant, obvious, cringing lie.

Culture has nothing to do with it. Therefore tedious cries of 'cultural imperliasm' mean nothing.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 30, 2008, 19:00

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 19:05

I've talked about the the J-Gov whipping up nationalistic sentiment in Japan by sailing into internationally protected antarctic waters to kill large numbers of whales on the pretext of a blatant, obvious, cringing lie.
Culture has nothing to do with it. Therefore tedious cries of 'cultural imperliasm' mean nothin

The reason why J-government is whipping up national sentiments is because they are the victims of cultural imperialism imposed by anti whaling countries. It is a reaction to the racist imperialistic mind set of anti whalers. If someone is nationalistic it is the anti whalers.

The scientific research programme is to calculate how many whales they can hunt and make it sustainable. That is what is scientific about it and that is not a lie. Being against Japans whaling is cultural imperialism. Thats my point.

Any culture evolves and how that culture evolves should be up to the people of that culture to decide and not some outsider. In this case the anti whalers.

The reason why this is politicalised is not because of Japan but anti whalers.

There is no scientific justification to protect a non endangered spiecies in a multi spiecies eco system. This has nothing to do with science or environemnt but simply the anti whalers treating the whales as some sacred floating cow.

This nationalism if there is one which Taiko666 talks about is not coming from Japan but rather from the culture imperialists. Why is it more wrong to eat whales than cows? This question I will never understand. Why can people fish in Antractica but not kill whales there?

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 20:08

"You don't like whaling! You must HATE us!!! You're not our friends!!!!" (cue sounds of toys being hurled from prams.)
When will Japan grow out of that argument? (Or rather the Japanese pro-whalers... there are Japanese who detest the J-Gov's stance.)
As for the toxicity issue: the J-Gov already knows about it (ditto the toxicity in dolphins) BUT fails to communicate it to the J-public. Why? (=rhetorical question)
So you're now relying on the anti-whalers to save you from the neglect of the J-Gov? Happy to oblige I'm sure.

Exactly, so why now blaming it on one german poster or Greenpeace from some?
Thats only ridiculous and thats all. I can only continue to wonder, why some refuse to grow up.

Your why is in fact exactly the question, Taiko . .a question the Japanese have to ask themselves. For exactly why some close their eyes in front of their own home made desaster, which has nothing to do with me or any German or any other country.
Its far too wellknown, that it is for money reasons and keeping their own people silenced. Its NOT the others, its their own people, that are and will be responsible.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 20:18

"We oppose whaling because I care for the health of Japanese people" is the funniest anti-whaling argument I've ever heard. Japanese population is among the most healthiest in the developed countries and Japanese people outlive almost every other nationalities.

It's the western diet that's causing health problems in Japan today. If you are really concerned for the health of Japanese people, please stop exporting cheap beef, German beer, and fat-loaded fastfood franchizes. That will save million times more Japanese compared to denying whale meat.

Yes, some whale species and certain parts contain alarming levels of toxic compounds, but so do a lot of other seafood. I'd rather eat whale meat than play russian roulette with 20% fat burger made from BSE-untested US-beef. We (Japanese) know the risks and we study and monitor what we eat more carefully than any other countries. We don't need your concerns.

Who is "we"? You mean "you". Because I don't have to, nor will ask you in general, and particularly not in relation to my many japanese friends, who do share the same concern as me in this (which has nothing to do with any other of your aspects from my side, only this one), and they have no idea, why I should be any scapegoat at all. They also blame their own government.
You blow far too much hot air. . .go eat your beef, whale or dolphin burger, I said already, thats your own responsibility, how you kill yourself or so. I personally did not send you any toxics, nor would. Neither would Greenpeace etc. Therefor you are barking on the wrong tree. Its for barking's sake only anyhow.
Please note, this only makes me laugh, thats all.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 20:24

Is the Minke whale what they hunt in Taiji? No, it is Pilot Whales. Is there more mercury in the blubber than the meat? You see there are all these things you have to know about.
WHALE IS NOT DANGEROUS There is no such thing as a whale.
Chi still has not answered me what whale spiecies and what part of the whale etc and then distorts facts with half truths. For instance in Minamata the fish was taken just outside of a chemical plant where as whales are not. There are 80 differtent whale speicies and since they have different diet the mercury level is different from whale spiecies to whale spieces not to mention where the whale has been swimming etc.
These cultural imperialists like CHi ANd Tako666 are practicing severe racial discrimination and culture imperialism by trying to impose their eating habits onto Japan or denying Japanese what they want to eat. That is the defenition of cultural imperialism. I am not telling them what not to eat but they are telling me what not to eat this makes them racists and not me.
If the minke whale was an endangered spiecies and if the hunt was not sustainable then they would have had a point but since it isnt they do not have any point at all.
INstead of pastintg pictures of Minamata victims why do not you in your own words tell me what whale speicies have mercury and what does not.
Anti whalers are driven mostly by ignorance and a lack of understandment of whales and cultures who have been eating whale meat for centuries.
If you compare whale meat to for instance beef you would be suprised to see how much filth there is in beef not to mention do you guys know how sausage is made and what is in them? Id choose an ecological whale beef over sausage any day thank you very much.

Why don't you finally read the sciencedirect article, I sent before?

You know well, that you have to ask the scientists, not me. Its not my job nor responsibility to chew this for you, which you can do yourself, any time.
Blaming me for the reports, that everyone can read (and does), and are also from Japan itself, is even more silly.

All the rest from you is the same running-wheel-blabla as before.

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 30, 2008, 20:25

Centrajapan, I think you would be better served to refrain from using the term "racist" here, as race doesn't seem to be an issue..

I am totally with MO on this as it has nothing to do with Racism whatsoever.

Whales are the issue.

My wife, I and ten month old son are coming to live in Japan permantly.

I cannot wait to be a permanant resident and start to voice my opinion, disagreements and vote in Japan on topics I disagree with.

My wife is Japanese, and always has her disagreements towards things in japan, as I'm sure we all do with our own countries.

Is she not racist because she is Japanese?

I used to hear complaints on a daily basis, mainly from Japanese teenagers, mid age, and seniors about Japan.

I often asked these people, will you vote.

They often replied, "No, because the next person is the same"

This used to annoy me as I figured as long as these people never voted, it was difficult for them to ever get their opinions and ultimate ways into action. Nothing would change, or it would take a long time..

So once again, I'm not sure where the pro whalers get their racism issues from.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 20:45

So once again, I'm not sure where the pro whalers get their racism issues from.

There must be some former old Nazi-friends amongst them, hehe ;-)

Hiroyuki Nagashima

Jan 30, 2008, 21:06

I must consider before an anti-whaling argument in this news.
Where is it?
(pollution source of mercury)
The Minamata disease was the source which a chemical factory of manure polluted.
In addition, if mercury of high density was found from a whale,
All the local fish are polluted.
In Minamata, a cat died first.
Because a body was small, the cat influenced mercury contamination first.

A questionable point of this news,
Around Taiji, there is not a chemical factory regarded as pollution source.
What time did the mercury contamination begin at?
If it is mercury of quantity of news,
The cat which already died,
In addition, it is not strange even if there is the person who became sick.
However, I do not know the person who became sick.

Kyoto Returnee

Jan 30, 2008, 21:22

That's terrible Hiroyuki.. The poor little cat:(

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 21:29

(PS. sorrry, KR, I did not see or mean you here)

You may like to read this older article, that had a similar issue and reason for japanese protesters. It once more explains former and new findings plus the often cited fact, that the whale (any whale and co !) in general is on top of the pyramid and thus

"Whales are at the top of the food pyramid, so that any pollutants in the oceans concentrate in their bodies," Yoko Tomiyama, chairwoman of the Consumers Union of Japan told Reuters.

which is still valid and often repeated and confirmed.

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/05/09/japan.whaling/index.html

Around Taiji, there is not a chemical factory regarded as pollution source.
What time did the mercury contamination begin at?

The Taiji research and article is from mid 2007, as you can see in the according article. It was also published openly in Japan, thus people should know, in fact. Thats why one cannot blame greenpeace or others for not once more pointing to it. It is within their and many other ecological concerned one's pages already, by the way. One only has to give it a look.

No chemical factory near needed, its the general pollution level in the oceans already, as you can see in the 2007 Taiji article. Thats pretty frightening indeed, not just for japanese people. To say, the antarctic whale meat is safer, is pure nonsense, because the whales are travelling all over and only stay there for a certain period. Its the very same whales, that you also find on other places.
Here in Europe we also have campaigns already to inform warehouses etc., not to sell according meat (mostly from Iceland) any more, because of similar reasons. Its not just Japan and has nothing to do with eating habits or other diverting rubbish, to blind the people.

Safe times are simply over, in general.

And to keep these informations under the table or ignore them (and even feed children with this meat!), is almost criminal. But they are openly available, thanks god. (and have absolutely nothing to do with me, I just remind some to have a look)

Best wishes to you, Hiroyuki Nagashima, by the way :-)
Greetings to my beloved Fukuoka/Hakata, and particularly the Art Museum in Ohori parc, where I have wonderful friends.

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 21:59

Here is CHi talking about the dangers of whale meat while she is eating sausages. And here is Chi wearing leather boots while telling how inhumane it is to kill whales.

Calling Chi from Berlin Germany. Can you hear me? Do you know what whale spiecies have mercury and what whale part of the whale is it you are referring to?

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A WHALE BUT MANY WHALES SPIECIES

Could you please tell me what whale spiecies you are referring top so that we can carry on this discussion.

Ethno centric values and imperialism is not a concept of the past. It is very live and it comes in new shapes and colours. See no further than western anit whaling extremists.

Mercury is not the reason to why people oppose whaling. People oppose whaling due to racist close minded reasons.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 22:04

Here is CHi talking about the dangers of whale meat while she is eating sausages. And here is Chi wearing leather boots while telling how inhumane it is to kill whales.
Calling Chi from Berlin Germany. Can you hear me? Do you know what whale spiecies have mercury and what whale part of the whale is it you are referring to?
Thumbs up for the whalers around the world including the Japanese and Scandinavian. I hope Japan will continue its fine tradition in many years to come and not let outside imperialistic thoughts corrupt Japan.

I am hardly ever eating sausages, by the way and I know why. And maybe you read the former article properly, before you post. There you have your answers already. But since you cannot read, here again:

"Whales are at the top of the food pyramid, so that any pollutants in the oceans concentrate in their bodies,"

Any whale and co!

The oceans stay polluted, so do the whales, if you or I like it or not.

Mercury is not the reason to why people oppose whaling. People oppose whaling due to racist close minded reasons.

The rest is the usual nonsense of the blind. . .

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 22:15

But you still do eat sausages. Do you know how sausages are made? So you eat meat yet think eating whale meat is inhumane? And now you want to warn us about the dangers of eating whale meat? How nice of you. Did you know that apple seed contains Cyanide which is very toxic. Be careful the next time you eat apples. Not to mention all the chemicals which is shot into the cow such as growth hormones which you then eat.

Whale meat in contrast is known to be healthy. And according to Norwegian, Icelandic scientists in countries with a rich sea food tradition unlike Germnay who hardly eat anything but sausages hence have come very far on this form of research say.

It depends on the whale, what part of the whale. What whale spicies but overall whale meat which is eaten by the Norwegians and Icelandics which is the same whale spiecies as the Japanese eat to be safe.

If there is so much mercury which is higly unlikely if we are to believe non biased research from whaling countries this should not be used as a reason by the racist anti whaling extremists. Rather this needs to be addressed among people who support whaling yet see this as a problem.

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 22:26

They also have some according healthproblems in other countries too, as stated in a former article, which you once more did not read.
Germans have also a long sea food tradition, and thus according regular warnings out, according to our two seas.

When I eat a sausage now and then, it does not harm me too much any more in my age. And I am happy to know, that my daughter is vegetarian, as you know already.

Whale meat is not healthy at all, as can be read in the former articles.
They found the high amounts in exactly the one for children and in general stores. If even Taiji refuses to eat it and also the government gives out warnings now, they definitely believe it, and there must be something, right?
Stay blind, if you like.
I wrote already, that there are already campaigns in other countries too.

Whats wrong with your eyes, too much whale meat already? Those are the first signs, including insanity. . .seems to be common amongst pro whalers.

And your repeatedly narrow racist blabla is only boring now.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 30, 2008, 23:10

Centrajapan, you keep saying "racist" but why do you think people against whaling are racist? Do you think that anti-whaling people would be less anti-whaling towards Norway or other country with a different racial makeup than Japan?

Cultural chauvanism and racism may be related in many cases, but they are not the same thing. Please substantiate your use of this term or stop using it. Nowhere has anyone said to my knowledge anything that sounds like it has racial undertones. It seems to me that anti-whaling people would be equally opposed to whaling practices regardless of the country doing the whaling.

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 23:11

Germans have also a long sea food tradition, and thus according regular warnings out, according to our two seas.

Not to sound too nationalistic and patriotic here but....

Germnay is for the most part land locked. Most Germans could not tell the difference between a whale and mackrell unlike we Norwegians. Which means The land of the fjords in some Viking ancient language. Norway means ocean. Deutchland. LAND. It means land. Our sea food tradition is compared with Germany rather deep and rich to say the least..... btw. If whales are as dangerous as you say it is. How come MY country is much richer than YOUR country? I also bet alot more Germans wear glasses than Norwegians. Germany is after all known for its glasses.

The top 10 sea food consumers in the world are.......drum roll................

1 Maldives
2 Iceland
3 Kiribati
4 Japan
5 Seychelles
6 Portugal
7 Norway
8 Malaysia
9 French Polynesia
10 South Korea

http://www.quia.com/rd/6921.html?AP_rand=314393023

IF German sea food tradition is rich than Norwegian is much richer and so is the Japanese.

Countries with a strong sea food cultures have a whale food culture too. It is safe to say Japan together with Iceland, Norway has a strong maritime culture. We invented the Vikings for crying out loud and we used to own 90% of all ships in the world at one stage.

Sea food in general is regarded as healthy. Rich in protein, omega, vitamin E etc. It is good for your health to eat some sea food. It is regarded as more healthy than meat. People who eat sea food tend to live longer than people who do not eat sea food.

All food is dangerous anything in moderation. But whale meat and other sea food is regarded as healthier than meat and dairy products in general. In Scandinavia and in Iceland you do not see many over weight people like you do in other parts of Europe or US. Thats because we eat less meat and more fish.

centrajapan

Jan 30, 2008, 23:18

Germans have also a long sea food tradition, and thus according regular warnings out, according to our two seas.

Germnay is for the most part land locked. Most Germans could not tell the difference between a whale and mackrell unlike we Norwegians. Which means The land of the fjords in some Viking ancient language. Norway means ocean. Deutchland. LAND. It means land. Our sea food tradition is compared with Germany rather deep and rich to say the least..... btw. If whales are as dangerous as you say it is. How come MY country is much richer than YOUR country? I also bet alot more Germans wear glasses than Norwegians. Germany is after all known for its glasses.

The top 10 sea food consumers in the world are.......drum roll................

1 Maldives
2 Iceland
3 Kiribati
4 Japan
5 Seychelles
6 Portugal
7 Norway
8 Malaysia
9 French Polynesia
10 South Korea

http://www.quia.com/rd/6921.html?AP_rand=314393023

IF German sea food tradition is rich than Norwegian is much richer and so is the Japanese.

Countries with a strong sea food cultures have a whale food culture too. It is safe to say Japan together with Iceland, Norway has a strong maritime culture. We invented the Vikings for crying out loud and we used to own 90% of all ships in the world at one stage.

Sea food in general is regarded as healthy. Rich in protein, omega, vitamin E etc. It is good for your health to eat some sea food. It is regarded as more healthy than meat. People who eat sea food tend to live longer than people who do not eat sea food.

All food is dangerous anything in moderation. But whale meat and other sea food is regarded as healthier than meat and dairy products in general. In Scandinavia and in Iceland you do not see many over weight people like you do in other parts of Europe or US. Thats because we eat less meat and more fish.

bakaKanadajin

Jan 30, 2008, 23:24

Chi65

Jan 30, 2008, 23:35

You can start to ignore CJ's post. He also has his brains effected, as you rightly state it your way . . .probably also high blood pressure, as another known symptom of his "healthy whalemeat".
And apart from that, he is completely off topic now. A Kind of Don Xichote. . .

kame

Jan 31, 2008, 00:47

I agree. But instead of 'us' ceasing exports, why don't 'you' just stop eating it? Or are you waiting for somebody to tell/force you to stop eating it?

I just said that because Chi seems to want Japanese to stop eating whales because she "cares" about the health of Japanese people.

What would American say if I told them to stop eating beef because it's bad for your health and I am worried about their health? They would say "mind your own damn business". Same with telling Japanese to stop eating whales because they are bad for them.

centrajapan

Jan 31, 2008, 03:27

Hiroyuki Nagashima

Jan 31, 2008, 03:32

"Whales are at the top of the food pyramid, so that any pollutants in the oceans concentrate in their bodies," Yoko Tomiyama, chairwoman of the Consumers Union of Japan told Reuters.

Wait a little!
A top of a food chain is a human being.
A whale of Taiji is a Gondo whale.
They eat a saury and a cuttlefish.
A human being eats the same thing, too.
If this information is correct, a Japanese is already dead by mercury poisoning.
http://luna.pos.to/whale/jpn_zat_foodchain.html

The logic that only a whale of Taiji is polluted does contradiction.

By the way,
The mink whales which are in the South Pole eat plankton.
It is not a top of a food chain.

Information should scan it justly.

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 04:13

I just said that because Chi seems to want Japanese to stop eating whales because she "cares" about the health of Japanese people.
What would American say if I told them to stop eating beef because it's bad for your health and I am worried about their health? They would say "mind your own damn business". Same with telling Japanese to stop eating whales because they are bad for them.
Its not just me, who wants to stop Japanese eating whales, you wish to misunderstand completely. I simply point out, what your own Japanese have also found out and were also protesting against, as can be seen in the former articles. Its common sense to question it under the present circumstances, and many Japanese did this far befor me, as several articles showed.
If even governmental reactions are the result, one may see, how urgent it really is. That has nothing to do with me, and is simple cheap scapegoating, because some Japanese do not wish to see, that the problem is homemade.
The splinter is in your own eye.
I am only a caring reminder.
I would do the very same in my own country in such a case. But this is a Japan forum, asking for exactly such facts and opinions.
So what.

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 04:39

"Whales are at the top of the food pyramid, so that any pollutants in the oceans concentrate in their bodies," Yoko Tomiyama, chairwoman of the Consumers Union of Japan told Reuters.
Wait a little!
A top of a food chain is a human being.

Not in the ocean or amongst the ocean inhabitants, which was meant here.

A whale of Taiji is a Gondo whale.
They eat a saury and a cuttlefish.
A human being eats the same thing, too.
If this information is correct, a Japanese is already dead by mercury poisoning.
http://luna.pos.to/whale/jpn_zat_foodchain.html
The logic that only a whale of Taiji is polluted does contradiction.

Its indeed contradiction, but of aother kind, because its not only the Taiji whale, but whale in general. They also found extreme poisonings in research whaling whales as well, there is this article from sciencedirect short before. Other sources confirm the same.
No one said, that only the Taiji whale is poisoned, by the way. I don't even know, if the meat in the shops around Taiji were only from their own area (the dolphin meat may thus, but it is also known, that whalemeat is widely distributed under the fake name of dolphin meat). The article does not say this. They only write on many other articles, that whale and dolphin meat was widely distributed in more than 250 schools for the children, and not just 2007, but at least since 2003, according to other articles (also general press).
And as also stated in another article, whales are much more vulnerable to such contents also in other fish, that they consume, which is, why they have such a high rate of toxics now, and obviously also in the already sorted out so called edible parts, who were examined! Imagine, how much more the non-edible parts must have had. . .puh. . .
That simply means, humans are less receptive to certain poisons than whales. But generally also, as the Minamoto deaster showed. And thats why there are certain allowed (supposed to be harmless) contents, from which the percentage of overdoses is taken during the researches of other scientists.

Signs of poisoning often do come much later, as the children, born after eating poisoned meat, clearly showed.

By the way,
The mink whales which are in the South Pole eat plankton.
It is not a top of a food chain.
Information should scan it justly.

Yes, as long as they are there, but they are there only for a limited time in the year, then they move to warmer zones once more for longer to raise their children and mate (see whale watching) and back again. . .they are the same whales in the same ocean eating the same fish, being the same top of the ocean food pyramid.

"Not only the blubber, but also the red meat is contaminated," said Yoko Tomiyama, head of the Japan Consumers Union, citing a recent Norwegian warning that pregnant women should not eat whale because of high levels of toxic mercury.

"This should not be imported to Japan, and we have made our views clear to the government."

. . . . . .

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 05:31

To illustrate the reactions of Japanese, but I don't know, how old it is, to be fair:
Open Letter to the Govt. of Japan

We are citizen groups active in Japan. Our stance is that the consumption of whale meat is not an indispensable part of the Japanese diet.
It is true that in a certain period after World War II, whale meat was an important source of protein for Japanese people. However, as the war-shattered society recovered, the number of people who continued eating whale meat declined sharply. Nowadays, whale meat is typically consumed as a luxury food, a gourmet specialty item served along with drinks, or presented as a gift.

The Japanese government has insisted to the international community that whale meat is one of Japan's traditional foods that is indispensable for the nation. Despite this claim, the industry and government have had to run various campaigns domestically to encourage whale meat consumption. These campaigns include providing distorted information on people overseas who are opposing whaling as well as routinely attempting to manipulate public opinion by announcing misleading reports on the IWC. The situation, however, has not changed and the majority of Japanese still do not eat whale... [more]
When the contamination of whale meat became an issue, the government contended that it would pose no health concern pointing out that the average amount of whale meat consumed annually per person in Japan is less than 1g. Despite these circumstances, the Japanese government has pushed ahead with an enlarged scale of "scientific" whaling and has attempted to resume commercial whaling, ignoring the international rules.
These actions benefit only a minority of people and businesses, and do not represent the general consensus of the Japanese people.

As groups and individuals acting in Japan, we demand the following of the Japanese government:

1. Stop the scientific whaling of sperm whales and Bryde's whales in the Northwest Pacific that is scheduled to start this summer.

2. Abandon lethal methods of research and pursue instead non-lethal research. Stop killing whales under the name of science.

3. Stop any activities aiming for the resumption of commercial whaling such as fisheries aid to buy the pro-whaling votes of other countries;

4. Exercise strict control over smuggled and/or illegally caught whale meat.

5. Immediately alert consumers regarding the health risk of consuming whale meat contaminated with chemical substances.

6. Stop using taxpayer's money to propagate biased reports designed to promote whaling.
This letter to the government of Japan was signed by 73 organizations and prominent individuals in Japan, including the Japan Wildlife Conservation Society, the Japan Consumers' Union, the Elsa Nature Conservancy, the Hokkaido Animal Conservation Society, and the Japan Animal Welfare Society.

bakaKanadajin

Jan 31, 2008, 06:02

CLEARLY stems from the fact that Norway is one of those countries affected by the ban.

Wrong. Norway does not have any whaling ban. We got so much whale meat that whale meat also is used as pet food. And the whaling population does not decrease, infact it is very much sustainable. Whale in Norwegain is called the Gold of the ocean.

Whaling is my culture. It also is Japanese culture. People with not my culture dictating my culture? You sound like a bunch of imperialistic nazis to tell you the truth.

So why should not Japan be able to hunt commercial?

If you're not affected by the ban then what you're actually saying is you're not observing the ban. Get the terminology correct, you're not technically supposed to be whaling if a ban is in effect.

And in this day and age if something you do affects the well-being of others or is deemed harmful to the global community then people WILL dictate what you can and can't do. Whether you choose to listen is another story, but don't think just because something is 'your culture' you have a free ticket to do whatever the F you want. The ancient Greeks regularly slept with children as a part of their culture but that wouldn't work in this day and age. That's an extreme example but it clearly demonstrates that cultural subjectivity isn't grounds for justification of anything.

As for why whaling has any connection to the global community, please re-read every single argument against whaling as it pertains to maintaining the ocean food chain, coral reefs, research into animal intelligence, etc.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 06:06

Centrajapan, you keep saying "racist" but why do you think people against whaling are racist? Do you think that anti-whaling people would be less anti-whaling towards Norway or other country with a different racial makeup than Japan?
Cultural chauvanism and racism may be related in many cases, but they are not the same thing. Please substantiate your use of this term or stop using it. Nowhere has anyone said to my knowledge anything that sounds like it has racial undertones. It seems to me that anti-whaling people would be equally opposed to whaling practices regardless of the country doing the whaling.
Centrajapan, please do not ignore me. Calling people racist is a serious matter. Defend your use of the term.

Sarapva

Jan 31, 2008, 08:05

It seems to me that anti-whaling people would be equally opposed to whaling practices regardless of the country doing the whaling.

That's right!! :bravo:

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 08:46

Exactly. . .I join in, if I may :bravo:

butakun

Jan 31, 2008, 17:00

As for why whaling has any connection to the global community, please re-read every single argument against whaling as it pertains to maintaining the ocean food chain, coral reefs, research into animal intelligence, etc.

All those things are possible under regulated and sustainable whaling. They can coexist. The argument is whether whaling is sustainable or not.

centrajapan

Jan 31, 2008, 17:01

Centrajapan, please do not ignore me. Calling people racist is a serious matter. Defend your use of the term.

My point has always been clear. You are a racist for opposing whaling. You show diregard towards other cultures and you are trying to impose your eating habits down peoples throats. Or rather denying people what people want to eat.

Native Americans, Japanese and others who hunt whales. They are the people who should decide what they want to eat and not to eat and no one else.

Whaling is sustainable. Thats the whole point of it. It also is very environmental friendly and energy efficient to produce 1 kilog gram of whale meat compared with 1 kilo gram of beef.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 17:06

But don't you see that you're wrong about the racist point? People who oppose whaling may or may not be cultural imperialists, but they are only racist if they oppose whaling due to the race of the people hunting whales. That is what racism is: treating people differently based purely on their race.

centrajapan

Jan 31, 2008, 17:15

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 17:22

All those things are possible under regulated and sustainable whaling. They can coexist. The argument is whether whaling is sustainable or not.
I agree with this statement, actually.

I did a quick search on why people oppose whaling in the first place, and I found several reasons. Many of them have been brought up here, but I did notice that most people seemed to treat all whales the same. In other words, whales were not considered any differently based on the numbers of any particular species. Whaling was just bad all across the board.

Thereupon, I found an interesting editorial in some American newspaper that gave me an idea of why. It said that many people in the industrialized world have come to the conclusion that whales are too intelligent to be classified as "just another animal." In other words, there was something inherently different about whales that made them offlimits to whaling. I wonder how widespread this belief is. It seems to me to actually be the main reason why people oppose whaling whether they actually state it or not.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 17:29

There are many people who only oppose Japanese whaling but not for instance Inuits hunting whales as they are very often regarded as "Nobel Savages". I have a problem with that attitude. Then there are people aho are against INuits whaling. I also have a problem against that attitude because whaling is a part of their culture.
In both cases it is a people who has no culture in eating whale meat telling people who has a culture in eating whale meat that what they eat and do is wrong. They are disrespecting that culture.
I'll be the first to admit my ignorancy on this area, but aren't Inuits allowed an exemption to the whaling moratorium because at least at the time of the moratorium's signing, those people relied on whaling for a substantial part of their diet?

I think what might be different about Japan is that even at the best of times, whale is not a significant part of the Japanese diet. In other words, there are many choices, and food is plentiful, so Japanese don't need to rely on whaling for survival.

Wasn't the whaling moratorium intended to be lifted when whale populations recouperated to sustainable levels? If one could demonstrate that whale populations have reached such numbers, people opposed to whaling wouldn't have a legal basis to do so anymore, would they?

EDIT: Is it just me, or is this really off-topic? If anyone would like the thread split, let me know!

Mars Man

Jan 31, 2008, 18:01

AND NOW IT'S TIME for a little comic relief:

Bob: Hey, Bill, did catch that whaling in Japan thread?

Bill: WOW !! You're joking?!! I guess evolution is speeding up these days !

and now back to our regularly scheduled program....

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 19:39

Strange, this is Japan forum, not an Inuit, nor Norvegian forum to my knowledge. . .

My reasons now are not limited to any country, nor ever were before, particularly after the now known facts about the contents of the meat.

What keeps on making me wonder, is the ignorance of some towards very simple and proven facts about the present state of these contents. . .that ignorance from whoever has fatal effects, because it is leading to misinformations and wishfull thinking.

Since there are loads of desasters in the world, caused by the very same ignorance for money's sake, it is in all cases better to point towards it, before it is too late. But I fear, according to the schoolchildren's diet, that the effects will show in the future.
I happen to know a Japanese, who is from Wakayama and has a little son (not yet schoolage though), and considers to move. . .even out of Japan. . .

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 20:13

If someone is well aware of the risks, but eats whale meat anyway, what would you say then? Surely then the mercury content, etc., would be a moot point, wouldn't it?

centrajapan

Jan 31, 2008, 20:39

I think what might be different about Japan is that even at the best of times, whale is not a significant part of the Japanese diet. In other words, there are many choices, and food is plentiful, so Japanese don't need to rely on whaling for survival.

Why do you have to prove to anyone that they need whale meat for their surviva? Do you have to prove that you need beef for your survival? There are super markets in Alaska and Greenland too. The whole point that whaling is bad initself is a very imperialistic stance. Racist. People can kill whales if they need to but we would prefer if they did not? Thats none of peoples business as far as I am concerned. Eating whale meat is no better or worse than eating pigs or cows. Speaking from an environmental perspective it is more ecological to eat whales because the natural habitat remains unaffected and energy is low in relation to yield. Anyway...

Take for instance Chi. This ignorant German woman who eats sausages and other types of meat and wears leather boots BUT she is against Japanese whaling. The whale for her is some sacred floating cow therefore she wants other people to have the same religion as she has towards whales. Thats imperialism and racism. Both Chi and her country Germany have no tradition eating whale meat. Its easy for her to say. Dont eat whale meat because it has never been a part of her culture.

Ja vi in Germany dont eat whalez thats why whaling iz barbaric. Its her attitude which is barbaric.

Now she recently discovered on the internet that whale meat is deadly. So now she wants to SAVE the Japanese from eating whales. She should be a comedian.

Whale meat is not dangerous. Beef, pork, apples, shrimp. All food is dangerous. Everything in moderation and a good balanced diet is the healthiest diet there is.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 20:47

Why do you have to prove to anyone that they need whale meat for their surviva?
This is simple enough to answer. At the time of the declaration of the whaling moratorium, there was a consensus that whale stocks were dangerously low. It was decided that that any unnecessary whaling could lead to extinction of whale species, and therefore few exceptions were granted. Substinance whaling was grounds for such an exception, and therefore it became necessary to demonstrate the need for whale meat for survival to obtain such an exemption.

Please keep insults to yourself. Calm and collected arguments are much more convincing than insults or arguments littered with them.

centrajapan

Jan 31, 2008, 20:50

At the time of the declaration of the whaling moratorium, there was a consensus that whale stocks were dangerously low.

I just want to add that Japan decided to stop hunting whales due to uncertainties in stock estimates. Now that we know that the whale spicies which Japan wants to hunt are not endangered there is no reason for opposing Japans whale hunt.

Substinance whaling was grounds for such an exception, and therefore it became necessary to demonstrate the need for whale meat for survival to obtain such an exemption.

Putting lables like this is typical imperialistic. You can whale but not you because you need it? Some Japanese need it to just as much as anyone else in the world.

edit.

The reason why Inuits and other Native Americans are not as criticised by the west is because the Nobel Savage mentality still exists among alot of people which intself is a racist attitude. Or they look at these people as primitive so they can whales but not Japan. Or because Inuits have had their culture destroyed they can whale but not Japan. Or they need it for their survival but once they do not need it for their survivial then they should not be allowed to hunt whales.

All these opinions which are very common are racist.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 20:53

I just want to add that Japan decided to stop hunting whales due to uncertainties in stock estimates. Now that we know that the whale spicies which Japan wants to hunt are not endangered there is no reason for opposing Japans whale hunt.
Sure there is. The moratorium has not been lifted yet. Why do you think Japan consistently tries to lift the moratorium on certain species when the international whaling commission meets. That's the best place to resolve this issue, as that is where I think the legality or non-legality of whaling comes from.

I just want to add that Japan decided to stop hunting whales due to uncertainties in stock estimates. Now that we know that the whale spicies which Japan wants to hunt are not endangered there is no reason for opposing Japans whale hunt.
Putting lables like this is typical imperialistic. You can whale but not you because you need it? Some Japanese need it to just as much as anyone else in the world.
For example?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 21:01

If someone is well aware of the risks, but eats whale meat anyway, what would you say then? Surely then the mercury content, etc., would be a moot point, wouldn't it?

What everybody (grown up of course) does to him/herself, is his/her thing. If some wish to destroy themselves, they can do so, but not with others. I also support free will in hospitals or wherever, to die willingly, when so wished.

Point is, if something is sold (and planned to be sold) by saying that there is no poison (mercury is only one example and content in our case, thus even the details and percentages are wellknown), its a pure fraud and a case for the court, at least hereabout and on many other places.
In case the seller knows the facts. . .which is no doubt in our case.
This is the situation with the schoolmeat (for example). Yet they distributed it!
You can say, the distributers blinded themselves, and thus "did not know", by ignoring, that still does not change the fact, that the meat was poisoned. In such a case, you would have to "pay the bill".

As said somewhere else, we had several "bad meat" cases here in Germany ourselves. . .they were followed to their origin and sentenced accordingly.

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 21:17

What everybody (grown up of course) does to him/herself, is his/her thing. If some wish to destroy themselves, they can do so, but not with others. I also support free will in hospitals or wherever, to die willingly, when so wished.
Point is, if something is sold (and planned to be sold) by saying that there is no poison (mercury is only one example and content in our case, thus even the details and percentages are wellknown), its a pure fraud and a case for the court, at least hereabout and on many other places.
In case the seller knows the facts. . .which is no doubt in our case.
This is the situation with the schoolmeat (for example). Yet they distributed it!
You can say, the distributers blinded themselves, and thus "did not know", by ignoring, that still does not change the fact, that the meat was poisoned. In such a case, you would have to "pay the bill".
As said somewhere else, we had several "bad meat" cases here in Germany ourselves. . .they were followed to their origin and sentenced accordingly.
But in this case then, the problem is not with whaling per se, but rather with marketing techniques, no?

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 21:21

[I]
Take for instance Chi. This ignorant German woman who eats sausages and other types of meat and wears leather boots BUT she is against Japanese whaling. The whale for her is some sacred floating cow therefore she wants other people to have the same religion as she has towards whales. Thats imperialism and racism. Both Chi and her country Germany have no tradition eating whale meat. Its easy for her to say. Dont eat whale meat because it has never been a part of her culture.
Ja vi in Germany dont eat whalez thats why whaling iz barbaric. Its her attitude which is barbaric.
Now she recently discovered on the internet that whale meat is deadly. So now she wants to SAVE the Japanese from eating whales. She should be a comedian.
Whale meat is not dangerous. Beef, pork, apples, shrimp. All food is dangerous. Everything in moderation and a good balanced diet is the healthiest diet there is.

Go and make up hatefull stories, you constantly ignore simple known facts and what I have really written. I never even said anything that comes close to thinking that a whale is a sacred cow. You are plain fantasizing, same with other contents of your writings.
As long as you construct reasons to your own liking apart from what is really written by me, plus quoted and for all to see in the internet, even accepted by Japanese officials with according changes, you are nothing but a clown yourself.
You even contradict yourself, if you ignore the official reactions to the posted poisonings. Are they also clowns and you know better, even if you obviously have no scientific knowledge??
Why don't you go to Wakayama and tell them directly, that they should feed their children with this mercury etc. once more??
Or better ask for the details, if you so insist that their meat is healthy?
That has absolutely nothing to do with me, and the according projection is more than silly and nothing but a waste of time and energy.
Also, this information has been on other threads before me already. I am not even the first one to find and post it. Its ridiculous to do as if its me.

At least it gives me the laughs about you, OK. you are really like someone in a hamsterwheel. You repeat yourself and can't get out of your fixed prejudices and weird unrelated constructions. Sorry for you.

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 21:30

But in this case then, the problem is not with whaling per se, but rather with marketing techniques, no?

Also, I would say, apart from the so obvious uselessness to even try to feed people with "bad meat", which very well is a general whaling issue. Before I knew about the dangers, I said very clearly (its in the Taiji thread) , that I would not be opposed, if the whaling is within proportions and for locals and with according respect etc. The next thing was, that I realised, how much out of proportion and respect it already was, and for nothing but moneymaking, but misusing all the other made up reasons, etc. etc.

And I am a manager myself, be it for culture, thus I do have an eye on their techniques too, of course. Particularly, when done so poorly and mean, which tells me, that they must have a lot to hide, and so it is.

"Always look for whats left out", which was more than obvious in an question and answer interview with Glenn Inwood, that I posted somewhere else. Not to mention, that our spezie from Norge is using the same poor techniques. . .

Mikawa Ossan

Jan 31, 2008, 21:38

OK, but if people want to eat whale meat, and it is a sustainable industry in terms of whale populations, then as capitolism works, there is no such thing as "uselessness" in trying to sell people bad meat. If they try to sell the whale meat to local school boards as "safe and healthy" but the truth is found to be otherwise, then they could be prosecuted for fraud. But fraud is a different animal than the entire whaling industry, no?

Also, in terms of food quality in general, if you could prove that the whale meat sold at stores exceeds the government mandated levels of mercury, you could probably get the companies fined and punished for breaking food safety law. You don't need to go after the entire industry when the reality might be difficult for the industry to work within the existing framework as it already is.

Chi65

Jan 31, 2008, 21:54

OK, but if people want to eat whale meat, and it is a sustainable industry in terms of whale populations, then as capitolism works, there is no such thing as "uselessness" in trying to sell people bad meat.

Thats why they try to convince people, that there are other reasons behind, and distort their views, not to even ask for the contents. Old marketing trick.
Reason, to make money from innocent people, no matter if they get sick from it or not. Milking the cow, is one of the usual terms. But don't tell her, its not milk for her.
If people would know better, what the real quality is, they are pushed to buy for partly very high price, be it money or/and health, they would not do so. Thus blind them the best way you can. And racism is a fine theme to exploit in Japan, because of its past history, not to forget the relation to Germany during Hitlertime.

If they try to sell the whale meat to local school boards as "safe and healthy" but the truth is found to be otherwise, then they could be prosecuted for fraud. But fraud is a different animal than the entire whaling industry, no?

But it starts there! And is only one example. And this way it becomes clear, what it is they are wishing to sell via whaling, and how.
Its another marketing strategy to "grow future consuments", by giving them a try. Drug dealers do the very same, including the use of "its safe" and "only the opponents are wrong" etc., if possible with very innocent children already, who tend to oppose any restrictions due to puberty.
Easy catches.

Also, in terms of food quality in general, if you could prove that the whale meat sold at stores exceeds the government mandated levels of mercury, you could probably get the companies fined and punished for breaking food safety law. You don't need to go after the entire industry when the reality might be difficult for the industry to work within the existing framework as it already is.

See above, its only the branches of the tree, called whaling, but if the branches are already poisoned, then the roots are even more.. . .

bakaKanadajin

Jan 31, 2008, 22:22

The reason why Inuits and other Native Americans are not as criticised by the west is because the Nobel Savage mentality still exists among alot of people which intself is a racist attitude. Or they look at these people as primitive so they can whales but not Japan. Or because Inuits have had their culture destroyed they can whale but not Japan. Or they need it for their survival but once they do not need it for their survivial then they should not be allowed to hunt whales.

All these opinions which are very common are racist.

You're wrong and out to lunch here. Saying that other cultures rely on whaling as much as the Inuit is incorrect. Norwegians and Japanese do not subsist on whalemeat alone for periods of time throughout the year and whaling is not pivotal to their economies. Take whaling away from the Inuit and they die as a people, it is the same for some aboriginal/first-nation communities and hunting/fishing. Take whaling away from Norway or Japan and they'll still have a high GDP and quality of life.

If you want to label this a racist 'noble savage' mentality go ahead but it makes you look like a complete jackass because in so doing you disregard the most basic of dynamics that differentiates the two situations.

centrajapan

Jan 31, 2008, 22:27

Inuits in Alaska would not die if they did not have whale meat and people in Greenland do have access to super markets. Not being able to comprehend this makes you look like a complete jack *** and your views of these primitive but nobel people in Arctic to be outdated and imperialistic.

Anyway. Does this mean that if they get enough food from other resources then they should not kill whales? What kind of attitude do you have towards cultures that eat whales?

For example?

Greenland gets ok for more whaling, Japan gets nothing

There is an extreme lack of consistency, a very unfair treatment of Japan’s reasonable and limited requests. The IWC is a breeding ground for hypocrisy and double standards where the anti-Japanese sentiments are running high

http://www.highnorth.no/read.asp?which=377

kame

Feb 1, 2008, 08:58

I'll be the first to admit my ignorancy on this area, but aren't Inuits allowed an exemption to the whaling moratorium because at least at the time of the moratorium's signing, those people relied on whaling for a substantial part of their diet?

I think what might be different about Japan is that even at the best of times, whale is not a significant part of the Japanese diet. In other words, there are many choices, and food is plentiful, so Japanese don't need to rely on whaling for survival.

Wasn't the whaling moratorium intended to be lifted when whale populations recouperated to sustainable levels? If one could demonstrate that whale populations have reached such numbers, people opposed to whaling wouldn't have a legal basis to do so anymore, would they?

You are correct. IWC's mission clearly states its objective of supporting sustainable use of whale resources.

The situation has changed dramatically since when the moratorium was imposed. At least population of several whale species are clearly increasing robustly and have reached sustainable levels (e.g. minke whales). As you can gather from the comments here, most, if not all, anti-whaling advocates don't care whether the whaling is sustainable or not. That kind of argument shouldn't be torelated at IWC, but the organization has gone dysfunctional and it is now more of a political arena rather than a responsible regulatory arm based on scientific data.

kame

Feb 1, 2008, 09:27

You're wrong and out to lunch here. Saying that other cultures rely on whaling as much as the Inuit is incorrect. Norwegians and Japanese do not subsist on whalemeat alone for periods of time throughout the year and whaling is not pivotal to their economies. Take whaling away from the Inuit and they die as a people, it is the same for some aboriginal/first-nation communities and hunting/fishing. Take whaling away from Norway or Japan and they'll still have a high GDP and quality of life.

It may have been true that Inuits needed to hunt whales to survive when the moratorium was first imposed, but I highly doubt that their survival actually depends on whaling today. If their governments take the arguments from this forum, the Inuits should change their "barbaric" habit and start living on microwavable food, other fish, or whatever.

Of course, the anti-whaling governments don't do that, but basically try to stop Japan and other countries from whaling based on the same argument. That's the double-standard.

You can't take away a part of someone's culture just because it's not necessary for survival. Let's ban ice hockey in Canada because it's a barbaric and cowardly sport where guys bang each other with sticks. We should ban dog sleds races too because it's just animal abuse for human ego that has nothing to do with survival. What do you say to that?

Chi65

Feb 1, 2008, 10:04

Isn't this off topic?. . .

Sarapva

Feb 1, 2008, 10:35

....many people in the industrialized world have come to the conclusion that whales are too intelligent to be classified as "just another animal." In other words, there was something inherently different about whales that made them offlimits to whaling. I wonder how widespread this belief is. It seems to me to actually be the main reason why people oppose whaling whether they actually state it or not.

This could be true, but my stance is more from an animal rights point of view: I'm against any animal cruelty, in whatever form.

Posted by kame:
We should ban dog sleds races too because it's just animal abuse for human ego that has nothing to do with survival. What do you say to that?

Animal rights groups also want to ban dog sled races. But since I lived in Alaska for a while and actually saw some of the racing and heard how the dogs love it and don't want to be left behind, I'm not fighting against this so much. But in cases where there's obvious pain and trauma inflicted on an animal, such as in slaughtering it slowly and laboriously, I am against that.

Mikawa Ossan

Feb 1, 2008, 18:03

Isn't this off topic?. . .
After reviewing this thread, it seems to have been offtopic for quite some time. I would love to split it, but honestly, I wouldn't know where to do so!

I'll respond to the points made shortly, but I'll just preface by saying that nothing anyone has said yet has sounded very convincing to me at this point. I suppose I'll have to remain neutral forever.

Mikawa Ossan

Feb 2, 2008, 15:33

OK, here we go!

I'll first address Centrajapan.

The International Whaling Commission has been around since 1946 (December 2nd, to be exact). It's purpose as taken from its website:
The purpose of the Convention is to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry. Norway joined the Commission in 1948, and Japan did so in 1951,

The moratorium on commercial whaling was decided upon in 1982 by the commission, and went in effect starting from the 1985/86 whaling season.

The website says the following about aboriginal whaling:
The pause in commercial whaling does not affect aboriginal subsistence whaling which is permitted from Denmark (Greenland, fin and minke whales), the Russian Federation (Siberia, gray whales), St Vincent and The Grenadines (humpback whales), and the USA (Alaska, bowhead and occasionally off Washington, gray whales).
And this as well:
Since its inception, the IWC has recognised that aboriginal subsistence whaling is of a different nature to commercial whaling. This is reflected in the different objectives for the two. For aboriginal subsistence whaling these are to:

* ensure risks of extinction not seriously increased (highest priority);
* enable harvests in perpetuity appropriate to cultural and nutritional requirements;
* maintain stocks at highest net recruitment level and if below that ensure they move towards it.

My points:

Norway is part of the convention, and therefore subject to the moratorium.
Not only that, but Norway was a member long before the moratorium went into effect. The same can be said for Japan. In other words, they willingly agreed to the moratorium at the time of its inception. If not, they could have pulled out of the convention.
The IWC does not care about such ideas as "Noble Savages." It merely sees an inherent difference between the natures of commercial and substinance whaling.
The IWC is not trying to dictate cultural dietary norms to its members. It is merely concerned with making sure that whale stocks stay at population levels that will allow sustainable whaling. They specifically use the term "moratorium" which has the spefic connotation that it will end at some time in the future.

If you want to argue with people like Sarapva and Chi65, please separate theory from practice. I believe that they are mostly concerned with theory at this point in time. Sustinance whaling is a red herring in the debate.

From a practical standpoint, the most effect argument for the lifting of the moratorium is to argue that whale stocks are presently at high enough populations for whaling to resume. In fact, if you look at the IWC website closely, you'll see that progress is being made towards this end.
http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/rmp.htm

Mikawa Ossan

Feb 2, 2008, 16:04

Chi65, why exactly do you oppose whaling? I can see that you oppose its very existance.

But that confuses me. Centrajapan is correct, of course, when he mentions that the cattle industry among others are less than ideal in their handling of animals at least some of the time. Also, with Foot and Mouth disease rearing its ugly head, along with research that beef consumption above very modest amounts is linked to increases in other diseases, one could hardly say that it is unquestionably "safe". Therefore, I don't see the difference between it and whaling.

There are institutions in the various countries concerned that regulate food products. When there is a problem with beef, they intervene, likewise with poultry and other livestocks. I can only speak for Japan and America (the only two countries that I have direct experience with), but Japan seems to do a good job in this regard. I have no reason to think that they would be any less vigilant towards whale meat.

Comparing whale meat to drugs is not appropriate for the simple reason that drugs are addictive, whereas whale meat is not. Equating them is not only misleading, but brings loaded images into the debate that are not helpful.

Sarapva's conviction "against any animal cruelty, in whatever form" is more difficult to debate, as it is a deeper discussion of ethics. I respect this point of view, but I posit the question, do you not think that a well-regulated whaling industry would be more humane than not? The reality of the world today is that people kill animals to eat. I don't think that it's reasonable to expect that to change any time soon, barring anything extremely drastic. Given human nature, I would think that if people are monitored doing such things, they would be forced to be less cruel than they might be otherwise.

Once again, this is coming from a practical point of view. I remain neutral on the actual ethicacy of commercial whaling on a thoeretical level.

butakun

Feb 2, 2008, 19:04

Mikawa Ossan

Feb 2, 2008, 19:45

This is not correct in Norway's case. Norway is not bound by the moratorium.
I stand corrected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_Norway

centrajapan

Feb 2, 2008, 21:11

Norway is part of the convention, and therefore subject to the moratorium. Not only that, but Norway was a member long before the moratorium went into effect. The same can be said for Japan. In other words, they willingly agreed to the moratorium at the time of its inception. If not, they could have pulled out of the convention.

Norway and Japan agreed to stop hunting whales due to uncertainties in stock estimates.

As you stated the objective of the convention is

The purpose of the Convention is to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry.

Anyway..By not working in accordance with the objective of IWC members such as USA, Australia, UK are not doing their jobs at IWC. So it is they who should leave if they cannot agree to the agreement that they have signed on. Honest people honour agreements. Countries who oppose Japan is not honouring their agreement.

The IWC does not care about such ideas as "Noble Savages." It merely sees an inherent difference between the natures of commercial and substinance whaling.

Yes it does. These Nobel Savages were not affected by the ban unlike Japan and Norway. Besides all whaling is commercial. All economies in the world is commercial. US votes in favour of the Inuits in Alaska and the Makah Indians hunting whales. But vote against Japan. This is double morals.

Butkun is right. Norway is not bound by the moratorium.

Norway registered an objection to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) commercial whaling moratorium, and is thus not bound by it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_Norway

Iceland and Norway did not request any whale quotas. They have their own arrangement with the IWC, which includes that they set their national quotas based on the best available scientific knowledge.

Only Japan’s request for a minke whale quota to four coastal communities was rejected at the IWC meeting.

http://www.highnorth.no/read.asp?which=377

The moratorium was supposed to be reevaluated in the early 90s. By that time it was clear that there were enough whales in the ocean and a hunt of these whales would not be a threat to the over all stock estimates.

The moratorium has no scientific justification.

Chairman of the Scientific Committee, Dr Philip Hammond of the UK, resigned in protest when IWC voted down the implementation of RMP. He further stated.

What is the point of having a Scientific Committee if its unanimous recommendations ... are treated with such contempt. I can no longer justify to myself being the organiser of and spokesman for a Committee whose work is held in such disregard by the body to which it is responsible. Nor can I justify asking other members of the Committee to spend their valuable time working hard ... knowing how the results of this work may be treated. (...) I am left with no alternative, therefore, but to resign as Chairman of the Scientific Committee.

http://www.highnorth.no/iwc2000/Briefings/RMS.htm

Countries who vote against Japan's hunt is not doing their jobs at IWC. The mistake Japan did was that it it not object to IWC like Norway and Iceland because at that time US threatened Japan not to do so.

Mikawa Ossan

Feb 2, 2008, 22:44

Norway and Japan agreed to stop hunting whales due to uncertainties in stock estimates.
As you stated the objective of the convention is
The purpose of the Convention is to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry.
Anyway..By not working in accordance with the objective of IWC members such as USA, Australia, UK are not doing their jobs at IWC. So it is they who should leave if they cannot agree to the agreement that they have signed on. Honest people honour agreements. Countries who oppose Japan is not honouring their agreement. Then this is where you should be spending your time arguing.
Yes it does. These Nobel Savages were not affected by the ban unlike Japan and Norway.No it doesn't. The IWC recognizes that those people's very existance relies upon hunting whales. By granting the exeption, they allow those people to exist. That is very different. Besides all whaling is commercial. All economies in the world is commercial. US votes in favour of the Inuits in Alaska and the Makah Indians hunting whales. But vote against Japan. This is double morals.The IWC would disagree with you, as would I.
Butkun is right. Norway is not bound by the moratorium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_Norway
http://www.highnorth.no/read.asp?which=377Yes, that is correct. If you look a little closer, I supplied that first link of yours when I admitted as much in my last post.
The moratorium was supposed to be reevaluated in the early 90s. By that time it was clear that there were enough whales in the ocean and a hunt of these whales would not be a threat to the over all stock estimates.Um, from what I could see, it was reevaluted, but the new regulations have not been approved yet. That is not the same as what you are claiming.
The moratorium has no scientific justification.
Chairman of the Scientific Committee, Dr Philip Hammond of the UK, resigned in protest when IWC voted down the implementation of RMP. He further stated.
What is the point of having a Scientific Committee if its unanimous recommendations ... are treated with such contempt. I can no longer justify to myself being the organiser of and spokesman for a Committee whose work is held in such disregard by the body to which it is responsible. Nor can I justify asking other members of the Committee to spend their valuable time working hard ... knowing how the results of this work may be treated. (...) I am left with no alternative, therefore, but to resign as Chairman of the Scientific Committee.
http://www.highnorth.no/iwc2000/Briefings/RMS.htmThat may be true, but then the proper place to put your energies is at the IWC to get the recommendations passed, not here calling everyone who opposes whaling racist.
Countries who vote against Japan's hunt is not doing their jobs at IWC. The mistake Japan did was that it it not object to IWC like Norway and Iceland because at that time US threatened Japan not to do so.Give it time.

By the way, all of the information that I have used (aside from that one link) comes from the IWC's homepage.

centrajapan

Feb 3, 2008, 00:20

Thanks for you well written reply. It is good to exchange opinions from someone who actually have put time in reading information from the IWC web page and not only thought Greenpeace.

The IWC recognizes that those people's very existance relies upon hunting whales. By granting the exeption, they allow those people to exist. That is very different.

Thats what is imperialistic about it. IWC labels "aborigonal subsistence" whaling. You have to be poor or else you will not be able to hunt whales. It imples that you have to prove to IWC that if you don't eat whales you will die. Or since you culture would die if you don't whale. Thats what imperialistic about it. All whaling cultures in the world are unique. All whaling is commercial. All economies in the world is commercial. By puttinng labels IWC put a divide between the various economies and cultures.

Anti whalers also pult labels to control ethnic minorities and keep them in a position of dependency. Once they can prove that they don't need to whale for their survival they should stop hunting whales. While they tell the rich countries that you should not hunt whales. And since they are "modern"

The Greenlanders have to prove before the IWC judges that they do not sell too much of the whale products on the market.

The Greenlanders have to prove before the IWC judges that they do not sell too much of the whale products on the market, and Greenpeace and other "environmental"
organizations have threatened the Greenlanders with sanctions if they
choose to cooperate politically with the Icelanders and Norwegians

http://www.mail-archive.com/pen-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu/msg28004.html

The IWC would disagree with you, as would I.

I disagree with you and IWC.

Um, from what I could see, it was reevaluted, but the new regulations have not been approved yet. That is not the same as what you are claiming.

Norway or Japan did not stop hunting whales for good. They agreed to stop hunting whales due to uncertainties in stock estimates. Now countries are telling Japan despite the stock estimates and robust management schemes that Japan still should not hunt whales.

The Scientific Committee has unanimously recommended the RMP to the Commission, noting that all the scientific aspects of the work had been completed. These scientific aspects were adopted by the Commission in 1994.

http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/rmp.htm

That may be true, but then the proper place to put your energies is at the IWC to get the recommendations passed, not here calling everyone who opposes whaling racist.

Being against whaling is showing prejudice towards people who eat whales. I am not a member of IWC. I wish I was though so that I could have called everyone in IWC for practicing cultural imperialism. A concept which is outdated and racist.

This is a good web site for all whaling cultures around the world.

http://www.worldwhalers.com/whaling_around_the_world/canada.htm

Sarapva

Feb 3, 2008, 02:20

Sarapva's conviction "against any animal cruelty, in whatever form" is more difficult to debate, as it is a deeper discussion of ethics. I respect this point of view, but I posit the question, do you not think that a well-regulated whaling industry would be more humane than not? The reality of the world today is that people kill animals to eat. I don't think that it's reasonable to expect that to change any time soon, barring anything extremely drastic. Given human nature, I would think that if people are monitored doing such things, they would be forced to be less cruel than they might be otherwise.

Yes, I think if whaling were well-regulated it would (hopefully) result in more "clean" killings and not going over quotas. But it seems to me that it would be hard to regulate whaling - a ship is alone in hundreds of square miles at sea, and the only way to supervise it would be to follow in another ship or plane and take pictures, or maybe with a spy satellite?! Or to have inspectors on board the ships.

I know that killing animals isn't going to change soon, and I do believe that industries should be regulated and routinely investigated (like at slaughterhouses to make sure the animals' welfare is being considered). My arguments aren't so much scientific as coming from a more compassionate standpoint. Whales and other animals can't speak in a language we understand, and we're making all these decisions that affect them directly. It seems that someone (and thank goodness it seems the number of animal rights groups is growing) needs to speak for the animal itself.

If I was a whale, I wouldn't want to be harpooned and dragged aboard a ship to be cut open and sliced into chunks. I might have had a family (there is evidence that whales have social groups and the absence of one affects the others) and a life, migrating every year.

This is from PETA.org's page "Why Animal Rights?"
http://www.peta.org/about/WhyAnimalRights.asp

All animals have the ability to suffer in the same way and to the same degree that humans do. They feel pain, pleasure, fear, frustration, loneliness, and motherly love. Whenever we consider doing something that would interfere with their needs, we are morally obligated to take them into account.

Supporters of animal rights believe that animals have an inherent worth—a value completely separate from their usefulness to humans. We believe that every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering.

Rose Selavey

Feb 3, 2008, 10:52

Yes, I think if whaling were well-regulated it would (hopefully) result in more "clean" killings and not going over quotas. But it seems to me that it would be hard to regulate whaling - a ship is alone in hundreds of square miles at sea, and the only way to supervise it would be to follow in another ship or plane and take pictures, or maybe with a spy satellite?! Or to have inspectors on board the ships.

Well said Sara!

The problem is that the Japanese whaling fleet want to hunt alone with no one to watch or regulate. The Minke whale population in the Southern Ocean is increasing in numbers but still the majority of marine biologists find that to lift the moratorium on commercial whaling would be a disastrous move. Their are many species of Minke whales some very endangered, while others are on the increase. At the moment the harpoon is released and if it is the wrong species this is not discovered until it is too late.

The differnece between aboriginal subsistence whaling and commercial whaling is so wide this should not even be an issue and as the moderator suggested simply a red herring! (nice pun)

Chi65

Feb 3, 2008, 11:35

Chi65, why exactly do you oppose whaling? I can see that you oppose its very existance.

I did not at first, in case it is in proportions and really serves an unavoidable need with according respect. See the Taiji dolphin massacre page.

But I do now, because of what I have learned about the very respectless and more than questionable methods of the whalers, incl. some(not all though) of their defenders, plus the real health issues.
Having seen this, I have come to similar conclusions than other opposers, but I only realised this later, when I found many other's conclusions, that were pretty much the same than mine, including the same sources, that are available for all. This told me, whom I can trust, and whom better not.

Who leaves important parts out or calls someone a liar, who is looking at even scientific results, has lost any credibility for me. If I then add the silly childish sadist behaviours of some pro whalers, I know, who has something to hide, and who does not.

And I will not side with sadists for profit, never.

But I do side with those former ones, who are willing to give back!