Jump to content
echeng

Paul Watson reportedly shot in chest by Japanese Coast Guard

Recommended Posts

Well if it was attempted murder, then they should prosecute the Japanese in a court of law. Turn over evidence and have the Australians go after them.

What benefit would killing Watson have? Absolutely none unless they really wanted a martyr on their hands and a PR nightmare. Did they think the little fledglings would disperse once Watson was dead? Bewildering! Going with the expert marksman theory further, Watson's kevlar was showing, since there was no penetration of his outer jacket. Any marksman would know that his round would less effective against kevlar. And why one shot only? If they wanted to really kill him, they'd take as many as they needed to. Perhaps the JCG was shooting out in anger or a warning shot? All these scenarios make little sense.

On the other hand, having those 2 guys board the boat seemed to be a measured stunt to produce media opportunities (where trespassing becomes a hostage situation) and now if the report is true, they have also used that stunt to plant tracking devices on the ship. This would mean they planned to be detained and brought to the main boat. If so, these are very smart people waging a great PR campaign.

Only time will tell who is lying and who is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My sources say that Lee Harvey Oswald was the marksman. He was standing on the grassy knoll behind the wheelhouse when he took the shot. I have proof of it to but I can't share it here yet. Keep an eye on the mainstream press though. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, constructive is not a word I'd use for your 2 posts. :rolleyes: Although I'm also not sure how constructive this discussion is except to examine the facts at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if it was attempted murder, then they should prosecute the Japanese in a court of law. Turn over evidence and have the Australians go after them.

What benefit would killing Watson have? Absolutely none unless they really wanted a martyr on their hands and a PR nightmare. Did they think the little fledglings would disperse once Watson was dead? Bewildering!

It would not be unheard of for people who's lively hoods or culture are threatened by someone from another culture to behave irrational.

 

Going with the expert marksman theory further, Watson's kevlar was showing, since there was no penetration of his outer jacket. Any marksman would know that his round would less effective against kevlar.

I think the whole marksman theory is flawed. It all assumes the person was actually aiming where it impacted. If it was a bullet, it could have hit anywhere. Who knows where the shooter was aiming.

 

And why one shot only? If they wanted to really kill him, they'd take as many as they needed to.

Maybe because they were so shocked it hit Watson and not the zodiac 50 yards to the left that they dropped the gun in terror.

 

I personally think Watson is doing a great job because he is doing everything in his power short of sending in a torpedo to stop the whalers in their tracks. He's risking life and limb for the cause he believes in. A cause most of us believe in. Maybe we don't like his methods, but he's getting results. It doesnt matter who or if a gun was fired. He's the underdog and has already won that battle. Little guy was shot by giant whale butchering monsters. He's milking it for all its worth, as he should. Im seeing worse things every day in the presidential campaigns.

 

When Julie was working for Greenpeace in their HQ in Amsterdam we saw these guys that go out on boats regularly. They are a little crazy. But it takes a little crazy to do what they do.

 

Cor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would not be unheard of for people who's lively hoods or culture are threatened by someone from another culture to behave irrational.

I think the whole marksman theory is flawed. It all assumes the person was actually aiming where it impacted. If it was a bullet, it could have hit anywhere. Who knows where the shooter was aiming.

Maybe because they were so shocked it hit Watson and not the zodiac 50 yards to the left that they dropped the gun in terror.

Sure, but it also goes both ways. Look at the Taiji fishermen using oars to repel the protesters, a pretty violent reaction to protect their livelihood. I can almost see if the acid attacks caused one of the JCG to draw his weapon in anger and fire. However, assuming they are not merely rent-a-cops but trained guys, your scenario is also flawed. Obviously this is all conjecture. That's why I say let SS go forward with criminal charges if they have proof. I'll admit my own experiences in the SS organization tells me to doubt the veracity of such a claim. PR machines are amazing in the amount of BS they spew. Many NGOs like to exaggerate numbers to make a point etc. It's the only way to get the attention of the general public.

 

I personally think Watson is doing a great job because he is doing everything in his power short of sending in a torpedo to stop the whalers in their tracks. He's risking life and limb for the cause he believes in. A cause most of us believe in. Maybe we don't like his methods, but he's getting results. It doesnt matter who or if a gun was fired. He's the underdog and has already won that battle. Little guy was shot by giant whale butchering monsters. He's milking it for all its worth, as he should. Im seeing worse things every day in the presidential campaigns.

I admire his passion as well. But no less passionate are the Green Peace group who do not engage in this sort of violent behavior. That is something that is very much debateable. The extent of which his campaign is working vs passive methods of actual diplomacy of governments working through the IWC and GreenPeace and other NGOs. The only effect I can see is the sensationalized publicity in the western world and disrupting one boat from hunting (which endangering lives on both sides) and breaking(not bending) the law by boarding other vessels, acid bottle throwing, prop fouling etc). The publicity is great for his money raising ability and ego, but the backlash to that is it serves the nationalists in Japan who use it to garner support for the whaling industry in Japan, the reverse of what is needed. I use to think his methods were effective because I wanted them to be. However, pulling my emotions aside and looking at the track record, it's not. How effective were these tactics in Norway in the 90s? Have the Norwegians stopped whaling? No, instead they have a warrant for his arrest(one of the big reasons he's no longer in the EU much) and still take over 500 minkes a year..

Nor are the Japanese really the victims they claim to be. They use a sham loophole to continue to support an industry that is failed. Nobody likes the guy who gets away on a technicality, like O.J. for instance :rolleyes:. That's why the IWC meeting in London over the weekend went again to resolve this issue. In fact several conflicting reports on how the meeting went have surfaced. One from the Independent states that there was consensus to allow limited whaling and shelf the phony JARPA permits. Of course Australia is also touting that they won support for whale conservation.

I believe Hogarth and others are doing their best to control the whaling situation. It's not easy when big money and national pride is involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Drew. My second post was trying to be humorous but was intended to highlight the absurdity of some of the reasoning on this thread. The first post was a little more pointed but I'd be happy to delete it. It did express my true opinion of the matter though. This kind of PR gets boring after a while and it doesn't help stop whaling. If this was effective, there would have been peace in the Middle East decades ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look zippsy, it's the smoking gun... and it wasn't from the grassy knoll... it was from the book depository of the Nisshin Maru... :rolleyes:

 

editorial_080308_3_2_gun_shot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally think Watson is doing a great job because he is doing everything in his power short of sending in a torpedo to stop the whalers in their tracks. He's risking life and limb for the cause he believes in. A cause most of us believe in. Maybe we don't like his methods, but he's getting results.

 

Cor

 

I agree with Drew on this one. I'm sorry, I don't believe in his methods at all, even though I believe in the cause.

 

Confrontation to violence is OK if it's for a cause we believe in or because he believes in it? Hardly the rationale I support. If everyone who believed so strongly about something used these methods, it would a very dysfunctional world.

 

When the Eco-green supporters start acid bombing the CO2 spewing dive yachts and yanking out moorings, it will be OK because they believe so strongly that sport diving should be abolished in order to reduce CO2 emissions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont believe in his methods either, or any violence for that matter, but he's out there. whether we like it or not. I hope his crazy antics doesnt get him or someone else hurt, but now that there is an incident, I think he's doing a great job milking it as much as possible. I dont have a problem with that specifically. I do hope he comes to his senses about his methods after this incident, but somehow I doubt it.

 

Cor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with Drew on this one.

Wow George, you actually agree with me for one thing... it isn't so hard is it? :rolleyes:

 

If everyone who believed so strongly about something used these methods, it would a very dysfunctional world.

Well it is kinda dysfunctional in many parts of the world. :D

 

When the Eco-green supporters start acid bombing the CO2 spewing dive yachts and yanking out moorings, it will be OK because they believe so strongly that sport diving should be abolished in order to reduce CO2 emissions?

 

Don't they first have to get the sport fishermen first with their 500hp 5mpg engines? Or the Hummer dealerships?

 

I do hope he comes to his senses about his methods after this incident, but somehow I doubt it.

Cor, he lives in an alternate reality. But his passion is his charisma, which is why many people follow him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If everyone who believed so strongly about something used these methods, it would a very dysfunctional world.

 

Iraq, Afganistan...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Iraq, Afganistan...........

 

Iraq, bombing of abortion clinics, military recruiting centers and animal research labs, or the most recent torching of large new homes.

 

These tactics raise awareness and are created by people with a great passion for something, but they don't persuade us less passionate folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK that's enough guys. If we tried to list everywhere where people are using violence to further their beliefs it will be a long list.

 

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look zippsy, it's the smoking gun... and it wasn't from the grassy knoll... it was from the book depository of the Nisshin Maru... :rolleyes:

You and zippsy are free not to comment on this thread. If you can't be constructive, please stay quiet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever anyone on this thread thinks of SS's tactics and the reactions to these, they have succeeded in their aims well and truly. They have raised the profile of the topic of whaling and have raised the profile of this highly emotive subject and got people talking about it. This thread is absolute evidence of that!

 

What baffles me about the whole subject of current whaling is that economically it MUST be damaging in overall terms. Whenever I talk to anyone at all interested in cetaceans (a surprisingly large number of people) the response is always the same - they tend to operate a bias in favour of buying goods sourced from non-whaling countries whenever they are able to do so (myself included). SS's actions will IMHO, raise the whaling debate in parts of the media and whatever people think of their actions I would say that the knock on effect of this raised profile has to be negative economically on Japan and other whaling nations.

 

Sorry to have been facetious with my last post - violent intervention is simply a fact of human nature (see history) and my cynicism got the better of me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries Eric. I'll keep quiet. It doesn't make a difference anyway as we all just keep restating the same points over & over. I don't know anyone that has changed their mind on the subject because of any posts. That's why I yawned.

 

my mouth is now zipped, see?

Edited by zippsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zippsy -- the is that some folks are trying to have a conversation. Some threads are clearly made better by humor and sarcasm, but this one is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whatever anyone on this thread thinks of SS's tactics and the reactions to these, they have succeeded in their aims well and truly. They have raised the profile of the topic of whaling and have raised the profile of this highly emotive subject and got people talking about it. This thread is absolute evidence of that!

 

What baffles me about the whole subject of current whaling is that economically it MUST be damaging in overall terms. Whenever I talk to anyone at all interested in cetaceans (a surprisingly large number of people) the response is always the same - they tend to operate a bias in favour of buying goods sourced from non-whaling countries whenever they are able to do so (myself included). SS's actions will IMHO, raise the whaling debate in parts of the media and whatever people think of their actions I would say that the knock on effect of this raised profile has to be negative economically on Japan and other whaling nations.

Paul

I would agree in principle that it raises awareness but I seriously doubt it's effectivenmess. Let's take this forum. We've heard many show outrage etc...but they also continue to use Sony, Nikon, Canon etc.

The other issue is the products from the whaling countries like Norway and Iceland are pretty much rare in our normal everyday life that I can honestly say I've boycotted them. But Japan is so much into consumer electronics that we can't ignore them.

The key to tackling this problem is realising that the Japanese government is run by old guard nationalist. Like every other human being on earth, when some foreigner tries to force doctrine down on someone else, it's doomed to failure because it builds resentment. Whaling in Japan will probably disappear in 10-15 years, phased out gradually by new politicians and voters. Raising nationalistic feelings just prolongs the defiance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drew

 

I do take your points, however from a European perspective I am sure that I have read the odd news item in papers and heard the odd radio broadcast that indicates that within a European context, countries such as Iceland and Norway have found whaling to be economically detrimental, and as a result I suspect that we will eventually see their whaling ambitions decline and eventually end - money, as they say, talks!

 

I know far less about the Japanese and the extent of any nationalistic fervour for old traditions like whaling. However I am not personally impressed by the attitude displayed by the Japanese government and will try to source any equipment I need from the used market rather than new wherever possible (and ok, I accept that its not always possible and that we live in a complex world economically). I can't do a great deal but what little I can do I will - money, as they say, talks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul I agree with Iceland. They stopped after killing a few whales because they couldn't get rid of the meat. Norway however is bankrolled by their petroleum industry and the subsidies will just keep coming for a long while. They could pay these guys to sit on their butts but they have to launch and catch something. It's unfortunately like the spanish fishing fleet ... a big voting base with political clout. Same for the Japanese, whose economic piggy bank is so deep that they can support the industry indefinitely. What's more for the Japanese is the fight to stake claim to resources. They know the seafood fisheries are collapsing in many parts of the work. I suspect it's a longer term thinking to secure a natural resource. Being a country with very little natural resource and an economy that's moved away from agriculture, it's not hard to see why they do so. Plus the various whaling villages that is a voting base. Hopefully the mercury buildup will put them off.

I hear you on the boycott but if the companies don't know you are avoiding their products because of japanese whaling, your abstinence is wasted as just a poor quarter.

Also seriously, we have more urgent issues with sharks than whales. And I seriously don't see anyone boycotting Chinese goods, again because now they are a manufacturing powerhouse. Casinos in Vegas will listen because their main customers are still americans, although a significant number of their bigger spending clients are of Asian background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsens ! Yes , read it again " Nonsens !!!!

 

If you are shot with a high calibre rifle , as the slug he shows suggests , wearing a Kevlar , the force is so high that you will be lifted off your feet and experience flight yourself. You will lie on the ground , struggle to breathe and need hospitalisation .At the hospital they will find compression fractures all around the area , and the bruise will be as large as approx 4 hands and increasing. A shot on the heart will cause such symphatic response, that he would have been vomiting all over the place and heart failure could have been inevitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emaltorio, I doubt very many people think this was a high caliber rifle. No way a kevlar jacket will protect against that. Watson seems to barely notice the impact. So it's either a very slow pistol round, or some kind of shrapnel.

 

I hope we get some more info about it, if only to solve the mystery.

 

Cor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nonsens ! Yes , read it again " Nonsens !!!!

 

If you are shot with a high calibre rifle , as the slug he shows suggests , wearing a Kevlar , the force is so high that you will be lifted off your feet and experience flight yourself. You will lie on the ground , struggle to breathe and need hospitalisation .At the hospital they will find compression fractures all around the area , and the bruise will be as large as approx 4 hands and increasing. A shot on the heart will cause such symphatic response, that he would have been vomiting all over the place and heart failure could have been inevitable.

Emaltorio

Actually the physics of that happening is not possible. It's not like the movies :rolleyes: Technically the inelastic collision of the bullet against the kevlar is less after traveling the distance from the gun to the target. The kinetic energy is changed into force via shock waves (causing bruising etc) and heat (burns). The mass of a bullet (even a high caliber rifle round) and the momentum it carries is not enough to knock a person off their feet, especially one as massive as Paul Watson. What knocks them down is the pain of the impact but you don't have a person flying backwards like say Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon 1 (the best was LW4 but I like Jet Li :D). I think even Mythbusters took a look at this at one point.

Which brings me to whether the round was a full metal jacket(the preferred round of infantry for the piercing ability) or a hollow point round (the preferred round of law enforcement for the damage).

Part of the reason of my disbelief it is a gun round is because of the physics involved. If it were shrapnel, I'd be less vocal about this. With an ex-cop on board, I think the identification of a bullet vs shrapnel should be pretty definitive. It is also very difficult for the 'truth' to be determined. If they hand in a bullet and examine the JCG guns and it's not from their issued guns, SS can claim the japanese dumped the gun in the Antarctic (opps gave them another idea). Maybe if the JCG don't do laundry for the next month it'll be possible to do a GSR test ... I'm going to suggest this as an episode for one of those CSI shows. :D

Still the JCG were crazy to throw flash balls at a boat, even the very latest devices are adviced to be used at least 5 ft away from any one. That's what happens when things escalate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the vest, it's really quite basic. This is not a military style vest. The way he just goes in there with his hands and bends the material it seems like it's got no ceramic or metal plates whatsoever, at least at the point of impact. The insert plates are what stop the high velocity rifle rounds, a regular vest can not.

 

What it could be is a .22 long range rifle round (which is a very popular cheap round). Those can be stopped by almost anything and carry relatively little kinetic energy compared to other rounds. But still, you'll know if you get hit by one of those.

 

It's interesting to read how the Japanese foreign office keep changing their story.

 

Cor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Drew

I have a house near Port Edward. Next time you go to S.A on your sardine trip, drop me a mail. I have a SADF issued Kevlar vest .

I aso have a 38 special, .22 (balistic) , and a 303. You can wear the vest , I am crack shot.

 

Lets test your theory ! ;->

Edited by emaltorio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...