Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter
Less Than $300 To Go!!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 02/27/2013 11:05:06 AM PST by jazusamo
Video and slideshow at link.
A federal appeals court panel has branded a Northwest anti-whaling group "pirates," ordering a halt to attacks on Japanese whalers in Antarctic waters.
The outspoken opinion, which reads at times more like "Moby Dick" than a court decision, hands a victory to Miller Nash, a Portland law firm that took the controversial step of representing Japan's whale hunters .
The 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals opinion issued late Monday is also unusual for ordering the transfer of a lower-court judge from the case, finding that U.S. District Judge Richard A. Jones made "numerous, serious and obvious errors" in the ruling that generated the appeal.
The majority opinion of the three-judge panel continues an earlier injunction ordering Sea Shepherd Conservation Society activists to stay at least 500 yards away from Japanese whaling ships.
"You don't need a peg leg or an eye patch," wrote Chief Judge Alex Kozinski in the majority opinion. "When you ram ships; hurl glass containers of acid; drag metal-reinforced ropes in the water to damage propellers and rudders; launch smoke bombs and flares with hooks; and point high-powered lasers at other ships, you are, without a doubt, a pirate, no matter how high-minded you believe your purpose to be."
The opinion is a blow to Sea Shepherd, registered in Oregon and based in Friday Harbor, Wash., known for combating whaling on the high seas. It's a win in a continuing legal battle waged by the plaintiffs, which are led by the Institute of Cetacean Research , a Japanese foundation that cites a scientific-research exception to an international whaling ban.
But the opinion isn't shutting down Sea Shepherd, which continued clashes this week off Antarctica, claiming whalers rammed one of its vessels and deployed stun grenades and a water cannon.
Scott West, a Sea Shepherd spokesman, said that to comply with the appeals court's earlier injunction, the U.S. organization has separated itself from Sea Shepherd Australia, which is now operating the anti-whaling campaign.
"It's not us," West said. "We have separated ourselves from having anything to do with what's going on in Antarctica."
That argument doesn't wash with the Cetacean Institute, which filed suit in 2011 against Sea Shepherd and its president, Paul Watson, whom the judges' opinion describes as eccentric.
Gavin Carter, an institute spokesman in Washington, D.C., noted that Sea Shepherd split its branches after the panel of judges issued a preliminary injunction Dec. 17.
"I would imagine that the courts would be able to see through what they've done," Carter said. "The question now is whether the nations that are flagging the Sea Shepherd vessels, which are the Netherlands and Australia, are going to be willing to continue providing a flag for vessels that the U.S. courts have deemed to be engaging in acts of piracy."
The appeals court judges said their opinion should be taken not as an endorsement of whaling but as a signal that "violent vigilantism by U.S. nationals in international waters" is not condoned.
Judge Jones, a former prosecutor who is a half brother of musician Quincy Jones, has been presiding in Seattle in the case.
The Cetacean Institute appealed Jones' decisions to dismiss its piracy claims and to deny the foundation's request for an injunction against Sea Shepherd. Miller Nash lawyer John Neupert presented arguments in October, supported by his law partner, Chris Helmer.
In the latest opinion, Kozinski wrote that Jones erred in dismissing the piracy claims. "Damaging Cetacean's ships could cause them to sink or become stranded in glacier-filled Antarctic waters," he wrote, "jeopardizing the safety of the crew."
Kozinski wrote in the majority opinion that the case, should be transferred to another district judge, drawn at random, as the case continues in the courts.
But another panel member, Circuit Judge Milan Smith, dissented on that point, saying Jones would be able to put aside his previous views and follow the appeals court's requirements.
"The Sea Shepherds are pirates. Period," Smith wrote. "No district judge could fail to grasp the clarity and firmness of our opinion."
lol! A salient fact. But good luck getting those who have had their minds manipulated by this television show to accept it.
A treaty has no binding power on any group not a signatory to the treaty. Japan, Norway and a few others never signed, ergo they are not bound.
Norway tends to hunt more whales then Japan does and yet you never hear anyone bitch about them. Make of that what you will.
The hippies also go after tuna boats and have indicated that they are against all fishing.
I wonder how sanguine the hippy huggers will be when their fishing boats are targeted?
BUMP!
These innocent Japanese are selling the whales to the highest bidder, for "research" of course. Maybe the research would be to find out which upscale Tokyo restaurant will contribute the most to the "research" fund.
I would agree that the whalers actions don't even come close to what the hippie lunatics are doing. If I was commanding one of the whalers, the Sea Shepard and its crew would have met Davey Jones a long time ago.
That being said, don't try to blow smoke at us here that the Japanese are not lying about their "research". If the "research" didn't pay well, they wouldn't put up with a bunch of crazy American hippies...and if the Hippies didn't have a TV gig, they would have gone home a long time ago.
The guiding principle here is "MONEY TALKS, AND BULLSHIT WALKS"
I would agree that the whalers actions don't even come close to what the hippie lunatics are doing. If I was commanding one of the whalers, the Sea Shepard and its crew would have met Davey Jones a long time ago.
I partially agree. However, the hippies' actions, while incredibly dangerous to human life, have not risen to the point where they warrant the death penalty. Not in America, anyway.
Ping a roo
BTW their show Whale wars got renew for this summer
Rumor has it they may go to Alaska do crossover by messing with Deadliest catch crews
I've always wondered why the Jap Whalers didn't get them some black market antitank weapons and fire a few at the Seasheps below the water line. Now that is a Whale Wars I would thoroughly enjoy!
I haven't watched even one episode of Whale Wars because I can't stand him but I've seen several post here that watch but say they root for the whalers. lol
I wonder to what degree this declaration clears the way for the Japanese to respond to acts of piracy with deadly force.
I don’t know but it’ll be interesting to see if they start taking sterner measures to protect themselves, they certainly should in my view.
The charter for the International Whaling Commission is to "provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry". Banning whaling is a violation of the purpose of the IWC's founding, and thus negates their authority.
US Constitution, Article I, Section 8:
Second question: When did the 9th District Court start caring about the constituion? lol
US Constitution, Article I, Section 8:
Second question: When did the 9th District Court start caring about the constituion? lol
That is a very good question and unfortunately I don't have a good answer to it!
I not joking there going be another season of Whale wars also for fans of Deadliest catch another season
Now Whale wars may start this summer I think June or July while Deadliest Catch is April premire
So, treat them as such. A quick trial on the quarterdeck followed by hanging from a yardarm, and disposal at sea. An entry in the ship's log, done.
That’d sure work for me, it’s exactly what they deserve.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.