Fishy.
I think next season with her on it will be great!
And we just thought this season is hilarious.
As long as you are sailing on a non commercial vessel, i.e. no for hire passengers or cargo, you can call your self captain and not even have to hold a drivers license.
Not that we’ll ever know, but I’d be curious to see how many of the “crew” of the Steve Irwin actually hold a license from their country of origin. I’ve seen US, Canadian, UK, Australia, The Netherlands on there. None of them are emerging countries, and each country has been going to sea for a long time.
From the WHALE WARS website…
Watson is listed as being a Master Mariner with Canadian merchant marine and Coast Guard service.
None of the other crew are noted as being licensed.
Is it me or is Watson way too cocky. He loves himself. Sure, he has world wide experience but sending his people out to board other ships is putting his people in danger. Boarding a ship after showing hostile actions will get you shot in my area.
Like any other cult leader.
LOL, wonder what flavor kool aid he keeps on board
I love the fact that the new “Communcations Officer,” some guy named Tom, admitted that he was trying to learn a lot, and had never seen a radar, but started reading about them only 3 days before hand. I was under the impression that Wilfred, the old communications officer, was licensed in some capacity, because they took him off the 4-8 watch after he told Peter Brown he was an ass. Which, he is. Hilarious.
this is an article written a year ago. its a very long read(almost 16 pages) but appears to be very thorough and well researched. it states he has no maritime license of any kind. its also details the insanity that is the life of paul watson.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/11/05/071105fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=all
I tried to watch the show once, but couldn’t. It is quite pathetic. But I had previously read the book “The Whale Warriors” by Peter Heller. It was on a ship I sailed on. To be truthful, it’s obvious they are complete amateurs. Let’s face it: No sailor would risk his license by such irresponsible behavior.
However, do not fall into the Bush administration byline of calling every opponent a “terrorist”. Fools these people are, but not eco-terrorists. Here’s why:
The Japanese whalers are in fact the criminals, and the United Nations permits the Sea Shepherd Society to “enforce environmental law” The UN Charter for Nature, ratified in 1982, banned whaling. The Japanese are members of the UN. The charter states: “…any non-govermental organization, individual, or nation-state is entitled to uphold international law, specifically and especially in international waters…”
Why is is that after the Japanese captured the 2 crew that boarded, they postured for a while, then let them go with no conditions? Because the Japanese government know very well who the criminals are. It’s, surprise, the Japanese! Whether or not you agree with Sea Shepherd, they are out there because they believe in a cause very strongly. They just don’t know jack about seamanship.
Daryl Hannah to the rescue
Mike,
Where did you find your quote fromt he UN chart for nature? I looked over it a couple times and couldn’t find it in there. Maybe I just missed it. Anyone want to double check?
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm
Actually I found another quote from the UN Preamble to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea that’s a bit more relevant:
<p align="center]Article101
<p align="center]Definition of piracy
<p align="left]Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
<dir><dir><dir>
<p align="left](a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:
<dir>
<p align="left](i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
<p align="left](ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;
</dir>
<p align="left](b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
<p align="left]© any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).
</dir></dir></dir>
"In the early nineties, instead of simply claiming the side of morality, as he did after ramming the Sierra, Watson began to assert legal authority for his actions. For this, he cited primarily the U.N. World Charter for Nature, a resolution passed by the General Assembly in 1982, which allows for private citizens to help “safeguard and conserve nature in areas beyond national jurisdiction”. But it is not a license for vigilantism. The charter is nonbinding, and does not have enforcement provisions. It indicates that individuals should act only “to the extent they are able”, a clause that Watson interprets to mean physical capability but which is obviously meant to encompass legal authority as well. No country regards ramming, disabling, or scuttling ships to be legal activities, and, except on rare occasions, even naval ships cannot lawfully interfere with foreign vessels on the high seas. When I described Watson’s use of the charter to David Caron, the co-director of the Law of the Sea Institute, at the University of California at Berkeley, he said, “Clearly wrong. There is no ambiguity”.
and NO, HE DOES NOT HAVE A LICENSE
MIKE173, I didn’t label Sea Sheperd as an “eco-terrorist” organization, they are mentioned by name on the FBI’s website as such.
Is it correct to infer that you are a former crewmember?
MIKE173,
One shouldn’t defended bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.
SEADOG! I love your crack about former crewmember. But, no, I’m certainly not. I would be ashamed to be associated with them. But I am very anti-whaling, very pro-environment. The only thing about them I respect is there enthusiasm. But at least this thread has taken a more intelligent direction other than just saying “I’d shoot 'em”. Because realistically, all have more to fear from the FBI than Sea Shepherd. Sea Shepherd just provides comedy.
MIKE173
It wasn’t meant as a crack. I understood your post to say you sailed on the boat in Whale Warriors. After re-reading that post I take your comment to be that you didn’t buy the book, the book was on a boat you sailed on
Although I am certainly not a “tree hugger”, from your tone I think you and I would agree on many other issues.
Hey SEADOG, yes, I just re-read my first post. It was written a bit vaguely. Yes, the book was in the library of a ship I was on. I read it with a mixture of humor and disgust (at both sides). And yes, I think we would probably agree on many issues. ON a side note, per post by RETIRED RAT, I seem to remember from the book that none of the crew were licensed. Not even the “officers”. I’m not sure about Paul Watson’s “professional” status, but most of the rest had never been on a boat before. Hence, the poor seamanship and decision making. I found it reprehensible that he stayed in bed while the RIB was lost at sea.
Finally watched an episode last night, in which they return to port to fix a blown main. What a cluster-fuck comedy of errors. I’ll not be surprised to hear someday they’ve killed one of their crew through their incompetence.
Maybe someone can explain this. Since this sad lot of idiots has no problem demonstrating their lack of seamanship, and utter disregard for any rule that they don’t like, can the nation whose flag they fly not rescind their permit to operate, and make this a stateless vessel? It’s not like the evidence isn’t there, or did they pick this particular country based on their reluctance to get involved??