Australian Government Blasts Japanese Whale Hunt

.........and shooting big holes in their own feet.

[...] snip [...] snip

If you really are quoting corretly here, I am afraid the credibility of the Australian government goes straight down the drain. The clause allowing whales to be processed is completely in line with the Intl. Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. In fact it is even reccomended according to said convention text, see article VIII below. Anyone reading the full text of ICRW (The URL for the IWC hompage is given below) should be able to discover that the anti-whaling nations are completely perverting the intent of the convention.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/iwcoffice/ Convention.htm

................... Article VIII

1. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as the Contracting Government thinks fit, and the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention. Each Contracting Government shall report at once to the Commission all such authorizations which it has granted. Each Contracting Government may at any time revoke any such special permit which it has granted.

2. Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted. ........

[...] snip [...] snip

numbers.

Such a grossly misleading statement is either a strong demonstration of incompetence or a deliberate lie. The global number of minke whales is more than 5 times the pre-whaling numbers. Sperm whale is the only of the larger whale species where population numbers are at, or near its original numbers.

This is a statement which only applies to the Antarctic whaling (and isn't even correct there). Reliable catch statistics for the North Atlantic have existed since 1930. The maximum numbers of whales caught was 4341 in the year 1958.

What kind of 'experts' do Greenpeace employ? seeesh.

Cassanders In Cod we trust

I don't think that you can assume that Richard is representing the Australian government postion accurately. I seem to recall statements to the effect that the State of Washington was going to challenge the Makah whale hunt on legal grounds.

It's probably just more false information.

Usually I don't , but I think I've seen these statements on a more reliable source as well.

Uhum, but that was just his parroting a press release or something from one of the numerous anti-whaling organizations on the West Coast, wasn't it?

Unfortunately, I think the Aussie story is fairly accurate. Just for the record, I do not have the impression that Rickhard wilfully disseminate lies. To me it simply looks like he is conveying any message supporting his agenda without checking the veracity of its content. Alternatively one can speculate if he is capable of checking the veracity of the content at all.

Cassanders In Cod we trust

[snip]

[snip]

That's my point.

While the news story 'Australian Government Blasts Japanese Whale Hunt' was written up for the media by journalists the basic elements cannot be misconstrued:

'The Australian Government remains totally opposed to lethal scientific whaling'. http://www.environment.gov.au/portfolio/minister/env/ 99/mr2dec99.html

Graham J. Clarke Whales in Danger

Do you actually expect me to take your word for it? after that disinformation campaign that was launched in regard to the State of Washington?

I'm sorry buy you aren't a reliable source of information.

I see, so you don't even believe the Australian government web site eh? Or did you not bother to follow that link?

For all I know you and your morally perverse cronies set up a phony web site to propopogate false information. You've done it before.

The following is a summary of an article about New Zealand whaling policy. I guess the situation is similar in Australia.

M. Ishida <http://luna.pos.to/whale/>

The end of whaling in New Zealand came about by public pressure on whaling companies to end whaling. It was not a voluntary thing, bit like the beech forests being protected, and other native forests likewise.

These things are battles fought by average Joe New Zealand public who see no reason for the continuing destruction of the fauna and flora that is New Zealand.

And it is good.

And do you mean that 'public pressure' allowed the government to withdraw from the IWC in 1968? So far as I know, the public pressure against whaling became hard after 1972 UN Conference on Human Environment at Stockholm.

M. Ishida <http://luna.pos.to/whale/>