David @ Tokyo

David, please put your glasses on and study what the images you have linked.

It is clear from the water movements that GP was taking evasive action to avoid a collision, also consider that if they had intended to ram the NM then it is unlikely that they would have been moving so slowly, hardly a ripple for a wake.

Before you suggest that I am echoing GP's account that was my opion when I watched and rewound many time the ICR video last year. Both parties are out to discredit the other, which comprimises any subjectivity to the incident.

GP has produced their own accunt from the ICR video and to see it in another light would question ones judgement, I've yet to see an ICR account that points out the situation differently accept and a video with no details, this relies on ignorance and lazyness to enquire and openness to see the events as they unfolded.

The fact that the whaling fleet is not iceclass in it's construction is a very valid point and one that you dismiss. Have you noted that all the ships of both GP and SS have some form of iceclass rating. Yet the whaling fleet does not have any from my research.

http://activism.greenpeace.org/mv/oceandefenders/ramming/ramming_video.html

It is difficult to know whose horn is blowing, this is important as it is a signal devise and has a meaning. So folks know 3 blasts means going in reverse ( and that can be heard) 1 blast going to port (left) and 2 blasts going to starboard (right).

I am sure you are an excellent compter programer, sadly as I have commented before you seem to lack experience on the water, whether fishing or recreationally. The rules of the land are left on the shoreline in all regards, at least acknowledge this. I do not say it as a critism just an observation, because if you did appreciate this your generosity and interpretation of some events may differ from your current position.

It is a fact that the Oceans are in peril and the governments of the world seem not to get it, particularly Japan, no mater what they may say. a nation that has such a vociforious appetite for seafood will sidestep the issue.

Raising tuna in pens is not sustainable, something in the region of 4.5lbs of fish is needed to produce 1lb of tuna. That is not sustainable due to the effort directed to provide such, fuel, depletion of other ecological resources etc.

GP did not ram the NM and that is clear to anyone who veiws the footage with an open mind. If it is the case I am sure the ICR would have released any findings (Lloyds, perhaps) that would substantiate the fact, yet I do not see this, so I remain sceptical to the claims of ICR.

As to the illegal landing of GP in St. Kitts and Nevis, sadly a trap was laid for GP so the appropriate spin could take place and they fell for it.

As to endangering ecosystems in their landing please bear in mind that no mariner wants to hit anything due to the potential damage to their own craft firstly, secondly as you will see if you use Google earth

"Greenpeace Landing" lat=17.2926907737, lon=-62.6832130783

to veiw the area, it is clear that there is ample room and depth of channels to make a landing without coming into contact with the so called barrier reef. There are clearly two breakwaters constructed by the Marriot, no doubt to retain their beach, so who is messing with the ecology and endangering it. To place that material would have required either a very large crane or a barge to deliver the material, a barge operating in the area would have been very dodgy and any anchors used likely to damage corals in the area. Charts of the area would suggest that there is water enough for a vessel that draws less than a couple of feet. Depth in the region of ten plus feet in the channels.

Nice spin, but to those who may look a little deeper it does not wash, I saw them come in and noted their course, that appeared to take into consideration the reef in question.

Of course you and many others did not witness it and will only get digested information that is spun to gain a desired result.

Truth sets you free.
 

Davidさん、

Martinという人もいささかヒステリック
ですなぁ。

＞you seem to lack experience on
＞the water,

↑こういう発言も失礼と思います。

＞GP did not ram the NM and that
＞is clear to anyone who veiws the ＞footage with an open mind.

結局長々と書いているけどこれが言いたかった
わけだよね。この人もＧＰの人なんだろうね。

Y/H(Japan)
 

Martin,

GP's "evasive action" came at a point in time that a collision was already imminent. The captain had a nasty bout of self-righteousness at a really bad time. Watching the video one could be forgiven for thinking that it was running in slow motion. Not so.

Step back. A ship engaged in truly "peaceful protest" against (legal) whaling activity would have taken care not to sail it's vessel on the course that the AS was on, heading right across the path of the vessel it was "peacefully protesting" against.

GP was attempting to make mischief of itself, or at very best, simply grossly negligent as far as "peaceful protesters" go.

The new IMO guidelines will hopefully be available for our perusal by August this year. I am fairly certain that a lot of the "peaceful protest" tactics we have seen in the Antarctic in recent times will fall outside of the bounds of the code of conduct that is eventually agreed. I believe that active obstruction of a legal activity on the high seas will be regarded as unacceptable by the international community.

Re the "Oceans are in peril" - many in Japan are fully aware of the (real) problems in fisheries management today. Perhaps if you were able to read Japanese this would be as obvious to you as it is to me - but I will take this comment in a positive way, and look to incorporate the topic into a future post.
 

Y/H-san,

Martin does appear to have a very soft spot for Greenpeace, which is unfortunate because people who associate themselves with or defend the immature behaviour of Greenpeace run the risk of being dismissed.

However, I'm always happy to hear from Martin, as he is a genuine voice from Antigua and Barbuda, as opposed to the urbanized trolls of the rich western nations who have been aggregating here recently with whaling being in the news. Martin has a true concern for the environment, and I respect him for that. While there is much on which I will disagree with Martin about, I have the impression that there is probably also a surprising amount on which we can agree.