What would be our reaction if 3 Japanese jumped aboard an Australian Government ship.
Bob Brown tells us we should act.
Forget the Whales this is law, at sea,Piracy.
And never forget, an act done for publicity.
3 years in prison in my view, half of that for being used.

there must be an injured party mr bell
reveal the injury

courts can only resolve disputes
re damages..[no victim no crime]

going by the clever naming of it..[the boat invaded]
all they got is illegal enrty to the japan state
immediate deportation is the only end result

further detainment..will result in a damages claim
for those..who's freedoms have been subverted

we all know about gimmics
this was a token publicity gimmic
till soeone sufferd real hurt or injury

[to wit those highjacked away from their home waters]
the law of the sea...has its own laws..but names nean things cettain

note the name of the boat..these boat people landed on
in distress...think of a british yachty...resqued on the high seas

was he jailed?

dont be so hurtfull mr bell
its was a cheap publicty..trick

now the world is watching
judging...and will see the stink
once they make the link

for once we agree Belly. Miracles happen.

I agree as well.
These idiots need to be jailed by the Japanese for invasion of their ship.

I don't like whaling, and I don't like the Japanese Government for allowing their fishermen to fish in our ocean. I am upset the Australian Government doesn't stop them either.

However, I am annoyed by these 'environmentalists' actions.

We humans are indeed weird.
Not just Australians all of us.
We line up to put our views, me too.
But take others as wrong totally.
Currently those who hold views about honesty, are concerned about the manipulation of the press and media.
Some of those same folk? set out to board a ship wearing another country's brand, at sea, no victim OUG?
The Japanese have acted with great skill, why give the idiots what they wanted, controversy.
Good reasons exist to oppose Japans Whaling, apart from the fact it is a constructed lie, food gathering not science.
Like a neglected dog, good protests suffer, from brainless fleas.
First control those self serving fools and stop bleeding supporters who are far too bright to not know a plot when they see it.
Lets get new threads rolling folks some are not doing much.

Dear Belly,

My husband tells me that he heard on the news this morning
that the three Australian detainees held on board the
Japanese whaling ship are to be released as soon as the
vessel reaches port. The word is that they are being
released sometime today. Watch the news.

Three years is a bit rich for boarding a ship. It is not piracy given there were three men against a whole bevy of Japanese crewmen. Clearly it is a protest action - let's not get ahead of ourselves and run away with delusions of 'justice'.

What about the Japanese conducting illegal whaling activities in ocean conservation areas and in territorial waters? Any thoughts as to how much prison time illegal whalers should receive - if we are being evenhanded.

The Australian Government is not acting, but practically from diplomacy aspect I acknowledge it is not straightforward.

The whaling industry is highly subsidised in Japan and the fishing industry has a strong influence on government. Australia treads lightly around the issue making bold statements but very little follow up action. Sending out the customs ship Ocean Viking to patrol the protected zones would go a lot further and bring with it the advantage of an official authority.

At least the Sea Shepherd group (albeit they are not perfect) is actually doing something about it, continuing to bring attention to these illegal activities, even if you disagree with their means.

I must confess to a certain ambivalence about this.
I hate the whaling trade. And in the Japanese case they cannot even argue that it's traditional as is true for, say, the Norwegians, because whale meat was only introduced to the Japanese diet after WW2 to meet a protein shortage.
This is about a highly profitable industry. Oh, and it's also about face, and its potential loss.
On the other hand, I passionately believe in the rule of law, and so, once these three broke the law in a serious and probably dangerous - to themselves, if nobody else - way, then they lost my support.
I also would argue that the way whales are killed is at least as inhumane as the way cattle were in the recent Indonesian cattle export debacle. Australians didn't tolerate that commercial cruelty so it's reasonable that we should be unwilling to accept this commercial cruelty.
I do support the Sea Shepherd tracking and documenting the Japanese whaling activities and if they can legally disrupt their activities without - too much - risk, then good luck to them.
But, in the end, either we're a law abiding society or we're not.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Well now we have it.

The Oz tax payer is going to spend a couple of hundred thousand to bring these cowboys back to Oz. That is sure to lower the gene pool some what.

The least this hopeless government could do is demand payment from them & the ships that put them there, for the cost of collecting them.

The sea Shepard ships should be confiscated, & held pending payment of these costs, & sold off to recover the funds, if payment is not received immediately.

This organization & the current officers should not be permitted to bring any ship into Oz waters for many years.

I am just so sick of bull sh1t, & pandering to ratbags masquerading as greenies.

What an odd bunch we are, to be sure.

The newspapers are filled for weeks with the antics of an Aussie kid who bought dope in a foreign country. From our national reaction, you'd think he had been volunteering his help to the handicapped, instead of breaking the laws of the nation that he had graced with his presence.

Now we must go through the same process over a bunch of smug punters who take the law into their own hands on the high seas. It is disappointing that the Japanese have let them go. They should have at least stood trial, especially at a time when paranoia over piracy is at a high level. And I sincerely hope that the Australian taxpayer is not footing a bill for these guys. That would be nothing less than theft.

Why do we have this bizarre sense of entitlement that we should be treated as special cases, and that other countries make an exception for us, simply because we are Australian? It's all a little... colonial, really.

Below is taken from another forum so I cannot vouche for accuracy.

Whales taken-:

**Japan has taken approx 10,000 whales over the past 26 years average 384 per year

**Faroe Islands take 950 Long Finned whales each year.
**Greenland takes 175 Minke whales each year
**Iceland takes 30 Minke and 9 Finn whales
**Norway takes 1286 Minke whales each year
**USA-Alaska takes around 50 Bowhead whales each year.
**Canada-Canadian whaling is carried out in small numbers by various Inuit groups around the country and is managed by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Harvested meat is sold through shops and supermarkets in northern communities where whale meat is a component of the traditional diet

and even the Russian have been taking whales

Isn't there an island near Iceland that regularly harvest pilot whales?

It has also been stated there are about 100,00 Minke whales, so it seems there can be some sustainable harvesting.

For those totally opposed to whaling. What about the poor little krill that the whales devour in the millions, alive! Don't they deserve a life without being eaten. You care not about them!

Dissappointed to read that our government has dispatched a customs vessel to meet up with the Jap ship and the fools transfered. This could take a few days but we are to get the idiots back far sooner than I wouild like. This will only encourage more idiots. You can bet they will not have to pay any costs either. Dammit

whale poop..the best carbon capture means we have
[whatever they poop out...captures the c02]

because their fecies are laden with iron oxide
suspended by fatty matter..that keeps it right where the micro planton need it to be to send the carbon to the bottum of the sea

we talk of protecting for-rests
but its about the whale poop
figure out the c02 tax on that

one dead whale=100's of tons
[1000's of ton's per whole of whale..life time
times..each whale...its petty stuff..you punitive nanny staters

much better we drop a few nukes on the nips
or fire bomb them to death in their cities

100's of millions died in wars
much better than 3 guys hitching a ride with the police..man
acting as look out,..and protection for looters dioing illegal activities

he who rides the get away car
is just as guilty...these guys arnt getting released..to let them go home

but to let the lookout
run its interferance

we dont care the money
donated to the sunami..is spent on whaling

morally to take risk..to save life
is worthy..and those condoning excess...
pick the justice they will recieve..[as they gave it]

what nukes worked better?
ya lot of appoligists..faculitating criminal activity..[murder most vile...in areas we lay claim to]..if the strong man dont protect his rights

he has none

Anthonyve
I agree it is not black and white. Your suggestions are the most sensible (monitoring, following, recording, media attention etc) and probably the better option for organisations like Sea Shepherd. Stronger intervention brings as many detractors as supporters and ultimately I reckon any organisation who sticks within the law, holding themselves to a higher standard, will fare better.

Yes Lexi knew that read the up dates on news a few times a day.
Changes nothing however we pay to bring the fools home.
An element of dishonesty can still be seen in these actions.
And think with me, these Whalers have been pelted with filth time and again, protest?
This could have ended very badly,given current well directed concerns at Somali Piracy, what if some one fired first then asked who they are.
Is such an act not piracy.
Again would our reaction been different if they climbed aboard one of our country's ships?
Sorry OUG not understanding your post here.
Any chance green peace can be forced to pay all costs.
Thanks go to Bob Brown ,his press conference reminds us how truly isolated his team are from us.
I stand firmly against Whaling.

I am interested to know who will pay for the time and fuel expended in collecting these pirates and bringing them back to Australia. I have heard that sailors who put themeselves at risk, by not having suitable safety gear are billed for the price of their rescue. I think the same should happen to these three galoots

Comments I heard from a spokesman for the Sea Shepherd organisation gave the impression that it was a deliberate strategy designed to force the Australian Governments hand.

I was thinking that Sea Shepherd should be held responsible for the costs but would not like to see sympathy generated for Sea Shepherd by doing so. At the moment they appear to have seriously harmed their own public image with this stunt, hopefully enough to dissuade them from further such stunts.

They should be placed on notice that should any future actions of the organisation or those working with it incur costs to the Australian taxpayer the cost of the current retrieval and any future costs will be paid for from the organisations assets.

R0bert

Dear Belly,

I think the government should present the organisation
that these three came from with the bill for their
rescue. It's one thing to protest against something,
quite another to break the law. What these three did
was wrong - and there should be consequences for their
actions.

Hi folks,

Let us try stepping through a little logic.

There have been several posters talking about the three breaking the law.

In our society it is against the law to intentionally kill someone. However if you are in fear for your life and that of your family an exception is granted.

If you rammed a get-away car to delay the criminals long enough for law enforcement to arrive I doubt you would be facing a traffic infringement or criminal damage charge, yet you surely broke the law and endangered others even when there was no direct threat to yourself.

Therefore it stands if these three have assisted in hindering, through their uninvited boarding of the Japanese vessel, the commission of a crime namely illegal whaling, then what is the problem?

How can we talk of piracy when three unarmed people board a ship yet when armed Israelis storm vessels on the high seas murdering passengers it is called a justifiable intervention?

If one of my kids were to have been among the three I imagine I would be a little chuffed. These aren't multi-million dollars yachtsmen putting themselves in harm's way for a sport, they are young people willing to put themselves in danger to stop a clearly illegal activity in a non-violent manner, an activity that our own government doesn't have the balls to stop.

I might be getting on a bit but I can still remember being that idealistic so I'm not going to begrudge a dollar from my tax supporting them.

Bravo.

csteele *never the twain shall meet* you and I never will agree.
For that I am both proud and grateful.
I agree with protesting, most protests are worth my support.
But warn laws are not to be miss used.
Leftists recently took this country's government on, because they did not agree with migration offshore processing, deliberate use of term migration.
They use abuse and miss use laws!
To place lessor value on law you disagree with, no value at all in this case is cheeky.
A list in this mornings Sydney press, shows who is supporting Greenpeace.
While supporting anti Whaling protests, those supporters if supporting breach's of law/safe protest should pay the bill.

Worth consideration, the extremes take extreme actions and this was planed to be the stunt it is.
Manipulation of this kind harms all protests.
How many think this takes the spotlight from dieing Whales and puts it on fools?

Interesting set of examples, csteele.

>>If you rammed a get-away car... armed Israelis storm vessels on the high seas... multi-million dollars yachtsmen putting themselves in harm's way for a sport...<<

The topic here is "who should pay", right?

If you rammed the getaway car, would you expect the government to pay? If so, why?

The "armed Israeli storm vessels" is a total red herring. It was clearly a government action, and the costs would therefore be paid by their government. If the whaling incident had been a government-sanctioned effort, the same would apply.

As for the multi-million dollars yachtsmen, I take the same position: the government should send them the bill, which (presumably) their insurance policy would pay.

I resent the assumption that the taxpayer will simply stump up every time someone takes it into their head to do something stupid.

lexie quote...[supporting bellies words and even drawing in the whilly percules]

""Dear Belly,

I think the government..should present the organisation
that these three came from..with the bill for their
rescue.""

great
lets have the same rules
for unions..for political parties...for bankers

for big buisiness
for accountants

let hold the other bellicose protesters
innocently protesting..[like mr bell]..fully responsable

in a just world...austraklia would be policing their OWN territories

please note this
THAT THEY DIDNT...is proof they got no lawfull claim..!

by their own lack of protecting what they claim is theirs
they forfeit the claim to it

think thatcher..faulklands..claim

australia...by doing nuthing
ionvalidates its own claim

in fact by virtue of the 'state of japan fishing arresting holding imprioned others disputing THEIR claim...have now a higher claim..!

use your minds
not ya loyalist party policy treasoning reasoning

""It's one thing..to protest against something,
quite another to break the law.""

obeyance to the law
makes the law..'state of japan..NOW has the law on its side

next it will claim the adjoining lands
adjoining the waters their works made claim to

UNDISPUTED CLAIM
by our govt silence

its treason
doing nuthing
validates the real crime

""..What these three did
was wrong""

means state of japans claim
is all rIGHT..!

""and there should be consequences for their
actions.""

there weill be
in court the japs will claim..no govt actiobn
means they had the right to act
ON THEIR OWN CLAIMED TERRITORIES

not ours..!

ya get it yet
ya lot of yes men?

these 3 are agents..for our own claim
or criminals..invading others sovereign territory!

Dear Pericles,

Thank you though I'm willing to concede one or two are a little trite. None-the-less they have come from my pen/keyboard so I had better defend them.

“If you rammed the getaway car, would you expect the government to pay? If so, why?”

It depends on the circumstance. If I rammed the car of a shoplifter then the answer would be no, however if I prevented armed bank robbers from escaping then yes I would expect to be compensated. Why? Because not only will the resources they have appropriated be returned the likelihood of them attempting further hold-ups endangering life and property would have been quite high and that is without including the resources in police manpower that would have to been utilised to track them down.

My example of armed Israelis storming vessels on the high seas was addressing the use of the word piracy to describe the actions of the three rather than costs but as that seems to be your focus then I should respond. You said “It was clearly a government action, and the costs would therefore be paid by their government.” yet aren't you arguing against yourself? Surely if you were going to be consistent you should be putting the argument that because the flotilla was intending to 'trespass' into Israeli territorial waters, just as the three had 'trespassed' onto the Japanese ship, the cost should be borne by the peace flotilla organisers.

If we run with the premise of your argument then the Greenpeace members boarded the vessel with the intention of forcing it into port to disembark them. The Japanese decided to keep steaming. The government made the decision to retrieve them at our expense. To use your own words, ''It was clearly a government action, and the costs would therefore be paid by our government.'

“I resent the assumption that the taxpayer will simply stump up every time someone takes it into their head to do something stupid.” So do I although your view of what is stupid and mine obviously differ.

Cont...

Cont..

'Bali boy' was obviously stupid but having kids I am happy that my government is prepared to put resources into assisting any Australian caught in such a situation. The move of the three boarders was in many eyes a legitimate non-violent protest action, both intelligent and courageous, an entirely different kettle of fish, or vat of whale blubber.

So if we return to the question of who should pay, if not our government, for attempting to protect the whales, noting of course we are a pretty poor nation if economics were the only determinate of their value. I recently stumped up a few hundred dollars for a whale viewing helicopter ride for the family near Warrnambool. I have also spend money on whale tours in WA and was more than happy to have spent over a thousand bucks swimming with the whale sharks off Ningaloo reef if they had been there at the time. Perhaps a one percent tax on whale tourism might be in order.

Dear Belly,

As it is your thread I will do you the courtesy of replying, though not without a little trepidation. Your quote “They use abuse and miss use laws!” could easily apply to the Japanese who try to dignify what they do as 'scientific whaling' which we all know is a complete and utter scam. Why isn't your anger directed at them as they are forcing young idealistic Australians into actions such as these? And just what would you consider a responsible form of action against the Japanese. This didn't involve ramming or throwing bags of rancid fat, or hosing, or putting themselves in the path of harpoons, it was as responsible as it gets while still being effective. Would you prefer they stay at home and pen little letters to the Japanese embassy? Not going to get it done my friend. What suggestions would you give them?

I still find your approach a little hard to swallow, csteele.

>>If I rammed the car of a shoplifter then the answer would be no, however if I prevented armed bank robbers from escaping then yes I would expect to be compensated.<<

An interesting approach. But I think it might founder on the rocks of bureaucracy. For a start, I think you will find that the police specifically discourage the intervention of civilians in these matters, especially if you are putting yourself - and possibly bystanders - in harm's way. Two wrongs not being a right, you have therefore a) illegally rammed another vehicle and b) done so against the express wishes of the authorities.

You'd need a silver tongue and a half to get that through.

>>Surely if you were going to be consistent you should be putting the argument that because the flotilla was intending to 'trespass' into Israeli territorial waters, just as the three had 'trespassed' onto the Japanese ship, the cost should be borne by the peace flotilla organisers.<<

Ummm... it was the Israelis who did the boarding, as did Greenpeace. The intentions of the boarded vessel do not come into consideration.

>>The government made the decision to retrieve them at our expense.<<

That's the part I disagree with.

>>I am happy that my government is prepared to put resources into assisting any Australian caught in such a situation.<<

Two words.

Julian Assange.

This is a general issue, not uniquely associated with beating up on the Japanese whaling industry. Our government, of whatever hue, feels entirely at ease with the concept of deciding, unilaterally, where our money is frittered away. The lack of accountability they display is both blatant and despicable.

They don't mind "compensating" themselves, either.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/revealed-millions-of-dollars-worth-of-claims-made-by-former-premiers-20120110-1ptm5.html

Bludgers.

If governments had balls, Japan would not be there doing what they do, hence, these guys wouldn't be there in the first place.

It is little wonder we are so tied to America, cause we can't even stop illigal whaling, let alone protect our shores if attacked.

csteele you need not address me if you do not wish to.
I set no rule in your case, but on the rare occasions we agree am surprised.
Like your go for the throat style, as you dislike what I say I just have to be hot headed and all that pap.
OUG we are drifting apart mate, you hurl trade union at me like a rock, it has nothing to do with this thread, not even remotely.
Why tell me, do you support bad protest?
It is bad protest, stupid protest, such as this, that defames all protest.
Tell me, why did these fools Bord that ship, what was the intention.
Why do some climb the Sydney Opera house, chain them selves to rail lines.
A picket line Parliament and Japanese Embassy's businesses would Be wise.
However hurl your mud, defend those who harm good causes but ignore the damage they do and the costs we pay at your peril.

Dear Pericles,

The compensation issue is a red herring but I will persist for the sake of argument.

If I rammed the getaway vehicle I wouldn't be expecting a full payout but I certainly would expect a grateful bank to offer some monetary appreciation for my efforts.

Ratcheting it up a notch, you say; "Two wrongs not being a right, you have therefore a) illegally rammed another vehicle and b) done so against the express wishes of the authorities." but if you were witnessing a child abduction in progress and the only option open to you to stop the perpetrator from escaping with the child appears to be to ram their vehicle, I for one hope most people would ignore your dictum.

A number of years ago, I removed the keys from the hand of a total stranger who was noticeably drunk but trying to get into his car. He took a swing but was persuaded to pull his head in. I really didn't need the agro but there was no way I was going to risk reading the next morning that this clown had wiped out a family down the highway.

I meet him the next morning to return them. He was pretty sheepish when he arrived. In the very strictest sense I had committed theft. Should I have been charged?

You wrote; "Ummm... it was the Israelis who did the boarding, as did Greenpeace. The intentions of the boarded vessel do not come into consideration."

Of course, but that was not the argument I made. Both were cases of trespass, both elicited governmental responses, but you are attempting to argue the burden of those actions should fall differently yet I don't think you have given a proper explanation why.

Dear Belly,

The union movement has had a long history of trespass and occupation of workplaces as a tool in their arsenal of protest actions, particularly in the building game. Do you condemn them all or do you think that form of protest is only permissible by the good old rank and file members and illegal when done by others?

belly quote..""you hurl trade-union..at me like a rock,
it has nothing to do..with this thread,..not even remotely.""..

what if..3 unionists...walk onto a site
unannounced..

should we..charge..'the union'..for tresspass?

should we punish..political/parties..that make criminals
like that union-guy..with the hookers?

the double-standards..old mate

""Why tell me,..do you support bad protest?""

i dont..support it..nor..not support it

im just looking at the acts...illegal activity
in australian waters...doing murder..[with money
meant for sunami aid]

here you see..people with conscience..simply boarding a boat
not to set-up some criminal damage..or assult...or other murderous reason

but simply
to support..the law..

[law..govt conveniantly ignores
but that has..severe consequence later]

who are you..to judge...
""It is bad protest,..stupid protest"'

i have heard bosses say that
about unions

''stupid..protest,..such
as this,..that defames all* protest.""

yeah...lol..them union scumm
how dare they complain

same/same ol mate

""why did these fools..Bord..that ship,
what was the intention?""

publicity..to reveal govt complicity

testing..[like i used to do]..or just see
if they criminals..further ignore human decency
or..follow other lawfull process

[WHO KNOWS lets ask them]

""Why do some..climb the Sydney-Opera/house,
chain them-selves..to rail lines.""

why do some join unions"
..[to get unions to 'do it..for them''
and others say..stuff ya union..i do things..for myself

its horse's for courses
why judge someone..asking for different..than you

who got hurt?
what injury?
DAMMAGES?

we didnt charge
a british yachtie SEARCH and rescue

but we do charge aussies...
[who is intrests..is YOUR govt serving?]

""A picket line"'

wouldnt make the news

""However hurl your mud,..
defend those..who harm good causes
but ignore the damage..they do and the costs..we pay at your peril.""

im not saying jail/criminalise..judge
you lot sling..the mud

name the damage..!
swallow the costs

govt has made enough of a fool..on its own...ignorances
on too many different issues..

[ya want the ever growing list?]

its getting to be more than..all its new rules
been more..than its new taxes..for ages..

what is it about unions
that they..want to lord it over us
by governing over us..like nannies..

do as we say
say,..."who's has the credit card?"
who's DOING..real criminal activity?

Fuzzy thinking and defense at any cost will not change the truth.
This protest is a stupid and dangerous act.
That ship is the property of a foreign nation.
The act of boarding it, at sea both piracy and dangerous.
I support the right to protest, have done so with the occupy ones world wide.
And pointed to the damage done by the infection of these protests of extremists .
Just look at the news paper headlines, the photos of these Bogans.
15 minutes of fame equals thousands more, forever of the view every protest is like this.
A publicity stunt.
True extremes left/green conservationists, need desperately to understand, they must farm mass support, not bleed it away impressing only the inner circle supporters.
Facts ,figures, polling shows very clearly, this back fired.
Feel no need to offer defense for trade unions .
But lets be honest csteele show me the hundreds of thousands in costs such a protest has bought us.

I will show you, in the 1990s a bus convoy to Canberra by workers, a protest, extreme left thugs, left construction workers.
Smashed Parliament house.
Non left unions ,still today, took no part felt only shame and discust and still are blamed for the whole thing.
Protest? yes!
But not like this, not throwing bottles about at workers either.
And again.
If Japanese did all of that, to one of our crews, ships?
Defending the indefensible is not changing the idiots actions.

Not entirely sure it is, csteele.

>>The compensation issue is a red herring...<<

I think it is a key issue. Although I was referring to the taxpayer's involvement.

>>If I rammed the getaway vehicle I would expect a grateful bank to offer some monetary appreciation...<<

My question was "would you expect the government to pay?", your response was "yes I would expect to be compensated". Now it would appear that you want that the bank should pay you.

Better, but I'm not at all convinced that a bank would like to be seen to encourage vigilantism, especially as the police themselves frown upon it. If you are seen to reward civilian action, when someone gets hurt you will be held liable. Banks have their public image to consider after all. And as far as the theft itself is concerned, they'd be well insured anyway.

Since you are stretching the example a little with the child-abduction scenario, let me take it one step further. How would you feel, as the parent of the abductee, if the action of a self-styled hero in ramming the car had killed your child? I doubt you'd be particularly grateful. You'd also be unlikely to offer to repair the car, I suspect.

I don't follow your logic on the Israeli incident at all.

>>Both were cases of trespass, both elicited governmental responses<<

When Israeli troops boarded the Turkish ship, it was a government-sanctioned action, for which the Israeli government was responsible. When Greenpeace activists boarded the Japanese ship, it was not a government-sanctioned action, and therefore the Australian government - and the Australian taxpayer - should not be held liable.

If the taxpayer is in fact footing the bill, it would be more honest of the government to go the whole hog, and send the Australian Navy after the whalers. At least that would show commitment to their principles. Letting Greenpeace do their dirty work, then slipping them a few quid after the event, seems a bit tacky.

Dear Belly,

The definition of piracy is "the act of attacking and robbing ships at sea".

You use of the term in this instance is incorrect and emotive. There was no attacking or violence of any kind.

They are no more pirates than is Mr Frary.

"MUA delegate Bruce Frary explained his reasons for occupying the vessel on YouTube: "I am an Australian seafarer and father of three children. Like a lot of other Australians I have a mortgage and bills, so I need to work."

"I've chosen to occupy the Shell-operated and managed vessel, Araluen Spirit, to ask Shell to keep this vessel, or replace it with an Aussie-manned and flagged ship and not a flag of convenience ship."

"I don't want another Pasha Bulker or Rena polluting any Australian beaches or harbours."

csteele,
Why do you love whales but show no concern for other creatures? Whales devour millions of krill and they are eaten alive. Do they not deserve to be able to live their life without being eaten?

Bit like protecting kangaroos because they are big and easily seen, but ignoring all the small marsupials that are endangered.

Have you ever considered how many krill are saved by the japs, and others, harvesting some whales? Just because whales are big should not be a reason for protection.

If you argue that krill are not endangered, well neither are minke whales, so why the big hoo haa about whales.

Dear Pericles,

Sorry, I would indeed expect compensation from the government. I had truncated my previous post for room, I think you would find it to be 350 words in total, and the piece removed would have given it more sense.

I was going to explain if I had crashed a $200,000 Merc into the getaway car then it would be a bit rich to expect the lot. However I am dubious that those true robber barons, the insurance companies, would pay out for self inflicted damage so the out of pocket expenses could be quite significant for the average Joe.

I think a solid case for market rate compensation from the government is evident. I don't mean market rate for the car but the normal 'reward for information leading to the arrest' rate. So if the offenders had escaped what would have been the amount offered, that is what I would expect for compensation to cover out of pocket expenses. If it doesn't cover the Merc then so be it. Sound fair to you?

On a more serious note knowing the incredibly sad statistics for the return of abducted children I as a parent, while obviously being gutted if a rescue attempt resulted in the death of my child, would have deep and continuing anger toward anyone who might have stopped the abduction but didn't, that would certainly be worse.

I hope  none of us ever find out.

As to government responsibility, if the Australian government were to send a vessel to pick up the three because they think it would be the most diplomatically expedient thing to do then isn't the cost burden on them?

Now csteele you take the words and reasons I think as I do right out of my mouth and throw them at me, to prove my reasoning for me.
I started a thread about these fleas on our back, you helped divert the subject, with OUG to union protests.
Quite brutally wrong.
Let me make it clear, my pride in unions and the achievements of past present and future ones is forever.
I highlight here one of HUNDREDS of protests that fill me with pride, EVERY ONE nothing like this threads subject.
Rothbury riot, look at it, look deep, my union did not take part, was insulted and maybe deservedly at that time.
A time Company's and political party's owned the workforce.
And that some,me too for a while but later, thought the only answer was communism.
This protest was a lockout, the judge who ruled in favor of the mine owner inherited those mines!
LOCKED OUT AFTER REFUSING WAGE CUTS!,A Labor government ignored mine workers.
Workers bashed by police, publicly in the street daylight.
Woman pushed and insulted by the same criminal police.
Rothbury starved my people, working Australians.
Csteele the left trys constantly to claim ownership of every crowd every protest, some workers till death will not contribute to unions because they wrongly see every protest as bad.
Like a tree invaded by Christmas Beetles leaves gone torn and tattered workers /unions suffer from the feeding , because that feeding was not for the benefit of the tree just the hungry invaders.

I wish I could find the words to put my full views here about the csteele type left.
I look at today our hung Parliament and Bob Browns strutting Bantam Rooster impressions and shudder.
We are being miss led and miss used.
Most of us want an end to the Whaling in this territory by this country.
If Australia was a log that wedge, the protest movement left, are splitting our resolve to act.
Far too many will think badly of every protest, because the leeches latch firmly on to every protest claiming ownership.
Other ways exist, but how can any one think this is the way.
Australians like humor,a well planned chaser type picket keeping the unwashed and untidy away, may be the answer.
These three yobbs are being miss used.
Would any big brand try to promote its product this way?

Dear Belly,

This is why I am so reluctant to engage with you. I quite simply, reasonably, properly and correctly put the position to you that your use of the word piracy was inappropriate in this case.

You chose not to answer my post but instead have proceeded to rant and rave over two whole posts about my 'type'.

Yet do you have any illusion that the silver tails would regard many of the Union actions you are proud of in much the same light as you are holding the actions of the activists on board the whaling ship?

I am clearly not conducive to you maintaining a decent blood pressure. I don't wish to be responsible for you taking a turn so we had better leave it there.

csteele you seem to have far too much self confidence and to me at least it is badly miss placed.
On first appearing here we had some things in common, still do.
It is those that divide us that irks you.
I see the equivalent to body language in your words.
Diverting the issue, blood pressure, shows you are on the defensive.
I hold my views with pride.
Piracy you say is not the term, well let me, doubtfully, concede the point.
Then, as is Green peaces norm in this project, they pumped up with advice about becoming hero's over night jumped a ship for what.
I note your lack of balance in debate involving the middle east Muslims and remember your support for the lies told about a police man.
And too the thuggish, nothing less, middle eastern Muslim mob, out side the courts.
I find no difficulty in ever disagreeing with you.
Rant? if every one who thinks different than you ranks then most of this country are ranters.
In an hour I could plan put together protest about Whaling that would offend only the Japanese.
Problem is leftist are still reading from books written before ww2

I think you're whistling in the wind, csteele.

>>I would indeed expect compensation from the government...if the offenders had escaped what would have been the amount offered, that is what I would expect for compensation to cover out of pocket expenses<<

Ok, what if you had not prevented their escape. Would you still apply for compensation, just for trying?

What if you had injured a passer-by in the process. Why would they not sue you for compensation? If they did, would you expect the government to fork out for that, too? And would it not be quite reasonable for the police to arrest you for reckless driving and causing bodily harm?

What if you had killed one of the offenders. That would clearly be manslaughter.

For all the above reasons - and many more - the police advise the public, in the strongest terms, not to intervene in such situations, unless this can be achieved without the use of excessive force. I submit that running your car into another vehicle is by definition, excessive force.

But beyond all that, there is an issue of responsibility for one's own actions. In my view it is unreasonable, although far too common, that you should expect the government to pay for any fall-out from activities that the individual chooses to take, whether it is the rescue of round-the-world yachtsmen, or the collection of some activists who got themselves into trouble.

Should they perform the rescue? Sure. Should they ask us to stump up for it? Certainly not.

Dear Belly,

I think we might have different reasons for coming to OLO. While I make no bones about firmly putting a position forward I am also expecting, even hoping, I will be forcefully and intelligently challenged on it. I want to learn from the exchange and if I end up having my views adjusted then all to the good.

Take the current exchange with Pericles, while on the surface it looks like an exercise in splitting hairs, and if we choose the wrong kind of hare it could turn into a bloody business, each is putting forward positions that I suspect, while they may reflect a general sentiment, neither of us would die in the ditch over. Yet I for one find the process instructive.

The truth sometimes really does lie in the exceptions, that is why they are worth exploring.

I really don't think I have a go for the throat style unless I perceive something as inherently racist, then I make no apologies for going for the jugular.

I remember as a youth attending a regular fundamentalist Christian bible study meeting every Wednesday evening. Often a young wannabe apprentice pastor would come and try out his message on the group. All through his delivery there would be the constant shuffling of thin rice paper bible pages as those attending would check to see if he had the words of the verses he was quoting correct and that they were in context. If they were found wanting he would be pulled up very promptly. One young chap had three tries with the same theme and I recall him sweating heavily on the third. When he finished there was a pause then one heard the thump of various bibles being closed and heads nodded in his direction. He had done it and the wheat had been separated from the chaff.

Your calling these peaceful protestors pirates was chaff, as you have acknowledged, as was demanding they serve three years for attempting to disrupt illegal whaling.

My offer to desist chaff cutting in your direction still stands.

Dear Pericles,

You said; "For all the above reasons - and many more - the police advise the public, in the strongest terms, not to intervene in such situations, unless this can be achieved without the use of excessive force. I submit that running your car into another vehicle is by definition, excessive force."

I am fortunate enough to have a cousin in the police force and so I have just finished putting the question to him.

His reply was to say the unofficial response by the police of someone ramming a getaway car to prevent their escape would be absolute delight.

As to compensation, all things being equal, there would likely be a submission put by the prosecution to the judge for some measure of restitution for the material loss suffered by the selfless act of assisting in the capture of the offenders.

He then referred me to 462A of the Crimes Act; 

"Use of force to prevent the commission of an indictable offence."

"A person may use such force not disproportionate to the objective as he believes on reasonable grounds to be necessary to prevent the commission, continuance or completion of an indictable offence or to effect or assist in effecting the lawful arrest of a person committing or suspected of committing any offence."

If I were to ram a car in with the intention of disabling it, especially in the case of armed robbery or abduction I would, I am told, be completely covered by this section.

And I submit to you that ramming the car of a child abductor is not excessive force by most people's measure.

Perhaps you have a policeman relative who might have a different perspective.

We, all of us are the product of our life's experiences csteele.
And our views and opinions are our right.
We have the right to be wrong, to be fixed in our own world.
To be uninterested in others views, to even challenge, quite wrongly their rights to those views.
While digging a mote around our own.
My life has been and is a protest.
My reason for living has been promotion of my Union and party by change and never ending improvement.
A plea, that we do not except change for change sake, but good change, based on the wishes of the many, not the few.
Education too, my groups, both once got that at home, we live seemingly unaware that has stopped.
Some of us do not understand , we need to replace that education, by setting examples.
SERVICE, being heard ,seen. inviting other to hear, be heard, is our mission.
Inclusiveness.
My last day in a tiny little school was in a different world.
I suffered just because my family was big and poor.
Found a hole to crawl away in, isolate myself.
But it educated me.
Away from my family I read and wandered in to Communism, then Socialism.
As a youth I helped craft union actions in the left, pure lies, to save the job of the worst workers you ever saw.
I sat in the room, heard the red flag sung, heard the lies constructed.
And started my growth again, I feel still the truth, bosses and those long ago workers, gave no value to it.
And csteele that truth wins in the end.
Your three saints, if not pirates, remind me of that, constructed on foolish acts, to put one sides views.
To hopefully, get Japan to over react, so your side could play the victim.
continued.

I speak often about the left of center, my fears radicals are damaging all in the paddock.
Achievable change, from that group is the only change I want.
The bleating from minority's that Labor has changed/betrayed them, is blind and wrong.
Refusal to even consider better ways to protest, cleaner more sympathy gaining protest is self injury.
I fear not Labor following the majority.
But minority infection of Labor, even when only perceived.
Your lurch in to my thoughts being anti protest.union party is not true.
A protest should do many things.
Bring publicity and supporters, embarrass those we protest against, not be a bed for groups who can not draw a crowd giving $50 notes away, infections.
Out side Canberra's Parliament, Japans Embassy, male and female protesters, dressed in some hand picked way colors the same.
Placards showing Whales and blood, words on posters calling Gillard gutless Japan crude lies highlighted.
Hurts no one and is not like your foolish Friends.
I feel no need to change my thoughts on migration and the problem this country is involved in.
Not in highlighting my City Sydney's shootings, replacing knifing.
And no pain in saying such as your self refuse to confront not all immigration has been good for my country.
Multi is not a word of interest to emerging cultures in my country.

I'm certain that it would be, csteele.

>>His reply was to say the unofficial response by the police of someone ramming a getaway car to prevent their escape would be absolute delight.<<

And I'm glad you had the grace to point out that this is the unofficial position.

You didn't ask, I notice, what their position would be if you a) had failed to stop them, b) had seriously injured a passer-by and c) had killed one or more of the felons.

Let me speculate. I suspect both their official and unofficial attitude towards a) would be a total lack of interest, and faced with b) they would back away nervously and concentrate on the paperwork. For c), their unofficial attitude would be joyful capering... but what would they be required to say to the public at the press conference?

Perhaps you could ask. My source is a retired Super from the UK, so maybe they do things differently over there.

As far as the Crimes Act is concerned, all that remains is the definition of disproportionate force. In your view, ramming another vehicle meets this test. In mine, it constitutes reckless endangerment of innocent people.

But neither your nor my view matters, when it comes to claiming compensation from the government, does it. Good luck with the negotiations with whatever Department they shunt you into.

Have a great day.

My concern is the furore about Japan’s whaling, it seems a bit much when we are catching every type of edible fish we can on a barbed hook for our food, while we raise hell about the Japanese harpooning the whales which I believe is for their food. We have a population of about twenty three million and a very good area suitable for food production, whereas Japan has a population of 125 million and a string of islands of dubious food growing capabilities with only about 1% of the country suitable for cultivation with about seventy active volcanoes and only a fraction of Australia's area. I enjoy watching whales also.

Dear Pericles,

I certainly did canvas all the above with my cousin and the gist of it is that one certainly has a duty of care to other members of the public and to not use disproportional force. We agreed that the line between mug and hero can be split second in nature and often purely down to luck. He has said there is only about 10% of those he works with who he would entirely trust behind him with a weapon in a tight situation, and these guys are well trained.

Each of the scenarios you mentioned would have to be judged on its merits.

I should reiterate though that the purpose of ramming the vehicle is not to injure but to disable the means of escape thus facilitate the arrest of the offenders. Aiming for a front corner rather than the driver's door would be implicit in that goal.

That is not to say there might not be a situation where aiming for a person was not completely out of the question. If someone pulled into the carpark at Port Arthur on that fateful day and were confronted with the sight over the bonnet of the killer engaging in his massacre then I would have had little problem with that someone planting the foot.

Thank you though for the conversation, prior to this I hadn't realized there was a mechanism in place for people to receive compensation and the topic has raised much discussion among my friends and relatives, the odd one or two even take you position :).

Take care.

Merv 09 do you think your post while of interest is about this threads path.
And do you understand Japan fishes in others seas while it lies about why.
Do you call for a ban on all fishing? or for controlled fishing, do you eat fish.
This was to be about rat bag protesters taking dangerous actions, hoping to raise hell to gain publicity.
csteele tried to defend those actions, by comparing them to other events.
Can we agree, those selling a product, turning that product from obscurity to every day brands, use common sense?
Would you if launching your own brand on the market send scruffy fools to act this way to promote it?
Go back to my suggestion above dress protesters in one color, change it now and again to maintain interest.
Stand quietly showing the sea full of blood/dead Whales.
Get rid of fools and let well mannered be in the group, show protests online invite the good ask others to stay away.
Find a focus, say sing a protest song, different one, each time a target walks past.
Draw middle Australia to you, not chase them away.
Radicals repel normal folk.
Normal folk have the power only them to push or pull politicians.

We sent the taxi cab the idiots have been picked up we pay the fare csteele is not concerned about that.
I am, have you, any of us, watched the TV films of this boats adventures.
Interesting stuff little regard for fairness.
Do we say our dislike of Whaling, wish to end it, is reason enough to hurl acid at humans?
I first felt my support for green peace slipping after watching those programs.
Willing to bet many will reconsider after this.
Next Navy ship sent down there? maybe to arrest the Steve Irwin, for blinding crew men.

I first posted and still believe, the actions are dumb and dangerous.
I still see no reason to ignore that Japan lies killing or food not research.
Even if it was for needed food, we should review our thoughts if it was, this is no way to act.
Defending the boarding at sea, un announced and un well come, of another country's ship is un wise.
We pay the bill.
Well hospitals food aid , so many good things, but we paid to bring the three stooges home.
The protest movement must stop tainting every good protest.
I will not be the only one unsure of future protesters reasons.
Not the only one remembering rubbish bins thrown at police by rag tag unwashed.
Get the TV on to cricket, look for the Richie's dressed as our legend is how about 30 of them out side the Japanese Embassy holding buckets of blood?
Every TV in the world would want air time film.
or has protest got down to the level of this?

While Australian tax payers lost this round it is clear who won.
Japan did by TKO refusing to fuel further the stupid act they pretended it never took place.
Had they held the nongs, took them back in time to Japan, Greenpeace's wanted out come, headlines would be world wide.
Well done Japan, but stop the Whaling
Stop lying about why you do it.
Just stop.

Well done to the brave Green Peace protesters. There was no way Japan wanted this dragged through the courts because it would have shown up just how hollow was the notion that 'scientific whaling' was going on.

Both Gillard and Abbott will bang on about the costs yet both were happily entertaining the idea of a Coast Guard presence to protect the sanctuary. Compare the costs of picking these guys up to keeping a vessel on station during the entire whaling season.

If these blokes have managed to see off these lawbreaking whalers then they may well have saved the taxpayers millions. If that turns out to be the case they should be carried shoulder high.

A safe non-violent protest that has got results, job well done one would have thought!

;)

Good stuff csteele, liked it, bought back memory's of my lost youth.
Plotting to show the Comrades we could take over the Capitalists , armed with nothing but feathers.
Turning defeat in to victory.
Claiming mass support, well some of us weighed a bit more than average.
Took me a long time to under stand, we sold only our selves the fabricated story's.
In fact some, who should have shared our views, walked away from us, forever!
Police took one of these HERO'S ha ha ha, away ,he owed other fines, Greenpeace may have paid them.
After all they should
he was used as fodder by them.
Stop the killing , best first move?
Bring the sea Shepard home park it and picket but not silly stuff.

The cost of fetching these cowboys should be deducted from all future welfare benefits these fools claim.

while channle surfing..i came accross the circle..[joke]
the hostess..began here intro..with words to this affect

''each tax payer..pays one dollar''
to bring these guys home

now i wonderd are there only 800,000 tax payers
cause previously i have heard..the cost to be 800,ooo
[an allready insane number...[what is that at holiday rates..or private contracter?]

the boat had to be specially built
anyhow its as insane as 1$..per tax payer
[im assuming more tax payers than 800,000...but why use that tag

so many will say our population...all pays hidden taxes

so tax payers number over 23 million
so this resque..cost 23 million [perhaps..lol]

sems someone has an adgenda
that is a media destraction..to other things
like populisim...for the pm...following the fucuss groups

then payed mouth pieces
to perpetuate bias..[and the most biased are haters]
hating any greenies..as well as all unions

but i repeat
if yuk yachties..can be resqued for free
why are these aussies burdened with 23 million...cost

in setting your redirection adgenda's
you reveal the spinning wheels..of the lap dog..[alp god]
that first sold out members..then the unions..next their bloggers

OUG I am haveing difficulty comparing your views with the reality of this action.
A protest, in my view has a few targets and wanted out comes.
In this case to stop the Whaling, I agree with that.
Also to bring attention to the Whaling and the protest.
That ends my support.
I want good attention, good publicity not bad.
And see no reason every protest can not at least, try to be legal.
How many new supporters come via this action.
How many via acid bombs thrown on deck.
What, come now be honest, our views be if a Japanese ship boarded one of ours and threw those bombs on it too.
If Greenpeace, the Steve Erwin continues to get in the way, but not throw bombs, if it sends real time kills I support it.
Protests driven by confrontations get less support blacken good reasons to protest.