A missed vote could see ALL whales wiped out - see this!

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 09:26

Citizen pressure is our best hope -- and it's working. The whaling lobby expected to win easily, but thanks to actions like ours, champions of the ban are standing strong. It was an explosive worldwide social movement in the 1980s that led to the commercial whaling ban we're now protecting. Now civil society access to the talks is being limited, so this powerful petition campaign is a vital channel of worldwide pressure in the final 72 hours of negotiations.





http://www.avaaz.org/en/whales_72hrs_left/?cl=622527132&v=6659

cyprusishome


Joined: 31/03/2007
Posts: 2381

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 09:52

Whaling is one of the most barbaric forms of "putting meat on the table".



A quote watching Aljezheera, "what would people say if it took cattle, pigs, sheep etc 4 hours to die when been shot"???????



The Japanese excuse is not applicable in modern times, there are a few indigenous tribes that use to whale in Japan but the rest have only started in last 150 years or so.



Iceland, I refuse to go there despite being on my list of places to visit.



We have been to Alaska and visited Barrow in the far north. The Inupiat still whale for subsistence, The whale "killers" take great pride in killing the whale with the first shot.



Whaling is an abomination, these creatures of the sea are known to be close to the intelligence of humans and certainly more intelligent the the scum he continue to slaughter them to extinction.

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2919

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 10:00

As far as I understand it (open to be corrected by someone more in the know) whales are predomiantly only hunted as a food source these days. I suppose you could say the same about cattle, sheep and chickens, in fact fish would be the closest example I suppose.

With that in mind, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to just ban the serving of whale meat in modern countries.

I am asking a genuine question because it is always amazing to me how much money is exhausted in trying to stop things that some if not all people disagree with.

Is it really worth it in the end ?

cyprusishome


Joined: 31/03/2007
Posts: 2381

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 10:11

Japan in particular poured masses of money into third world countries to bribe them to vote in Japan's favour at last CITIES meeting, and it worked.



According to the Japanese they only hunt for scientific purposes and that is how they are conning people. However everyone knows the whale meat all ends up on the table.



Any campaign to stop legalised murder is worth it.

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2919

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 10:25

It is all symantics really but I was under the impression that murder is only a term used for the unlawful killing of humans, in the animal kingdon a murder is a group of crows.

If the complaint is about the killing of animals for meat then what about all the other food sources, some would answer that this can be done humanely but then would it still be so barbaric to kill whales if it was done in a humane way for meat products.

I am not trying to cause an uproar here, I am just a little confused as to where the line could or even should be drawn. It has always been a cofusing subject for me, Torture of animals is barbaric and killing of household pets for no reason is horrific as they have the ability to show you thier love but I am afraid I don't understand this when it comes to animals with no human contact.

This arguement has and will go on for a long time with or without me but I would just like to know why people feel so strongly about whales.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 11:11

proger1:



What might jolt you to your senses is a coupla three trips out on a whaling vessel, or even a purseiner, where hundreds of dolphins are crushed, or drowned, crying and screaming as they gasp their last.

cyprusishome


Joined: 31/03/2007
Posts: 2381

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 11:22

tenakoutou.



Think we should just leave him to it, just like stiring trouble. Has no real ideas of his own just "poses questions".



Having seen the garbage between him and groucho they should start their own forum and leave the rest in peace.

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2919

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 11:35

Tenakoutou, why would you state that it would jolt me to my senses. Could you not have stated I might change my opinion.

I did say that I was not trying to start anything but I would like to get more of an understanding as to why whales and as you have now mentioned dolphins, porpoises are more actively protected.



I am only trying to educate myself to the situation through the understanding of others, it is very evident in your case that you feel strongly about it and probably with very good reason but in my case it is not so easy to decide.



Paul

Jovial_John


Joined: 31/01/2009
Posts: 1024

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 11:44

People are so romantic about whales for several reasons - the primary 2 being their intelligence and pure magnificence.

Whales may be primarily killed for food, but it is interesting that, anticipating success at this year's conference, many companies in the whaling nations have filed patents for new whale-based products including hair dye, golf balls and fish food.



http://www.blnz.com/news/2010/06/15/Scores_whale_products_pipeline_8717.html

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2919

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 12:43

cyprusishome,

Thanks for being so unhelpful. I do have my own ideas I just was trying not to cause a conflict by getting a greater understanding but some people just read into a post what they want to read. I asked a question and got no answer except to imply that I am wrong and am not in my senses. You accuse me of trying to cause trouble. In what way have I done that, My opinion differs from this at the moment and I would like to know why I feel differently just incase I am missled by my ideas.

Groucho and my dissagreement has nothing to do with this, I don't like his comments and the way he talks about me without knowing me and decided to express why.

It is a forum of information, is asking for such so wrong. If tenakoutou and I were sitting together discussing this I could ask why but we are not so I phrased it as a question to all.

If you want to leave me to it, by all means do so but do you really feel the need to advise others to do the same.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
22/06/2010 21:06

Proger1:



I said 'jolt' because any feeling person who actually witnessed any Cetacaen slaughter would, indeed, be utterly shocked. Shock = a jolt to the senses - [electric or sensory].



I would be very happy to sit down and discuss this subject with you, or anyone else who is genuinely interested - but if that person started mocking me about such a serious subject, he'd better look out how far he pushes me!



Seriously, though, I'm sure there are many members of this forum that have much more experience, or knowledge, than I have. One of the best ways to acquire knowledge on almost any subject under the sun is to glean it from the Internet - the 'Super Information Highway', as it's widely known as.

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2919

Message Posted:
23/06/2010 07:21

Tenakoutou, Thanks for not interpreting my comments as abrasive as some others might have.

I genuinely can not fully understand how some people can get so worked up about this situation and no it is not mocking, I suppose if anything I am worried that I might be unfeeling about such things.

As has all ready been pointed out, this comes across as me stirring trouble so I will not go on about it here, I will hopefully at some toime catch up with you in or around NC and you can tell me what you have seen and it might help me to understand.

Thanks for the suggestion about researching on the internet, I realise I could do this to find out what is happening but that will not help me understand the rationality of peoples actions in this regard only what reasons they might have as justification.



Paul

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
23/06/2010 10:58

proger1/msg 12:



There are many subjects that we don't have 'inside information' on, yet we still form strong opinions about - e.g., 'nuclear proliferation'.



'Nature Conservation', a priority for me, without being ridiculously extremist, is but one of these controversial issues, or subjects.



I believe that 'human communal responsibility' is being able to see and try and assess matters that are outside one's own immediate environment - sort of, like 'initiative' = doing the right thing without being told!

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2919

Message Posted:
23/06/2010 11:08

Maybe that is my personal issue. I have always been sort of family, friends, people first and have put the lesser cretaures way down the list of priorities.

I guess I am just one of those I am allright jack type people and others can worry about the other things.

Not very forward thinking of me I know, and really not the way I should be. Like yourself although nowhere near so experienced I am a diver and have honestly told people that I am never more at peace than when I am blowing bubbles and that would be a little pointless if all the life were destroyed.

I think the issue for me, perhaps wrongly is that so much money is spent on trying to save the environment, creatures and yet there are still starving, homeless and destitute humans out there.

I suppose as I type this and think about it, there has to be someone saving the environment in order for those people to have food and homes to live in. Starting to make sense to me now but still not easy to convert.

Paul

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
23/06/2010 11:38

This is not intended as 'preaching', but, think, then, about how much money is being spent on the space race and nuclear arms programmes - the armaments industry, and prosecuting wars in impoverished countries to sustain it - 'live weapons testing'. Should not much of this expenditure be channelled elsewhere - the alleviation of human suffering as a priority, for instance?



The objective of any form of Nature conservation, or protection, is to prevent the wanton destruction and decimation of this planet before it's too late.



For instance, the implementation of propery protected marine reserves in Cyprus is essential, before all remaining [coastal ecosystems] become devoid of fish and mollusc life. I'm afraid we're on a 'loser' on this one - no one at government level in the RoC would listen to us, so I harbour no illusions that TRNC authorities would be any more receptive - as, blatantly obviously, any form of 'conservation' is right at the bottom of their list of priorities!