Petition to Drop Charges Against Sea Shepherd’s Paul Watson

brianlux

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Fiscalia_CR_Liberemos_a_Paul_Watson_de_la_persecucion_de_las_Mafias_de_la_Pesca_Ilegal/edit

The preamble of the online petition of the petition to drop charges against Captain Paul Watson reads:

"The greedy interests of the very few who enrich themselves ravaging the life seas have turned his main defender, captain Paul Watson, a fugitive from the supposed "justice". They are using no other than the courts of the country that boasts itself as "environmentalist", which chase him for nearly thirteen years with a judicial cause invented by illegal shark fishermen and supported by illegal fishing mafias who kill marine wildlife in cold blood and without restrictions. It's time to say "ENOUGH" to such injustice!"

Watson wife posted the following message on FB:

"Please Sign this Petition for my Husband Captain Paul Watson"

My name is Yana Rusinovich Watson. My husband is Captain Paul Watson. I asked my husband if he could please post this picture of us along with a request for people who support Sea Shepherd to sign this petition to present to the President of Costa Rica.

My husband has dedicated his life to defending the living diversity in our oceans and has risked his life and freedom many times over the years. As a result he has helped to save tens of thousands of lives. He told me that the greatest satisfaction of his work is knowing that because Sea Shepherd has intervened thousands of whales, tens of thousands of seals, sea turtles, birds and fish continue to swim in the sea. Without that intervention they would be dead.

Every whale saved that gives birth, every seal pup born is a lasting legacy to this intervention.

My husband has never hurt another person and Sea Shepherd has an unblemished history of non-violence. He is wanted by Costa Rica for stopping a shark finning operation in Guatemalan waters, something he did at the request of the Guatemalan government. He is wanted in Japan for interfering with the illegal slaughter of whales in the Southern Ocean. He is wanted for his successful actions in saving lives and he did so without injuring anyone.

Because Sea Shepherd and he have been successful, both Japan and Costa Rica have conspired to punish him by using their power as governments to place him on what is called the Interpol Red List. This is an international notice to detain people responsible for serial murders or war crimes. No one in the history of Interpol has ever been placed on this list for trespassing on a whaling ship or stopping the illegal activities of shark-finning fishermen.

The charges are political and my husband needs your support. There are over a half a million friends on this public page. Surely we can recruit 10% of you to sign this petition.

Last-12-Exit

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

hedonist

brianlux said:

Every whale saved that gives birth, every seal pup born is a lasting legacy to this intervention.

Though I don't know much about Watson or the charges involved, it's tough to argue with what I quoted.

brianlux

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

brianlux

hedonist said:

brianlux said:

Every whale saved that gives birth, every seal pup born is a lasting legacy to this intervention.

Though I don't know much about Watson or the charges involved, it's tough to argue with what I quoted.

I like that quote too, H.

Watson's wife, Yana Rusinovich Watson, said this recently:

"My husband has dedicated his life to defending the living diversity in our oceans and has risked his life and freedom many times over the years. As a result he has helped to save tens of thousands of lives. He told me that the greatest satisfaction of his work is knowing that because Sea Shepherd has intervened thousands of whales, tens of thousands of seals, sea turtles, birds and fish continue to swim in the sea. Without that intervention they would be dead."

Last-12-Exit

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

rr165892

I think he's genuine and has always fought the good fight.Seems like he's someone to be admired for his actions.

HughFreakingDillon

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

HughFreakingDillon

I have been reading the link, Brian, and while he claims to not use violent means, he also states clearly quite often how he has rammed and/or sunk several whaling ships. These ships have people on board. I would have to agree with the position of Greenpeace when they say that what constitutes a violent act is the act itself, not if any casualties resulted as a consequence of it or not.

Last-12-Exit

HughFreakingDillon said:

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

Yes, even if by illegal means unless he's got the authority to fine or arrest people. If I saw you stealing something and instead of calling the cops, I tried to put you under arrest myself. Probably wouldn't work very well. I know that's not a very good analogy, but it was all I could think of off the top of my head.

HughFreakingDillon

Last-12-Exit said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

Yes, even if by illegal means unless he's got the authority to fine or arrest people. If I saw you stealing something and instead of calling the cops, I tried to put you under arrest myself. Probably wouldn't work very well. I know that's not a very good analogy, but it was all I could think of off the top of my head.

I see what you mean. But non violent intervention is perfectly legal, however this doesn't seem to the case with this guy. He is destroying private property/possessions, and risking their safety at the same time.

I can appreciate what he is trying to do, but the ends cannot justify the means.

brianlux

HughFreakingDillon said:

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

Exactly, Hugh. Watson and crew go after people doing things that are illegal and immoral, not those who are honest hard working people like (I assume anyway) all of us here.

brianlux

HughFreakingDillon said:

I have been reading the link, Brian, and while he claims to not use violent means, he also states clearly quite often how he has rammed and/or sunk several whaling ships. These ships have people on board. I would have to agree with the position of Greenpeace when they say that what constitutes a violent act is the act itself, not if any casualties resulted as a consequence of it or not.

Last-12-Exit said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

Yes, even if by illegal means unless he's got the authority to fine or arrest people. If I saw you stealing something and instead of calling the cops, I tried to put you under arrest myself. Probably wouldn't work very well. I know that's not a very good analogy, but it was all I could think of off the top of my head.

Hey guys, I totally get that this sort of thing is hard to get behind. But here's the thing- if you read enough about how these guys work you begin to realize they are very careful about setting things up so that no one is hurt. Watson and the Sea Shepherd people have been doing what they do for 38 years and have not hurt anyone. Their actions are non-violent to humans. The one person who has been physically harmed the most is Watson himself. Reading his story, it's amazing he has survived.

I get it that this sort of action is not for everyone. I won't argue that it should be. And yes, it would be so much better if legal means to stop the illegal killing of these animals worked but they have not. If you study this stuff, it's very easy to see that legal means have never come even close to protecting these sea mammals. For some of us, Watson is a true hero. I hope some here will consider signing the petition and I fully understand and get why most will not.

Thanks for at least checking it out.

PJfanwillneverleave1

OP

Do you have a vested interest in this Paul guy?

Jason P

This dude was too hard core for Green Peace. Didn't he scuttle some ships?

brianlux

Jason P said:

This dude was too hard core for Green Peace. Didn't he scuttle some ships?

Varying accounts mention why Watson left Greenpeace which he helped found. My understanding is the Watson's leaving/ousting from Greenpeace was basically a parting of ways over disagreement with tactics. Watson was in favor of more action, less bureaucracy. In his biography, Watson talks about how Greenpeace was using a large portion of their resources and time building a top heaving international organization instead of focusing on action.

Scuttle, noun.
The deliberate sinking of one's own ship; Coal scuttle, a bucket-like container for coal.

Other's ships? Yes. Sea Shepherds have sunk other's ships engaged in illegal activity.

Sea Sheperd's own ships? Not that I know of. Some claim he let their ship The Ady Gil sink after it was rammed by Japanese vessel Shonan Maru #2. My understanding is that Watson did not attempt to save that ship for safety reasons and the crew was rescued by one of their other ships, The Bob Barker.

Last-12-Exit

brianlux said:

Jason P said:

This dude was too hard core for Green Peace. Didn't he scuttle some ships?

Varying accounts mention why Watson left Greenpeace which he helped found. My understanding is the Watson's leaving/ousting from Greenpeace was basically a parting of ways over disagreement with tactics. Watson was in favor of more action, less bureaucracy. In his biography, Watson talks about how Greenpeace was using a large portion of their resources and time building a top heaving international organization instead of focusing on action.

Scuttle, noun.
The deliberate sinking of one's own ship; Coal scuttle, a bucket-like container for coal.

Other's ships? Yes. Sea Shepherds have sunk other's ships engaged in illegal activity.

Sea Sheperd's own ships? Not that I know of. Some claim he let their ship The Ady Gil sink after it was rammed by Japanese vessel Shonan Maru #2. My understanding is that Watson did not attempt to save that ship for safety reasons and the crew was rescued by one of their other ships, The Bob Barker.

You sound like you are saying what they did is ok because someone was engaging in illegal activity. Now, I have no clue what kind of illegal activity was going on, but I highly doubt t it was worth killing people in the process. Isn't that attempted murder?

Since I have no idea what the circumstances were (the ship could have been docked), I'll refrain from flat out calling this guy a criminal. But if he is deliberately sinking ships in open waters, he should be in jail.

HughFreakingDillon

brianlux said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

I have been reading the link, Brian, and while he claims to not use violent means, he also states clearly quite often how he has rammed and/or sunk several whaling ships. These ships have people on board. I would have to agree with the position of Greenpeace when they say that what constitutes a violent act is the act itself, not if any casualties resulted as a consequence of it or not.

Last-12-Exit said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

Yes, even if by illegal means unless he's got the authority to fine or arrest people. If I saw you stealing something and instead of calling the cops, I tried to put you under arrest myself. Probably wouldn't work very well. I know that's not a very good analogy, but it was all I could think of off the top of my head.

Hey guys, I totally get that this sort of thing is hard to get behind. But here's the thing- if you read enough about how these guys work you begin to realize they are very careful about setting things up so that no one is hurt. Watson and the Sea Shepherd people have been doing what they do for 38 years and have not hurt anyone. Their actions are non-violent to humans. The one person who has been physically harmed the most is Watson himself. Reading his story, it's amazing he has survived.

I get it that this sort of action is not for everyone. I won't argue that it should be. And yes, it would be so much better if legal means to stop the illegal killing of these animals worked but they have not. If you study this stuff, it's very easy to see that legal means have never come even close to protecting these sea mammals. For some of us, Watson is a true hero. I hope some here will consider signing the petition and I fully understand and get why most will not.

Thanks for at least checking it out.

I can understand why ne does what he does, but he is doing something illegal to prevent something else illegal from happening. It's a slippery slope.

brianlux

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Jason P said:

This dude was too hard core for Green Peace. Didn't he scuttle some ships?

Varying accounts mention why Watson left Greenpeace which he helped found. My understanding is the Watson's leaving/ousting from Greenpeace was basically a parting of ways over disagreement with tactics. Watson was in favor of more action, less bureaucracy. In his biography, Watson talks about how Greenpeace was using a large portion of their resources and time building a top heaving international organization instead of focusing on action.

Scuttle, noun.
The deliberate sinking of one's own ship; Coal scuttle, a bucket-like container for coal.

Other's ships? Yes. Sea Shepherds have sunk other's ships engaged in illegal activity.

Sea Sheperd's own ships? Not that I know of. Some claim he let their ship The Ady Gil sink after it was rammed by Japanese vessel Shonan Maru #2. My understanding is that Watson did not attempt to save that ship for safety reasons and the crew was rescued by one of their other ships, The Bob Barker.

You sound like you are saying what they did is ok because someone was engaging in illegal activity. Now, I have no clue what kind of illegal activity was going on, but I highly doubt t it was worth killing people in the process. Isn't that attempted murder?

Since I have no idea what the circumstances were (the ship could have been docked), I'll refrain from flat out calling this guy a criminal. But if he is deliberately sinking ships in open waters, he should be in jail.

Perhaps you missed my earlier posts. As I said early, Watson and Sea Shepherds have not killed or injured anyone. They are a non-violent group. In 38 years they have not killed or harmed any one. Only Watson himself has been injured and this was while confronting illegal killing of seals. Canadian mounties threw Watson in frigid arctic waters and forced him to stay in the water until almost dead and then took him on board ship and beat him severely.

Like I said, Watson's tactics are not for everyone but it is indeed a shame that this is what's needed to save these animals. Desperate measures for desperate times.

brianlux

HughFreakingDillon said:

brianlux said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

I have been reading the link, Brian, and while he claims to not use violent means, he also states clearly quite often how he has rammed and/or sunk several whaling ships. These ships have people on board. I would have to agree with the position of Greenpeace when they say that what constitutes a violent act is the act itself, not if any casualties resulted as a consequence of it or not.

Last-12-Exit said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Last-12-Exit said:

brianlux said:

Last-12-Exit said:

Did he break the law by interfering with the fishing?

That is open to interpretation, Last-12. Paul Watson has been accused of being a "terrorist". This, of course, is absolute nonsense. Quite the opposite as you can see in Watson's comment below. Watson is a saboteur, not a terrorist.

This might further answer your question:

"Some anti-environmentalists try to use the fact that an extreme minority in the environmental movement resorts to force and sabotage to brand the movement as a whole as "terrorist." One such attempt has been specifically condemned by a Norwegian court. [7]

Captain Paul Watson: There is nothing extremist about saving the lives of whales from illegal whaling operations. It seems like a very conservative action to me - upholding international conservation law. Eco-terrorism is the illegal destruction of endangered species and habitats. Sea Shepherd has never injured a single person nor been convicted of a single felony nor have we ever been sued. We don't break the law, we uphold it."

http://www.seashepherd.org/who-we-are/paul-watson-and-greenpeace.html

I get people wanting to "save the whales" sort of speak. I don't know much about this incident, but you can't sabotage people living. I highly doubt he's a terrorist too, but he probably should be charged with something.

You can if their living is by illegal means.

Yes, even if by illegal means unless he's got the authority to fine or arrest people. If I saw you stealing something and instead of calling the cops, I tried to put you under arrest myself. Probably wouldn't work very well. I know that's not a very good analogy, but it was all I could think of off the top of my head.

Hey guys, I totally get that this sort of thing is hard to get behind. But here's the thing- if you read enough about how these guys work you begin to realize they are very careful about setting things up so that no one is hurt. Watson and the Sea Shepherd people have been doing what they do for 38 years and have not hurt anyone. Their actions are non-violent to humans. The one person who has been physically harmed the most is Watson himself. Reading his story, it's amazing he has survived.

I get it that this sort of action is not for everyone. I won't argue that it should be. And yes, it would be so much better if legal means to stop the illegal killing of these animals worked but they have not. If you study this stuff, it's very easy to see that legal means have never come even close to protecting these sea mammals. For some of us, Watson is a true hero. I hope some here will consider signing the petition and I fully understand and get why most will not.

Thanks for at least checking it out.

I can understand why ne does what he does, but he is doing something illegal to prevent something else illegal from happening. It's a slippery slope.

I understand that feeling, Hugh. This all ties in to the greatly disrupted balance in ocean ecology. The oceans are dying due to human influence. If the oceans die, our species dies. Jacques Cousteau warned us of this a half century ago. As I said, it's desperate measures for desperate times.

Edit: not just our species, probably all large mammals, perhaps even all mammals. This comes from basic concepts of ecology, not some far fetched radicalism.

gimmesometruth27

somebody has to enforce the laws and protect those whales. if the international community won't do it, then i am all for vigilantes who will.