Paul Watson is an activist, for whales. He has put his life on the line year after year, for whales. He has spent months in jail, for whales. He takes his boats down to Antarctica with the intent to ram himself into Japanese boats, for whales. Paul Watson is what much of the world calls an extremist, and to the Japanese a terrorist. Japanese whalers have been hunting whales in Antarctica for decades, "in order to ascertain when there will be enough to harvest for profit." Who in this situation is "right"? Surley it cant be Watson, he intentionally sinks ships in freezing water using his "Can opener". Yet the Japanese can't be "right" they are pushing the limits of an already unstabe habitat, pushing animals toward extinction. Surley neither are "right". The question comes down to perspective. If you weigh the good and bad of each side it seems, to me, like the Sea Shepard is more "right". His cause is noble, who wouldnt want to protect animals of our planet, but I feel this cetacean obsessed loony is going about the process wrong. Still I feel violence may be the best answer here, because its getting attention.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
0 comments:
Post a Comment