|
I Approve of This
On Jan 9, 1:24*am, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed.. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 |
I Approve of This
Tim wrote:
On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 To me it looks like the PETA boat caused an intentional collision. You could see the prop wash from both engines so the boat had to have forward momentum and control. All's well that ends well. No lives were lost. |
I Approve of This
"Tim" wrote in message
... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume |
I Approve of This
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. 4th. You are just plain stupid. Do you know what it would take for the whaleing ship to avoid having that little maneuverable boat impale itself on the bow of the whaling ship? |
I Approve of This
On Jan 9, 1:12*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume What a dip. Have you ever heard of 'maneuverability'? Your knowledge of maritime law is eclipsed only by... Can't think of anything. |
I Approve of This
On 1/9/2010 1:24 PM, John H wrote:
On Jan 9, 1:12 pm, wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume What a dip. Have you ever heard of 'maneuverability'? Your knowledge of maritime law is eclipsed only by... Can't think of anything. Of course, neither of us know anything about maritime law, either. Hehehe. |
I Approve of This
"John H" wrote in message
... On Jan 9, 1:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume What a dip. Have you ever heard of 'maneuverability'? Your knowledge of maritime law is eclipsed only by... Yes, but there's no indication that the Japanese boat even tried. It's not like it was heavy fog or they didn't know the other boat was around. Can't think of anything. Pretty much sums up your "thinking." -- Nom=de=Plume |
I Approve of This
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "John H" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume What a dip. Have you ever heard of 'maneuverability'? Your knowledge of maritime law is eclipsed only by... Yes, but there's no indication that the Japanese boat even tried. It's not like it was heavy fog or they didn't know the other boat was around. Can't think of anything. Pretty much sums up your "thinking." -- Nom=de=Plume ~~ Snerk ~~ You tell him sister! |
I Approve of This
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:09:54 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume What a dip. Have you ever heard of 'maneuverability'? Your knowledge of maritime law is eclipsed only by... Yes, but there's no indication that the Japanese boat even tried. It's not like it was heavy fog or they didn't know the other boat was around. Can't think of anything. Pretty much sums up your "thinking." What 'signs' are you looking for? Do you expect a ship that big to show 'signs' in about 4 seconds? I knew I had you filtered for a reason. -- John H "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." Thomas Jefferson |
I Approve of This
On Jan 9, 2:28*pm, John H wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:09:54 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "John H" wrote in message .... On Jan 9, 1:12 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message .... On Jan 9, 1:24 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:22:01 -0800, JR North wrote: Mebbe you would change your mind if somone shot a harpoon into you.. JR Mebbe YOU would change your mind if someone rammed your boat because you were fishing. There are plenty of PETA folks who think that is cruel to the fish, deplete the seas and whatever From what I heard, the Whale Wars boat boat was not moving. It was rammed. Are you really trying to defend the Japanese whaling industry?? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/...rctica_whaling Even if the WW boat was still moving isn't it at a minimum _both_ boats' fault? That's how I read the laws involved. -- Nom=de=Plume This vid looks to me like it was moving right along the side of the Japanese fisherman then decided to cut across the bow and got clipped: http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-15749633/17481983 A couple of things... First, this vid is from the Japanese perspective, so it can't be considered definitive. Second, the WW mother ship probably has contradictory vid that we haven't seen - I read they have five camera angles. Third, both sides are obligated to avoid a collision, and since the Japanese and the WW boat could take action to do that, both should be at fault. -- Nom=de=Plume What a dip. Have you ever heard of 'maneuverability'? Your knowledge of maritime law is eclipsed only by... Yes, but there's no indication that the Japanese boat even tried. It's not like it was heavy fog or they didn't know the other boat was around. Can't think of anything. Pretty much sums up your "thinking." What 'signs' are you looking for? Do you expect a ship that big to show 'signs' in about 4 seconds? I knew I had you filtered for a reason. -- John H "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." Thomas Jefferson "Filtered", and still reading her posts...what a liar. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com