Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Tim Tim is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,111
Default 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
  #22   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Jim Jim is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 134
Default 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.
  #23   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default 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


  #24   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,249
Default 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?
  #25   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,637
Default 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.


  #26   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Jim Jim is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 655
Default 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.
  #27   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default 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


  #28   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,997
Default 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!


  #29   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 817
Default 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
  #30   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,267
Default 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.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'm NOT John Kerry and I approve of this message. A boater General 1 September 13th 04 03:05 AM
V.P. Chaney Does Not Approve of Gay Marriage Christopher Robin General 0 January 11th 04 06:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017