was kommen mag

Off the back of Sea Shepherd’s most successful campaign to date, Operation Zero Tolerance that saved 932 whales, Sea Shepherd launches Operation Relentless. Like last season’s campaign, Operation Relentless will be managed and led by Sea Shepherd Australia with campaign leaders Bob Brown and Jeff Hansen.

It will be Sea Shepherd’s 10th Antarctic whale defence campaign defending at risk whales in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. During the past nine seasons, Sea Shepherd’s direct-action interventions have saved the lives of more than 4,500 whales and exposed illegal Japanese whaling to the world. With the help of Australians and people around the world, Operation Relentless is shaping up to be a monumental success for the whales.

"Australia is now the focus of the biggest whale saving operation on Earth and funding depends on the generosity of whale loving Australians. These whales are Australia’s responsibility. Sea Shepherd is acting where Governments have failed to intervene in the illegal slaughter of these magnificent creatures,” said Dr Bob Brown, Sea Shepherd board member.

"Japan stated that the attempt to kill whales in the Antarctic whale sanctuary was abandoned due to ‘relentless interference’ by Sea Shepherd,” said Jeff Hansen, Sea Shepherd Australian Director.

“Sea Shepherd likes that kind of relentless accusation, we like being relentless in the pursuit of finally bring peace to the whales of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. Sea Shepherd knows that this is a David and Goliath struggle. Our past victories show we have one thing that the whalers do not, and that’s the passion and courage of our crew. No matter what the odds, no matter what the risks, no matter how well equipped, funded and Government backed your opponents are, you must never give in, must never surrender.  You must fight for what is right, because the one thing that is worth fighting for on our beautiful planet is life,” said Mr Hansen.

via SeaShepherd.org

I’m really curious to see how this goes down, because the Ninth Circuit’s Judge Kozinski essentially labeled the what the Sea Shepherd operation does piracy in February in his opinion Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Society708 F.3d 1099 (2013).

If you are student of international and/or maritime law, you may know that piracy is one of the very few (in fact, some would argue the only) truly international crime with universal jurisdiction. In other words, any nation’s police can arrest and prosecute piracy. If the Sea Shepherd folks find themselves in the within the territorial exclusive economic zones of any country, that country can chase them in hot pursuit to the ends of the earth and prosecute. And I think more than a few nations would love to prosecute them.


HuffPO: Florida Counties Out Sex Offenders With Signs →

I think this is too much.


Phys.org: Preserving the health of the Arctic →

via Anthony King


Keystone XL Pipeline: EPA Criticizes State Dept. Environmental Review →

proconorg:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a public letter on Mon. Apr 22 criticizing the conclusions of a Mar. 1, 2013 State Department environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL tar sand pipeline.

According to the EPA, the State Department had concluded in its “Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Review“ that tar sand oil would continue to find its way into the US market regardless of whether or not the pipeline is built, and therefore, approval of the pipeline would “not by itself substantially affect GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions or contribute to climate change.”

The EPA letter criticized those findings, arguing that the State Department report did not properly assess the higher costs associated with rail transport of tar sand oil. The EPA reasoned that higher transportation costs could reduce the total amount of tar sands oil that is extracted and refined, thus reducing future greenhouse gas emissions.

Jack Spencer, Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, challenged the EPA’s conclusions stating that the “EPA’s objections to the State Department’s draft [environmental impact statement] demonstrate once again that the EPA is more interested in promoting a political agenda than protecting public health and safety… The XL pipeline has been studied extensively and has been found to be environmentally safe twice.”

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has been opposed to the pipeline stating that he is “disturbed by the proposal” and questions “why in the world would we ever consider approving a new Big Oil pipeline to carry dirty fuel and keep America addicted to oil, when we could save money, create jobs, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil by moving to stronger fuel economy standards?” Dr.James Hansen, former Director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies at NASA, has argued that “exploitation of tar sands would make it implausible to stabilize climate and avoid disastrous global climate impacts.”