The Icelandic Ambassador to the EU and Belgium Exposed!
If I were you I would read this entry from Joannas TwoLands blog diary. It is the biggest load of political sleaze I have ever read in my life ... What happens with these kinds of letters and this kind of text is two things:
1. Mr. Stefan Haukur Johannesson, the Icelandic Ambassador to the EU and Belgium, who wrote this letter, feels justified and in fact good about himself in fighting the pro-whaling battle on behalf of Iceland.
2. The people who are already pro-whaling, and especially those that make money off it, sleep soundly at night because they feel that what is being done is justified for other reasons than money.
I don't know about the rest of you anti-whalers but that letter made me feel sick. It, contrary to it's purpose, didn't make me go, "Ooooohhh riiight, it's sustainable whaling to positively control the marine stock (as if it was stocks of product readilly available to us at our whim) within the 200 miles of Icelandic water ... that's okay then, I'm all for it!" No! To me it sounds more like 'word salad'. Maybe Mr. Ambassador needs a holiday ... or a retirement ... or a sacking ... because that letter has made me even more anti-whaling than I was. That means, that as far as my involvement goes(and I don't think I'm so special to be the only one who thinks this) the letter had the opposite effect to what it was intended to. Which in turn means that Mr. EU and Belgium is pretty rubbish at his job of selling it to me. Which means he should be sacked ... or supported through this difficult time he's clearly going through and given a loooooonnngggg holiday ... on an Icelandic whaling boat marooned on a piece of ice floating in the Atlantic ocean, being harpooned by whales, dragged into the ocean and gutted ... he might see it slightly differently then.
Me and Joanna were discussing this 'scientific' whaling that has apparently been going on since 2003. In fact it never actually stopped prior to that year as far as I know. Has anybody ever seen any research papers from these scientific researches? Have any interesting findings come from them other than, whale blubber is good for you? 200 Sample subjects to be killed, for what? "Sustainable marine stock??? control," says Mr. Icelandic Ambo, but does he believe it?
When Joanna did her research for her masters degree, all of her 'sample subjects' survived her research and yet the research produced important information in her field of practice. And as a Psychiatric Nurse, her field of practice is in bettering and even saving peoples lives. Her research was deemed good enough to be published in a recognized, widely read and respected medical journal. I'll admit I don't read marine journals but having had a decent look on the internet, I could not find any reference to any publications made around scientific whaling. But I did find this. Here are some quotes for those of you not bothered about the link:
"The science they perform consists of DNA sampling, physical measurements such as earbone size, age ID, and most importantly, the contents in the digestive tract."
"The data on what the whales eat is then perverted to help their propaganda campaign, which argues that whales eat too much commercially important fish, and that we should cull the population to save our fisheries. They selectively release data on certain species, while ignoring data on others, especially baleen species."
"Australia and many other countries use non-lethal data collection techniques, such as 'knicking' the skin of a whale for biopsy samples to determine DNA and toxin levels. Analysis of faeces is the most accurate way of determining the animals' diet.
Also, tagging whales with data sensors and tracking their movements tell us much more about their behavior and life patterns than any forensic data could provide."
By the way, the 200 minke whale samples studies that Mr. Brussels talks about in his letter and says will end in 2007, that's what they've been catching each year. As well as 200 fin whales and 100 Sei whales every year. That means that the 200 sample studies are actually 500 ... per year. That means that from 2003, the official start date of the scientific whaling, until 2007, they won't have caught 200 'sample studies' as implied, they will have caught 2,500 'sample studies'.
The fact they need to twist their words in such a manner is proof to me that they know what they're doing is wrong, inhumane and probably illegal. So let me end this blog in big bold letters and say:
STEFAN HAUKUR JOHANNESSON, THE ICELANDIC AMBASSADOR TO THE EU AND BELGIUM IS LYING TO US ALL.
1. Mr. Stefan Haukur Johannesson, the Icelandic Ambassador to the EU and Belgium, who wrote this letter, feels justified and in fact good about himself in fighting the pro-whaling battle on behalf of Iceland.
2. The people who are already pro-whaling, and especially those that make money off it, sleep soundly at night because they feel that what is being done is justified for other reasons than money.
I don't know about the rest of you anti-whalers but that letter made me feel sick. It, contrary to it's purpose, didn't make me go, "Ooooohhh riiight, it's sustainable whaling to positively control the marine stock (as if it was stocks of product readilly available to us at our whim) within the 200 miles of Icelandic water ... that's okay then, I'm all for it!" No! To me it sounds more like 'word salad'. Maybe Mr. Ambassador needs a holiday ... or a retirement ... or a sacking ... because that letter has made me even more anti-whaling than I was. That means, that as far as my involvement goes(and I don't think I'm so special to be the only one who thinks this) the letter had the opposite effect to what it was intended to. Which in turn means that Mr. EU and Belgium is pretty rubbish at his job of selling it to me. Which means he should be sacked ... or supported through this difficult time he's clearly going through and given a loooooonnngggg holiday ... on an Icelandic whaling boat marooned on a piece of ice floating in the Atlantic ocean, being harpooned by whales, dragged into the ocean and gutted ... he might see it slightly differently then.
Me and Joanna were discussing this 'scientific' whaling that has apparently been going on since 2003. In fact it never actually stopped prior to that year as far as I know. Has anybody ever seen any research papers from these scientific researches? Have any interesting findings come from them other than, whale blubber is good for you? 200 Sample subjects to be killed, for what? "Sustainable marine stock??? control," says Mr. Icelandic Ambo, but does he believe it?
When Joanna did her research for her masters degree, all of her 'sample subjects' survived her research and yet the research produced important information in her field of practice. And as a Psychiatric Nurse, her field of practice is in bettering and even saving peoples lives. Her research was deemed good enough to be published in a recognized, widely read and respected medical journal. I'll admit I don't read marine journals but having had a decent look on the internet, I could not find any reference to any publications made around scientific whaling. But I did find this. Here are some quotes for those of you not bothered about the link:
"The science they perform consists of DNA sampling, physical measurements such as earbone size, age ID, and most importantly, the contents in the digestive tract."
"The data on what the whales eat is then perverted to help their propaganda campaign, which argues that whales eat too much commercially important fish, and that we should cull the population to save our fisheries. They selectively release data on certain species, while ignoring data on others, especially baleen species."
"Australia and many other countries use non-lethal data collection techniques, such as 'knicking' the skin of a whale for biopsy samples to determine DNA and toxin levels. Analysis of faeces is the most accurate way of determining the animals' diet.
Also, tagging whales with data sensors and tracking their movements tell us much more about their behavior and life patterns than any forensic data could provide."
By the way, the 200 minke whale samples studies that Mr. Brussels talks about in his letter and says will end in 2007, that's what they've been catching each year. As well as 200 fin whales and 100 Sei whales every year. That means that the 200 sample studies are actually 500 ... per year. That means that from 2003, the official start date of the scientific whaling, until 2007, they won't have caught 200 'sample studies' as implied, they will have caught 2,500 'sample studies'.
The fact they need to twist their words in such a manner is proof to me that they know what they're doing is wrong, inhumane and probably illegal. So let me end this blog in big bold letters and say:
STEFAN HAUKUR JOHANNESSON, THE ICELANDIC AMBASSADOR TO THE EU AND BELGIUM IS LYING TO US ALL.
posted by Tóti Freysson at Friday, October 27, 2006
2 Comments:
Hey there,
I'm more likely to visit Iceland now than ever before.
There is nothing wrong with sustainable whaling. Iceland deserves support for showing the guts not to be pushed around by animal rights fanatics and the USA.
It's really crazy that the USA is considering threatening Iceland with trade sanctions, when the fact is that USA citizens kill more than 60 whales themselves, every year.
Why does no one complain about Americans killing whales, but get all upset when Icelanders, Norwegians do it?
I am opposed to whaling anywhere in the world, America as well as Iceland, Japan and Norway. I don't think I am fanatical, Iceland just happens to be closer to my heart than any of these other countries. As an Icelander I am dissapointed in my government for their decision to commence commercial whaling when there is no need, or even market, for it.
The USA is threatening sanctions because the USA have always believed their domestic policies are their own business and their foreign policies are something the rest of the world should obide by. They believed this when I lived there during the Reagan administration and they still believe it today.
I see on your profile, David, that your business is investment banking and you are based in Japan. What is the market like there for imported whale meat? Do you know? I'm interested to know because I belive Norway has tried to break the market since 2001 and as yet been unsuccessful. Is this true?
Post a Comment
<< Home