Captain Paul Watson Speaks Out on Facebook

[SEAM]

"I don't want to argue with killers, I want to Shut Them Down!"

https://www.facebook.com/captpaulwatson?fref=nf

I Have No Tolerance for the Enemies of Life

Commentary by Captain Paul Watson

Why do I delete some comments and ban some whalers and pro-whalers from this page. A few pro-killing “friends” have complained that I have banned them or other pro-killing “friends” from this page. Yes I have. First because if they support the cruel slaughter of whales, they are obviously not my friends and it would be disingenuous of me to pretend that they are. This is my page and I have the right to ban anyone who comes here to post insults, to be rude and also people who support and advocate killing whales.

For those who scream that they have freedom to speak and express themselves. Yes you do, in your own homes, forums or on your own page. I have the freedom to delete and the freedom to ban. If not Facebook would not have allowed both options.
I would not allow anyone who was pro-rape, pro-child molestation, or pro-human serial killing to comment, so why should I allow people who are pro-whale serial killing to comment.

Killing whales is a disgusting, immoral, perverse and sadistic act and anyone who supports the slaughter of whales in the Faroes is in my opinion disgusting, immoral, perverse and sadistic. I am not interested in justifications. Serial killers always justify their crimes. I would not allow some psychopath to comment about how much he enjoys killing children or how satisfying raping someone is so why should I tolerate anyone expressing their opinion that killing whales is fun. I would not tolerate some cannibal posting how much they enjoy the taste of human flesh so why should I allow some whale killer to post how much they enjoy the taste of whale flesh?

I am also fed up with all those whale eaters who also eat pork, beef, chicken, fish and mutton commenting that there is no difference. Yes according to them there is no difference because they are eating any animal they wish to eat. I do not support the eating of pigs, chickens, cows, sheep and fish so such comments are meaningless. And for the meat-eating idiots who comment “well plants feel pain.” All I can say is if they believe that, they should also stop eating plants. And yes eating plants is also destructive to the environment when there are seven plus billion people consuming resources but relatively speaking eating plants is less destructive than eating meat.
One of the most amusing thing about the people who criticize our opposition to whaling is when they ask if we are vegetarians or vegans. It is a legitimate question, but it is not usually asked legitimately by our critics, because it is a question for which they already have prepared a rebuttal. Are you a vegetarian? If no, that means you are a hypocrite. If yes, that means you are a fanatic.

So why bother to engage in a debate with people who are pro-killing who have already classified their opponents as hypocrites or fanatics. The truth is however that all humans are hypocrites. The world we were born into forces us to be hypocrites. However we can choose to mitigate our hypocrisy. And unfortunately anyone who has ever attempted to change the world, for better or for worse has always been called a fanatic. Jesus Christ himself was called a fanatic by both Jews and Romans. Perhaps eating meat was indeed justified when it was for survival and most importantly when human numbers were such that the impact was low. There were one billion people on the planet in 1800, three billion on the planet in 1950 and over seven billion now. It took 150 years to jump from one billion to three billion and only 65 years to jump from three billion to seven billion. By 2050 there will be over ten billion, and by 2100, between fifteen and twenty billion although it won’t reach that high because eco-systems will collapse well before the end of the century and children born in the last decade and every year from now will inherit a strange new and much more hostile world than any generation of humanity has yet experienced and that future will not be deterred by denial.

Eating meat is the single greatest contributing factor to climate change and it is one of the most wasteful uses of water resources on the planet. Eight thousand gallons of water to make one hamburger and so-called conservation groups like the Sierra Club (of which I am a past National Director) tell us to limit our showers to conserve water.
If I were to stand under the shower for a month, I would not use the amount of water that goes into making a “happy meal.”

In my opinion you cannot call yourself a conservationist or an environmentalist and still consume factory farmed animals or condone the plundering rape of the sea.
With seven billion plus people on the planet, a number that will certainly double this century as it has more than doubled in the last 75 years, we have to accept the fact that we have reached the limit of carrying capacity and our numbers will continue to expand only by stealing the carrying capacity of other species.

We don’t know how many pilot whales are in the North Atlantic. The Faroese say, without any scientific verification, that there are 800,000 pilot whales. They are a little vague as to how they arrive at this number and even the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) states there is insufficient data to determine population numbers. But say there are 800,000 pilot whales and the Faroese are right. How incredibly arrogant it is for a species numbering in excess of seven billion to say that 800,000 is a large number of whales. Human cities tend to have more than 800,000 people in them. And of course as the passenger pigeon demonstrated even billions of numbers were no protection from extinction caused by human greed.
What I find most amusing about the pro-killers is how so many of them call us violent when we have never injured a single person in our entire history. We are so non-violent we advocate not killing any animals and our ships are run 100% as vegan vessels and have been such for two decades.

And how do our critics respond to their own accusations that we are violent? They threaten us with violence. I once was doing a radio show in Vancouver and the studio and the whole building was evacuated because someone called in a bomb threat to protest my “violence.” For those critics who call us racist, give it up. We are not impressed. Sea Shepherd is a global movement and we do not and never have discriminated against any group of people based on race, nationality or culture. We are anti-whaling, not anti Faroese, anti-Japanese or anti-Danish etc.

Sea Shepherd represents our clients and our clients just happen to not be human. Our clients are the citizens of the sea. The oceans are dying and we humans are killing it. I know it is difficult for some people to understand where I am coming from. I am a biocentric and that means I do not view humans as better than other animals. I view humanity as being indivisible from the biosphere that makes all species interdependent.

When I say that fish and worms and trees are more important than humans this is not an anti-human statement. It simply means that without fish and worms and trees humanity will not survive. It means that when the oceans die, we, that is, all of us will die with the oceans. The law of diversity means that diversity is the strength of an eco-system. The law of interdependence means that we humans are dependent upon all other species for our survival, for the air we breathe, for the crops they pollinate, for the food that plants give to us, to all animals. The law of finite resources means there is a limit to growth, a limit to carrying capacity and a limit to our numbers. We have exceeded that limit, surviving now by stealing the carrying capacity of other species in what is now the homocene, the sixth great global extinction and this time caused by one species – our own.

And finally what benefit is there to having people post their pro-killing diatribes on my page? It is not going to turn me into a pro-killer. What is the point of debating the pros and cons of killing when I my position is anti-killing. Yesterday I was criticized by a pro-whaler asking me why I call the whalers barbaric and savage, why I call them psychopaths and why do I not show respect for their culture. My answer is simple. I call the whalers barbaric because the killing of whales is barbaric. I call whaling savage because it is savage and I call the whalers psychopaths because their behavior is violently psychotic. And I do not show respect nor will I ever show respect for any culture that practices or condones the inflicting an agonizing death upon any sentient being.

So if anyone posts any comments in support of cruelty and death I will delete them and I will ban them from this page. There are plenty of barbaric pages on Facebook. I’m sure serial killers Ted Nugent or Sarah Palin would welcome kindred spirits.
Our job is not to debate whalers, sealers, dolphin murderers, turtle slayers or anyone who is contributing to the death of diversity in our oceans. Our job is to utilize all our resources to directing our passion towards ending the legacy of death and sadism that humanity has dragged along with our evolution through the ages.

Our job is to defend life and to safeguard the future for all life, human and non-human.

[Bob]

I've met Capt. Watson and had some great discussions with him. He is indeed very passionate.

[TargeT]

Killing whales is a disgusting, immoral, perverse and sadistic act and anyone who supports the slaughter of whales in the Faroes is in my opinion disgusting, immoral, perverse and sadistic. I am not interested in justifications. Serial killers always justify their crimes. I would not allow some psychopath to comment about how much he enjoys killing children or how satisfying raping someone is so why should I tolerate anyone expressing their opinion that killing whales is fun. I would not tolerate some cannibal posting how much they enjoy the taste of human flesh so why should I allow some whale killer to post how much they enjoy the taste of whale flesh?

Hmmm... righteous indignation must feel so right; the ability to judge and feel wholly just in that judgement.. the ability to completely "pigeon hole" someone into a category of "disgusting, immoral, perverse and sadistic" and ignore all other aspects of the person... the extreme of extremity!


I'd like to say I don't tolerate anyone who doesn't tolerate anyone.... but that doesn't quite work does it?


I hope this guy enjoys his particular form of polarity, I'm pretty sure it's a big reason why we are here.



Personally I can't tolerate comments from someone like this who hypocritically performs genocidal acts at least once a day (assuming he showers once a day), killing millions of organisms and not even considering the outcome or impact of his actions.

This guy should be a vegan (if he's not), he seems to share their myopic view of reality.

But then, maybe that's too polarized of me?

[amor]

Two comments here. First on "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual." My version is that we are a creation of the mind of God which, essentially, must have the attributes of the most advanced paralell computer of unlimited memory. The object may be to create a companion for God who may be lonely and, much like myself, explores the internet to avoid brain death from boredom.

I heartily agree with the conclusions that meat eating and its murdering is beneath us. Recently I read that there is work undertaken in the laboratory to grow protein in the laboratory. Perhaps one day soon it may be grown much like luttuce?

A memorable and horrible experience one day as I walked past the local slaughter house was the outcry of a sheep. It contained an outcry with spiritual feeling of BETRAYAL BY GOD and man, the ones trusted in to safeguard its very existence. It cut me to my heart and I have never forgotten it.

The Bible allows us to eat fish with scales and nothing else swimming. That excludes sea mamals and anything else not bearing scales, this for our own health and that of the earth. All living requires our love and respect. Amor

[TargeT]

Posted by amor (here)
Two comments here. First on "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual." My version is that we are a creation of the mind of God which, essentially, must have the attributes of the most advanced paralell computer of unlimited memory. The object may be to create a companion for God who may be lonely and, much like myself, explores the internet to avoid brain death from boredom.

I heartily agree with the conclusions that meat eating and its murdering is beneath us. Recently I read that there is work undertaken in the laboratory to grow protein in the laboratory. Perhaps one day soon it may be grown much like luttuce?

A memorable and horrible experience one day as I walked past the local slaughter house was the outcry of a sheep. It contained an outcry with spiritual feeling of BETRAYAL BY GOD and man, the ones trusted in to safeguard its very existence. It cut me to my heart and I have never forgotten it.

The Bible allows us to eat fish with scales and nothing else swimming. That excludes sea mamals and anything else not bearing scales, this for our own health and that of the earth. All living requires our love and respect. Amor

I was with you until your memorable experience, I completely agree with the top part; immaterial-spiritual (I'd say mental falls soundly under spiritual) and meat eating provoking (at least slight) cognitive dissonance (as in, compassion for animals held in the same hand that would love to be cutting into a thick porter house) etc...

Then you went off into another realm, emotional response, which is what... the "spice" of this existence? A set pattern of mostly-predictable condition dependent habitual behaviors; is that an expression of creativity or a program that is run to assist creativity?

the emotional body is very interesting, not something I understand very well.

I do understand the need to resolve dissonance, and belief systems seem to fit the bill nicely there, but unless a belief system is so widely held that it can be taken as common knowledge; well using it as a reference in a conversation with who, I assume, you either take the forum for granted as fellow believers in your chosen (usually imposed from child hood) religion or you just assume your belief system is the only truth there is; if that were your audience the tact would be acceptable. However, should your audience not hold these base beliefs then your references break down a fruitful discussion rather quickly.

true belief cannot be refuted by others; that's why I'm casual in all things that I can be... haha


quick question though:

why is your solution to eating meant (killing living animals) just to simplify the living thing to a level you can accept. If something meats(hehe) the definition of "life" does it still have to meet a second threshold that it becomes "immoral" to end? Why does this dissonance persevere where others don't ?

or do we only like complex living things, simple life is disposable.

So lets go back to

Posted by amor (here)
Two comments here. First on "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual." My version is that we are a creation of the mind of God which, essentially, must have the attributes of the most advanced paralell computer of unlimited memory. The object may be to create a companion for God who may be lonely and, much like myself, explores the internet to avoid brain death from boredom.

Now, that's a fine start; I agree with this a lot though I had not considered us seeking to create permanent polarity for our selves.... to destroy "oneness" into "me" and "you"... I'm not sure what i think about that... I could see it being very attractive to the omnipotent/omniscient source field (called god? I doubt it needs a label for itself) but I don't think it'd go quite that far.

My theory is that we are all just different parts of source, playing a very complex game with ourselves so that we can experience our selves objectively, so if I change (eat) part of me, that's still me, what really matters in that action?

Intent

Some people brand themselves for decorative body art, others cut themselves for masochistic mental instabilities; between the two actions, what is the real difference?

Anyway,

My solution to the problem is that we realize that we are of the whole, that it is us and there is no vacuum, but "it" is everywhere & powered by the magic magnetic-gravito-electric field we refer to as electricity that we hardly understand how to harness.

Is that what living off Prana is? since we live in a fractal universe, no concept can exist with out being actually possible... that's why quotes like "there is no such thing as Science Fiction" work; if we can think of it, we will do it... or so it seems.

[DeDukshyn]

Even though I am against mass farming of animals for meat, and against whaling completely I stopped at " ... meat eating idiots".

[jake gittes]

I do not condone the killing of whales, dolphins, etc, and at some point I probably should give up eating meat entirely, if not for my health benefits, but to support what is unfortunately the horrible existence of slaughterhouse animals.

I disagree, however, with Watson's overpopulation fear porn. Populations would seek their own levels if TPTB didn't over-control and cater everything to the benefit of corporations and the elite.