And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

From: "Craven, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Response to the latest polemic of the Sea Shepherd (SS)below:
August 3, 1999

- summer resorts empty as tribe prepares to kill more whales

Last spring's whale hunt by the Makah Indian tribe of Neah Bay, Washington,
has triggered a long, disastrous summer for local tourism-dependent towns
and businesses in Washington state. Occupied fishing boat slips at the
Makah marina are down from a seasonal norm of 200 to about 75, and area
resorts, at the height of the season, are surprisingly vacant. Local
chambers of commerce, while acknowledging that the Makah's nationally
televised shooting of a young Gray whale on May 17 has impacted tourism,
have attempted to put the blame on poor weather. However, fishing and whale
watching is booming just across the Canadian border in British Columbia.
(Victoria, B.C., has passed a resolution condemning the Makah hunt.)

Response to the SS: There is an elementary fallacy known as the "Fallacy of
Post hoc Ergo Propter Hoc" (After this "therefore" because of this). Here we
see it in action. For example if event Y follows event X and it is asserted
that "therefore" event Y must have been caused by event X this commits the
basic "post hoc" fallacy. Why? Because both events Y and X could both be
effects of some other cause. Or, it could be that the collection and
reporting of the data on events Y and X only give the impression of one
event following the other through non-comparable data collection/reporting
time periods. Or, it could be that there is no causal relationship at all
between events Y and X--only a spurious and superficial correlation (e.g.
Sun spots and economic cycles).

Note above this tortured logic. The claim is that it could not be poor
weather causing the drop in tourism as "right across the Canadian border in
British Columbia" supposedly--asserted without data--"fishing and whale
watching are booming." Even assuming the assertions of the SS to be correct,
and I make no such assumption, the U.S. and Canadian economies although
highly integrated, are still separate economies in some meaningful ways.
Further, there is the matter of the exchange-rates between the Canadian
Dollar and other currencies making tourism more attractive in Canada.
Further, there is the matter of the extent of capitalization and pricing of
tourism in Canada relative to the operations from the U.S. In short, there
are many critical variables influencing levels of demand for various forms
of tourism as well as demand differentials between adjacent places.

Finally if indeed the whale hunt had some effect on discouraging whale
watching, and not even one interview of a turned-away potential tourist was
even offered (surprisingly given the SS's and self-proclaimed "Captain" Paul
(legend-in his own-mind) Watson's demonstrated penchant for outright
falsifications of data and opinions attributed to others) why not assume
that what was is discouraging tourism is the harassment of Makah whalers by
the SS? It would appear to be a more logical assumption as without the
harassment of the SS and the media it draws the whale watchers would likely
not even know or be in a position to see the Makah whale hunt.
The National Marine Fisheries Service is investigating the possibility that
the Gray whale the Makah shot on May 17 was a "resident" whale. The Makah
have announced they will hunt again when the whales start to migrate south
in October, and may take a whale before their Makah Days celebration August
28. "They were out practicing on the water last week," said Captain Paul
Watson, president of Sea Shepherd. "They're getting ready to go out again,
and they're talking about taking as many as five whales."

Sea Shepherd notes that the tribe is now proposing to go hunting just after
a spring Gray whale migration that had the highest mortality rate ever
recorded. Scientists are unsure as to the cause. Opinion polls and
Washington newspapers have reported overwhelming public opposition to the
Makah hunt.


Response to the SS: Note the above disjointed and unrelated--and
undocumented--assertions. Simple plays to emotion. What "Washington
newspapers" and what "opinion polls" have pointed out what "overhwelming
oppoistion"? What are the sample sizes of the opinion polls? Who
commissioned and who carried out the polls? What were the questions posed?
And even if the above were true, so what? Newspapers and opinion polls once
vigorously supported and then completely turned around on the Vietnam War
and so many other issues.?

"One more whale hunt will be devastating for tourism in northwest
Washington state," said SSCS International Director Lisa Distefano. "This
is a region dependent on sport fishing, whale watching and tourism, and
those industries start suffering major damage from one more year of this

Response to SS:
Here they quote SSCS (Sea Shepherd Conservation Society) Director Lis
Distefano's self-interested OPINION as "EVIDENCE" that the case has been
made of a causal relationship between the Makah Whale Hunt and loss of
tourism in general; they make the leap from a causal relationship between
the Makah Whale Hunt and loss of whale watching tourism and then theh next
leap in logic and lack of evidence to losses of sport fishing and general
tourism supposedly caused by the Makah Whale Hunt. Indeed although there are
some common determinants of supply and demand for all forms of tourism,
there are also unique determinants governing supply and demand for specific
forms of tourism such that this grotesque leap of logic simply cannot be
sustained by any reasonable person.

"We strongly suggest that the business leaders of the affected communities
get in touch with their state representatives and tell them they're not
going to take 'it's out of our jurisdiction' as an excuse any more. The
state needs to seek relief from the tragic policies and actions of the
federal government that are perpetuating this blood sacrifice in U.S.

Although there is a whale-hunting clause in the Makah's 1855 treaty with
the United States, Sea Shepherd and many other environmental organizations
have pointed out that the U.S.-sanctioned hunt can in fact only be
authorized by the International Whaling Commission. The IWC has refused to
recognize any subsistence need on the part of the Makah to hunt whales. The
U.S. government, in attempting to honor its obligation to the Makah treaty,
is thus violating its obligation to uphold the Convention of the IWC, to
which it is signatory.

Response to SS:
Here is where we get to see the naked racism of the Sea Racists so clearly.
Supposedly the US is to "honor" its Treaty obligations when referring to the
IWC Convention, but not when it comes to the 1855 Treaty with the Makah.
Further Nations do not make Treaties with individuals or even groups of
their own citizens--only with sovereign nations. The US Government has no
right under International Law, Common Law of Nations, the Vienna Convention
of indeed under Article VI Sec 2 of the U.S. Constitution to sign a
convention in the name of or binding another sovereign nation especially
when that would summarily abrogate another and preexisting Treaty with
another Sovereign Nation.

Here the SS arrogates to determine what forms of life are worthy of
protection and what peoples and cultures are not. The Makah and other Indian
Peoples and Cultures are far closer to extinction than any Gray Whales.
Further, as the Makah have signed and have honored (far beyond honoring) the
terms of the 1855 Treaty, no one can enforce new terms on an old Treaty
without their consent. That is what sovereignty and internationa law on
treaties is all about. Here just as the SS arrogates to define what life
forms and cultures are worth protecting and not protecting, so they arrogant
to summarily declare what Treaties are worth honoring and what are not worth
honoring. Their naked racism is naked.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society successfully deployed its ships and
small craft to curtail hunting efforts in Neah Bay for several months in
1998, and has proposed Congressional legislation to return a portion of
former Makah lands to the tribe in exchange for an amendment of the whaling
clause in the treaty that ceded the land to the United States in 1855. The
Sea Shepherd proposal is available on the World Wide Web at

Response to the SS:
How many of these SS have even talked with the Makah Tribal Council? How
many of them have even been to the Makah Reservation?  In any case, the SS
cannot "propose" Congressional Legislation--only one of their bought (bought
from donations to the SS or from monies from the known anti-Indian and
anti-Treaty racists and anti-Semites/Holocaust revisionists nominally
supporting the SS) legislators can do that. In any case what they are
proposing is more legislation to summarily abrogate an existing Treaty and
impose some new terms without any concern for how the Makah might feel about
that. This is why they are properly called racists; that is what racism is
all about: "We will define "life worthy of life" (Hitler loved dogs); We
will define what cultures and what Treaties are worth protecting and

How about if the Government of China tells the US what existing treaties it
will honor and what it will not? How about if the Government of China tells
the U.S. what animal or plant forms it may kill and harvest for food and
culture and what forms it may not? How about if the Government of China
tells the U.S. what amendments to existing Treaties it declares and what the
US must in turn accept? 

These SS are nothing new; their hubris, duplicity, lack of command of
elementary reasoning, intentions and their hidden agenda are quite like the
SS of some 66 years ago in Germany--genocide and white privilege under the
banners of various self-defined "sacred"  causes.
Jim Craven

Reprinted under the Fair Use doctrine 
of international copyright law.
           Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit)
                      Unenh onhwa' Awayaton
            UPDATES: CAMP JUSTICE    

Reply via email to