Wales
Jun 20th 2005 | 3:50 am
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wales
ULSAN, South Korea To the dismay of conservationists, pro-whaling
countries appeared set to take a majority on Monday in the
International Whaling Commission for the first time since a moratorium
on whaling was imposed in 1986.
A Japanese proposal to delete discussion of whale sanctuaries from the
five-day meeting's agenda was voted down 29-28 in what was seen as a
test of whether whaling advocates had built a majority among the 66
members of the International Whaling Commission.
A majority would give pro-whaling countries broad authority to set the
commission's agenda. However, it would still fall far short of the
three-fourths vote required to overturn the moratorium on commercial
whaling.
The Cambridge, England-based commission that regulates whaling banned
commercial hunts in 1986, handing environmentalists a major victory in
protecting species that were near extinction after centuries of
whaling.
Norway holds the world's only commercial whaling season in defiance of
the ban. Japan kills whales for what it describes as scientific
research, but sells the meat. Japan, Norway and other countries are
expected to take more than 1,550 whales this year.
New Zealand, Australia and conservationist groups such as Greenpeace
oppose any expansion of whaling.
Japan is against new whale sanctuaries and proposed that the issue -
and others opposed by pro-whaling countries - be pushed off the agenda.
The African countries of Gambia, Togo and Cameroon and the Pacific
island of Nauru became the newest members of the whaling commission
when the main session opened in the South Korean port city of Ulsan on
Monday and are expected to vote in favor of whaling states.
Although 75 percent of votes will be needed to pass policy decisions,
such as ending the moratorium on whaling, making it unlikely there will
be any major changes, whaling states could still use their newfound
majority to push the commission to shake off its protectionist image
and return to its historic roots of regulating whaling. Such a shift
would probably be opposed by countries seeking more curbs on an
activity they view as cruel and unnecessary.
"The world today will either be stepping forward into an era where
conservation and the environment really matter, or it will be stepping
back into the Dark Ages, where the people of the world think that
slaughter of whales using grenades, electric lances and shooting them
with rifles is something that we should accept," said the Australian
environment minister, Ian Campbell.
Conservation groups have accused Japan and other pro-whaling nations of
trying to win support by bringing developing states into the body with
promises of aid, a charge Japan denies.
Representatives from New Zealand, Britain and Australia, countries
staunchly opposed to whaling, said these new members would probably
side with pro-whaling nations and give those in favor of a resumption
of commercial whaling a slim majority. "The probability is very high
that the pro-whaling bloc will be able to secure a slim majority," said
Sue Lieberman, a director of the conservation group WWF International.
The slim majority will enable pro-whaling groups to set the agenda,
close down committees - such as the commission's conservation
monitoring group for environmental issues posing potential harm to
whale stocks - and pass resolutions in favor of Japan expanding its
scientific whaling program.
The commission does not regulate Japan's scientific whaling program,
which harvests hundreds of whales a year. Most of the meat, a delicacy
in Japan, ends up in upmarket restaurants.
A Japanese representative to the talks made clear that it would waste
no time in taking advantage of a new majority. "We have a long shopping
list," said Joji Morishita, the alternate commissioner of the Japanese
delegation.
The International Whaling Commission was founded in 1946 to regulate
whaling and protect the giant mammals that had been hunted to the edge
of extinction, but the rise of environmentalism has gradually made it
more protectionist in tone.
In an early victory for the conservationists, Gambia, Togo and Nauru
were not allowed to vote on an early procedural issue because it was
not clear whether they had paid their dues.
One of the more contentious items is Japan's proposal to increase its
annual intake of minke whales to 935 from 440 and to expand its hunt to
include 10 fin whales a year for the next two years. By 2007-08, Japan
wants to be allowed to hunt 40 fin whales and 50 humpback whales.
countries appeared set to take a majority on Monday in the
International Whaling Commission for the first time since a moratorium
on whaling was imposed in 1986.
A Japanese proposal to delete discussion of whale sanctuaries from the
five-day meeting's agenda was voted down 29-28 in what was seen as a
test of whether whaling advocates had built a majority among the 66
members of the International Whaling Commission.
A majority would give pro-whaling countries broad authority to set the
commission's agenda. However, it would still fall far short of the
three-fourths vote required to overturn the moratorium on commercial
whaling.
The Cambridge, England-based commission that regulates whaling banned
commercial hunts in 1986, handing environmentalists a major victory in
protecting species that were near extinction after centuries of
whaling.
Norway holds the world's only commercial whaling season in defiance of
the ban. Japan kills whales for what it describes as scientific
research, but sells the meat. Japan, Norway and other countries are
expected to take more than 1,550 whales this year.
New Zealand, Australia and conservationist groups such as Greenpeace
oppose any expansion of whaling.
Japan is against new whale sanctuaries and proposed that the issue -
and others opposed by pro-whaling countries - be pushed off the agenda.
The African countries of Gambia, Togo and Cameroon and the Pacific
island of Nauru became the newest members of the whaling commission
when the main session opened in the South Korean port city of Ulsan on
Monday and are expected to vote in favor of whaling states.
Although 75 percent of votes will be needed to pass policy decisions,
such as ending the moratorium on whaling, making it unlikely there will
be any major changes, whaling states could still use their newfound
majority to push the commission to shake off its protectionist image
and return to its historic roots of regulating whaling. Such a shift
would probably be opposed by countries seeking more curbs on an
activity they view as cruel and unnecessary.
"The world today will either be stepping forward into an era where
conservation and the environment really matter, or it will be stepping
back into the Dark Ages, where the people of the world think that
slaughter of whales using grenades, electric lances and shooting them
with rifles is something that we should accept," said the Australian
environment minister, Ian Campbell.
Conservation groups have accused Japan and other pro-whaling nations of
trying to win support by bringing developing states into the body with
promises of aid, a charge Japan denies.
Representatives from New Zealand, Britain and Australia, countries
staunchly opposed to whaling, said these new members would probably
side with pro-whaling nations and give those in favor of a resumption
of commercial whaling a slim majority. "The probability is very high
that the pro-whaling bloc will be able to secure a slim majority," said
Sue Lieberman, a director of the conservation group WWF International.
The slim majority will enable pro-whaling groups to set the agenda,
close down committees - such as the commission's conservation
monitoring group for environmental issues posing potential harm to
whale stocks - and pass resolutions in favor of Japan expanding its
scientific whaling program.
The commission does not regulate Japan's scientific whaling program,
which harvests hundreds of whales a year. Most of the meat, a delicacy
in Japan, ends up in upmarket restaurants.
A Japanese representative to the talks made clear that it would waste
no time in taking advantage of a new majority. "We have a long shopping
list," said Joji Morishita, the alternate commissioner of the Japanese
delegation.
The International Whaling Commission was founded in 1946 to regulate
whaling and protect the giant mammals that had been hunted to the edge
of extinction, but the rise of environmentalism has gradually made it
more protectionist in tone.
In an early victory for the conservationists, Gambia, Togo and Nauru
were not allowed to vote on an early procedural issue because it was
not clear whether they had paid their dues.
One of the more contentious items is Japan's proposal to increase its
annual intake of minke whales to 935 from 440 and to expand its hunt to
include 10 fin whales a year for the next two years. By 2007-08, Japan
wants to be allowed to hunt 40 fin whales and 50 humpback whales.
Jun 20th 2005 | 4:56 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
Blah !
<[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email protected] om...
> ULSAN, South Korea To the dismay of conservationists, pro-whaling
> countries appeared set to take a majority on Monday in the
> International Whaling Commission for the first time since a moratorium
> on whaling was imposed in 1986.
> A Japanese proposal to delete discussion of whale sanctuaries from the
> five-day meeting's agenda was voted down 29-28 in what was seen as a
> test of whether whaling advocates had built a majority among the 66
> members of the International Whaling Commission.
> A majority would give pro-whaling countries broad authority to set the
> commission's agenda. However, it would still fall far short of the
> three-fourths vote required to overturn the moratorium on commercial
> whaling.
> The Cambridge, England-based commission that regulates whaling banned
> commercial hunts in 1986, handing environmentalists a major victory in
> protecting species that were near extinction after centuries of
> whaling.
> Norway holds the world's only commercial whaling season in defiance of
> the ban. Japan kills whales for what it describes as scientific
> research, but sells the meat. Japan, Norway and other countries are
> expected to take more than 1,550 whales this year.
> New Zealand, Australia and conservationist groups such as Greenpeace
> oppose any expansion of whaling.
> Japan is against new whale sanctuaries and proposed that the issue -
> and others opposed by pro-whaling countries - be pushed off the agenda.
> The African countries of Gambia, Togo and Cameroon and the Pacific
> island of Nauru became the newest members of the whaling commission
> when the main session opened in the South Korean port city of Ulsan on
> Monday and are expected to vote in favor of whaling states.
> Although 75 percent of votes will be needed to pass policy decisions,
> such as ending the moratorium on whaling, making it unlikely there will
> be any major changes, whaling states could still use their newfound
> majority to push the commission to shake off its protectionist image
> and return to its historic roots of regulating whaling. Such a shift
> would probably be opposed by countries seeking more curbs on an
> activity they view as cruel and unnecessary.
> "The world today will either be stepping forward into an era where
> conservation and the environment really matter, or it will be stepping
> back into the Dark Ages, where the people of the world think that
> slaughter of whales using grenades, electric lances and shooting them
> with rifles is something that we should accept," said the Australian
> environment minister, Ian Campbell.
> Conservation groups have accused Japan and other pro-whaling nations of
> trying to win support by bringing developing states into the body with
> promises of aid, a charge Japan denies.
> Representatives from New Zealand, Britain and Australia, countries
> staunchly opposed to whaling, said these new members would probably
> side with pro-whaling nations and give those in favor of a resumption
> of commercial whaling a slim majority. "The probability is very high
> that the pro-whaling bloc will be able to secure a slim majority," said
> Sue Lieberman, a director of the conservation group WWF International.
> The slim majority will enable pro-whaling groups to set the agenda,
> close down committees - such as the commission's conservation
> monitoring group for environmental issues posing potential harm to
> whale stocks - and pass resolutions in favor of Japan expanding its
> scientific whaling program.
> The commission does not regulate Japan's scientific whaling program,
> which harvests hundreds of whales a year. Most of the meat, a delicacy
> in Japan, ends up in upmarket restaurants.
> A Japanese representative to the talks made clear that it would waste
> no time in taking advantage of a new majority. "We have a long shopping
> list," said Joji Morishita, the alternate commissioner of the Japanese
> delegation.
> The International Whaling Commission was founded in 1946 to regulate
> whaling and protect the giant mammals that had been hunted to the edge
> of extinction, but the rise of environmentalism has gradually made it
> more protectionist in tone.
> In an early victory for the conservationists, Gambia, Togo and Nauru
> were not allowed to vote on an early procedural issue because it was
> not clear whether they had paid their dues.
> One of the more contentious items is Japan's proposal to increase its
> annual intake of minke whales to 935 from 440 and to expand its hunt to
> include 10 fin whales a year for the next two years. By 2007-08, Japan
> wants to be allowed to hunt 40 fin whales and 50 humpback whales.
>
Blah !
<[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email protected] om...
> ULSAN, South Korea To the dismay of conservationists, pro-whaling
> countries appeared set to take a majority on Monday in the
> International Whaling Commission for the first time since a moratorium
> on whaling was imposed in 1986.
> A Japanese proposal to delete discussion of whale sanctuaries from the
> five-day meeting's agenda was voted down 29-28 in what was seen as a
> test of whether whaling advocates had built a majority among the 66
> members of the International Whaling Commission.
> A majority would give pro-whaling countries broad authority to set the
> commission's agenda. However, it would still fall far short of the
> three-fourths vote required to overturn the moratorium on commercial
> whaling.
> The Cambridge, England-based commission that regulates whaling banned
> commercial hunts in 1986, handing environmentalists a major victory in
> protecting species that were near extinction after centuries of
> whaling.
> Norway holds the world's only commercial whaling season in defiance of
> the ban. Japan kills whales for what it describes as scientific
> research, but sells the meat. Japan, Norway and other countries are
> expected to take more than 1,550 whales this year.
> New Zealand, Australia and conservationist groups such as Greenpeace
> oppose any expansion of whaling.
> Japan is against new whale sanctuaries and proposed that the issue -
> and others opposed by pro-whaling countries - be pushed off the agenda.
> The African countries of Gambia, Togo and Cameroon and the Pacific
> island of Nauru became the newest members of the whaling commission
> when the main session opened in the South Korean port city of Ulsan on
> Monday and are expected to vote in favor of whaling states.
> Although 75 percent of votes will be needed to pass policy decisions,
> such as ending the moratorium on whaling, making it unlikely there will
> be any major changes, whaling states could still use their newfound
> majority to push the commission to shake off its protectionist image
> and return to its historic roots of regulating whaling. Such a shift
> would probably be opposed by countries seeking more curbs on an
> activity they view as cruel and unnecessary.
> "The world today will either be stepping forward into an era where
> conservation and the environment really matter, or it will be stepping
> back into the Dark Ages, where the people of the world think that
> slaughter of whales using grenades, electric lances and shooting them
> with rifles is something that we should accept," said the Australian
> environment minister, Ian Campbell.
> Conservation groups have accused Japan and other pro-whaling nations of
> trying to win support by bringing developing states into the body with
> promises of aid, a charge Japan denies.
> Representatives from New Zealand, Britain and Australia, countries
> staunchly opposed to whaling, said these new members would probably
> side with pro-whaling nations and give those in favor of a resumption
> of commercial whaling a slim majority. "The probability is very high
> that the pro-whaling bloc will be able to secure a slim majority," said
> Sue Lieberman, a director of the conservation group WWF International.
> The slim majority will enable pro-whaling groups to set the agenda,
> close down committees - such as the commission's conservation
> monitoring group for environmental issues posing potential harm to
> whale stocks - and pass resolutions in favor of Japan expanding its
> scientific whaling program.
> The commission does not regulate Japan's scientific whaling program,
> which harvests hundreds of whales a year. Most of the meat, a delicacy
> in Japan, ends up in upmarket restaurants.
> A Japanese representative to the talks made clear that it would waste
> no time in taking advantage of a new majority. "We have a long shopping
> list," said Joji Morishita, the alternate commissioner of the Japanese
> delegation.
> The International Whaling Commission was founded in 1946 to regulate
> whaling and protect the giant mammals that had been hunted to the edge
> of extinction, but the rise of environmentalism has gradually made it
> more protectionist in tone.
> In an early victory for the conservationists, Gambia, Togo and Nauru
> were not allowed to vote on an early procedural issue because it was
> not clear whether they had paid their dues.
> One of the more contentious items is Japan's proposal to increase its
> annual intake of minke whales to 935 from 440 and to expand its hunt to
> include 10 fin whales a year for the next two years. By 2007-08, Japan
> wants to be allowed to hunt 40 fin whales and 50 humpback whales.
>
Jun 20th 2005 | 5:06 am
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
Runge wrote:
> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
> Blah !
whats o.o.t. ?
> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
> Blah !
whats o.o.t. ?
Jun 20th 2005 | 6:43 am
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
Out of topic like most postings on this group
<[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email protected]. com...
> Runge wrote:
>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
>> Blah !
> whats o.o.t. ?
>
<[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email protected]. com...
> Runge wrote:
>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
>> Blah !
> whats o.o.t. ?
>
Jun 20th 2005 | 12:35 pm
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
"Runge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Out of topic like most postings on this group
> <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
> [email protected]. com...
>> Runge wrote:
>>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
>>> Blah !
>> whats o.o.t. ?
I think the usual abbreviation is OT -- for off-topic.
Marianne
news:[email protected]...
> Out of topic like most postings on this group
> <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
> [email protected]. com...
>> Runge wrote:
>>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
>>> Blah !
>> whats o.o.t. ?
I think the usual abbreviation is OT -- for off-topic.
Marianne
Jun 20th 2005 | 4:33 pm
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
Duh
Here comes a thread o.o.t.
"Mimi" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email protected]...
> "Runge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Out of topic like most postings on this group
>> <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
>> [email protected]. com...
>>> Runge wrote:
>>>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
>>>> Blah !
>>> whats o.o.t. ?
> I think the usual abbreviation is OT -- for off-topic.
> Marianne
>
Here comes a thread o.o.t.
"Mimi" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email protected]...
> "Runge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Out of topic like most postings on this group
>> <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
>> [email protected]. com...
>>> Runge wrote:
>>>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
>>>> Blah !
>>> whats o.o.t. ?
> I think the usual abbreviation is OT -- for off-topic.
> Marianne
>
Jun 20th 2005 | 7:28 pm
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
Runge wrote:
> Duh
> Here comes a thread o.o.t.
> "Mimi" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
> [email protected]...
> >
> > "Runge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Out of topic like most postings on this group
> >>
> >> <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
> >> [email protected]. com...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Runge wrote:
> >>>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
> >>>> Blah !
> >>>
> >>> whats o.o.t. ?
> >>>
> >
> > I think the usual abbreviation is OT -- for off-topic.
> >
> > Marianne
> >
I found o.o.t.
Out On Thursday ~ Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Social Support Group For
Men and Women Aged 25 and Under gay, london, bisexual, confused,
support, group, hammersmith,
> Duh
> Here comes a thread o.o.t.
> "Mimi" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
> [email protected]...
> >
> > "Runge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Out of topic like most postings on this group
> >>
> >> <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
> >> [email protected]. com...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Runge wrote:
> >>>> You think people will r ead all that o.o.t. stuff?
> >>>> Blah !
> >>>
> >>> whats o.o.t. ?
> >>>
> >
> > I think the usual abbreviation is OT -- for off-topic.
> >
> > Marianne
> >
I found o.o.t.
Out On Thursday ~ Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Social Support Group For
Men and Women Aged 25 and Under gay, london, bisexual, confused,
support, group, hammersmith,
Jun 20th 2005 | 8:41 pm
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
"Runge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Out of topic like most postings on this group
Including the majority of yours !!!
The best way to reduce the percentage of OT postings is to make more
On-Topic posts.
news:[email protected]...
> Out of topic like most postings on this group
Including the majority of yours !!!
The best way to reduce the percentage of OT postings is to make more
On-Topic posts.
Jun 20th 2005 | 10:21 pm
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
Runge wrote:
> Duh
> Here comes a thread o.o.t.
A measure proposed by Japan to resume regulated commercial whaling has
been defeated at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting.
Japan lost a vote on its so-called revised management scheme by 29 to
23 with five states abstaining.
It is the country's second defeat on a major measure it has proposed to
the IWC, which is holding its annual meeting in Ulsan, South Korea.
Japan said its scheme would move forward sustainable commercial
whaling.
The proposal was to involve monitors stationed on whaling fleets and
testing of whales that were captured.
> Duh
> Here comes a thread o.o.t.
A measure proposed by Japan to resume regulated commercial whaling has
been defeated at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting.
Japan lost a vote on its so-called revised management scheme by 29 to
23 with five states abstaining.
It is the country's second defeat on a major measure it has proposed to
the IWC, which is holding its annual meeting in Ulsan, South Korea.
Japan said its scheme would move forward sustainable commercial
whaling.
The proposal was to involve monitors stationed on whaling fleets and
testing of whales that were captured.
Jun 21st 2005 | 2:37 am
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
On 21 Jun 2005 07:36:15 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>your topic should have been whales
or more on topic.
--
Martin
>your topic should have been whales
or more on topic.
--
Martin
Jun 21st 2005 | 3:28 am
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
[email protected] wrote:
>your topic should have been whales
No. Wales is an appropriate topic. It's the content of the post that
is inappropriate.
I like Caernavon.
--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
>your topic should have been whales
No. Wales is an appropriate topic. It's the content of the post that
is inappropriate.
I like Caernavon.
--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
Jun 21st 2005 | 3:53 am
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
> >your topic should have been whales
> No. Wales is an appropriate topic. It's the content of the post that
> is inappropriate.
> I like Caernavon.
Caerphilly is tastier.
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
> >your topic should have been whales
> No. Wales is an appropriate topic. It's the content of the post that
> is inappropriate.
> I like Caernavon.
Caerphilly is tastier.
Jun 21st 2005 | 4:00 am
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Wales
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:53:01 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> [email protected] wrote:
>> >your topic should have been whales
>> No. Wales is an appropriate topic. It's the content of the post that
>> is inappropriate.
>> I like Caernavon.
>Caerphilly is tastier.
Wensleydale and Thursleydale are different.
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> [email protected] wrote:
>> >your topic should have been whales
>> No. Wales is an appropriate topic. It's the content of the post that
>> is inappropriate.
>> I like Caernavon.
>Caerphilly is tastier.
Wensleydale and Thursleydale are different.
--
Martin
