http://chrisabraham.com/2008/04/06/cook-the-whale-eat-the-whale/#title

The first development will be brutal, bloody and shocking to many people who might be under the impression that whaling is a thing of the past. But the second may be even more significant for whale welfare in the long term, for it would pave the way for an eventual resumption of commercial whaling, which the 1986 moratorium put on indefinite hold.

Japan is leading the way on both counts. Its whaling fleet is firing harpoons right now in the Antarctic Ocean, hunting 935 minke whales, more than double the number it took last year, all of them under the guise of “scientific” whaling – killing the animals allegedly for research purposes. This label is a fiction which fools no one, as whale meat, popular with Japanese consumers, is sold on the open market.

It is also hunting 10 endangered fin whales – the second-largest animal on earth, after the blue whale – and over the next two years will seek to harpoon 40 more fin whales, and 50 humpbacks, the big whales whose spectacular “breaching” – leaping from the water – delights observers on whale-watching cruises.

Norway, which is pursuing commercial whaling openly by simply declining to adhere to the moratorium, is following close behind, with another leap in its planned kills in the coming year. Four days before Christmas, the Norwegian government announced it would increase its 2006 whale hunting quota by a further 250 animals to 1,052, following a unanimous recommendation by the Storting (Norwegian parliament).

Iceland, which recommenced whaling three years ago, also under the “scientific” label, killed 39 minkes last year and is expected to hunt a similar number in 2006.

That all adds up to by far the bloodiest bout of whale slaughter since the days of full-scale commercial whaling and has greatly angered environmental campaigners.

Do u see whats happening or are u too absorbed in your little try to get attention
we need to help them, they cant help themselves, because people cause them harm, its only right that people help them

I am positive that I am not the stupidest person you have ever heard speak in your life, of that I am certain.

Hey there, again. I think what I am addressing with these articles is how carefully people don’t read and how completely wrong believing what you read is. Caveat lector! Let the reader beware. I try to make people consider the source, to consider what is being said.

Don’t save has never meant kill. The comprehension skills of the general populace is not my responsibilities. Here is what I do say:

If you have all of your ducks in a row, if your children are
happy and well-adjusted, if your health is good and you get enough
sleep and exercise, if you still chase your spouse around the bed
pretty regularly, and you call your mother, with energy to spare for
yourself, then you have the right to save the whales.

I think maybe you just read the title only because none of the rest of the article says “kill the whales.”

If the whales have friends like all the people who have responded to my article then they don’t need enemies.

Besides, the people who think they’re really saving the whales by writing a check while still using plastics and driving and not motoring their inflatable between a whaling ship and a whale are naive.

Maybe I wrote the title the way I did to sensationally get you to read the article. Sadly, nobody reads the article, they get stuck on the title.

Tell me in a sentence what the artice is about. If it makes it easier for you then picture the title as being “Save Your Family.” Is that better?