John Thiel tries to delete his undesired history about our refutation of the Australian court’s jurisdiction over Antarctic waters.

John Thiel(Facebook / LinkedIn) often posts comments on the Facebook page of Japan Today. I don’t know what he says about the other topics of Japan well. But on its post of the Australian court’s rule against our whaling vessels , facing our refutation of its jurisdiction over Antarctic waters by Yamamoto San, Tricia Wiles, and me, he deleted his comment thread including our replies and reposted the same comment. So he tried to delete his undesired history about our refutation.

John Thiel(* the start of the thread. Scription from my capture):

I wouldn’t mind if someone if someone sank just one of their ships.

If you ask me, Australia should board and seize the whole fleet, and arrest the crews.

Emmanuel Chanel (* Scription from my capture):
LoL! looks that you don’t know Antarctic Treaty. Australia has no jurisdiction over our whaling vessels because of that. Are you really a graduate of Harvard, huh? In Japan, such your ignorance is excused by the words like “I don’t have degree of law!”, “I didn’t go to college.”, or so.(*)

(* Note of typo: is excused -> is not excused )

—–

Antarctic Treaty
(Omitted)
Article IV

[territorial claims]

1. Nothing contained in the present Treaty shall be interpreted as:

(a) a renunciation by any Contracting Party of previously asserted rights of or claims to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica;

(b) a renunciation or diminution by any Contracting Party of any basis of claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica which it may have whether as a result of its activities or those of its nationals in Antarctica, or otherwise;

(c) prejudicing the position of any Contracting Party as regards its recognition or nonrecognition of any other State’s right of or claim or basis of claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica.

2. No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force.
http://www.nsf.gov/geo/plr/antarct/anttrty.jsp

http://www.ats.aq/documents/ats/treaty_original.pdf

John Thiel(* Scription from my capture):
In Japan the tradition is to give an answer even when you don’t actually have one, as you have done here. Japanese people will self-disparage their remarks, but only as a sort of conceited, fake modesty.

Therefore I’ll put this in simple language so you can learn:

They have jurisdiction over the waters. Even without Atlantic Treaty, Australia has jurisdiction–that’s the (a) territorial sovereignty part.

The USA has absolutely nothing to do with it except as a party to the treaty. No idea why you brought that up.

Australia cannot (b) renounce its sovereignty over those waters by contract. In other words, if they don’t enforce the treaty then they’re breaking it, and can be held liable as well as criminally accountable.

And (c), a contract for whaling does not supersede sovereignty, the rule of law or the treaty.

I do actually know what I’m doing, but you apparently don’t. I’m a qualified professional; you are not.

But by all means, bring in your next fake troll account and try the personal attac tactic again.

Note: John Thiel shows ignorance of the fact that he needs to check the interpretation of the parties’ governments when he discuss treaties.

The Antarctic Treaty “freezes” the positions of both claimants and non-claimants and thereby permits its Parties to undertake cooperative activities and agree on collective regulation of those activities, without prejudice to their legal positions.

From http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1996/nstc96rp/chii.htm

In addition, he miscall the treaty Atlantic Treaty. It shows that he doesn’t know anything actually.

Yamamoto San (* Scription from my capture):
“Australia should board and seize” – Australia has no authority to board Japanese vessels in international waters.
“They have jurisdiction over the waters” – only in their own territorial waters.
“territorial sovereignty part.” – the problem is that it’s not Australia’s territorial waters. The so called Australian Antarctic territory is self-claimed, only 4 other countries in the world recognize it, Japan is not one of them. It is international waters as far as Japan is concern. Australia knows full well their legal rights, hence they never enforce it fully.
John Thiel (* Scription from my capture):
They are not international waters. They are Australian waters.

[Source URI Capture FTP / HTTP]

I missed the capture of Tricia Wiles’ comments on the thread. But her text is like this.

Tricia Wiles
If you’re so tough John, why dont you do it? Or will you block then bomb as you did here? And no doubt will do again in response to my comment, the coward you are. No “personal attack” was made upon you, I’d suggest you merely had ball shrinkage at being wrong. And you ARE wrong, even scant reading of the appropriately valid documentation from the appropriate sources will reveal to persons of even average intellect such as myself (in simple language so you can learn):Australia does NOT have jurisdiction.The Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary is not in the Australian Territorial waters, EEZ, OR Antarctic *CLAIM*.In fact it’s not in *ANY* nation’s territorial waters, EEZ or *claim.There are several areas *claimed* by two nations, and an area *claimed* by three nations – UK, Argentina AND Chile.

A claim is not ownership.

A treaty is not sovereignty.

Australia has no sovereignty in the area to renounce.

“Criminally accountable” LOL!!

Whaling is legal in 12 nations.

Whaling is legal in international waters.

Scientific whaling is legal in international waters AND the SOWS.

Whaling does not occur IN the SOWS, but near it.

In fact their research is part of what enables the SOWS to LEGALLY retain it’s sanctuary status.

You know what you’re doing? REALLY?

What exactly IS your “qualification” John? It sure as shit isn’t international maritime law, Australian Law OR Scientific whaling Law.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.496287240407226

Tricia Wiles If whaling WAS illegal AND Australia HAD jurisdiction it WOULD interfere. The fact it doesnt should say a lot to a harvard grad…. PFFFF

John Thiel cannot face the truth on our replies. So he post this thread start again.

John Thiel Australia should board and seize the whole fleet, and arrest the crews.

2 December at 00:31

[Source FTP / HTTP]

Tricia Wiles John Thies, you coward –

If you’re so tough John, why dont you do it? Or will you block then bomb as you did here? And no doubt will do again in response to my comment, the coward you are. (HE DID EXACTLY THAT!) No “personal attack” was made upon you, I’d suggest you merely had ball shrinkage at being wrong. And you ARE wrong, even scant reading of the appropriately valid documentation from the appropriate sources will reveal to persons of even average intellect such as myself (in simple language so you can learn):

Australia does NOT have jurisdiction.

The Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary is not in the Australian Territorial waters, EEZ, OR Antarctic *CLAIM*.

In fact it’s not in *ANY* nation’s territorial waters, EEZ or *claim.

There are several areas *claimed* by two nations, and an area *claimed* by three nations – UK, Argentina AND Chile.

A claim is not ownership.

A treaty is not sovereignty.

Australia has no sovereignty in the area to renounce.

“Criminally accountable” LOL!!

Whaling is legal in 12 nations.

Whaling is legal in international waters.

Scientific whaling is legal in international waters AND the SOWS.

Whaling does not occur IN the SOWS, but near it.

In fact their research is part of what enables the SOWS to LEGALLY retain it’s sanctuary status.

You know what you’re doing? REALLY?

What exactly IS your “qualification” John? It sure as shit isn’t international maritime law, Australian Law OR Scientific whaling Law.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.496287240407226

Unlike · Reply · 2 · December 2 at 5:46pm

Emmanuel Chanel John Tiehl blocks me and Tricia Wiles. Probably, Yamamoto San, too. He repeats same word: “Australia should board and seize the whole fleet, and arrest the crews.” with deleting the thread itself. So he can’t face the truth.

(Omitted. The copies of the deleted comment.)

Like · Reply · December 2 at 6:24pm

Tricia Wiles harvard grad – in “social sciences” – yet he’s behaving like a proper amoeba here, spreading hateful lies, and backbiting people he blocks because he doesnt like the TRUTH.

I doubt he passed…

Unlike · Reply · 1 · December 2 at 6:26pm

[Source URI Capture FTP / HTTP]

Commentary

  • Feeling difficulty, I asked Yamamoto San and Tricia Wiles to help me. And with https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.496287240407226 , Tricia Wiles refutes John Thiel far more than I expected.
  • John Thiel is an unexpectedly dishonest dolphin freak. So if you want to refute him, remember to capture your arguments before he deletes his inconvenient history. He is no respectable as all anti-whaling foreigners are so. In Japan, we, so-called right wing Japanese people would be ashamed of unfairness if we reposted the thread in such his way. It’s not what proud people do.
  • John Thiel calls out Australia to sink our whaling vessels that act legal research. He shows his terroristic mentality by that.

2 thoughts on “John Thiel tries to delete his undesired history about our refutation of the Australian court’s jurisdiction over Antarctic waters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*