We heard the story about the Sea Shepherds throwing bottles of acid at Japanese whalers, right? Well, now there seems to be some controversy as to whether or not the captain of the protesting ship was shot during the exchange. How there could be debate as to whether someone took a bullet or not, I don't know? It seems like someone getting hit with a bullet would be pretty obvious.

The captain of the Steve Irwin -- the protesters' vessel -- claims that he owes his life to a bulletproof kevlar vest he wore during the protests. Paul Watson (pictured) claims he was struck by a bullet in shoulder during the latests of many encounters between his group and the whalers. While wearing a kevlar vest is surely not a bad precaution, it seems a little strange to be wearing one in a self-proclaimed 'non-violent' protest -- like you're expecting to get shot at.

Japanese coastguard officials were assigned to the whaling ships after a string of escalating clashes between whalers and protesters, and they were armed with pistols -- although Japanese authorities claim that no shots were fired. The Australian fisheries ministry had at first reported that the Japanese had fired "warning shots." Then they clarified that only flash grenades had been used, saying that Watson "must have heard the bang of the flash grenade and got a shock."

It's hard to know who to believe here. Even Watson admits that "I didn't see anyone shoot at me," perhaps the "bullet" was actually shrapnel from a grenade. I'm sure there's no lack of video evidence documenting the whole event. So what's really going on here? Is the Japanese government trying to cover up an itchy trigger finger? Or, are the protesters trying to spark an international incident to draw attention to their cause?