•    Mass Extermination is Not Euthanasia   

    Scales of Balanced Justice

    TO:  All Media Outlets & WSYR Channel 9 News

    RE:  Stop Calling Mass Extermination & Genocide Euthanasia

    Abstract: In order to protect animals from abuse – we must first be candid and HONEST about what abuses are routinely taking place right under our noses. Typically, the media lacks this kind of candor and honesty. But HERE we disclose the naked, lamentable TRUTH lurking behind the whitewash media euphemisms.

    The term “Euthanasia” is being abused on a massive epidemic scale. And it doesn’t seem to matter whether it’s erudite, highly educated professional journalists at the New York Times \ Washington Post or recent high school grads at the local newspaper. This term is being misused to describe killing that does not qualify as “Euthanasia.” Even many animal rights activists and no-kill animal shelters can often be heard abusing this counterfeit term (it’s a counterfeit term when used to describe genocide).

    So the task here is to understand WHY this is happening on such a massive scale. This entails identifying the reasons for — the “causes” of — this pernicious, intractable practice of fraudulently labeling genocide. Such an inquiry leads us to two primary reasons for the fraudulent abuse of the term “Euthanasia”:  1) Definition Confusion; 2) The deliberate, calculated, intentional effort to deceive, conceal, distort, misrepresent, and candy-coat acts of killing that are deemed so morally unacceptable that society would be sickened, outraged and appalled if they knew the ‘truth’ — so those who commit those acts are bent on concealing the ‘truth’ with lies, half-truths, fraudulent counterfeit terms and euphemisms.  Regarding this second reason, a profoundly bizarre phenomena has wrapped itself around the initial core problem, by way of by-stander witnesses and journalists, analysts and experts, academics and pundits — who are complicit, unwittingly or not, in the conspiracy to deceive. Perhaps it’s a journalist who feels obliged to regurgitate the terms handed to him (this is not journalism it’s a secretary “taking dictation”) or perhaps it’s an entrenched favorable bias for the accused killer(s).  The bottom line is that there are a wide variety of reasons for engaging in the deception, which range from political and moral to economic and judicial.

    Media accounts about the mass slaughter of Canadian Geese in New York kept calling it “Euthanasia.” The Media stories I’m referring to repeatedly talked about the mass “Euthanization” of Canadian Geese for a variety of alleged reasons ranging from “over population” (a human convenience standard) to “nuisance eye-sore” (a human convenience standard) to air traffic safety (another human convenience standard). Mass Extermination is Not Euthanasia and it never will be — no matter how many times a society or a Hitler butcher’s the human language to make that claim.

    The term “Euthanize” only applies when it is done SOLELY for the benefit of the Euthanized animal or person, to alleviate excruciating, unrelenting pain and suffering of that animal or person, and only where that animal is in an irreversible terminal medical condition, where there is no hope of recovery and the pain and suffering is both pointless and inhumane (pointless in the sense that it is NOT pain briefly endured during a recovery period). In such cases Euthanasia is a last resort because they cannot be medically cured of their injuries, disease or illness and they are suffering enormous pain from their incurable illness.  (fn 2 & 7).

    Virtually every respected dictionary and encyclopedia defines Euthanasia as:  “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.” (Miriam-Webster & Encyclopedia Britannica – fn 2 & 7). Sometimes referred to as “Mercy Killing,” it is unmistakably clear that the sole purpose of the mercy killing is to alleviate the needless, excruciating and extreme suffering of the terminally ill creature being killed. With true Euthanasia – the creature being killed is the SOLE beneficiary.   There is no other ‘ulterior’ motive — no other intended beneficiary — no other collateral purpose or interest being served when TRUE “Euthanasia” is implemented.

    It is imperative that we understand the profoundly Dark History entailed by the abuse and misuse of the term “Euthanize.”  It has deep roots in the Nazi propaganda machine that served Hitler’s “Final Solution” for achieving genetic purity of the race (Eugenics Program), as they too sought to clear the streets of the ‘rift-raft’ — the physically disabled, the mentally disabled, the elderly, the gays, the gypsies, the Jews and the non-Aryans — just as society today seeks to clear the streets of the ‘rift-raft’ — the homeless wandering dogs and cats deemed to be a ‘nuisance’ and an eye-sore. Hitler and the Nazi Regime called this genocide plan the “T4 Euthanasia Program”  (fn 3-6).

    Hitler knew that if he called it what it really was, “Extermination,” there would have been a mass revolt. But Hitler noticed that the animal shelters routinely abused and misused the counterfeit term “Euthanasia” to describe the wholesale slaughter of healthy animals — merely because they could not find homes for them and they were perceived as a ‘nuisance’. And Hitler immediately realized that society had completely accepted this fraudulent, wholly inappropriate use of this counterfeit term. So he shrewdly falsified what he was doing by calling his genocidal extermination plan the “T4 Euthanasia Program” knowing that most people deem Euthanasia to be a compassionate ‘humanitarian’ act of kindness and benevolence, rather than a ruthless, senseless, sociopathic genocide.  (fn 3-6). It is imperative that we never, ever forget the enormous danger and dire consequences emanating from the desensitization of a society through the constant, routine, calculated falsification of the meaning of the term Euthanasia. We simply cannot allow this term to be hijacked and bastardized, yet again, by a similar brand of sociopaths.

    Killing one being, taking one life, solely for the benefit of ‘another’ (namely the ones doing the killing) is NOT, I repeat, is NOTEuthanasia” in any sense of that term and that term should never, ever be used to describe such conduct.

    Media accounts about the mass slaughter of Canadian Geese in New York kept calling it “euthanasia.” It would appear that all those engaged in this “Mass Extermination Program” and all those in the media reporting about it, are acutely aware of how immoral, inexcusable, unethical, unjustifiable, reprehensible and indefensible this “Mass Extermination Program” really was, otherwise there would be no need to cover it up with fraudulent, sham euphemisms, as the Nazi’s did. If the Extermination of the Canadian Geese is so defensible and honorable and morally justifiable, then come right out and call it exactly what it is — the Mass Extermination & Genocide of perfectly healthy Canadian Geese purely for human convenience reasons, and in no way is it Euthanasia for the benefit of the geese.

    These geese were “Exterminated” purely for human convenience, and that makes the term “Euthanize” totally inapplicable and reprehensible. The ‘human convenience’ is that the humans saved themselves the time, the expense and inconvenience of solving the Canadian Geese problem in an intelligent, non-violent, humanitarian manner. One way or another, this ‘rift-raft’ was going to be discarded — either to a relocation center or to an incinerator. They chose the lazy, unintelligent, sociopathic, ruthless solution — the ‘incinerator’ method, just as Hitler’s “Final Solution” did.

    Killing one being, taking one life solely, for the benefit of ‘another’ (namely the ones doing the killing) is called social engineering “EXTERMINATION” — regardless of whether the killing ‘method’ is deemed to be humane. It is precisely what Hitler’s Nazi Regime did with humans — they “EXTERMINATED” them for the twisted perceived benefit of society (the Supreme Aryan Race) under his demented social engineering notion of a genetically pure race of human beings.  (fn 3-6). The mass slaughter of perfectly healthy beings — merely because they are deemed to be rift-raft — a ‘nuisance’ — How does that ever, EVER come to be described as “Euthanasia?”

    Therefore the media and everyone else should STOP calling these Mass Extermination & Genocide crusades “Euthanasia” since that term absolutely does NOT apply. And the fact that this term does NOT apply is not a gray-area of uncertainty or a debatable point today any more than it was when Hitler deliberately and strategically abused the term to facilitate his Mass Extermination & Genocide agenda. Take a good hard look at these words — Mass Extermination & Genocide — because that is what humans have been doing to animals at kill-shelters — NOT “Euthanasia” as everyone is fraudulently claiming.

    Definition Confusion:  This is the most common reason for the general population — which could include many thoughtless journalists, commentators, pundits and observers who adopted the counterfeit use of the term Euthanasia without ever giving it a second thought — without ever giving it any kind of scrutiny whatsoever. This is particularly astonishing, given how terribly simple and obvious the error is. People have come to erroneously believe that if someone kills in a manner that causes no pain or trauma — if someone kills “humanely” — then it is Euthanasia. So the animal kill-shelter that kills 3,000 perfectly healthy cats each year because they couldn’t find homes for them — they are said to have “Euthanized” the cats merely because they did it in a humane manner.

    The point is that many people erroneously think that the definition for “Animal Euthanasia” is “when an animal is humanely killed” — i.e., when the killing ‘method’ is deemed to be humane.  That is 10 million light-years from the true definition. And just a modest amount of simple common-sense is all that is needed to discover the error. There is no separate definition for human animals versus non-human animals. The term “Euthanize” is the same for each. To uncover the truth simply try applying the erroneous definition to a variety of different, yet comparable, circumstances. Suppose a disgruntled neighbor injects your happy, healthy pet with the same drug that kill-shelters use to kill cats — does that make the killing of your pet Euthanasia? Of course not. In the U.S. many death-row inmates are executed by humane methods (according to the U.S. Supreme Court) each year and no one is suggesting that the inmates were “Euthanized.” Slaughter houses claim that they kill millions of animals each year by ‘humane methods’ — while federal, state and local governments have concurred that the killing methods are humane. Yet no one is calling this Euthanasia. They correctly refer to it as the wholesale “slaughter” of animal life.

    Animal shelters that kill thousands of healthy cats and dogs each year because they cannot find homes for them are called “kill-shelters.” Animal shelters that do not are called “no-kill” shelters. Yet the media and the kill-shelters and the public — and even many no-kill shelters — will refer to the kill-shelter killings as “Euthanizing” those perfectly healthy cats and dogs. This is a case where common usage has completely jumped the tracks, so that a term has come to mean its exact opposite. But we can’t be complacent about the abuse of THIS term because it has a profoundly dark history — tracing back to Hitler’s “T4 Euthanasia” program — which in truth was the “Final Solution’ extermination program. We simply cannot allow this term to be hijacked and bastardized, yet again, by a similar brand of psychopaths. Or even by unwitting dolts.

    Animal Shelters – Animal Rights Groups:  What is most unfathomable is the fact that many animal shelters and animal rights groups have so unwittingly signed-on to this grotesque abuse of the term Euthanasia. You hear it most often when they talk about their noble and admirable “mission” to significantly “reduce the number of cats and dogs Euthanized each year.” The twisted irony is that when the term is fraudulently misused in this way it is weaponized as a euphemism in order to falsify, distort, conceal and candy-coat the reality of what is actually taking place — the wide-scale SLAUGHTER, KILLING, EXTERMINATION of perfectly healthy animals by the thousands — by the millions — merely because society has determined they are a “rift-raft” nuisance eye-sore in the neighborhood communities. What many animal shelters and animal rights groups have failed to realize is that by weaponizing the term as a euphemism it has made it infinitely EASIER for people to abandon pets and to sweep the neighborhoods clean of the nuisance rift-raft — because “Euthanasia is such a kind, compassionate, caring, benevolent thing to do to animals.” What a bitter, brutal irony that is. And so many members of these groups are completely clueless — oblivious of this undeniable horrific consequence of routinely acquiescing to the abominable torture and abuse of the term “Euthanasia.” Even the notorious PETA organization often abuses this term. The blistering irony is that Hitler’s propaganda campaign to trivialize his extermination program as merely Euthanasia was stolen from the animal shelters’ playbook of flagrant, perpetual abuse of that term to describe the routine wholesale slaughter of thousands of perfectly healthy animals — at what they disgustingly called “shelters” for homeless animals. The term “shelter” — when not fraudulently hijacked — usually means “safe haven” — “refuge of protection.”

    Animal Shelters – Animal Rights Groups:  What animal shelters and animal rights groups should realize is that they, themselves, invariably use the terms “kill-shelter” and “no-kill shelter.” These terms are universally recognized by these groups. They do NOT use the terms “euthanasia-shelter” and “non-euthanasia-shelter.” So there is already this very feint, hazy, inarticulate recognition that what’s really going on is the wide-scale SLAUGHTER, KILLING, EXTERMINATION of perfectly healthy animals — NOT the kind, compassionate, caring, benevolent “euthanizing” of animals. The message here is unmistakably clear. If you want to truly educate the public about the importance of being responsible pet owners — STOP falsifying and candy-coating the enormous dire consequences guaranteed to result from ‘irresponsible’ pet ownership — namely — “the wide-scale SLAUGHTER, KILLING, EXTERMINATION of perfectly healthy animals.” Actually, the expression “kill-shelter” is a fallacious contradiction in terms. If it is a killing fields animal warehouse facility — it most definitely is NOT a “shelter.”

    Either this action is justifiable when we call it exactly what it is (Mass Extermination & Genocide) or it is NOT justifiable when we call it exactly what it is (Mass Extermination & Genocide). In either case, falsifying the accounts of what is taking place by deliberately using what, ipso facto, is a patently fraudulent, inaccurate counterfeit term (“Euthanasia“) to misrepresent what is going on, is most definitely morally and ethically and logically repulsive, wrong and logically\morally indefensible. If it is too horrible and too ugly and too disturbing to think about what it really is (Mass Extermination & Genocide) then clearly it is something humans should NOT be doing.

    We urge the media to STOP calling these Mass Extermination & Genocide crusades “Euthanasia.”   Just because some business or government entity attempts to defraud the media with a counterfeit term, does not mean the media is licensed or obliged to pass that fraud onto the general public as though it had legal tender status. We simply cannot afford to have the media, the Fourth Branch of Government, constantly falling asleep at the wheel, shirking its responsibility to the truth, sucking down every flim-flam sham counterfeit term that some fast-talking, sociopathic snake-oil salesman decides to panhandle — and then dispensing that fraudulent tripe to the public as though it was the Gospel truth. 98% of what humans consume from the media is NOT verbatim quotes, but rather, paraphrased summaries — it’s an editorial license to paraphrase. We implore the media to exercise an honest, ethical standard of human decency and refuse to paraphrase “Mass Extermination & Genocide” as “Euthanasia.” We urge the media to question those who dispense the fraudulent use of the term and to challenge the appropriateness of the term. And where it is necessary to include the inappropriate use of the term in a direct quote — the media should realize it is entirely appropriate, if not obligatory, to subsequently point out that the known facts are at odds with the authentic true meaning of that term.

    We urge the mass media — Please tell all news writers and reporters to STOP misusing and misapplying this term “Euthanasia” and call the routine wholesale slaughter of perfectly healthy animals what it really is — Mass Extermination.  STOP being the complicit hand-maidens of dishonest entities seeking to distort, conceal and falsify the truth in a determined effort to defraud and deceive the public.
            (see footnotes for authority and links below that provide correct, accurate lexical definition and use of the term “Euthanasia“).
     
    Sincerely,
    Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog

    Human Dishonesty Against Animals
    A Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog Website
    http://gbruce.com/reflect/?p=225


    The sub-heading for this CBS News whitewash story reads: “Mass Euthanization of Geese a Step in Goal of Clearing Geese Within 7 Miles of JFK and LaGuardia Airport.

     
     

    The Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog


     
  •    Human Dishonesty Against Animals   

    Scales of Balanced Justice

    Abstract: In order to protect animals from abuse – we must be candid and HONEST about what abuses are actually routinely taking place right under our noses. Typically, the media lacks this kind of candor and honesty. But HERE we disclose the naked, lamentable TRUTH lurking behind the whitewash media euphemisms.

    The term “Human Dishonesty Against Animals” at first blush sounds awkward. One might think, “shouldn’t it be ‘Human Dishonesty ABOUT Animals?’ ” We phrase it as “AGAINST Animals” in order to emphasize the point that this is a deliberate, calculating, intentional and intractable human attempt to demote animals to a lower ‘value’ rating than humans and to denigrate their importance while trivializing their pain and suffering — compared to human suffering. It is a strategic dishonest human exercise in “jaundiced perceptions” engaged in by humans as a matter of self-serving specie-biased convenience, very much like political boundary gerrymandering that seeks to strategically and dishonestly redraw voting district boundaries — solely to dilute the votes of a targeted group in order to rob them of their political voice in government. Human dishonesty regarding non-human animals is calculated to hide the human atrocities committed against animals while either denying or trivializing the horrific, unconscionable pain and suffering animals endure. Clearly this is AGAINST animals – while exalting and prioritizing human’s superiority complex.

    The dishonesty we are talking about is the surreptitious ‘slight-of-hand’ manipulations of so-called ‘facts’ when considering the interests of non-human animals versus the interests of human animals. Let’s start with the terms and the euphemisms. Usually we say “humans” versus “animals” — as though humans are not animals, but something ‘higher’ and more important than just ‘animals.’ We human animals tend to absolutely deplore any attempt to connect us with chimps, gorillas or the horseshoe crab, when reaching back through the biological causal chain of events for the origins of life. It’s a kind of condescending inbuilt bias humans have ‘for’ human animals and ‘against’ non-human animals.

    Then there’s the torrent of commonplace idioms and phrases humans use which desensitize people to the meaning of the expressions and trivialize the horror of the acts alluded to. Phrases like: “killing two birds with one stone” — “line-up all your ducks in a row’ — “hog tied” — “pig in a blanket” — “I ought to tan your hide” — “tougher than shoe-leather” — “We’ve got bigger fish to fry” — “easy as shooting ducks in a pond” — “red as a lobster” — “a pig in the poke” — “he flopped around like a chicken with its head cut off.”

    These phrases desensitize people to the horrors of the acts every time these phrases are used. And they trivialize the suffering behind those acts. It illustrates just how sociopathic humans have become — to be so estranged from any level of Compassion or human decency.

    We also see this bias embedded in a phalanx of other terms. When referring to non-human animals humans invariably refer to them as “it.” Most pet owners refer to their pets as “he” or “she.” The term “it” converts the creature into an object, like a rock or a table, as opposed to a sentient “being.” Occasionally one hears someone refer to an infant as an “it” and I always cringe when I hear that too. If there is uncertainty as to the gender of an infant or a non-human animal it is better to call them a “he” or a “she” and risk the 50\50 chance it might be wrong, as opposed to calling them an “it” which has a 100% guarantee that it is wrong. Whenever I hear a pet owner refer to their pet as “s\he” I always feel relieved because I feel more confident that the pet is probably in a good home – because they see their pet as a ‘being’ and not an object.

    One couldn’t help but notice the disproportionate amount of attention lavished on the human victims of the BP Gulf Oil Spill Disaster compared to the attention given to the non-human animal victims, who were suffering mind-boggling horrid deaths, while the human fishermen’s suffering was largely confined to financial losses. It’s a self-serving operating assumption of convenience, that “dead animals” are just incidental expendable “road kill” lying on the side of the road — something the Transportation Department should clear away as soon as possible so as not to create a hazard or an eye-sore for human animals. Beings are beings, and suffering is suffering. Suffering does not cease to be suffering simply because it is happening to someone else other than ourselves.

    This human dishonesty is particularly apparent when one looks at the criminal statutes and sentencing statutes for incomprehensibly horrific acts of cruelty perpetrated against non-human animals, even when they are someone’s beloved pet — a virtual, actual family member for most pet owners. The law treats animals as mere ‘property’ — “objects” – something humans ‘own’ and ‘possess,’ like a golf bag or a pair of shoes, which the law says one should be free to discard as one pleases. And if a human cruelly tortures and kills another human’s pet, the legal system holds that reimbursing the owner for the market value of the pet constitutes full and “just compensation” for their loss. The perpetrator makes out quite well when s\he tortures and kills a pet that was a pound mutt that is not a pedigree. This twisted mind-set goes beyond just being “dishonest.” It’s flat-out demented and sociopathic — and its deeply embedded in the human culture and legal system, even though pet owners most often see their pet companions as actual ‘beings’ and as actual family members.

    There’s so many ways that human dishonesty against animals manifests itself.

    There’s the dishonest flim-flam ‘slight-of-hand’ dishonesty that goes on in the Animal Experimentation debates. It especially happens when the argument hones in on WHY it is morally impermissible to experiment on humans. The answer is always the same — “because of the pain, suffering and death it would inflict on the human, where that human is not the targeted beneficiary of the experiment.” Yet this reason would also apply to animals. There’s not a single aspect of that ‘reason’ that does not also apply to animals. Yet, in every Animal Experimentation debate I have ever participated in, there is a staunch refusal to honestly admit that this would apply to non-human animals as well as humans and would make such experimentation equally immoral. What one always hears as a rebuttal at these debates comes in the way of pettifoggery — Machiavellian double-talk — as Ph.D. experimenters argue that “we do not know with any degree of certainty that animals suffer as humans do.” It’s a response only a sociopath or a pickpocket could embrace. We know they have a central nervous system like ours that feels pain, experiences fear and like humans, animals seek to avoid that pain and escape from the source of that fear. And no amount of flim-flam woo woo double-talk is ever going to hide that fact.

    This human dishonesty even permeates the local government so-call “Shelters” (“Animal Kill Centers” — the Dog Pound), where sham euphemisms are routinely used to distort and misrepresent what is really going on behind closed doors. Typically you will hear a Pound director stating that they “Euthanized” 2,000 animals that year (for example) — because no homes could be found for them. (fn 1).   On July 12, 2010 CBS News had a story about “400 Canada Geese Killed for Air Safety Reasons.” The subheading for the CBS story read “Mass Euthanization of Geese a Step in Goal of …”. They did NOT “Euthanize” these animals or these Canadian Geese!! They “Exterminated” them. They “Exterminated” perfectly healthy, non-injured, non-suffering animals for human convenience. The ‘human convenience’ is that the Pound keeps picking up animals in the neighborhood in an effort to clear the streets of the rift-raft nuisance ‘items’ neighbors complain about. The ‘human convenience’ is that the humans saved humans the time, the expense and inconvenience of solving the Canadian Geese problem in an intelligent, non-violent, humanitarian manner. One way or another, this ‘rift-raft’ was to be discarded — either to an adopting human or to an incinerator. They chose the unintelligent, violent, ruthless ‘incinerator’ method.

    The term “Euthanize” only applies when it is done solely for the benefit of the Euthanized animal to alleviate horrific immediate pain and suffering of that animal, and only where it is a last resort because the animal’s condition is terminal and there is no medical cure for his\her disease or illness. It is worth noting that the fraudulent, deliberate misuse of the term “Euthanize” has deep roots in the Nazi propaganda machine that served Hitler’s Grand Plan for genetic purity (Eugenics Program), as they too sought to clear the streets of the human ‘rift-raft’ — the physically disabled, the mentally disabled, the elderly, the gays, the gypsies and the Jews. Hitler and the Nazi Regime called this the “T4 Euthanasia Program.” (fn 3-6).

    This particular human dishonesty about the term “Euthanasia” regarding animals is virtually identical to the Nazi calculated misuse of the term, in that it seeks to conceal (via misrepresentation) the true reality of what is taking place and why, by hiding it behind a sham euphemism that falsifies the reasons for the killing and falsifies the intended beneficiary of the killing, just as the Nazi Regime did. Virtually every respected dictionary and encyclopedia defines Euthanasia as: “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.” (fn 3 – 5). Sometimes referred to as “Mercy Killing,” it is unmistakably clear that the sole purpose of the mercy killing is to alleviate the pointless, unequivocal and extreme suffering of the creature being killed. There is no OTHER ‘ulterior’ motive — no OTHER intended beneficiary — no OTHER collateral purpose or interest being served when TRUE “Euthanasia” is implemented. And it is only done when the animal’s medical condition is “terminal” — thereby making the suffering pointless.

    Killing one being, taking one life solely for the benefit of another (namely the one doing the killing) is NOT, I repeat, is NOT “Euthanasia” in any sense of that term and that term should never ever be used to describe such conduct. Mass extermination is NOT euthanasia.

    Killing one being, taking one life solely for the benefit of another (namely the one doing the killing) is called “EXTERMINATION” because that is exactly what it is. It is precisely what Hitler’s Nazi Regime did with humans – he “EXTERMINATED” them for the twisted perceived benefit of society (others) under his demented notion of a genetically pure race of human beings. The killing of these Canadian Geese is no more “Euthanasia” than is the Nazi genocide.

    It would appear that all those engaged in this “Extermination Program” and all those in the media reporting about it, are acutely aware of how immoral, unethical, unjustifiable and reprehensible this “Extermination Program” really is, otherwise there would be no need to cover it up with fraudulent, sham euphemisms, as the Nazi’s did. Hitler knew that if he called it what it really was, “Extermination,” there would have been a mass revolt. Hitler deliberately falsified what he was doing by calling it “Euthanasia” knowing that most people deem Euthanasia to be a ‘humanitarian’ act of kindness, rather than a ruthless, senseless genocide. Hitler understood that the public had already fully accepted the misuse of that term (Euthanasia) at the animal control centers, where massive numbers of animals were routinely killed every day. Even though the public knew it was NOT really euthanasia that was going on, they accepted the misuse of that term, and Hitler’s plan was to get the public to react the same way with his planned “T4 Euthanasia Program” aimed at exterminating select categories of the human population. Hitler reasoned, “If you call it ‘euthanasia’ and characterize it as ‘absolutely necessary’ the public will accept it just as they had at the animal control centers. And as it turned out, Hitler was dead right. The public bought the dishonest snow-job, hook, line and sinker.

    So the deliberate, calculated misuse of the term “Euthanasia” sets a dangerous, horrific precedent for both human and non-human animals. For this reason, there should be a ‘zero tolerance’ for misuse and misrepresentation of that term — given its horrific Nazi history of abusing the term to justify the extermination of millions of people.

    If the Extermination of the Canadian Geese is so defensible and morally justifiable, then come right out and call it exactly what it is — the mass extermination & genocide of perfectly healthy Canadian Geese purely for human convenience reasons, and in no way is it for the benefit of the geese.

    Therefore the media and everyone else should STOP calling these mass extermination & genocide crusades “Euthanasia” since that term absolutely does NOT apply. And the fact that this term does NOT apply is not a gray area of uncertainty or a debatable point today any more than it was when Hitler deliberately and strategically abused the term to facilitate his mass extermination & genocide agenda. Take a good hard look at these words — mass extermination & genocide — because that is what humans have been doing — NOT “Euthanasia” as everyone is fraudulently claiming.

    Either this action is justifiable when we call it exactly what it is (mass extermination & genocide) or it is NOT justifiable when we call it exactly what it is (mass extermination & genocide). In either case, falsifying the accounts of what is taking place by deliberately using what, ipso facto, is a patently false, inaccurate term (“Euthanasia“) to misrepresent what is going on is most definitely morally and ethically and logically wrong. If it is too horrible and too ugly and too disturbing to think about what it really is (mass extermination & genocide) then clearly it is something humans should NOT be doing. The media and citizens need to employ an honest, ethical standard of human decency and refuse to paraphrase “mass extermination & genocide” as “Euthanasia.”

    These few examples are just the tip of the iceberg when we are talking about “Human Dishonesty Against Animals.” These are just a token list out of the vast littany of examples of the many embedded, surreptitious ways the human animal has been dishonest about their non-human counterparts — their brothers and sisters on this planet we all share.

    For now, it is sufficient to stress that there are horrific, lamentable consequences that flow from the human social practice of desensitizing ourselves via euphemisms and counterfeit logical schemes that alienate us from our conscience, our compassion and from the Truth. We do this at our own peril.


    Footnote 1 Link: “CBS News – “400 Canada Geese Killed for Air Safety Reasons” New York, July 12, 2010    Below is a Comment we submitted to CBS regarding this story.

    Footnote 2 Link: “Merriam Webster Dictionary – Euthanasia:  “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.”

    Footnote 3 Link: Encyclopedia Britannica Online – Nazi “T4 Euthanasia Program” (1939-1945)

    Footnote 4 Link: Jewish Virtual Library – The T-4 Euthanasia Program

    Footnote 5 Link: Middle Tennessee – The T-4 Euthanasia Program

    Footnote 6 Link: Disability Social History Project – Nazis, Eugenics, and the T-4 Program

    Footnote 7 Link: Encyclopedia Britannica – Euthanasia:  “Act or practice of painlessly putting to death persons suffering from painful and incurable disease or incapacitating physical disorder or allowing them to die by withholding treatment or withdrawing artificial life-support measures. Because there is no specific provision for it in most legal systems, it is usually regarded as either suicide (if performed by the patient himself) or murder (if performed by another). “

    (See also, “Rationalism Religion & Dogma – The Three Wicked Sisters” and “Mass Extermination is Not Euthanasia“).

    This brief summary stands as the framework for this subject category entitled: “Human Dishonesty Against Animals” This is an open forum and participation by way of Comments on the posted articles is invited and encouraged. At this point in time, no membership, registration or log-in is required to post a Comment.

    The Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog