•    “You Gotta Be Happy” – An Ayn Rand Mantra   

    Scales of Balanced Justice


    “You Gotta Be Happy” – An Ayn Rand Mantra


    At issue is the Ayn Rand mantra “selfishness is a virtue” coupled with the embedded sentiment that “You Gotta Be Happy” — and the focus is on what that sentiment actually means.

    I take the position that — The notion of “You Gotta Be Happy” is a human concoction fabricated by the “Doctor Feel-good” social engineers, who believe Life must, at all times, be a bouncy, up-beat, jingoistic, bright-eyed, bushy-tailed, cheery, rosy, bouyant Pollyanna fun-ride. When it’s not, the ‘patient’ must be ‘depressed’ and they’ve got the meds needed to “correct” this ‘medical defect.’

    I take the position that the sentiment “You Gotta Be Happy” inherently contains a fraudulent, emotively pumped-up spin and in Buddhism, this subtle point has great significance which often is missed by persons ‘indoctrinated’ in a Western materialistic culture — where ‘more’ is ALWAYS deemed better. This important distinction goes like this…

    The Western materialistic culture is, by its very nature, very dualistic. That is to say, we habitually live in a “Two Bin” sorting & sifting environment. When confronted with any ‘thing’ or any ‘person’ we instinctively sort them into one of two bins: 1. Good, 2. Bad. The third category, “Undecided,” gets wiped out because anything that cannot be judged good is deemed Bad by virtue of its uncertainty, its unpredictability, its unreliability, its defiance relative to a “Good” rating.

    A “Good” rating, in Western materialistic culture, is invariably derived from a tunnel-vision selfish, i.e., self-centric, self-serving interpretation of the impact which the person or thing may have on the individual observer. A ‘thing’ that is deemed useful, advantageous, profitable, gratifying, manipulable, attractive, exploitable, etc., for one’s ego-self is deemed to have merit which we call “Good.” A ‘person’ who is deemed to be useful, advantageous, profitable, gratifying, manipulable, attractive, exploitable … someone who is deemed to make us feel “good,” important, superior, wise, profound, revered, desired, wanted, is deemed to have merit which we call “Good.” Everything else we call “bad.”

    In our Western materialistic culture we are instinctively “attracted to” things and persons that are deemed “Good.” And we are instinctively “repelled by” things and persons that are deemed “Bad.” That is to say, in our Western materialistic culture we are instinctively “attracted to” things and persons who are deemed to fulfill our “egotistical self-centric immediate needs and desires.” And we are instinctively “repelled by” things and persons who are deemed to have an adverse impact or a “zero-sum-gain” impact on our “egotistical self-centric perceived immediate needs and desires.”

    The Tao Te Ching, written 2,500 years ago in China, spends a great amount of time talking about this human tendency, which has been honed to a razor’s edge in the Westwern materialistic culture. The Tao talks about a great tree that has lived to be thousands of years old … because it is deemed by people to be useless. It’s branches and limbs are twisted and gnarled and so it cannot be used for wood. Its leaves are pungent and poisonous so they cannot be used for food or shelter. Its limbs and bark give off a noxious, poisonous smell when burned, so it cannot be used for kindling.

    Because the tree is deemed to be utterly useless by human-kind, it has therefore managed to live to be thousands of years old. Thus it is said in the Tao, That which is useless “endures.” That which is deemed useful “comes to an early end.”

    Some religions share this ‘different’ Taoist view. The idea is that which human-kind deems inferior and useless, is what God most cherishes. Some religious teachings are steeped in this core understanding. Christ stated it as “Least on Earth … Greatest in Heaven.” And he issued the prescription, “As above, so below.”

    Many religions teach that “Least in Man’s eyes is Greatest in God’s eyes.” Their core teaching is that Everything has integrity in its own right, by virtue of the fact that its Creator gave it an existence. Many religions teach that “A person or thing exists FOR ITS OWN SAKE and not for the sake of something else or someone else.” This is the most fundamental, universal spiritual teaching shared by many great religions. All things have inherent integrity in their own right. It is the teaching of COMPASSION and respect for all things. It is what St. Francis and environmentalists understand so well.

    And so we are impaled on the horns of this harsh reality … the only thing that can endure … is that which humans deem worthless … without intrinsic value — precisely because it cannot be exploited. And that which is absolutely essential to human existence — like clean air and water — can NOT “endure” — precisely because it can be and is plundered and ruthlessly, recklessly exploited for the most trivial of reasons — profits and the almighty $dollar$. Thus when viewed through the tunnel-vision self-centric human lens — the right to engage in irresponsible self-destructive profiteering behavior is “enshrined” as the highest ‘good’ — the greatest ‘value’ and an inalienable right.

    Thus we are deeply embedded in this Western materialistic cultural environment with its propensity for the “Two Bin” self-centric utilitarian sorting system. Yet this militant utilitarianism is inherently antithetical to any spiritual or compassionate notion that “A person or thing exists FOR ITS OWN SAKE and not for the sake of something else or someone else.” So now we can readily see why the western materialistic model is deemed to be truant, inherently defective, patently dishonest and self-destructive. That which fails to put a smile on our face, fails to give us an ego-massage or an orgasm or a profit … that which fails to subordinate itself to our every whim and petty desire, is deemed to be worthless … having no intrinsic value. This Western materialistic cultural environment has monetized and dogmatize the value of ‘things’ and ‘beings’ and it has, thereby, trashed a lot of good people and a lot of good things because of its stunted, short-sighted tunnel-vision truancy.

    So now we come around full-circle back to the sentiment “You Gotta Be Happy” … with its Western Culture materialistic background. This is the mantra and the dogma of the “Dr. Feelgood” society, owned by the Pharmaceutical Industry, which has a monkey on its back by way of a fairly serious drug & alcohol addiction problem. Given this unmistakable Western influence, I am simply advocating that we refrain from embracing and legitimizing the ‘feel-good’ sentiment “You Gotta Be Happy” … as it is being generated by the opaque, self-centric, tunnel-vision dogma of a Western materialistic culture bent on placating greed and short-sighted desires in a self-destructive downward spiral — steeped in its commitment to Ayn Rand devotional anthems touting the virtue of “egotism” … and “narcissism” and “selfishness” and hedonism and the demented World View that only one’s own ego self has ‘value’ and all other ‘selves’ are worth nothing.

    The problem with the sentiment “You Gotta Be Happy” is laid bare by considering the spate of Buddha statues that abound around the World. There are an incredibly wide variety of Buddha statues. The India statues tend to always depict Buddha as rather gaunt, with a slight pained grimaced expression on his face. Perhaps that is because many Indian cultures emphasize the ascetic nature of the Buddha’s life.

    The western Buddha statues tend to always depict Buddha as quite “Fat & Happy” … usually reflected in a cherubic body with an avuncular smiling face. But the “Truest” depiction of the Buddha in a Buddha statue is reflected in the gigantic Japanese statue of the Buddha sitting in a full lotus posture, holding the mudra with both hands, just below his naval. The expression on the Buddha’s face is astonishing. It is not smiling in any way. It does not express pain or sorrow. Neither does it express sadness or joy. When you examine the face carefully, it has absolutely no emotive expression whatsoever. And what is remarkable about this Buddha expression is that it is NOT devoid of expression, even though it does not express joy, pain, happiness, sadness or sorrow.

    The Buddha’s expression in this extraordinary Japanese statue expresses pure “Serenity.” “Peace and Tranquility” … which Shunryu Sazuki best described as “Imperturbable Composure” (Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind,” by Shunryu Sazuki). There is no ‘strain’ in the face. A face that is smiling or is grimacing or is sad … is strained. If ever there was a pure, faithful artistic depiction of simple “Peace, Tranquility” and “Serenity” this statue is it. Whoever was responsible for creating this remarkable Japanese statue surely understood the full meaning of the Buddha’s teachings.

    And so, to understand this extremely subtle distinction being made regarding the sentiment “You Gotta Be Happy” … is to understand the paramount distinction between feeding into the rampaging, insatiable appetites of the ego versus finding peace, contentment, tranquility and fulfillment with what we already have — without needing more. Understandably — capitalism feels threatened by this — while the environment derives ‘hope’ from this alternative World View. To depict Christ or Buddha as extolling the virtues of pain and suffering because of the pain and suffering they endured, is to misrepresent their teachings. To depict Christ or Buddha as extolling the singular virtues of joy and happiness because of the pain and suffering they sought to transcend, is to misunderstand, entirely, the meaning of their lives as teachers.

    The Heart of their teachings is that midway between the Yin-Yang positions of Joy and Sorrow is something which is neither. And that “something” which is neither, is … pure “Peace” and “Serenity and Tranquility” … which Shunryu Sazuki aptly described as “Imperturbable Composure.” It is only from within this subtle ‘place’ that all of reality, as it actually is, can be understood, respected and accepted — unconditionally — as having its own integrity — existing FOR ITS OWN SAKE, not for the sake of something else or someone else. And it is only from within this subtle place that what we already have — is understood to be — more than sufficient.

    This is the True “submission” being asked of us us by the teachings of Islam, and Buddhism and Christ’s teachings, and by the teachings of many other religions. It is the surrender of the small “self” … the “ego self” in deference to the higher “Self” which embraces all things and all beings in its circle of Compassion.

    This, I believe, expresses the supreme difference between the sentiment “You Gotta Be Happy” versus the alternative known as pure “Peace, Tranquility” and “Serenity” … which Shunryu Sazuki described as “Imperturbable Composure.” The latter is self-sufficient, content and needs nothing more. The former is hostage to the perpetual need and greed of insatiable appetites which can never be appeased. The latter is not leaning against anything. It is not ‘engaged’ but rather is completely and totally “disengaged.” It is not grasping for something or clinging onto anything, nor is it pushing anything away. The latter expresses that which is already enduring, complete and self-sufficient unto itself, while the former is hostage to that which is transitory, ephemeral and fleeting … that which is grasping for something … clinging onto something — in a futile effort to maintain and perpetuate its existence … The former is dependent on something transitory outside itself to maintain its existence … it is that which rises and falls in a whimsical tide and precariously fluctuates with surrounding events. The latter is enduring and sufficient unto itself — while the former is akin to the run-away horse that has kidnapped its rider as a hostage.

    Simply contemplating this vital distinction … this subtle nuance is, itself, enlightening beyond description.



    The Reflecting Pool Discourse Blog


     
  •    Mass Extermination is Not Euthanasia   

    Scales of Balanced Justice

    TO:  All Media Outlets & WSYR Channel 9 News

    RE:  Stop Calling Mass Extermination & Genocide Euthanasia

    By-Line: 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.

    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.”

    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.

    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