I am thankful for the Arctic Refuge because every inch, yard and mile of non-human occupied land is precious in terms of the new consciousness arising which tells us we must change how we live on the earth. We are not ON the earth, we are OF the earth. We are beings who exist within and among the animal/plant/microbial life of the planet. No one GAVE it to us. We emerged as the apex species and boasted more and more loudly about our brains, not realizing that we are still in important ways stuck in the out of date models of killing and destruction which have up to now made up the central part of our coping skills. We must ask: What would be the enlightened morality of an apex species capable of thinking about the consequences of actions?
Alaska's wilderness needs to be treated as a sacred place and protected from human destroyers.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Harvard waterboards, kills monkey
At Harvard Medical School Southborough Facility some 1800 primates are kept. Recently one was killed in an extended tortured fashion when he was (accidentally?) left in his cage during an aggressive "cleaning" process. Here is my letter to Harvard President Drew Faust and Medical School Dean Jeffrey S. Flier:
"I write to express my sorrow and dismay at the neglect, torture and killing of primates at Harvard's Southborough Facility. The time has passed when such atrocities as the recent killing can be done with impugnity. The inquiry and fines that may be levied are an example that even the most conservative forces in society recognize the kind of immorality that was formerly done in secret, distorted in reports, and justified in public relations double-talk.
Most such "animal" studies as those at Southborough are misguided, poorly performed and unnecessary. The most enlightened vision of science and the earth is moving beyond torturing or killing creatures in the guise of "studies." We are not ON the earth; We are OF the earth. We live WITHIN the animal/plant/water/microbial life of the earth. We cannot live without it. A platelet shift in consciousness must be the next step in our evolution.
With every day we see more clearly that imprisonment and torture of beings such as practiced at the Southborough facility is not the solution or the way for the web of life to continue on this planet.
The same developments that created civilizations and enabled the ascent of humans as the apex predators on the planet gave us two conflicting opportunities. One was the technology to eliminate or imprison entire species for food, clothing, medical "study," industry and ornament or because we wanted exclusive use of the land they occupied. Another opportunity was slow to arise but is now at our doorsteps: through thinking and observation we began to see the web of life as we never did before. There is no defensible reason to continue the method of earlier and more primitive mankind by imprisoning, torturing and killing members of other species.
No one of these killings is simply a killing. We humans cannot survive if we continue our outdated approach to the other inhabitants of the world.
We ignore the welfare of other planetary species at the expense of our human spirits, our human life and the human future.
"I write to express my sorrow and dismay at the neglect, torture and killing of primates at Harvard's Southborough Facility. The time has passed when such atrocities as the recent killing can be done with impugnity. The inquiry and fines that may be levied are an example that even the most conservative forces in society recognize the kind of immorality that was formerly done in secret, distorted in reports, and justified in public relations double-talk.
Most such "animal" studies as those at Southborough are misguided, poorly performed and unnecessary. The most enlightened vision of science and the earth is moving beyond torturing or killing creatures in the guise of "studies." We are not ON the earth; We are OF the earth. We live WITHIN the animal/plant/water/microbial life of the earth. We cannot live without it. A platelet shift in consciousness must be the next step in our evolution.
With every day we see more clearly that imprisonment and torture of beings such as practiced at the Southborough facility is not the solution or the way for the web of life to continue on this planet.
The same developments that created civilizations and enabled the ascent of humans as the apex predators on the planet gave us two conflicting opportunities. One was the technology to eliminate or imprison entire species for food, clothing, medical "study," industry and ornament or because we wanted exclusive use of the land they occupied. Another opportunity was slow to arise but is now at our doorsteps: through thinking and observation we began to see the web of life as we never did before. There is no defensible reason to continue the method of earlier and more primitive mankind by imprisoning, torturing and killing members of other species.
No one of these killings is simply a killing. We humans cannot survive if we continue our outdated approach to the other inhabitants of the world.
We ignore the welfare of other planetary species at the expense of our human spirits, our human life and the human future.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Nat'l Geographic asks us about Shell
The magazine wanted to know what we thought of their Shell Oil ads.
"In general my opinion of National Geographic is high, my opinion of all mainstream oil and energy companies is low.
I think we have not evolved the consciousness we need to be effective guardians of the planet as our dwelling place.
Since our destructiveness so far outpaces our consciousness through human history we need at this profound point not so much an evolution but a revolution of consciousness. That starts with clarity of information, a more dimensional understanding of life, passion for collective and individual ideas, and an open-ended search across all disciplines, arts and cultures for visions and other perspectives we have never known.
We ourselves and political leaders in Washington and elsewhere ignore the welfare of the planet and especially of other planetary species and lifeforms at the expense of human life and the human future."
"In general my opinion of National Geographic is high, my opinion of all mainstream oil and energy companies is low.
I think we have not evolved the consciousness we need to be effective guardians of the planet as our dwelling place.
Since our destructiveness so far outpaces our consciousness through human history we need at this profound point not so much an evolution but a revolution of consciousness. That starts with clarity of information, a more dimensional understanding of life, passion for collective and individual ideas, and an open-ended search across all disciplines, arts and cultures for visions and other perspectives we have never known.
We ourselves and political leaders in Washington and elsewhere ignore the welfare of the planet and especially of other planetary species and lifeforms at the expense of human life and the human future."
Monday, October 11, 2010
MoveOn.Org asks what we want and wish
My answer to MoveOn.Org is below.
"What do you take away from the news recently? What are you excited about? What do you want from MoveOn?
If you have any thoughts you'd be willing to share, please reply to this message or drop me an email at: jruben@moveon.org"
-0-
Dear Justin Ruben -- I'm glad you asked.
--My main frustration, edging into despair, concerns how the "others" have taken control of the public perception. Obama came into the presidency of a diminished and confused country. He seemed such a light that a great number of us -- even those who opposed him -- thought or wished that he could wave some wands of personal power and make us and our country better. We would have been glad to see the wands but our wiser selves already could see this was not thinking but magical thinking. So, just as in a family dysfunctional to the point of ruin, the blamers screamed loudest.
Whoever had worked the hardest to save the family most often became the villain. That almost could be considered emotional physics -- if you scream at the only clear-headed one you get a double payoff: you deflect blame or responsibility from yourself, you "win" by attacking the one who made you uncomfortable, the one who was trying to see and reveal the truth as a possible pathway to better life.
--So we got the tea parties, and a Republican party which rather smoothly transitioned and nurtured its moral corruption from the Bush presidency into a status of being pained and aggrieved about the mess we're in that they can deny they created themselves. They now yelled loudest and more effectively (give the devil his due)about the mess.
--We have to look at the battered public. What is the effect on a people of a ruling government (Bush's) which lies continuously and successfully to bring about a disastrous war that destroys a sovereign country, kills and maims thousands of its own military, along with hundreds of thousands of civilians in the invaded country? What can we think about the trillions of dollars spent on this destruction, money coming from the pockets of ordinary people who generally cannot imagine numbers even in the millions, who all of a sudden face the alien concept of trillions? People who know the tax numbers on their pay stubs represent money siphoned by a government which generally lies when it declares they have a voice and which, in effect, colludes with the richest tier of citizenry to protect the riches of the richest from taxation.
--We Americans have laughed and joked always about "politicians" and the wrong-headedness of those who govern. We all more or less know that it is an unusually exceptional man or woman who can, upon being voted into office, hold to the same moral principles of his or her campaign. Yet, because of the high-flown phrases and the litany of "American" ideals written and spoken we never quite give up the hope, the hope that -- through some happenstance -- the ideals will become a form of reality.
--We had a light in Obama, which to some of us, had an additional brightness because he was a man who -- in general terms of what we have seen as normal -- could not have been elected.
--We miscalculated the perfidy of Congress, which certainly can be considered as corrupt and implacable as most authoritarian governments. We miscalculated the power of overt and hidden racism. We miscalculated the "ethos" of the high profile Republicans.
--We stepped off a cliff. We hoped. We acted as a dysfunctional family in that we would not, could not, look at the truth of a tough reality as it unfolded. We were like a traumatized child who has to be brought carefully and caringly to a point where the terrible thing can be looked at -- only when we can do the hard work of seeing without blinders can we do the hard work of moving on.
--So we blame. We yell. We are angry. We see that hope seems to slip away. We see the days in succession taken by the forces of the status quo, the forces of raw power without compassion.
--Dilemma: If Obama or any of his kind emphasize the horrific state they encountered in Washington and in corporate America, they are drowned out by cries of lack of patriotism. The dark side translates all such talk into being a criticism of the American public. Very effective. How can it be said that most of us are good and valuable and deserve representation without sounding like the dark side which has co-opted these words? It reminds me of the hopelessness I felt when anti-abortion forces began to sing "We Shall Overcome." Good and meaningful words become almost obscene. America actually needs a revolution. The entrenched stasis and corporate twinship of Congress has to be stopped. How can it be done? How to find the words? How to find the actions? How to find the passions? How to find the vision? How to wake up the fearful? How to lead? How to "Fix It?" How to move on? We have to look at these questions with all our mental capacities and imagination and passion. We have to climb out of the deflections and wrangling and stand on another ground. We have to help Obama get back to his light, to regain his ground. We have to tend, with passion, to our own lights.
--One specific. I'm most disappointed in Obama's lack of a planetary vision. Sure it seems almost square to use the term. But the days of planetary considerations as a non-debatable necessity are already upon us, have been for some time. These thoughts cannot be secondary, or relegated to "when we can get around to it." I am disappointed in Obama's lack of consciousness about the position of humans in relationship to other living beings. The future of humanity cannot be effectively considered without acceptance of the planetary network of life -- animal/plant/water/microbial. We are not ON this planet; We are OF this planet. If the network cannot live we cannot live. We protect commercial interests and their destroy/kill/wipeout practices -- "America is business." Is it? New ideas, new concepts can arise. Otherwise we choose death, not just for the "others" but for ourselves. We have to unmire our feet from the sticky mud of the status quo -- If not now, when?
"What do you take away from the news recently? What are you excited about? What do you want from MoveOn?
If you have any thoughts you'd be willing to share, please reply to this message or drop me an email at: jruben@moveon.org"
-0-
Dear Justin Ruben -- I'm glad you asked.
--My main frustration, edging into despair, concerns how the "others" have taken control of the public perception. Obama came into the presidency of a diminished and confused country. He seemed such a light that a great number of us -- even those who opposed him -- thought or wished that he could wave some wands of personal power and make us and our country better. We would have been glad to see the wands but our wiser selves already could see this was not thinking but magical thinking. So, just as in a family dysfunctional to the point of ruin, the blamers screamed loudest.
Whoever had worked the hardest to save the family most often became the villain. That almost could be considered emotional physics -- if you scream at the only clear-headed one you get a double payoff: you deflect blame or responsibility from yourself, you "win" by attacking the one who made you uncomfortable, the one who was trying to see and reveal the truth as a possible pathway to better life.
--So we got the tea parties, and a Republican party which rather smoothly transitioned and nurtured its moral corruption from the Bush presidency into a status of being pained and aggrieved about the mess we're in that they can deny they created themselves. They now yelled loudest and more effectively (give the devil his due)about the mess.
--We have to look at the battered public. What is the effect on a people of a ruling government (Bush's) which lies continuously and successfully to bring about a disastrous war that destroys a sovereign country, kills and maims thousands of its own military, along with hundreds of thousands of civilians in the invaded country? What can we think about the trillions of dollars spent on this destruction, money coming from the pockets of ordinary people who generally cannot imagine numbers even in the millions, who all of a sudden face the alien concept of trillions? People who know the tax numbers on their pay stubs represent money siphoned by a government which generally lies when it declares they have a voice and which, in effect, colludes with the richest tier of citizenry to protect the riches of the richest from taxation.
--We Americans have laughed and joked always about "politicians" and the wrong-headedness of those who govern. We all more or less know that it is an unusually exceptional man or woman who can, upon being voted into office, hold to the same moral principles of his or her campaign. Yet, because of the high-flown phrases and the litany of "American" ideals written and spoken we never quite give up the hope, the hope that -- through some happenstance -- the ideals will become a form of reality.
--We had a light in Obama, which to some of us, had an additional brightness because he was a man who -- in general terms of what we have seen as normal -- could not have been elected.
--We miscalculated the perfidy of Congress, which certainly can be considered as corrupt and implacable as most authoritarian governments. We miscalculated the power of overt and hidden racism. We miscalculated the "ethos" of the high profile Republicans.
--We stepped off a cliff. We hoped. We acted as a dysfunctional family in that we would not, could not, look at the truth of a tough reality as it unfolded. We were like a traumatized child who has to be brought carefully and caringly to a point where the terrible thing can be looked at -- only when we can do the hard work of seeing without blinders can we do the hard work of moving on.
--So we blame. We yell. We are angry. We see that hope seems to slip away. We see the days in succession taken by the forces of the status quo, the forces of raw power without compassion.
--Dilemma: If Obama or any of his kind emphasize the horrific state they encountered in Washington and in corporate America, they are drowned out by cries of lack of patriotism. The dark side translates all such talk into being a criticism of the American public. Very effective. How can it be said that most of us are good and valuable and deserve representation without sounding like the dark side which has co-opted these words? It reminds me of the hopelessness I felt when anti-abortion forces began to sing "We Shall Overcome." Good and meaningful words become almost obscene. America actually needs a revolution. The entrenched stasis and corporate twinship of Congress has to be stopped. How can it be done? How to find the words? How to find the actions? How to find the passions? How to find the vision? How to wake up the fearful? How to lead? How to "Fix It?" How to move on? We have to look at these questions with all our mental capacities and imagination and passion. We have to climb out of the deflections and wrangling and stand on another ground. We have to help Obama get back to his light, to regain his ground. We have to tend, with passion, to our own lights.
--One specific. I'm most disappointed in Obama's lack of a planetary vision. Sure it seems almost square to use the term. But the days of planetary considerations as a non-debatable necessity are already upon us, have been for some time. These thoughts cannot be secondary, or relegated to "when we can get around to it." I am disappointed in Obama's lack of consciousness about the position of humans in relationship to other living beings. The future of humanity cannot be effectively considered without acceptance of the planetary network of life -- animal/plant/water/microbial. We are not ON this planet; We are OF this planet. If the network cannot live we cannot live. We protect commercial interests and their destroy/kill/wipeout practices -- "America is business." Is it? New ideas, new concepts can arise. Otherwise we choose death, not just for the "others" but for ourselves. We have to unmire our feet from the sticky mud of the status quo -- If not now, when?
Monday, October 4, 2010
U.S. Army Wants to Defy German animal welfare laws
In defiance of Germany's animal welfare laws the U.S. Army is trying to get permission to attack pigs and other animals as "training exercises" for combat medicine. An example of these attacks is one soldier who shot a pig in the face with a high-powered rifle, then poured gasoline, set it on fire, and bragged about keeping it alive for 15 hours.
In my posted reply to this proposal I wrote: "Why add to the already tarnished image of the U.S. military by seeking to conduct cruel and deadly trauma so-called training exercises on animals in Oberpfalz -- exercises already denied by German officials who are trying to hold the U.S. army to the same moral standard practiced within their country.
The image and public relations of the U.S. Army still includes -- internationally -- suspected cavalier killing of civilians, mistreatment of prisoners, torture and other violations of internationally accepted standards of decency.
It illustrates further hubris and imperalism for the U.S. Army to insist on violating animal welfare laws in a sovereign nation."
PETA said "Oberpfalz officials have already denied the Army's previous application because they determined that this training would violate Germany's animal welfare law, since effective non-animal methods--which are already used by the German military--are available. Germany's own Armed Forces has written to PETA, stating: "[T]he armed forces do no animal tests for training purposes. For training exercises the soldiers learn with really good models and the doctors don't need animal experiments." The US Army's Alfred V. Rascon School of Combat Medicine at Fort Campbell also does not use animals in its trauma program . . . Clearly, animals are not needed to teach trauma management skills."
To take action:
https://secure.peta.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3307&autologin=true&c=weekly_enews
In my posted reply to this proposal I wrote: "Why add to the already tarnished image of the U.S. military by seeking to conduct cruel and deadly trauma so-called training exercises on animals in Oberpfalz -- exercises already denied by German officials who are trying to hold the U.S. army to the same moral standard practiced within their country.
The image and public relations of the U.S. Army still includes -- internationally -- suspected cavalier killing of civilians, mistreatment of prisoners, torture and other violations of internationally accepted standards of decency.
It illustrates further hubris and imperalism for the U.S. Army to insist on violating animal welfare laws in a sovereign nation."
PETA said "Oberpfalz officials have already denied the Army's previous application because they determined that this training would violate Germany's animal welfare law, since effective non-animal methods--which are already used by the German military--are available. Germany's own Armed Forces has written to PETA, stating: "[T]he armed forces do no animal tests for training purposes. For training exercises the soldiers learn with really good models and the doctors don't need animal experiments." The US Army's Alfred V. Rascon School of Combat Medicine at Fort Campbell also does not use animals in its trauma program . . . Clearly, animals are not needed to teach trauma management skills."
To take action:
https://secure.peta.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3307&autologin=true&c=weekly_enews
Friday, September 17, 2010
Childrens Rides on Tubercular Elephants -- "Care" of Elephants
At Southwick's Zoo in Massachusetts a second elephant used for children's rides has died of tuberculosis. My letter to the Zoo president follows:
Dear Ms Justine Brewer,
I was saddened by the death of the elephant named Dondi by her owners at Southwick's Zoo, and more so because she is the second elephant to die of tuberculosis at your facility. First, it's upsetting that the Zoo continued to use elephants for children's rides after the first elephant died of TB, highly transmittable to humans. Since it's difficult to tell whether elephants have TB, since TB is highly contagious to elephants and humans, and since one had already died would it not have been the better part of sense to stop the children's rides after the first death?
In general can you please consider another approach to the use of elephants? Ask yourself whether they are treated, in effect, as prisoners forced to perform not only rides with nervous children and no breaks, but degrading circus tricks for their food and shelter. It's indisputable that elephants are intelligent, sensitive and social creatures who, as captives, suffer continuously from being in the kind of inadequate and artificial environments you provide.
The elephant who died was named "Dondi" by her human owners. She had another and more valid identity to the other elephants in her life at the time and formerly. We haven't yet tried to know what may be the true identities of these beings who are as much individuals as humans are. Certainly consideration of their needs and respect for their lives needs to be the foundation of our relationship with them. Humans who make their living by the use of captive animals need to transform from owners to guardians.
A new consciousness is emerging on the earth about the human relationship to animals. Please consider this in your thinking about the web of life without which humans cannot live. Thank you.
Dear Ms Justine Brewer,
I was saddened by the death of the elephant named Dondi by her owners at Southwick's Zoo, and more so because she is the second elephant to die of tuberculosis at your facility. First, it's upsetting that the Zoo continued to use elephants for children's rides after the first elephant died of TB, highly transmittable to humans. Since it's difficult to tell whether elephants have TB, since TB is highly contagious to elephants and humans, and since one had already died would it not have been the better part of sense to stop the children's rides after the first death?
In general can you please consider another approach to the use of elephants? Ask yourself whether they are treated, in effect, as prisoners forced to perform not only rides with nervous children and no breaks, but degrading circus tricks for their food and shelter. It's indisputable that elephants are intelligent, sensitive and social creatures who, as captives, suffer continuously from being in the kind of inadequate and artificial environments you provide.
The elephant who died was named "Dondi" by her human owners. She had another and more valid identity to the other elephants in her life at the time and formerly. We haven't yet tried to know what may be the true identities of these beings who are as much individuals as humans are. Certainly consideration of their needs and respect for their lives needs to be the foundation of our relationship with them. Humans who make their living by the use of captive animals need to transform from owners to guardians.
A new consciousness is emerging on the earth about the human relationship to animals. Please consider this in your thinking about the web of life without which humans cannot live. Thank you.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Belgium Catholic Church Praises Its Courage
Here's my letter to the public editor of the New York Times in reference to the Associated Press story of September 13 about the Belgium Catholic Church's admission of hundreds of instances of sexual abuse. I asked the Times to expand and/or question in these ways:
Antwerp bishop Johan Bonny: ''We have had the courage to let the commission do its work and publish its conclusions." This attitude needs to be questioned editorially. It comes across as a falsehood, pretentious and self-praising. After all these decades courage cannot have been the church's motivation, rather the overwhelming pressure of truth-telling by hundreds of victims, an action that qualifies for the attribution of the word "courage."
Continuing . . .
"On Monday, Leonard said it was up to the Vatican to decide on any punishment.
''"It is not up to Monsignor Vangheluwe himself. The nuncio has assured us that a decision in Rome will be taken with a reasonable time limit,' he said."
I hope the New York Times will discover and report on the laws of Belgium in regard to such abuse. Please question the compelling and timely issue of whether religious bodies are exempt from the laws of the countries in which they practice.
This resonates with the experiences of Somali-born Ayaa Hirsi Ali who received a range of threats, even of death, in the Netherlands when she questioned Muslim "religious" practices such as genital mutilation of young girls being carried on in immigrant communities living there and in other Western countries. Hirsi Ali questions whether nation-states should continue to use the guise of "religious freedom" to look the other way at "religious" practices defined by the state as criminal. From her book Nomad:
p 217: It is not a trivial thing to know that, even in the West, if you criticize or even analyze a particular religion you may require protection… if you speak out…you yourself … will become a target, stalked, ostracized, even murdered. . . Most people consciously or not, seek to avoid it. Fear has an effect.
. . .
Thus slowly,. . . people begin to get used to not saying certain things, or they say them but certainly won’t write them. The thin fingers of self-censorship begin to tighten around individual minds, then groups of people, then around ideas themselves and their expression. When free speech crumbles in this way, . . . when Westerners refrain from criticizing or questioning certain practices, certain aspects of Islam, they abandon those Muslims who seek to question them too. They also abandon their own values. Once they have done that, their society is lost.”
Antwerp bishop Johan Bonny: ''We have had the courage to let the commission do its work and publish its conclusions." This attitude needs to be questioned editorially. It comes across as a falsehood, pretentious and self-praising. After all these decades courage cannot have been the church's motivation, rather the overwhelming pressure of truth-telling by hundreds of victims, an action that qualifies for the attribution of the word "courage."
Continuing . . .
"On Monday, Leonard said it was up to the Vatican to decide on any punishment.
''"It is not up to Monsignor Vangheluwe himself. The nuncio has assured us that a decision in Rome will be taken with a reasonable time limit,' he said."
I hope the New York Times will discover and report on the laws of Belgium in regard to such abuse. Please question the compelling and timely issue of whether religious bodies are exempt from the laws of the countries in which they practice.
This resonates with the experiences of Somali-born Ayaa Hirsi Ali who received a range of threats, even of death, in the Netherlands when she questioned Muslim "religious" practices such as genital mutilation of young girls being carried on in immigrant communities living there and in other Western countries. Hirsi Ali questions whether nation-states should continue to use the guise of "religious freedom" to look the other way at "religious" practices defined by the state as criminal. From her book Nomad:
p 217: It is not a trivial thing to know that, even in the West, if you criticize or even analyze a particular religion you may require protection… if you speak out…you yourself … will become a target, stalked, ostracized, even murdered. . . Most people consciously or not, seek to avoid it. Fear has an effect.
. . .
Thus slowly,. . . people begin to get used to not saying certain things, or they say them but certainly won’t write them. The thin fingers of self-censorship begin to tighten around individual minds, then groups of people, then around ideas themselves and their expression. When free speech crumbles in this way, . . . when Westerners refrain from criticizing or questioning certain practices, certain aspects of Islam, they abandon those Muslims who seek to question them too. They also abandon their own values. Once they have done that, their society is lost.”
Friday, August 6, 2010
HERO WALKS OUT OF NASA
Engineer April Evans left NASA when the agency refused to address her concerns—and those of a growing number of scientists—about its misguided plan to irradiate squirrel monkeys in the unlikely thought that this will yield information for human space travelers. You can sign and write your own thoughts for an email to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden Jr. This outreach is organized by Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine: http://pcrm.org/newsletter/aug10/nasa.html
Following is my precede to the letter
We of the human species are going through an evolution in thought -- beginning to realize we are OF the earth, not just ON the earth. We are AMONG the other inhabitants of the earth. Our descendants eventually will look with astonishment at how we killed, tortured, imprisoned and used our fellow species in ways that to an enlightened mind will look like insanity.
Please be part of the enlightenment to come. Please help by your example in taking the first step out of now-accepted behavior that already belongs to the past.
Following is my precede to the letter
We of the human species are going through an evolution in thought -- beginning to realize we are OF the earth, not just ON the earth. We are AMONG the other inhabitants of the earth. Our descendants eventually will look with astonishment at how we killed, tortured, imprisoned and used our fellow species in ways that to an enlightened mind will look like insanity.
Please be part of the enlightenment to come. Please help by your example in taking the first step out of now-accepted behavior that already belongs to the past.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
BP burns creatures alive in incompetent "cleanup"
Androcles comment on BP site:
Please stop burning turtles and other sea life. Please don't make your so-called cleanup actions as murderous as your first assault, which was not an accidental "oil spill." It was a releasing of grotesque calamity through your carelessness. It can be compared to detonating a bomb larger than the one over Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
The consequences will extend through many lifetimes.
In addition, perhaps the most troubling part of your company's response to this terrible catastrophe has been the sickening "spin" and public relations convolutions of all that BP says or publishes. It's known your corporation is bigger than the Roman Empire at its greatest; BP is larger and stronger than most nations in the world.
I can speculate that this note will go into the trash or some other collection marked irrelevant. But why cannot your company in its richness and vastness see that it has caused the most grievous assault yet by a single entity upon the planet?
You may call me an idealist or a dreamer but I think the only moral response for BP in its immensity is to take a position never before assumed in human history. BP could become the first empire company of the earth to say something simple and direct: "Yes, our company is responsible for this catastrophe. We cut corners and pushed our subordinates to cut costs in irresponsible ways. Yes, we were encouraged to go further by the multitude of safety violations that piled up without any appreciable notice from the public or from governments.
"Our position has arisen from corporate hubris and our mission to maximize every iota of money possible for our top tier officers and our shareholders. Maximizing profits has surmounted all other matters. We have no adequate plan to repair or to avert this disaster, nor to clean it up. We have caused an assault that affects the entire ecological system of the planet. We are wrong. We were wrong. We are in the process of dismantling the corporation to draw every bit of funding possible so that what remains of the company may be dedicated to doing what can be done in the Gulf of Mexico. Once these resources are exhausted, the corporation BP will no longer exist."
Even then, the end of your empire will not compensate for what you have done.
Please stop burning turtles and other sea life. Please don't make your so-called cleanup actions as murderous as your first assault, which was not an accidental "oil spill." It was a releasing of grotesque calamity through your carelessness. It can be compared to detonating a bomb larger than the one over Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
The consequences will extend through many lifetimes.
In addition, perhaps the most troubling part of your company's response to this terrible catastrophe has been the sickening "spin" and public relations convolutions of all that BP says or publishes. It's known your corporation is bigger than the Roman Empire at its greatest; BP is larger and stronger than most nations in the world.
I can speculate that this note will go into the trash or some other collection marked irrelevant. But why cannot your company in its richness and vastness see that it has caused the most grievous assault yet by a single entity upon the planet?
You may call me an idealist or a dreamer but I think the only moral response for BP in its immensity is to take a position never before assumed in human history. BP could become the first empire company of the earth to say something simple and direct: "Yes, our company is responsible for this catastrophe. We cut corners and pushed our subordinates to cut costs in irresponsible ways. Yes, we were encouraged to go further by the multitude of safety violations that piled up without any appreciable notice from the public or from governments.
"Our position has arisen from corporate hubris and our mission to maximize every iota of money possible for our top tier officers and our shareholders. Maximizing profits has surmounted all other matters. We have no adequate plan to repair or to avert this disaster, nor to clean it up. We have caused an assault that affects the entire ecological system of the planet. We are wrong. We were wrong. We are in the process of dismantling the corporation to draw every bit of funding possible so that what remains of the company may be dedicated to doing what can be done in the Gulf of Mexico. Once these resources are exhausted, the corporation BP will no longer exist."
Even then, the end of your empire will not compensate for what you have done.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
NY Times asks about the decision to have children
Peter Singer of the New York Times asked for comments on "whether to have a child? . . . what factors entered into your decision?. . . the desirability of adding to the strain that .. .nearly seven billion people already are putting on our planet’s environment. But very few ask whether coming into existence is a good thing for the child itself. . . . consideration of family history and possibility of a devastating illness, physical or mental? ..."
Androcles commented: "I think it's unwise and edging into a kind of egoist insanity to bring into the world children who will have great suffering. Yet there is the question of, for example, Stephen Hawkins. If genetic testing would have revealed his inevitable condition, should that potential being have been aborted? Is the gene pool so assorted and rich that someone else would have arrived at his conclusions? I think a tentative yes, but obviously the answer is not known.
The American idea of individualism has a lot to answer for -- isn't it the case that most humans are more similar to each other than not? Mathematical/probability question: How many times do we have to toss the genetic dice in order to get a genius or a gifted athlete?
The arrival of Birth Control was a watershed in human history, yet powerful forces throughout the world fight against it. Religions, governments and some cultural forces fight birth control as if it were an evil -- what do they gain from that viewpoint? Could it be thought of as a global version of the suppression of women expressed in the colloquial saw: "Keep them barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen." The concept of a woman's being "caught" by pregnancy and therefore revealed as a sexual (not to say sinful) being is still valid in most of the world. Americans in particular are still juvenile about sex, regarding it as something separate from life, fighting sex education and so on.
Remember "Zero Population Growth?" This valid movement was buttressed with wise thought. Yet, among the questions that arise: If so-called sophisticated societies eschew large families or any families and so-called emerging societies are denied the same birth control and knowledge that brought about this decision in the former societies -- what are we to do with this conundrum?
Androcles commented: "I think it's unwise and edging into a kind of egoist insanity to bring into the world children who will have great suffering. Yet there is the question of, for example, Stephen Hawkins. If genetic testing would have revealed his inevitable condition, should that potential being have been aborted? Is the gene pool so assorted and rich that someone else would have arrived at his conclusions? I think a tentative yes, but obviously the answer is not known.
The American idea of individualism has a lot to answer for -- isn't it the case that most humans are more similar to each other than not? Mathematical/probability question: How many times do we have to toss the genetic dice in order to get a genius or a gifted athlete?
The arrival of Birth Control was a watershed in human history, yet powerful forces throughout the world fight against it. Religions, governments and some cultural forces fight birth control as if it were an evil -- what do they gain from that viewpoint? Could it be thought of as a global version of the suppression of women expressed in the colloquial saw: "Keep them barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen." The concept of a woman's being "caught" by pregnancy and therefore revealed as a sexual (not to say sinful) being is still valid in most of the world. Americans in particular are still juvenile about sex, regarding it as something separate from life, fighting sex education and so on.
Remember "Zero Population Growth?" This valid movement was buttressed with wise thought. Yet, among the questions that arise: If so-called sophisticated societies eschew large families or any families and so-called emerging societies are denied the same birth control and knowledge that brought about this decision in the former societies -- what are we to do with this conundrum?
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Obama stops Chukchi Sea Oil Drilling
Androcles to President Obama: "Thank you from my heart for stopping the oil drilling proposed in the Chukchi Sea. What you did is another step forward in the evolutionary development of homo sapiens as shepherds of the planet. We must ask in every instance: does this action harm the world of the earth, the world we don't acknowledge, the world of the earth in which we are creatures along with other creatures and wonderful living things beyond the imagination of our most brilliant minds? We will not survive as dominating killers and destroyers. The planet is not to use up and discard. Let us cherish all the life of the earth and the earth itself, our great home of all time, long before and ever since our linage began. Humanity has no other treasure that can compare with the planet.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Killing as entertainment
Comment sent to Animal Planet TV: "Please re-consider both the title and the premise of "River Monsters." In the evolving thought about the planet is it a good thing to label a living creature as a monster and then kill it for show? In war we label "enemies" with negative words and then kill them. A new vision is necessary. These river creatures are not as monstrous as those who kill them. I like Animal Planet and I question using killing as entertainment. The mainstream channels do it; but there is a higher and brighter ground. Please consider the evolving role of humans as shepherds not killers of the world."
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Words to Kerry and Brown re Great Ape Bill
I ask you to support the Great Ape Protection Act, to be introduced soon in the Senate. The U.S. needs to evolve into a society which does not use killing and torture as either a routine solution to problems or as "scientific research." Most actual studies reveal that we do not have to torture humans as part of war or non-humans as part of "research."
Millions of federal research dollars are be wasted on the ineffective and unethical "research use" of chimpanzees. I want my tax dollars to be spent on superior methods that include ethical, human-centered studies, in vitro testing, and tissue engineering.
Why is torture in secrecy still part of the America way? Studies show that chimpanzees, intelligent and social, suffer extremely in laboratories from pain, anxiety, fear, post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Since they are long-lived this can go on for decades as regulations permit them to be kept in cages the size of a kitchen table, placed in isolation, and repeatedly physically harmed.
Millions of federal research dollars are be wasted on the ineffective and unethical "research use" of chimpanzees. I want my tax dollars to be spent on superior methods that include ethical, human-centered studies, in vitro testing, and tissue engineering.
Why is torture in secrecy still part of the America way? Studies show that chimpanzees, intelligent and social, suffer extremely in laboratories from pain, anxiety, fear, post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Since they are long-lived this can go on for decades as regulations permit them to be kept in cages the size of a kitchen table, placed in isolation, and repeatedly physically harmed.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Tourists Pay to Kill Lions as Trophies
In South Africa some 4,000 trapped lions are shot to death each year by rich tourists. This legal business practice,"Canned Hunting," makes money by breeding lions in captivity. When they are cubs tourists pay to cuddle them. When they grow larger they are locked in fenced areas where they cannot escape tourists who pay to kill them for trophies.
Up to 50,000 Euros is charged for permission to kill and take away the corpse of an adult male lion. From 2006 to 2008 the number of shot lions more than tripled; most of the killed were born in captivity. More of these coward-hunters are expected this year since South Africa hosts the World Cup.
Such practices in regard especially to foxes are permitted as business operations in some American states. The hand-reared foxes are put into fenced areas where pseudo-hunters can kill them, usually by following one of the human-friendly foxes up to a fence barrier and blasting it with an assault rifle. Additional money comes from the luxurious hunting lodges provided for customers.
All of this relates, of course, to the business of whale killing. With technically advanced search devices and military guns those on whaling ships are doing the equivalent of shooting fish in a bucket.
Our species uses the phrase "homo sapiens" to describe itself; maybe a better phrase would be something like homo assassinios. Comes a time...maybe...when -- many generations beyond now -- our descendants will say: "Why did they kill so unceasingly? Why was killing at the heart of their lives?"
Think this over-stated? Almost nothing is more political than eating. Each American eating meat from supermarkets and restaurants participates in the death of more than two thousand animals a year.
Then "civilization" adds in all matter of pseudo-hunters, baby seal killers, whalers, poachers, bushmeat eaters -- hundreds more. One study shows the English language has 85 words relating to killing, including:
ecocide destruction of the entire natural environment
ethnocide destruction of an entire culture
genocide destruction of an entire national, ethnic or religious group
mundicide destruction of the entire world
onmicide destruction of all living things
populicide killing of all people
speciocide killing of a species
To protest canned hunting in South Africa: https://www.secureconnect.at/4pfoten.org/petition/100427/
Up to 50,000 Euros is charged for permission to kill and take away the corpse of an adult male lion. From 2006 to 2008 the number of shot lions more than tripled; most of the killed were born in captivity. More of these coward-hunters are expected this year since South Africa hosts the World Cup.
Such practices in regard especially to foxes are permitted as business operations in some American states. The hand-reared foxes are put into fenced areas where pseudo-hunters can kill them, usually by following one of the human-friendly foxes up to a fence barrier and blasting it with an assault rifle. Additional money comes from the luxurious hunting lodges provided for customers.
All of this relates, of course, to the business of whale killing. With technically advanced search devices and military guns those on whaling ships are doing the equivalent of shooting fish in a bucket.
Our species uses the phrase "homo sapiens" to describe itself; maybe a better phrase would be something like homo assassinios. Comes a time...maybe...when -- many generations beyond now -- our descendants will say: "Why did they kill so unceasingly? Why was killing at the heart of their lives?"
Think this over-stated? Almost nothing is more political than eating. Each American eating meat from supermarkets and restaurants participates in the death of more than two thousand animals a year.
Then "civilization" adds in all matter of pseudo-hunters, baby seal killers, whalers, poachers, bushmeat eaters -- hundreds more. One study shows the English language has 85 words relating to killing, including:
ecocide destruction of the entire natural environment
ethnocide destruction of an entire culture
genocide destruction of an entire national, ethnic or religious group
mundicide destruction of the entire world
onmicide destruction of all living things
populicide killing of all people
speciocide killing of a species
To protest canned hunting in South Africa: https://www.secureconnect.at/4pfoten.org/petition/100427/
Obama may permit commercial whaling
As a candidate Barack Obama declared that commercial whaling was “unacceptable.” Now as President, his International Whaling Commission (IWC) delegates are currently backing a plan that would legitimize commercial whaling for the first time in over 20 years.
Greenpeace link: http://us.greenpeace.org/site/DocServer/Photos_to_Save_the_Whales_Toolkit.pdf?docID=521
Androcles wrote Obama: "As a candidate you said commercial whaling was 'unacceptable." Changing your policy on whaling is more than 'unacceptable' -- it's horrifying. The world has moved beyond promoting mass murder of species. I do not want my America to join the nations who pursue such ignorant practices. All of knowledge and all of history stand against mass killings as an acceptable answer to anything in life itself. Stewardship of the earth has to replace 'anything for business.' I plead that you do not go backward. Stand with life, not death. Please."
Greenpeace link: http://us.greenpeace.org/site/DocServer/Photos_to_Save_the_Whales_Toolkit.pdf?docID=521
Androcles wrote Obama: "As a candidate you said commercial whaling was 'unacceptable." Changing your policy on whaling is more than 'unacceptable' -- it's horrifying. The world has moved beyond promoting mass murder of species. I do not want my America to join the nations who pursue such ignorant practices. All of knowledge and all of history stand against mass killings as an acceptable answer to anything in life itself. Stewardship of the earth has to replace 'anything for business.' I plead that you do not go backward. Stand with life, not death. Please."
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
TEXAS GOVERNOR PRAISES HIMSELF FOR KILL
Texas Governor Rick Perry shot a coyote while walking with his dog, then telephoned the Associated Press to describe his heroism. He used his laser-sighted.380 Ruger pistol because he said the coyote was "staring" at him and dog.
The Republican governor told the AP: "The coyote became mulch."
Wendy Keefover-Ring of WildEarth Guardians said "With all due respect to his manhood, 90-pound women in tennis shoes effectively scare 30-pound coyotes away with a sharp shout." She added that "Rick Perry's fierce attack on a little wild dog doesn't bring to mind the image of a macho gun-slinging Texan on the wild frontier. Sam Houston he is not."
Androcles left a note on the governor's site: "The way you've tried to make yourself into a national hero because you shot a coyote is sad. The intersections between humanity and the "wild" inhabitants of the earth grow ever more indistinct as habitats vanish. I can understand protecting your pet but why shoot and why call the press to brag? Such encounters are a tragedy, brought about entirely by humanity. We have a responsibility as stewards of the earth. The "solution" you espouse -- carry guns and kill animals at will -- is outmoded and marks you as more pitiable and ignorant than brave. A new world is evolving. I am sorry you belong to the destructive past."
The Republican governor told the AP: "The coyote became mulch."
Wendy Keefover-Ring of WildEarth Guardians said "With all due respect to his manhood, 90-pound women in tennis shoes effectively scare 30-pound coyotes away with a sharp shout." She added that "Rick Perry's fierce attack on a little wild dog doesn't bring to mind the image of a macho gun-slinging Texan on the wild frontier. Sam Houston he is not."
Androcles left a note on the governor's site: "The way you've tried to make yourself into a national hero because you shot a coyote is sad. The intersections between humanity and the "wild" inhabitants of the earth grow ever more indistinct as habitats vanish. I can understand protecting your pet but why shoot and why call the press to brag? Such encounters are a tragedy, brought about entirely by humanity. We have a responsibility as stewards of the earth. The "solution" you espouse -- carry guns and kill animals at will -- is outmoded and marks you as more pitiable and ignorant than brave. A new world is evolving. I am sorry you belong to the destructive past."
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Scene (Seen) near Boston's Copley Square
She had a cap of bright white hair in a swinging cut just below her ears. Her smartly-cut jacket in tangerine stopped at her waist to display her black well-cut slacks. Black wedge shoes lifted her about two inches above the ground which was important because she was five-feet tall at the most. Her body was more gently square than curved.
I was watching her out of a taxi window. Here’s the important thing: As striking as she was in general her face revealed her as being in her unsurgically-altered late eighties. But there’s more. She drew my attention because she was crossing in the middle of a block -- Boston style -- and was giving the classic “What” gesture with her shoulders and face to the taxi that had just braked to avoid her. Her upper body gesture with the accompanying facial expression could measure with the best of “street” language. But there’s more. As she made these gestures -- somewhat incongruous in the gorgeous outfit and coming from the small person capped with such a striking haircut -- she was putting a dark (Belgian?) chocolate into her mouth and held another one in her other hand.
She walked on through the next lane of traffic and proceeded with constant energy diagonally across Copley Square, a paved place with a fountain, a few trees, a few flower beds and some sculptures, in front of the Boston Public Garden.
As my taxi moved on I almost told the driver to let me out. I wanted to follow her, maybe talk with her. WHO are you? But the weight of groceries piled into the taxi’s trunk held me snared as my taxi moved on.
Who was she? Her clothing could have cost a lot or could be made up of expensive pieces she’d saved for years. The haircut was both casual and stunning in the way that either costs a lot or maybe was done in a student academy. The chocolates? Who knows?
But there was so much more: the spirit, the mien, the persona, the being that she was. Did I invent her? No, my good imagination is not that good. A fantasy? No, I was sane that day under the blue skies.
If she continued her diagonal path through Copley Square it would lead to the Copley Plaza Hotel with its gilded entry hall, its brilliant chandeliers, its Oak Room bar the most elegant in Boston. Was she staying at that stately hotel after dropping into Logan Airport on her private jet -- a roaming trillionairess who did as she pleased as the years ticked into larger and larger numbers?
Was she a free spirit who would continue on past the Copley Plaza into the deeps of the South End of Boston to her studio apartment where she had lived for decades? The South End with its historic brownstones sprucing farther every week from its polyglot past, some of its artists yet hanging on.
Who ever she was, she was a vision. Maybe an avatar? From the past? From the future? From the slippery now that some of us yearn to inhabit?
I was watching her out of a taxi window. Here’s the important thing: As striking as she was in general her face revealed her as being in her unsurgically-altered late eighties. But there’s more. She drew my attention because she was crossing in the middle of a block -- Boston style -- and was giving the classic “What” gesture with her shoulders and face to the taxi that had just braked to avoid her. Her upper body gesture with the accompanying facial expression could measure with the best of “street” language. But there’s more. As she made these gestures -- somewhat incongruous in the gorgeous outfit and coming from the small person capped with such a striking haircut -- she was putting a dark (Belgian?) chocolate into her mouth and held another one in her other hand.
She walked on through the next lane of traffic and proceeded with constant energy diagonally across Copley Square, a paved place with a fountain, a few trees, a few flower beds and some sculptures, in front of the Boston Public Garden.
As my taxi moved on I almost told the driver to let me out. I wanted to follow her, maybe talk with her. WHO are you? But the weight of groceries piled into the taxi’s trunk held me snared as my taxi moved on.
Who was she? Her clothing could have cost a lot or could be made up of expensive pieces she’d saved for years. The haircut was both casual and stunning in the way that either costs a lot or maybe was done in a student academy. The chocolates? Who knows?
But there was so much more: the spirit, the mien, the persona, the being that she was. Did I invent her? No, my good imagination is not that good. A fantasy? No, I was sane that day under the blue skies.
If she continued her diagonal path through Copley Square it would lead to the Copley Plaza Hotel with its gilded entry hall, its brilliant chandeliers, its Oak Room bar the most elegant in Boston. Was she staying at that stately hotel after dropping into Logan Airport on her private jet -- a roaming trillionairess who did as she pleased as the years ticked into larger and larger numbers?
Was she a free spirit who would continue on past the Copley Plaza into the deeps of the South End of Boston to her studio apartment where she had lived for decades? The South End with its historic brownstones sprucing farther every week from its polyglot past, some of its artists yet hanging on.
Who ever she was, she was a vision. Maybe an avatar? From the past? From the future? From the slippery now that some of us yearn to inhabit?
Friday, April 9, 2010
DISCOVERY TV SIGNS PALIN TO TALK ABOUT NATURE
Discovery TV has signed Sarah Palin to host a program about Alaska's wildlife and nature. Defenders of Wildlife has a petition opposing this move, which is wrong-headed as well as bizarre. On the website Androcles said:
"Palin has tried to pay bounties for parts of animal corpses, and promotes an image of herself/as a hunter/killer as part of her self-aggrandizing ego-driven need to be some version of the cute girl who hunts and socializes with the "real" guys. In reality "hunting" as practiced by Palin and the guys is not hunting. It is slaughter and massacre of defenseless creatures using assault rifles from protected cover to kill them at food lures or to shoot them from the air. Humans acting in this way are as outdated and dangerous to the soul of the world as were those who created the entertainment-killing in the Roman Coliseum. Don't you remember she asked for bloody wolf haunches to be brought to the Alaska State House so bounties could be paid?
Her views show no respect, honor, or concern for the planet or for nature. Putting her on Discovery would be a horror and a betrayal of the enlightenment we have been accustomed to see on Discovery."
"Palin has tried to pay bounties for parts of animal corpses, and promotes an image of herself/as a hunter/killer as part of her self-aggrandizing ego-driven need to be some version of the cute girl who hunts and socializes with the "real" guys. In reality "hunting" as practiced by Palin and the guys is not hunting. It is slaughter and massacre of defenseless creatures using assault rifles from protected cover to kill them at food lures or to shoot them from the air. Humans acting in this way are as outdated and dangerous to the soul of the world as were those who created the entertainment-killing in the Roman Coliseum. Don't you remember she asked for bloody wolf haunches to be brought to the Alaska State House so bounties could be paid?
Her views show no respect, honor, or concern for the planet or for nature. Putting her on Discovery would be a horror and a betrayal of the enlightenment we have been accustomed to see on Discovery."
Sunday, April 4, 2010
OH HAPPY DAY
OH HAPPY DAY
During the long days of an illness … reading about the world …
I thought mostly: s i g h.
On the second day of April in this year 2010 I was sitting on the “T” going to a doctor’s appointment when my world changed as quickly as if I had been swept (by a worm hole?) into a fantasy.
It was the kind of subway car where you can sit on parallel rows facing each other. Across from me I noticed a woman absorbed in an old black book, which, squinting, I could see was Antigone. She was 40-ish, absorbed, dark hair drawn back, a former ballerina? Next to her a woman, older, her countenance weary, was absorbed in a paperback, Cabin 333. I realized that five of those in this seven-place seat-set were lost in reading: a young woman, perhaps 27, a hardcover copy of God Is Not Great…a slender bookish-appearing man, The Economist. A handsome dark-haired man, perhaps early 30s, had his hands wrapped so securely around his hardcover book I couldn’t read the title. As I was leaving the car I asked him for the title: Treasures of the Earth: Need, Greed and a Sustainable Future. Friendly and curious he said “Why do you want to know?” I’m surveying what people read on the T, I said. He gave a big smile.
I paused on an outside bench to ponder: If five out of seven people on a random subway car were reading what I just saw they were indeed reading, then the world is better, it has to be! Maybe the change is coming. My heart had lifted up, reasonable or not. The world seemed hopeful. My persistent hyper-seriousness danced in my mind a semi-hostile tango with my intermittently-appearing happy heart. I swept it all away and walked on with my happy heart.
Coming back I was walking from the far end of the Charles Street Station’s platform when I remembered a scene from years before. Two young teens, black, were standing with their backs to the river; I heard one say “Maybe we can see Charles.” I thought to help: “No, you have to turn around, it’s the river, the Charles River, over there.”
On an instant their faces were startled. One said “It’s our cousin Charles. Sometimes we can see him in the yard.” They had been looking with such great intensity in the correct direction: at the Charles Street Jail. While I, a white busybody stranger, had thought she would “help” them understand what Charles was. “I’m sorry to interrupt,” I awkwardly said as I took a step away. Oh! My chagrin arrived like a lightning strike. I was consumed with a grievous awareness.
Life lessons.
Now on today’s day I crossed over for the first time to the hotel developed in 2007 out of the imposing building that had been built in 1851 as a “humane” jail for short-term prisoners. I entered beneath a modernist sign “The Liberty Hotel,” walked past a bar café labeled in jaunty sans serif letters: “Clink.” The concierge told me the jail’s history was illustrated in a small space around the corner of the gigantic atrium.
Among the prisoners in the early decades were murderers awaiting trial and young boys fined $3 and two days in jail for “playing ball in the street.” In 1945 a U-Boat commander, seized in the Azores and imprisoned in Charles Street Jail with his crew, killed himself with glass from his sunglasses.
The exhibition heralded one of the most well known residents: birth control activist William R Baird imprisoned in 1967 for giving out birth control devices at Boston University. State law at the time banned distribution of contraceptives except to married couples with a doctor’s prescription, a case eventually overturned by the Supreme Court.
Standing in the great atrium I registered how confidently architects and designers had transformed the old building into “Can you believe it!” Vast walls of nineteenth century brick, uncovered in their careful beauty, sweep around the atrium like upright meadows. Hugely ornate round windows drew visual focus in a way that must not have been possible before.
And there is a slight eeriness, like the thrill we deny we feel when we see an accident. The past can easily be felt. Some will no doubt sense the prisoners, the bad times.
The concierge had an impeccable and solicitous manner far beyond what we usually see in these helpful professionals. A kind of shield? For him? For us?
I walked away to find and eat unwashed strawberries out of their box. To daydream about the subway readers, the black teenagers, the prisoners, the privileged guests lounging at the bottom of the atrium’s vastness. How fascinating to see the world. I was super alive. I was happy.
During the long days of an illness … reading about the world …
I thought mostly: s i g h.
On the second day of April in this year 2010 I was sitting on the “T” going to a doctor’s appointment when my world changed as quickly as if I had been swept (by a worm hole?) into a fantasy.
It was the kind of subway car where you can sit on parallel rows facing each other. Across from me I noticed a woman absorbed in an old black book, which, squinting, I could see was Antigone. She was 40-ish, absorbed, dark hair drawn back, a former ballerina? Next to her a woman, older, her countenance weary, was absorbed in a paperback, Cabin 333. I realized that five of those in this seven-place seat-set were lost in reading: a young woman, perhaps 27, a hardcover copy of God Is Not Great…a slender bookish-appearing man, The Economist. A handsome dark-haired man, perhaps early 30s, had his hands wrapped so securely around his hardcover book I couldn’t read the title. As I was leaving the car I asked him for the title: Treasures of the Earth: Need, Greed and a Sustainable Future. Friendly and curious he said “Why do you want to know?” I’m surveying what people read on the T, I said. He gave a big smile.
I paused on an outside bench to ponder: If five out of seven people on a random subway car were reading what I just saw they were indeed reading, then the world is better, it has to be! Maybe the change is coming. My heart had lifted up, reasonable or not. The world seemed hopeful. My persistent hyper-seriousness danced in my mind a semi-hostile tango with my intermittently-appearing happy heart. I swept it all away and walked on with my happy heart.
Coming back I was walking from the far end of the Charles Street Station’s platform when I remembered a scene from years before. Two young teens, black, were standing with their backs to the river; I heard one say “Maybe we can see Charles.” I thought to help: “No, you have to turn around, it’s the river, the Charles River, over there.”
On an instant their faces were startled. One said “It’s our cousin Charles. Sometimes we can see him in the yard.” They had been looking with such great intensity in the correct direction: at the Charles Street Jail. While I, a white busybody stranger, had thought she would “help” them understand what Charles was. “I’m sorry to interrupt,” I awkwardly said as I took a step away. Oh! My chagrin arrived like a lightning strike. I was consumed with a grievous awareness.
Life lessons.
Now on today’s day I crossed over for the first time to the hotel developed in 2007 out of the imposing building that had been built in 1851 as a “humane” jail for short-term prisoners. I entered beneath a modernist sign “The Liberty Hotel,” walked past a bar café labeled in jaunty sans serif letters: “Clink.” The concierge told me the jail’s history was illustrated in a small space around the corner of the gigantic atrium.
Among the prisoners in the early decades were murderers awaiting trial and young boys fined $3 and two days in jail for “playing ball in the street.” In 1945 a U-Boat commander, seized in the Azores and imprisoned in Charles Street Jail with his crew, killed himself with glass from his sunglasses.
The exhibition heralded one of the most well known residents: birth control activist William R Baird imprisoned in 1967 for giving out birth control devices at Boston University. State law at the time banned distribution of contraceptives except to married couples with a doctor’s prescription, a case eventually overturned by the Supreme Court.
Standing in the great atrium I registered how confidently architects and designers had transformed the old building into “Can you believe it!” Vast walls of nineteenth century brick, uncovered in their careful beauty, sweep around the atrium like upright meadows. Hugely ornate round windows drew visual focus in a way that must not have been possible before.
And there is a slight eeriness, like the thrill we deny we feel when we see an accident. The past can easily be felt. Some will no doubt sense the prisoners, the bad times.
The concierge had an impeccable and solicitous manner far beyond what we usually see in these helpful professionals. A kind of shield? For him? For us?
I walked away to find and eat unwashed strawberries out of their box. To daydream about the subway readers, the black teenagers, the prisoners, the privileged guests lounging at the bottom of the atrium’s vastness. How fascinating to see the world. I was super alive. I was happy.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
We win on this one
Massachusetts Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz reported that the House Bill prohibiting devocalization of dogs and cats was passed by the Senate.
She said This legislation will make the very painful and cruel act of devocalizing dogs and cats illegal in Massachusetts, except when deemed medically necessary by a licensed veterinarian. The bill will also pose strict criminal penalties on anyone, including a veterinarian, who conducts this surgical procedure unlawfully, including imprisonment, fines and/or losing their practicing license.
In my letter on this issue I said: "This bill is being opposed by commercial animal sellers who want to add destructive amendments.
"Commercial breeders want to devocalize animals so they can locate their often-suspect "breeding mills" in any area at all without complaints about loud sounds. Additionally they want to expand their client base by selling the "convenience" of customized bark-free animals.
"Devocalization goes along with "declawing" in being a misleading euphemism used to advance sales and mislead the public. Declawing means amputation of parts of the cats feet. Devocalization means surgical excision of the vocal cords and larynx, a complex operation performed in a delicate and important part of the animal's body, with the risk of collateral damage, infection, leisons, scarring and the assurance of pain along with permanent psychological harm to the animal.
"Devocalization" is against the law in the UK and parts of Europe.
Commercial breeders treat animals as product, therefore no moral obligation to the animals' lives. They seek buyers who want a modified (read mutilated) animal in order to reduce the amount of care and attention to the animal.
When barking causes neighborhood disputes and legal problems, it usually begins because the owners have not provided the dogs with the basic needs for their lives.The dilemna of chronic excessive vocalization by dogs rests on the shoulders of the owners, usually guilty of improper socialization, care and training, conditions of stress, boredom, neglect, fear or frustration. Some owners make insensible decisions, such as putting a German Shepherd or other large breed in a tiny apartment with no provision for walks or other exercises. Many dogs are led out of the house for five minutes twice a day, taken a few feet down the sidewalk to relieve themselves and dragged back into what is -- in fact -- a prison.
Mutilating dogs and cats for human "convenience" violates the tenets of many spiritualities in the world. Those who push these mutilations exist on a continuum of degraded behavior that harms the world and the spirits of those who seek new answers for life on the planet. We humans are OF the earth. Those we call "other" animals are OF the earth. A new consciousness has begun to evolve seeking ways for us to live congenially, pragmatically and spiritually with all the rich life forms sharing the earth with us. There are hopeful signs we may yet transcend the horrors of the present and the past.
She said This legislation will make the very painful and cruel act of devocalizing dogs and cats illegal in Massachusetts, except when deemed medically necessary by a licensed veterinarian. The bill will also pose strict criminal penalties on anyone, including a veterinarian, who conducts this surgical procedure unlawfully, including imprisonment, fines and/or losing their practicing license.
In my letter on this issue I said: "This bill is being opposed by commercial animal sellers who want to add destructive amendments.
"Commercial breeders want to devocalize animals so they can locate their often-suspect "breeding mills" in any area at all without complaints about loud sounds. Additionally they want to expand their client base by selling the "convenience" of customized bark-free animals.
"Devocalization goes along with "declawing" in being a misleading euphemism used to advance sales and mislead the public. Declawing means amputation of parts of the cats feet. Devocalization means surgical excision of the vocal cords and larynx, a complex operation performed in a delicate and important part of the animal's body, with the risk of collateral damage, infection, leisons, scarring and the assurance of pain along with permanent psychological harm to the animal.
"Devocalization" is against the law in the UK and parts of Europe.
Commercial breeders treat animals as product, therefore no moral obligation to the animals' lives. They seek buyers who want a modified (read mutilated) animal in order to reduce the amount of care and attention to the animal.
When barking causes neighborhood disputes and legal problems, it usually begins because the owners have not provided the dogs with the basic needs for their lives.The dilemna of chronic excessive vocalization by dogs rests on the shoulders of the owners, usually guilty of improper socialization, care and training, conditions of stress, boredom, neglect, fear or frustration. Some owners make insensible decisions, such as putting a German Shepherd or other large breed in a tiny apartment with no provision for walks or other exercises. Many dogs are led out of the house for five minutes twice a day, taken a few feet down the sidewalk to relieve themselves and dragged back into what is -- in fact -- a prison.
Mutilating dogs and cats for human "convenience" violates the tenets of many spiritualities in the world. Those who push these mutilations exist on a continuum of degraded behavior that harms the world and the spirits of those who seek new answers for life on the planet. We humans are OF the earth. Those we call "other" animals are OF the earth. A new consciousness has begun to evolve seeking ways for us to live congenially, pragmatically and spiritually with all the rich life forms sharing the earth with us. There are hopeful signs we may yet transcend the horrors of the present and the past.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Bureau of Land Management Wants to Remove 1000 horses
My personal words preceding the opposition letter:
"Being part of the change in the enlightened America now being evolved means looking carefully at the customary approach to "wild" animals who are our co-inhabitants of the planet. We need to question, with appropriate respect, human ideas about "management." Imprisoning, culling, removal, killing -- those methods belong to the atavistic past. Along with the original human inhabitants, most of the non-human animals living on this continent were killed in terrible and persistent massacres. Life itself now has reached a point where we must learn from, not blindly copy, the past, when we must not unthinkingly resort to solutions that were wrong even at the time."
Following from 'In Defense of Animals.' The link is at the bottom.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has been found repeatedly to arbitrarily set Appropriate Management Levels (AMLs) for wild horses. The BLM's contention that approximately 1.7 million acres in the two HMAs can only sustain approximately 1,165 horses is questionable.
The proposed massive removal of wild horses and burros from the Adobe Town and Salt Wells HMAs and the warehousing of these animals in government holding facilities violates the intent of Congress and the will of the American people that our wild horses be managed on the range in a humane and minimally-intrusive manner that preserves their wild and free-roaming behavior.
https://secure2.convio.net/ida/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=1421
"Being part of the change in the enlightened America now being evolved means looking carefully at the customary approach to "wild" animals who are our co-inhabitants of the planet. We need to question, with appropriate respect, human ideas about "management." Imprisoning, culling, removal, killing -- those methods belong to the atavistic past. Along with the original human inhabitants, most of the non-human animals living on this continent were killed in terrible and persistent massacres. Life itself now has reached a point where we must learn from, not blindly copy, the past, when we must not unthinkingly resort to solutions that were wrong even at the time."
Following from 'In Defense of Animals.' The link is at the bottom.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has been found repeatedly to arbitrarily set Appropriate Management Levels (AMLs) for wild horses. The BLM's contention that approximately 1.7 million acres in the two HMAs can only sustain approximately 1,165 horses is questionable.
The proposed massive removal of wild horses and burros from the Adobe Town and Salt Wells HMAs and the warehousing of these animals in government holding facilities violates the intent of Congress and the will of the American people that our wild horses be managed on the range in a humane and minimally-intrusive manner that preserves their wild and free-roaming behavior.
https://secure2.convio.net/ida/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=1421
Friday, March 12, 2010
Canada to begin annual seal pup slaughter
The first two pghs are my precede to the following Humane Society letter to the Canadian prime minister. Sign by pasting this in your address line:
http://humanesociety.org/cancelthehunt
"Killing animals to sell their skin for ornamental wear is as outdated as killing entertainment in the Roman Coliseum. Aside from the horror of the seal killings, what kind of message does it extend to the world? We are already in the transitional time when humans realize that other species are not here for wholesale murder at the whim or commercial desire of humans. My own country also has customs of murdering animals; but please, can Canada be among the countries who say: No More?
The wholesale murder of baby seals is hurting the soul of the world."
Harp seals are facing a natural disaster. They need the sea ice to give birth to and nurse their young.
But this year, Environment Canada reports the lowest ice formation in history off Canada's east coast. For the first year on record, virtually no sea ice has formed in key seal birthing areas. The impact will be devastating. Many mother seals are likely to abort in the water, and unprecedented numbers of pups may die.
In the short term, we cannot halt the devastating impacts of climate change on these seals. But, a responsible government must take action to save the pups who manage to survive.
If the 2010 commercial seal hunt takes place, the few seal pups who live through this disaster will be clubbed and shot to death as they cling to tiny pans of ice.
The world is watching Canada's commercial seal hunt this year. Please protect both the seals and Canada's international reputation: Cancel the 2010 commercial seal hunt.
In the longer term, I urge you to consider the extremely negative animal welfare, ecological, and economic impacts of the commercial seal hunt, and end it for good.
http://humanesociety.org/cancelthehunt
"Killing animals to sell their skin for ornamental wear is as outdated as killing entertainment in the Roman Coliseum. Aside from the horror of the seal killings, what kind of message does it extend to the world? We are already in the transitional time when humans realize that other species are not here for wholesale murder at the whim or commercial desire of humans. My own country also has customs of murdering animals; but please, can Canada be among the countries who say: No More?
The wholesale murder of baby seals is hurting the soul of the world."
Harp seals are facing a natural disaster. They need the sea ice to give birth to and nurse their young.
But this year, Environment Canada reports the lowest ice formation in history off Canada's east coast. For the first year on record, virtually no sea ice has formed in key seal birthing areas. The impact will be devastating. Many mother seals are likely to abort in the water, and unprecedented numbers of pups may die.
In the short term, we cannot halt the devastating impacts of climate change on these seals. But, a responsible government must take action to save the pups who manage to survive.
If the 2010 commercial seal hunt takes place, the few seal pups who live through this disaster will be clubbed and shot to death as they cling to tiny pans of ice.
The world is watching Canada's commercial seal hunt this year. Please protect both the seals and Canada's international reputation: Cancel the 2010 commercial seal hunt.
In the longer term, I urge you to consider the extremely negative animal welfare, ecological, and economic impacts of the commercial seal hunt, and end it for good.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Sometimes we win ... a little bit
Many of us wrote to the USDA after seeing a nightmare video about veal calves at a Vermont slaughter house. We can dream of a time when infant calves are not packed without being able to move into dark boxes for their entire short lives to feed the human desire for white baby meat. But for now we have a chance that their last days and hours will not be the unrelenting nightmare shown on a Humane Society film. Part of the response from the USDA follows:
"Subject: Communication with FSIS Regarding Handling of Veal Calves at Vermont Facility
Dear Sir or Madam:
Thank you for your correspondence to the Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the handling of veal calves at a Vermont facility. USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has been asked to provide a response to you. We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns.
As you know, USDA launched an immediate investigation upon learning of an undercover video produced by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) that depicted animal abuse at Bushway Packing, Inc., of Grand Isle, Vermont. The deplorable scenes recorded in the video released by HSUS are unequivocally unacceptable. USDA’s FSIS is continuing its investigation into alleged violations depicted in the video.
In addition to its ongoing investigation, FSIS immediately suspended inspection at the plant, effectively shutting it down. USDA fully supports the investigation of all those involved in these alleged violations of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA), which requires that all livestock at federally inspected establishments be handled and slaughtered in a humane way. To this end, the Secretary has also called on USDA’s Inspector General to conduct a criminal investigation of the events in the video.
As you know, USDA launched an immediate investigation upon learning of an undercover video produced by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) that depicted animal abuse at Bushway Packing, Inc., of Grand Isle, Vermont. The deplorable scenes recorded in the video released by HSUS are unequivocally unacceptable. USDA’s FSIS is continuing its investigation into alleged violations depicted in the video.
In addition to its ongoing investigation, FSIS immediately suspended inspection at the plant, effectively shutting it down. USDA fully supports the investigation of all those involved in these alleged violations of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA), which requires that all livestock at federally inspected establishments be handled and slaughtered in a humane way. To this end, the Secretary has also called on USDA’s Inspector General to conduct a criminal investigation of the events in the video. ..."
"Subject: Communication with FSIS Regarding Handling of Veal Calves at Vermont Facility
Dear Sir or Madam:
Thank you for your correspondence to the Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the handling of veal calves at a Vermont facility. USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has been asked to provide a response to you. We appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns.
As you know, USDA launched an immediate investigation upon learning of an undercover video produced by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) that depicted animal abuse at Bushway Packing, Inc., of Grand Isle, Vermont. The deplorable scenes recorded in the video released by HSUS are unequivocally unacceptable. USDA’s FSIS is continuing its investigation into alleged violations depicted in the video.
In addition to its ongoing investigation, FSIS immediately suspended inspection at the plant, effectively shutting it down. USDA fully supports the investigation of all those involved in these alleged violations of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA), which requires that all livestock at federally inspected establishments be handled and slaughtered in a humane way. To this end, the Secretary has also called on USDA’s Inspector General to conduct a criminal investigation of the events in the video.
As you know, USDA launched an immediate investigation upon learning of an undercover video produced by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) that depicted animal abuse at Bushway Packing, Inc., of Grand Isle, Vermont. The deplorable scenes recorded in the video released by HSUS are unequivocally unacceptable. USDA’s FSIS is continuing its investigation into alleged violations depicted in the video.
In addition to its ongoing investigation, FSIS immediately suspended inspection at the plant, effectively shutting it down. USDA fully supports the investigation of all those involved in these alleged violations of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA), which requires that all livestock at federally inspected establishments be handled and slaughtered in a humane way. To this end, the Secretary has also called on USDA’s Inspector General to conduct a criminal investigation of the events in the video. ..."
Monday, March 8, 2010
Wild horses and burros "Program"
Congressional hearings are scheduled again to decide on funding for "management" of wild horses and burros, meaning torturous round-ups, culling and killing.
Androcles wrote to the relevant congresspeople:
"Killing persons and animals as a solution to so-called problems needs to transition into the atavistic past of humanity. The time has already arrived when we must decide to co-habit with the other beings of the earth. Down the road of animal murder lies our destruction. Killing what we identify as inconvenient or as living on lands we want is not worthy of a civilized nation. Please join the new time now in transition. Please do not dig your feet into the murderous mud of the past."
Androcles wrote to the relevant congresspeople:
"Killing persons and animals as a solution to so-called problems needs to transition into the atavistic past of humanity. The time has already arrived when we must decide to co-habit with the other beings of the earth. Down the road of animal murder lies our destruction. Killing what we identify as inconvenient or as living on lands we want is not worthy of a civilized nation. Please join the new time now in transition. Please do not dig your feet into the murderous mud of the past."
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
U.S. may undermine whale moratorium
Greenpeace reported there is indication that some in the present administration are championing a deal to undermine the whale moratorium of 1986 and secure the future of the outrageous and unnecessary practice of commercial whaling. Although the moratorium has been defied by Japan, Iceland, and Norway, it has proven to be the most important whale conservation agreement in history. Androcles emailed the president:
"Killing the whales in ocean waters is like deliberately killing the inhabitants of another country. Nothing can justify it. Most enlightened humans have evolved in their consciousness and subsequently in their thinking about humanity's relationship to other species with whom we share the earth.
With every day we see that wholesale killing is not the solution or the way for the web of life to continue on this planet.
The same developments that created civilizations and enabled the ascent of humans as the apex predators on the planet gave us two conflicting opportunities. One was the technology to eliminate entire species for food, clothing, industry and ornament or because we wanted exclusive use of the land they occupied. At the same time came the other opportunity: through thinking and observation we began to see the precious and essential web of all life. There is no defensible reason to continue the method of earlier and more primitive mankind by killing species without regard for global consequences.
We humans pride ourselves on being the most successful predators in the history of the planet. Also we pride ourselves on the gift of consciousness. When will our consciousness see the impractical, immoral and perilous consequences of rampant killing? No killing is simply a killing.
The wholesale elimination of other species by murder and destruction of territory is not consistent with our survival.
"Killing the whales in ocean waters is like deliberately killing the inhabitants of another country. Nothing can justify it. Most enlightened humans have evolved in their consciousness and subsequently in their thinking about humanity's relationship to other species with whom we share the earth.
With every day we see that wholesale killing is not the solution or the way for the web of life to continue on this planet.
The same developments that created civilizations and enabled the ascent of humans as the apex predators on the planet gave us two conflicting opportunities. One was the technology to eliminate entire species for food, clothing, industry and ornament or because we wanted exclusive use of the land they occupied. At the same time came the other opportunity: through thinking and observation we began to see the precious and essential web of all life. There is no defensible reason to continue the method of earlier and more primitive mankind by killing species without regard for global consequences.
We humans pride ourselves on being the most successful predators in the history of the planet. Also we pride ourselves on the gift of consciousness. When will our consciousness see the impractical, immoral and perilous consequences of rampant killing? No killing is simply a killing.
The wholesale elimination of other species by murder and destruction of territory is not consistent with our survival.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Ellen DeGeneres, Cover Girl, and Animals
I've admired comedienne Ellen DeGeneres for her outlook on animals and was distressed to see her appearing in "Cover Girl" ads. I wrote to PETA -- which named her Woman of the Year for Animals -- to ask if Ms DeGeneres was aware that Cover Girl's parent company Proctor & Gamble is long known as one of the worst corporate offenders in practicing cruelty to animals through outdated tests. A good many of us have boycotted P & G and all its products for a long time because we know they continue to blind and kill thousands of animals, usually rabbits, every year even though alternate tests for so-called "hypoallergenic" products are available.
PETA emailed a reply within the same day! Here it is:
Before signing with Cover Girl, Ellen was diligent in making sure that Cover Girl no longer tests on animals. She made it crystal clear that the company’s "no testing" policy was essential in order for her to agree to be its spokesperson. We love her for that! It is because of principled people like Ellen that we will see an end to animal testing for cosmetics.
Cover Girl's parent company, Procter & Gamble (P&G), announced in 1999 that it had revised its animal-testing policy. P&G stated that it will end the use of animal tests for all its current nonfood, nondrug products. This indicates that P&G realizes the importance of the animal-testing issue.
However, P&G has not permanently halted all nonrequired animal experiments. According to P&G, it will not perform experiments on many existing products, but it has not agreed to stop testing new ingredients and products on animals. This is why P&G products are not listed as cruelty-free by PETA. In addition, P&G subsidiary Iams continues to perform unnecessary tests on animals (for information, please visit http://www.IamsCruelty.com).
Please contact P&G's chair, and encourage him to make a permanent commitment to never again test any product or ingredient on animals.
Alan G. Lafley
Chair, President, and CEO
Procter & Gamble
1 Procter & Gamble Plz.
Cincinnati, OH 45202
513-983-1100
513-983-9369 (fax)
http://www.pg.com "
PETA emailed a reply within the same day! Here it is:
"Thank you for writing to us about Ellen DeGeneres appearing in Cover Girl ads.
Before signing with Cover Girl, Ellen was diligent in making sure that Cover Girl no longer tests on animals. She made it crystal clear that the company’s "no testing" policy was essential in order for her to agree to be its spokesperson. We love her for that! It is because of principled people like Ellen that we will see an end to animal testing for cosmetics.
Cover Girl's parent company, Procter & Gamble (P&G), announced in 1999 that it had revised its animal-testing policy. P&G stated that it will end the use of animal tests for all its current nonfood, nondrug products. This indicates that P&G realizes the importance of the animal-testing issue.
However, P&G has not permanently halted all nonrequired animal experiments. According to P&G, it will not perform experiments on many existing products, but it has not agreed to stop testing new ingredients and products on animals. This is why P&G products are not listed as cruelty-free by PETA. In addition, P&G subsidiary Iams continues to perform unnecessary tests on animals (for information, please visit http://www.IamsCruelty.com).
Please contact P&G's chair, and encourage him to make a permanent commitment to never again test any product or ingredient on animals.
Alan G. Lafley
Chair, President, and CEO
Procter & Gamble
1 Procter & Gamble Plz.
Cincinnati, OH 45202
513-983-1100
513-983-9369 (fax)
http://www.pg.com "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)