On May 12, 2011, Prime Minister Kan (Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters) ordered the Fukushima Governor to euthanize the remaining livestock in the 20km no-entry zone. Since livestock are someone’s property, Fukushima prefecture has to obtain permission from the owners of the livestock when euthanizing. The decision was made based on the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency. The method of euthanazia should comply with the ones set forth in the guidelines of OIE (The World Organization for Animal Health) and American Veterinary Medical Association (The AVMA). Based on that, the Japanese government uses drugs like tranquilizers and muscle-relaxants to euthanize the animals. There is no humane way of killing, animals always faint in agony before given any of these drugs that definitely put them to death.

The officials of Fukushima government stated that “these livestock does not have any market value. By destroying them, livestock farmers can start a new life.”  Animals are property of people. Livestock does not have any value other than as “products.”

According to Yomiuri Newspaper, issued on April 24 2011, there were 4,000 cattle, 30,000 pigs, 630,000 chickens and 100 horses in the 9 effected villages in Fukushima. Most of the pigs and chickens had died by last summer.

Yomiuri newspaper reports that 80% of cattle in the affected areas still remain trapped in the 20 km no-entry zone, as of October 20, 2011. Some of them were abandoned and left to their own devices, while others left locked enclosures to suffer slow death. Those that have been abandoned are being described by Yomiuri, as “invading people’s property.”

These animals are also the victims of human’s arrogance and neglect. They are dying through no fault of their own and in a very sad irony the enslaved creatures who through this terrible event gained their freedom for brief time, are slaughtered in the end, none the less.  They are guilty of nothing other than being non-human.

<references>

OIE:

http://www.oie.int/index.php?id=169&L=0&htmfile=chapitre_1.7.6.htm

AVMA:

http://www.avma.org/

Yomiuri Newspaper “野良牛　捕獲１割未満 警戒区域の民家被害” Nov.10, 2011:

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/news/20111109-OYT1T01023.htm?from=tw

According to the Fisheries Minister, “We had no choice but to end (the season) to ensure the safety of lives (from Sea Shepherd etc.), assets and our ships,” Fisheries Minister Michihiko Kano told a news conference. (Quoted from Washington Post) But as you can imagine, this is a propaganda.

There are several reasons for Japan (needed to) to stop whaling early this year.

1. The Institute of Cetacean Research (I.C.R.) is in the red.

The I.C.R. incomes are as below in 2010:
For whale research, our tax money is used as subsidy, the amount is
¥900,000,000. The profit of whale meat sales which is about ¥6,500,000,000.

However the Government Revitalization plan to screen budget and cut substantial amount of expenses, the subsidy for I.C.R. was greatly reduced. Also the whale meat consumption has kept declining, therefore I.C.R. can not longer keep the body as it is, as of December 2010.

2.　They system of Amakudari (the practice of rewarding government officials with cushy, post-retirement jobs in the area of their official responsibility) Personnel at I.C.R. was demolished as of December 2010.

According to the list of staff of I.C.R. in November 2010, there are no amakudari employees in the list, in order to reduce expenses. They are seriously in the red.

3. A decrease in Japan Whaling Association activities.
The long term Chairman at Japan Whaling Association, Nakajima resined. He was a very strong advocator for supporting whale hunting. This changes the culture and strategies of the association and they are planning to greatly reduce their activities (and researches.)

4. Simply, people do not eat whale meat anymore.
Whale meat is not popular at all. There is no need to spend so much of our tax money into such insignificant activities, which they claim as “scientific researches.”

So they stopped whaling, not because of Sea Shepherd’s aggressive protest, but there are also many other factors that influenced in bringing about the stop.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/japan-cuts-its-whaling-hunt-short-will-it-be-/blog/33374

February 19, 2011

How will the Police determine who to suspect?  That is my simple question.  Recently my husband had a very heated online “discussion” with his old friend who is a cop.  He had spent several days arguing back and forth with the friend.  The friend could just not answer the simple question I have just asked.  He admitted that “racial profiling” would likely be employed, after avoiding that admission for more than 30 hours. He believed that it was unfortunate but necessary and would not violate the fourth amendment.

Other men joined the discussion.  However they were too close-minded and outraged at people on the left and progressive and they did not make a logical argument.  I can tell that these people just hate liberals.  I felt also very disappointed that the county that we will be living in in the near future is so divided and there is a lot of hatred and anger.  I realized that the antagonism toward the Obama administration and liberals is so powerful and so illogical.

I am very concerned. If this Arizona law stands, how much division will be created (rather than been fixed) at the boarder and in other states around the country if they follow suite.

I am also concerned about the police’s judgement. Ezra Klein stated, “you might say, most cops are good guys, and they’ll use it responsibly. And some cops aren’t good guys, and they won’t use the law responsibly and they won’t deal with the fear and anger it generates diplomatically.”

It is true that the immigration policy should be reconsidered to suite the current situation, however this law will only further complicate the already complicated immigration problems, rather than resolving the situation.

No need to explain.

Well said and put. No need to add words.

The US Supreme Court ruled in January 2010 that it is unconstitutional for congress to make laws limiting corporations’ financial contributions to the political dialogue, any laws. Congress and the president may now talk of legislating some set of laws yet, under some other pretense, to limit corporations “free speech” rights, but this is a red herring. If and when any laws are actually enacted, they will be struck down by the court, and all the while money will be pouring into and corrupting further the political system of the country.

Understand that the American people no longer have the right to legally restrain corporate monetary influence on their own political system. The highest court in the land now interprets the constitution’s first amendment as providing protection to “corporate citizens”, from “human citizens”. Read that again because this is not hyperbole, it is absolutely the real situation now. This does not bode well for the future of the nation.

Corporations first, nearly a century ago, persuaded the then US Supreme Court to recognize them as “citizens” of the nation, with many commensurate rights. They cynically and as it may yet turn out; ironically, claimed these rights under the 14th amendment to the constitution, an amendment enacted to protect the rights of newly freed slaves. So we have the following legal reasoning: The court says corporations are “citizens” under the 14th amendment. Money is a form of speech, and speech is protected under the 1st amendment. Therefore it is unconstitutional for citizens, the people, even through their elected officials in the legislative process, to limit the rights of other, corporate, citizens. The problem is corporations are not real people and are in fact creations of the state. They are not your neighbors, friends or families, no matter how hard they may try to appear to be. They are sort of “tin men” without hearts or souls. They may want to be human, but will not nor should they ever be. We have made a huge mistake in affording them the status they now enjoy.

We are now left, as far as I can see, with only two possible ways of reigning in corporate influence in our political system, in our democracy. The first would be if the court reverses itself and the second would be a constitutional amendment.

Be assured, the first is not going to happen. There is no amount of public pressure that will dispose the court to reverse their own decision, and frankly there really should not be. The constitution enshrines the members of the supreme court to lifetime appointments to insulate them from the whims of public opinion, so they are in a sense untouchables. The five judges who wrote the majority opinion are going to be on the court for some time yet. In a classic “catch-22″ we can only wait for members to retire or pass away but during that interval the corporations can institutionalized their agenda, making a change in the court’s ideological make up unlikely, or worse moot, because the political system will have been gamed beyond redemption.

As for the second, a constitutional amendment, let’s face it, it will be difficult. With everything Americans have on their collective plate at the moment and all the daily distractions of modern American life, I cannot see the society being able to complete such an arduous task. Not to mention that the corporations will be able to direct enormous resources at defeating this over the course of the several years this process would likely take. Anyway, in the end we are far too fragmented a society now to be able to revisit and agree to change a document like the constitution which is a fundamental instrument in maintaining the little cohesion we do have.

Mr. Obama raised a worrisome, record breaking $800 million in the last campaign cycle. According to the IRS, in 2005, corporate America was worth $23 trillion. Comparatively speaking they have unlimited resources. Corporations and politicians will not exercise self-restraint based on the people’s will nor what is good for the country. Corporations cannot do so by law as they have a legal, fiduciary responsibility to shareholders to do all within their power to increase the returns on their shareholders’ investments. The politicians will not because of fear. They fear they will be buried by their opponents’ corporate money, so they will have afford themselves of as much of it as they can.

Unless we see and comprehend the seriousness of what has just been done to our political system in the US and act to mitigate it, in pretty short order, I believe we may some day in the not too distant future, find ourselves talking about democracy in the past tense, and in hushed tones at that. A corporate fascism of the future will have no need to maintain the veneer of democracy nor tolerate any possibility of it’s return. Life under corporate control in 21st century may be comfortable compared to let’s say 14th century serfdom I suspect, but oh so unnecessarily diminished.

(Duane, 2010)

http://blogs.reuters.com/photo/2010/03/29/dark-side-of-japans-pet-boom/

Reality is always tinted by flashy illusions.  Clothing stores for pets shows warped phenomenon which was created by the pet industry in Japan.  You wonder, where are puppies and kittens at pet shops go, if they are not sold? Why are there only puppies and kittens?  Why are they in a small plastic case and being sold after midnight in the downtown of Tokyo?  Something terribly wrong is going on but the dark side of the pet industry has not been shown to public it is always hidden, as the news depicted the sickening truce about a pet funeral undertaker that kept dumping pets’ dead bodies in the mountain in Saitama.

First when Kim Kyung-Hoon contacted me, I was not sure how much she knew about the problems about animals in Japan.  She has spent a lot of time and begging her boss to let her cover the dark side of the pet industry in Japan.  She did it so well.
She wrote a short but very straightforward story about the pet industry in Japan.  She video-taped “dream box” where unwanted dogs and cats will be suffocated and be killed by carbon dioxide gas.

Please hear their voices. These dogs you see in the video in the Tokushima pound have destroyed.

REUTERS: Dark Side of Japan’s Pet Industry.

http://blogs.reuters.com/photo/2010/03/29/dark-side-of-japans-pet-boom/

2. Freedom from Discomfort – by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.

3. Freedom from Pain, Injury or Disease – by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.

4. Freedom to Express Normal Behavior – by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal’s own kind.

5. Freedom from Fear and Distress – by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.
FAWAC states that, “Stockmanship, plus the training and supervision necessary to achieve required standards, are key factors in the handling and care of livestock.”  In Japan, the idea of animal welfare is rather new and there are few farmhouse stockmanship conceded toward 5 freedoms.

A lot of people would wonder about the word “animal” and “welfare.”  Please remember that the livestock has as complex nerve system as humans and they feel pain and have emotions.  They need to be treated ethically and should have freedom to move around.

I visited a slaughter house that was run by the local government in Hokkaido in 2007.  Slaughter houses have a death laden air around them.  High pitched machinery sound spreads out, but that is actually the sound of pig screaming.  In the back of the building, the drain had dark red streams.  The smell that seems like fresh and blood also covers the place.  The whole scene is haunting.  Pigs are terrified, since they know that are killed soon, just like the other pigs were.  Before death, they wait in a packed small stall, trenching and crying for help.  Some are pasing and some are deadly depressed.
The slaughterhouse in Hokkaido had a memorial grave stone for slaughtered animals there.  Workers go there to commemorate the lost lives and pains that the animals had to have.  If the good conscience arises strongly sometimes in their lives, things may change for the livestock gradually.

Cheap yakiniku, yakitori, ramen shops are everywhere in Tokyo, or any cities in Japan.  Each one of them use and waste tons of meat and food.  When sitting in front of a deliciously looking food at restaurant , even if your conscience reminds you about the terrified pigs, but the aroma pulls you.   However the conscience is the key to change the vicious cycle of the current mass produced meat industry.

That particular St.Bernard was in a chain store that breaks my heart every time I see it.  This store is located in a large entertainment district in Tokyo and is open all night.  The animals are treated more like souvenirs than live creatures.  In addition, a very disgusting practice often goes on in this type of store.  This practice, for example like “Enjo-Kosai” (a sugar daddy system) encourages buying pets for all the wrong reasons.  Customers at “hostess bars” buy pets for their favorite hostesses who have no interests in owning a pet, but will accept a cute puppy for a short period of time and then return the puppy to the pet store to get the money back.  There are even some cases, “a kick back system” is arranged between the hostesses and the pet shops.

I would like to conclude this; many people in Japan get (buy) pets for the wrong reasons.  They get them because they are cute at first and when the cuteness or the novelty wears off, the poor animals become disposable.  For this reasons the concept of cuteness has its dark side to it.

Cute is not always good and maybe torture for some animals.  These puppies that are bought, because they are cute, “given as gifts”, returned like unwanted and unloved products, probably wish they weren’t cute.

The attitude of animals being a source of food as an inalienable human right and the attitude of animals being objects to be bought, sold and returned stem from the same mentality.

<Reference>

http://www.alive-net.net/material/materialbook/siryou28.html

I am excited to blog!  This is a great place to express and exchange thoughts and opinions with fellow bloggers.  I am especially interested in animal welfare/right, environment issues, but I believe that everything has to be taken into account to solve a lot of problems we are facing.  I like “Vegans of Color”, because it is not addressing single-issues.   So here I am.  I am looking forward talking with you all!

Maho Cavalier

Tokyo