Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Do people just want to be criminals?

Maybe the point is getting beaten to death, but what I can see in a photograph seems to be quite different from what was actually there.  One of the usual suspects persists in railing at me for not seeing it and I don't care for that act.  Adding personal insults makes it worse.  I will argue bitterly against denouncing anyone on the basis of photographs. 

These days you can't rely on the "rescue" that wants to take anyone's horses, particularly multiple horses.  If the rescue evaluates the horse and can and does take the horse away, that is an automatic fail because of conflict of interest.  I always see it as robbery at gunpoint.  Every single time a "rescue" or "humane society" or "ASPCA" has taken animals that they have evaluated themselves without using a third party, it has been armed robbery and I want to see them spending long years in jail, very long and hard years.

Did someone say that this is the way that they've always done it?  Then they've always belonged in jail.  The robberies are just one reason.  The other is that they have corrupted jurisprudence. 
Every person who has participated in this is criminally liable.  Very few of them are willing to take their needed jail time and end it.  If they were that kind of hero they would never have allowed it to get started.

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Too scared to try

Being too scared to try is not living.  Maybe some people mean well when they tell me not to touch the tiger, he might bite, but isn't it being too scared to try to wait until such time as one has somehow earned "permission"?  Don't they seem to want to suspend you in that state until they feel like allowing you to live, to be human?  I have felt this way for a long time and I haven't always been able to put it into words.

It seems kind of ridiculous that the better part of my soul is on the other side of a fence that "belongs" to someone else.  They reach out to me.  I can hear their purrs, feel the soft intensity of their gaze upon me, and I fall in love.  They cherish me when I reach out and touch them, and roll with happiness after a pet or a kiss.

I can feel this place where certain people seem to just have to be, so they can make me do things to gratify them and they can take my reward away from my life.  They can reach it verbally, emotionally, or impose themselves physically.  I am always afraid that when I get occupied with a real encounter someone is going to do that and give me that rending tearing pain again.  So I don't go near them for the most part and the last time I thought I was going to get near them I had a psychotic break from the fear, but what else is new about that.  They made a game of inducing such mental states in me for so long that it's just part of the routine.

There is a knot in my gut and my fist is aching for release.  So is my middle finger.  You know, it's just easier to not live.  I build enough energy to move mountains, or at least my massive butt, and someone siphons it off and uses it for their purposes.  In this realm the parasites seem to have more control over everything than those people who work for a living.  And yes, those parasites will use that control to prevent themselves from having to take any responsibility at the same time that they get others to smash up other people's homes and menageries.

Some people get to live.  I've seen it and some people are still living.  I'm glad for them.  My soul, is it really to be found in a big cat?  About one in three that I meet seem to want to merge with me.  When we do we exchange soul matter and both of us are more than we were before.  That's also called "being happier" and "living."  This is more precious than gold.  Rich people who understand it will write big checks.  Those who merely clean up after the highness's hindquarters don't usually rate a touch.  Regal my ass.  It shits in its own drinking water.  Come to think of it, the inbred royalty of Europe is often more than a little peculiar.

Were the big cat to live with me and were I to use him or her that way, they would love it and they would have a home.  The neurotics are very intent on making sure that doesn't happen.  It's pretty much the same if I'm "allowed" under conditions that they impose, because they have still managed to get in between and tap that energy for their own misuse.  Dammit that's my energy to misuse.  That's why they accuse people of abuse when the animal is as pleased and as happy as it can possibly be.

I'm sick of making concessions.  Concessions are all that I make and I don't get to use my energy for me.  They should use their own damned energy.  The whole thing is about making me work and someone else collecting the rewards that I should be collection.

Monday, June 25, 2012

Someone said this on Facebook:

To prevent the situation that animal owners got into, animal owners needed to place being good to each other above all other considerations. To get ourselves out of that situation, the same solution applies.

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Humane Feelings Used As Psychological Torture

I just wrote this on Facebook:

"The bait is the idea of humane care of animals and inflicting the minimum of pain. Zero tolerance, a bait and switch game, sets the hook that comes with the bait. The perpetrators use your compassion against you. They think that they have a natural right to own the issue, your person, and your resources.

The ones who think that way are always less. I've been persuaded at times that they have a stronger grip on reality. Then I realize that it is not the embrace of a lover, but the strangling grip of, well, someone who is not so loving.

I can say that. They define themselves by behavior that aggresses against other humans and living things, that destroys to further an agenda, and that isn't smart.

This was in response to a blog entry by The Naughty Tobiano about the definition of the term "humane."  You can read Nathan Winograd's "Redemption" and see that the term has been abused for over a century, for monetary gain and to further agendas.  If I am going to have to define the word, it might as well be for a human-animal agenda that allows humans the same privileges as animals, to be free to cohabit with or to eat whatever species we want.  It's been hard for this to be an agenda because the normal course of things is not an "agenda," it is what we do because we are human.

People like to inflict a minimum of pain and like to give pleasure, although anhedonia can set in, the aversion to pleasure.  I'm not even going to try to paste together a Greek word for a phobia against pleasure this morning.  Pleasure dissolves pain and works to defeat neurosis.  Then we worry too much about where we got the charge.  There is a certain amount of permissible exploitation of animals and exploitation in and of itself is a good thing.  The usual suspects try to twist the meaning of the word, but their behavior shows that they will exploit the animals with far more ruthlessness and they will destroy what people have built.  Their whole point is to identify those who are "not us" as needful of being destroyed.  Most of our social problems are caused by people who define other people as social problems.  At the bottom of such there is usually some kind of ripoff.  If they accuse you, you will find that they do that so that they can exploit your animals, and they will be ruthless and destructive.

Friday, June 8, 2012

Can we handle the truth?

It seems like in every European-influenced nation the fight against big cat ownership is a religious war that they can deny even exists.  I don't know that Judaism, Zoroastrianism, or even Catholicism were called "religions" in the beginning, or even Jainism.

A religious war would not fly in the 21st century in any Renaissance culture.  However, a war over junk science definitely can and does, and instead of "my God is bigger than your God" it's "my science says kill you."  But they really can't say "kill" so they have to take our lives by taking our animals.  The animal extremists hide a crap religion behind junk science and scientists fall in line so they won't get fired or set on fire.

Dominion religions are simply gangs of thieves.  They might well have some genuine stuff, but the dominators captured it and make it a weapon.  One has to practice in secret to practice true worship. 

Animal worship has more than one real reason.  What could possibly be better than human and God in a close symbiotic relationship where between you and the animal, you can feel the Presence? 

And I'm watching Richard Hoagland right now and he just said that the religionists say that the truth will kill us and we have to be protected form it.  Here we are.  To me the truth includes the vital force itself, and love, and what a loving relationship does for humans and animals.  That is an ultimate truth.  I know the truth when it climbs up in my lap and wants me to hug it.  Look what the truth thinks of me. 

You can read Oliver Twist and gain an understanding of the humane societies and the extremists, and you can read Hal Lindsay's "The Late, Great Planet Earth" and gain some understanding, and Richard Hoagland, and Wayne Dyer.

People have actually told me that I was insane and schizophrenic because I see all these connections.  Me, I think it's just plain intellectual honesty.


Tuesday, January 10, 2012

The first thing about critical thinking (short note)

If anyone tells you any story that tugs on your heartstrings, stop and think. Your kneejerk reaction is probably wrong. Too many times they ask you to go along with your kneejerk response, the one that they want, and will berate you if you refuse. When they do this it's your choice which window you throw them out of, but if they won't let you stop and think, FORCE them to let you stop and think, and use as much force as it takes. If they get offended they weren't your friend. They were trying to use you.

Friday, December 23, 2011

"Equal Rights," My Donkey

The ARs don't afford them the same rights as humans. What they actually do is put up a set of ideas, like the "five freedoms" which don't hold up under scrutiny, at all, and falsely claim that those trump human rights. If your right to eat or conduct yourself as a human or your privacy rights conflict with a vague set of wrongheaded "animal rights" then theirs trump yours. It's entirely arbitrary and intentionally confusing. They often mislabel this as "animal welfare." That is part of their drive to co-opt and coerce.

The "Five Freedoms" are listed here: http://www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm The words in bold are the original wording. The words in regular type are their qualifiers. Those qualifiers were a big mistake. When your enemy hands you poison and tells you to eat it, you don't put ketchup on it and try to eat it and smile. You shove it as far down his throat as you can, doing as much damage as you can, and you explain to him that his botulism sandwich is not fit to eat.

Something had to go missing for people to be able to swallow the wording of the Five Freedoms at all, and that was the recognition of positives intentionally phrased in the negative. There is a huge difference between "freedom from hunger and thirst" and "having enough good food and clean water." The qualifiers can be shed at any time and you are left with the original crap, which the Farm Animal Welfare Council was kind enough to set in bold print. An animal that is free from hunger, thirst, exposure to uncomfortable temperatures, emotional discomfort, or injury, is dead. By species it is extinct.

It is not too strong a statement to say that the people who foisted the Five Freedoms on the world belong under the jail for infamous crimes that include vandalism, arson, death threats against human beings, and the killings of innocent animals as part of the vandalism. Let them eat what I care to feed them and they will kiss up to me and beg for Burger King.

The "Five Freedoms" were deliberately, calculatedly, written such that only dead animals could fulfill the criteria. The FAWC would have been better off biting the bullet, or shooting it at the miscreants, than modifying their demands to make them seem palatable. When they give the extremists enough rope to hang US with, our animals are DEAD.

Real animal welfare would use positives. We feed and water the animals according to their needs. We comfort them and give them medical care when they are ailing or injured. We give them happiness when we can. It's a lot easier to do that for an animal than for a human. I'm going to dismiss entirely the "normal behavior" thing because it's bunkum and not worthy of trying to explain to an extremist. None of the credit goes to the extremists for "making" me do anything. They have caused the deaths of thousands, maybe millions of animals, the non-existence of many species individuals that the world is short of, such as tigers, lions, and cheetahs, and they are crazy sick hateful. I don't worry so much that abuse is "disgusting." I am concerned with the fact that I can create a place where animals are happy and healthy and I can give happiness and health.