No, Haitian Immigrants Are Not Eating Pet Cats
“the Springfield, Ohio, police department confirmed Monday that it found ‘no credible reports’ of immigrants—illegal or legal—harming or eating pets, and no evidence of other concerning illegal behavior.” - The Dispatch
- 1960 views
Immigrant populations have been known to have a little bit of trouble coming up to speed on U.S. hunting and fishing restrictions and views/laws towards eating certain species. A pastor told me once about seeing new immigrants posting pictures of predatory birds hunted by a refugee group his church was reaching out to, and there have been jokes about certain populations eating pets for decades. It makes sense given that many cultures do eat dogs and even cats--the story I was told once was that a term for cat in some asian cultures was "fragrant meat" due to its off smell from being a predator.
But that said, it's a long way from patterns and rumors to actually get actionable evidence, and we ought to be way more careful than this. It means something that the police don't know any such thing, and for that matter, it also means something that many refugees are eligible to receive SNAP benefits, and thus have little/no need to supplement their diet with pets, theirs or otherwise.
Side note; carnivores and omnivores tend to concentrate fat soluble poisons in their fatty tissues, which is why their meat has an off smell, and is also why we want to be careful about eating predators. A National Geographic article about the nuclear submarine polar expeditions of the early sixties has a hilarious bit about the aftermath of a poor chef tasked with cooking polar bear steaks in the submarine's mess. Let's just say that after that smell, the crew was pretty glad for mystery meat and SOS.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I have advocated for the eating of geese in parks for years. In many towns they are a nuisance. Why not let people eat them if they want to so that we can lower the population. I think it would be way less demeaning to let someone hunt their own food than to give them a stamp to get free food.
I grew up in south Minneapolis, not far from Lake Nokomis. I remember one time in my teenage years riding my bike around the lake and seeing a member of an immigrant group that arrived in the Twin Cities by the tens of thousands around that time with a baseball bat in one hand & a burlap sack in the other. He was clearly stalking a gaggle of geese that were on the water’s edge. I kept riding, so I don’t know if he was ultimately successful in his pursuit.
I just read that the Governor of Ohio is sending the National Guard to Springfield but then another source said that it was State Troopers. More evidence that our news reporters may not always get the facts straight or is he is sending both???
Cats and geese are not the main concerns of residents. I will put a link to an interview with a resident and if you watch to the end, she makes a comment about not having a problem with immigrants, but how they should be expected to learn our laws and how we should have a chance to learn about them. I felt she was very fair in that statement and she even spoke positively about Mexican immigrants. It sounds like there are issues in Springfield that we must not just ignore. She lays out her concerns and even how she was assaulted.
BTW, I have no idea who Taylor Hanson is. He is the interviewer that spoke to the lady and put out this video.
It is a bunch of fearmonging about immigrants that have existed in this country from the very beginning. I was born in an immigrant community in Chicago and all kinds of stories were created by others around us. The Prussians hated us, the Nazi's certainly hated us, and Russians hate us.
Then Puetro Rican immigrants started moving into our immigrant community and we did just the same thing, the community started telling all kinds of terrible stories about them. It is basically adult kindergarten in this country. At the end of the day, we are all immigrants.
Stupid anit-immigrant stories and stereo types are created and perpetuated by ignorant people. It is just a rehash of the same garbage throughout history.
People are not eating our pets, they don't take away jobs, violent crime has been dropping, prisons are not being opened and countries shipping immigrants to our country. All of these stupid stories have been replicated time and time again in this country against numerous immigrant groups. I am not saying have strong borders, but lets try to assume we are smarter than the garbage that comes out of some of our politicians mouths.
BTW, I have no idea who Taylor Hanson is. He is the interviewer that spoke to the lady and put out this video.
He is a gateway pundit field reporter, which has about as much journalistic credibility as the National Enquirer. His whole MO with Jan 6th was to try to prove that Antifa were the rioters that breached the Capitol rather than MAGA supporters. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/exclusive-independent-journalist-tayler-hansen-riot-turned-deadly-witnessed-us-capitol-riot/
This is the problem with the Republican's approach to immigration. It is to stoke fear based off of stereotypes and not facts. Instead of outlining a clear plan and approach. The people they keep pointing to are more times than not, legal immigrants. Almost every fear they promote is not true. Biden has actually deported more people than Trump. Prisons are not being opened in South and Central America and criminals flooding the US, crime is not going up, jobs are not being taken away, they are not eating our pets. The fact that Trump takes precious debate time to articulate that one of the key reasons we should deport more immigrants is that they are eating our pets, is a clear, clear take that the Republicans really don't have good data to support their cause. That right there should put the nail in the coffin. Should we have good border protection? Yes. Can it and should it be improved? Yes. But lets approach this pragmatically, with real data and a real approach to the problem.
Murders, rape, arson. . . But somehow we’re actually debating whether it’s really true that some pets have disappeared and maybe eaten.
Here's the actual story of what's going on in Springfield.
Instead of working with the residents to gradually integrate Haitian refugees into a new country, the federal government, together with a host of immigration nonprofits, dropped 20,000 immigrants into a city of 60,000 in a little over three years time, while basically telling the residents to "figure it out." The influx of refugees is straining the social safety net, overwhelming medical centers and schools, and raising housing costs, as unscrupulous landlords take advantage of Haitians while displacing residents in a city that already had a 22 percent poverty rate.
Trump, Vance, and the GOP could've gone after the Biden Administration's broken refugee policy that, in the case of Springfield, ignores significant unintended social-economic consequences that do more harm to the overall community than good because it overwhelmed the city. But instead, they went for cheap, unsubstantiated sound bytes designed to stoke fear and rally their base. The Democrats have their own set of lies about Trump (Project 2025) designed to stoke fear among their base as well. Its the spirit of our postmodern age where our "leaders" care little about truth as long as it produces their desired end result. It is consequentialist ethics, plain and simple.
The story in Springfield is the story of immigrants. It goes all the way back to Jamestown when the influx of British immigrants strained the supplies of the colony during the early 1600's. Continued during immigration waves from Italy, Ireland, Poland....... I am not sure there are many examples ever from history where a collapsing nation needs help and a refuge policy is established and it goes well. Trump just cut them off. Not sure that was a great plan, but he didn't have to face refugees at that point. Trump isn't really interested in fixing the problem. He wants to create fear, typically of what was found in the 1800's, that people who are not citizens and don't look or act like us are a threat to this country. Even those who live here legally are a threat to us. Most of it is not rooted in reality. Like Paul states above, there are problems like those outlined above, but in reality, that story doesn't create the level of fear that Trump needs to put in more extreme measures. His only plan is to kick everyone out and shut down the borders entirely. Not really a workable plan as seen during his first administration, but it does feed into his base.
Another well-thought article from a politically conservative evangelical immigrant from Ghana Africa.
Usually, when the Left and the Right have differing views on an issue—one side is wrong and the other is Right. But sometimes, both sides are wrong. That is the case with what is happening in Springfield. The biggest voices on the Left and the Right are wrong about Springfield.
Leftists have been quick to dismiss the real issues in Springfield and conservatives have been just as fast to sensationalise it. I know some conservatives do not want to hear this, but the truth is, we have become guilty of much of what we hate about the Left.
It seems like many of us are willing to pause discernment on claims that draw attention to real issues, especially in the middle of a crucial presidential election.
Usually, when the Left and the Right have differing views on an issue—one side is wrong and the other is Right. But sometimes, both sides are wrong. That is the case with what is happening in Springfield. The biggest voices on the Left and the Right are wrong about Springfield.
Leftists have been quick to dismiss the real issues in Springfield and conservatives have been just as fast to sensationalise it. I know some conservatives do not want to hear this, but the truth is, we have become guilty of much of what we hate about the Left.
It seems like many of us are willing to pause discernment on claims that draw attention to real issues, especially in the middle of a crucial presidential election.
The above comment summarizes the situation quite well. Whether a few dogs or cats have been eaten or not is not the real issue. The real issue is that politicians recognize how to tug at heart strings and how to get headlines. People love their pets so this will get attention.
Years ago, I remember the conversation about whether or not campaigns should go negative or not. One of the commentators on the radio said that going negative was not good, but it worked. As Christians we should understand the folly of pragmatism. The reality however is that our country is made up of a lot of non Christians and they are not making decisions based on what God's moral ethic would dictate.
I think there is too much of a thought that since the majority of Christians vote republican that the republican party is majority Christian and should therefore act more Christian. I have never thought that. I do not think we should ever assume that the majority of the people at the head of the republican party are Christians, therefore I am not surprised that they would do some things that would bother me as a Christian. On the other hand, I do not think it is wise that Christians stop trying to have an influence where they can in the party.
BTW, I do not think that the way to have more of an influence in the republican party is to vote or promote democrats, but I think there is plenty of room for us to talk about other effective ways to address our concerns.
I guess that part of what I am trying to say is that if all of us who have concerns about the republican party just walk away from it, why should it surprise us that the republican platform has been weakened so much. Once you come to grips with the fact that unsaved people are making most of the decisions, you realize that they will pragmatically conclude that if they are not going to get the evangelical vote anyway, then why even try to address the evangelical concerns?
Whether a few dogs or cats have been eaten or not is not the real issue.
Considering the headline of the article and the aggressive fact-checking going on, this is indeed the real issue. When the full story comes out in a few weeks, if I turns out that immigrants (legal or otherwise) are poaching in city parks and skinning cats, I will be looking in vain for retractions from all the fact-checkers. Unfortunately, by then the world will have moved on, and the damage will have been done. That's how it usually seems to work.
Considering the headline of the article and the aggressive fact-checking going on, this is indeed the real issue. When the full story comes out in a few weeks, if I turns out that immigrants (legal or otherwise) are poaching in city parks and skinning cats, I will be looking in vain for retractions from all the fact-checkers. Unfortunately, by then the world will have moved on, and the damage will have been done. That's how it usually seems to work.
Yes, I agree. What I find interesting is that we have people who are "certain" that no one is eating cats. It reminds me of the people who were "certain" that there would be no side effects from the covid vaccine. It seems that there are always a certain percentage of close minded people on any subject.
It reminds me of the people who were "certain" that there would be no side effects from the covid vaccine.
Not sure I've ever heard anyone say there would be no side effects.
As for eating the cats and dogs, if it turns out to be true I'm quite sure that there will be plenty of people proclaiming loudly how Trump was right after all.
Discussion