Oops! Ollie Belatedly Gives Up a Closely Guarded Secret Much to the Chagrin of Employees of Manchester International

"We were completely shocked when we found out and just couldn't believe it...We've heard all the jokes from staff and some of them say we shouldn't be surprised as she's always been a bit of a diva."
-- Bob Molloy

A routine visit to the vet has left staff, vendors, airline personnel, and passengers using Manchester International Airport with egg on their faces. As it can now be revealed, Ollie, who took up residence at the airport in 2007, is in fact a she.

No, she has not suddenly emerged from the closet after masquerading in drag for years. Nor has she undergone a recent sex change operation.

Ollie is what she always has been, i.e., a female. Staffers and others at the busy transportation hub simply incorrectly assumed from the beginning that she was a male. (See photos above and below.)

"We were completely shocked when we found out and just couldn't believe it," Bob Molloy, who works as a receptionist at the airport's administrative office in Olympia House, told the Manchester Evening News on October 26th. (See "Goodbye Ollie, Hello Olivia as Airport Cat Reveals a Secret.") "...We've heard all the jokes from staff and some of them say we shouldn't be surprised as she's always been a bit of a diva."

Since it would no longer be proper to continue calling her Ollie, the staff at Olympia House has renamed her Olivia. While Olivia has not publicly commented one way or another on either her sex or name change, Molloy insists that he already can detect subtle changes in her personality.

"The funniest thing is we actually think her character has altered since we found out," he continued. "She's much more loving and seems to be showing her maternal side more."

Most likely, that is all in Molloy's head since the cat always has been nothing but loving and special. Besides, cats are full of all kinds of surprises and that is in part what makes them so adorable.

"The wonderful thing about the cat is the way in which, when one of its many mysteries is laid bare, it is only to reveal another," Robert De Laroche wrote in his book, The Secret Life of Cats. "The essential enigma always remains intact, a sphinx within a sphinx within a sphinx."

At least that is the way things used to be before the scientific community began systematically stripping away all the veils in its never ending quest to subjugate, exploit and, finally, annihilate the species that Leonardo da Vinci once called "nature's masterpiece." (See Cat Defender posts of December 5, 2007 and December 17, 2008 entitled, respectively, "Decoding the Feline Genome Provides Vivisectors with Thousands of New Excuses to Continue Torturing Cats in the Course of Their Bogus Research" and "Mr. Green Genes' Coming Out Party Ushers In a New Era of Unspeakable Atrocities to Be Committed Against Cats by Cloners and Vivisectors.")

In a way this latest revelation is just one more metamorphosis in Olivia's turbulent life. When she arrived at the facility as a stray she was down-at-the-heel and sans a huge chunk of her left ear.

Provided with lots of tender loving care for perhaps the first time in her life, she soon responded by capturing the hearts of all who came to know her. A luxury cat box was built for her and attached to the side of Olympia House while those working at the airport vied with one another for the honor of feeding her.

"Air crews give him a feed early in the morning and staff from the airport and its service partners look after him throughout the day," Molloy said in an interview in November of 2007. "He's a big talking point around here. Everybody likes him." (See Cat Defender post of November 28, 2007 entitled "Lovable Ollie Finds a Home at Manchester International Airport After Workers and Vendors Come to His Aid.")

As soon as her story appeared on the Internet, food parcels began arriving from as far away as Paris, New York City, and Chicago. A page of Facebook was established for her and she now has more than fifteen-hundred friends in cyberspace.

Her tenure at the air terminal has not always been smooth sailing, however. Last year, for example, no-good, rotten airport suits hatched a sinister plot to give her the boot but hundreds of her fans from as far away as New Zealand and Kuwait rallied to her side and signed a petition demanding that they reconsider.

As a consequence, Olivia is not going anywhere anytime soon. Perhaps more importantly she is even more popular now than ever before.

"Every day we get people coming in to leave gifts for Olivia," airport employee Hazel Williams told the Manchester Evening News in the article cited supra. "The other week someone had been fishing and brought in a whole mackerel; they had even cooked it for her!"

With the holidays just around the corner, Williams is expecting that Olivia is going to receive her fair share of presents. "It's incredible how well loved she is..." she added.

On a more somber note, since the airport had the vets checking out her private parts it is a good bet that she has been spayed if she had not been altered before she arrived on the scene. Consequently, there will not be any little Olivias or Ollies to take her place once she finally crosses the Rainbow Bridge which, hopefully, will not be for a long, long time.

Finally, the faux pas committed by airport personnel is certainly an easy enough one to have made. For instance, even Charles Dickens was forced to change the name of his cat William to Williamina after he was discovered to be a member of the tender gender.

Make no mistake about it, the naming of cats is anything but a trifling matter. Here, for example, is what T. S. Eliot had to say regarding this weighty matter in his poem, Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats:

The naming of cats is a difficult matter,
It isn't just one of your holiday games;
You may think at first I'm as mad as a hatter
When I tell you, a cat must have three different names.

First of all, there's the name that the family use daily,
Such as Peter, Augustus, Alonzo or James,
Such as Victor or Jonathan, or George or Bill Bailey --
All of them sensible everyday names.

There are fancier names if you think they sound sweeter,
Some for the gentlemen, some for the dames:
Such as Plato, Admetus, Electra, Demeter --
But all of them sensible everyday names.

But I tell you, a cat needs a name that's particular,
A name that's peculiar, and more dignified,
Else how can he keep his tail perpendicular,
Or spread out his whiskers, or cherish his pride?

Of names of this kind, I can give you a quorum,
Such as Munkustrap, Quaxo, or Coricopat,
Such as Bombalurina, or else Jellylorum --
Names that never belong to more than one cat."

Therefore, according to this reckoning, airport staffers still owe Olivia at least one more name and they should endeavor to get it right this time. But, wait, that is not all. The job of naming a cat is far more complicated.

"But above and beyond there's still one name left over,
And that is the name that you never will guess;
The name that no human research can discover --
But the cat himself knows, and will never confess.

When you notice a cat in profound meditation,
The reason, I tell you, is always the same:
His mind is engaged in rapt contemplation
Of the thought, of the thought, of the thought of his name:
His ineffable effable
Effanineffable
Deep and inscrutable singular name."

Accordingly, all those who steadfastly believe that a contemplative cat is all the time daydreaming about culinary and amorous delights are dead wrong. Eliot's theory also goes a long way toward explaining why cats so seldom come running when they are summoned.

Photos: Manchester Evening News.

Jeremy Tuffly Feeds a Kitten to a Pet Python but When It Demurs He Does the Foul Deed Himself by Kicking It to Death

"Congratulations, Phoenix! We have the one guy on the planet who was out-classed by a snake. Hopefully, he can look on the bright side: if he doesn't like jail, at least he has Hell to look forward to."
-- James King of the Phoenix New Times

Cat owners in the Brislington section of Bristol were left horrified back in June when a pet Burmese python belonging to Darren Bishop devoured Martin and Helen Wadey's beloved four-year-old cat, Wilbur. (See Cat Defender post of September 8, 2009 entitled "Four-Year-Old Wilbur Is Ambushed and Eaten Whole by a Thirteen-Foot-Long Burmese Python in Bristol.")

Although Bishop should not have left the snake unattended, there is nothing in the record to suggest that he did so just so that it could prey upon cats and other domestic animals. That is considerably more than can be said for twenty-eight-year-old Jeremy Tuffly of Mesa, Arizona, who deliberately fed a kitten to a python of unknown pedigree. (See photo above of him.)

When the snake, for whatever reason, repeatedly refused to kill the kitten Tuffly did the job himself by kicking it across the yard until it died. Like so many teenage hoodlums who film their deadly assaults upon sleeping homeless men so that they can relive their devilry over and over again, Tuffly also filmed his murder of the kitten.

An unidentified individual somehow got hold of a DVD of the attacks and promptly delivered it to legendary Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Tuffly was accordingly arrested on August 31st on suspicion of felony animal cruelty.

Far from being an isolated case, Tuffly is not the only person who abuses and kills cats and other animals for cinematic purposes. Pornographers have been making a mint for years filming naked women in stiletto heels stomping to death defenseless kittens and puppies.

The issue of whether the flagrant crimes committed against animals in these so-called crush videos are protected by the First Amendment is currently before the United States Supreme Court in a case entitled United States versus Stevens and a ruling is expected sometime this term. Since the statute being challenged, Public Law 106-152, 18 U.S.C. section 48 entitled "Depictions of Animal Cruelty," applies only to crush videos trafficked in either interstate or foreign commerce, the court's ruling will have no impact upon the production of home videos, such as the one made by Tuffly, that are not sold.

Worst still, if the sentiments expressed by the justices during oral arguments on October 6th are any indication of how they plan on voting, they are going to uphold the constitutionality of these videos and the senseless slaughter of kittens and puppies is going to continue. (See Los Angeles Times, October 7, 2009, "Supreme Court Weighs Free Speech Versus Animal Cruelty.")

The case in Mesa moreover demonstrates that even much-maligned pythons have considerably more scruples than do cretins like Tuffly. "Congratulations, Phoenix! We have the one guy on the planet who was out-classed by a snake," James King astutely pointed out in the September 1st edition of the Phoenix New Times. "Hopefully, he can look on the bright side: if he doesn't like jail, at least he has Hell to look forward to."

If he does indeed wind up in Hades, Tuffly is not going to get lonesome. In fact, he is going to be joined by so many of his fellow Arizonians that it is going to look like old home week at the Devil's dinner table.

For example, since mid-September fourteen cats from Tempe, Chandler, East Phoenix, and Tuffly's own Mesa have had their backs sliced open by unknown fiends. Two of them have died from their wounds while those lucky enough to have survived have been forced to undergo costly surgeries and extended convalescence.

Another twenty felines have been poisoned and their bodies dumped in a canal in Phoenix. All of that is in addition to at least another two dozen moggies who have been either poisoned or torched in central Phoenix. (See Phoenix Pet News Examiner, October 28, 2009, "Catch a Cat Killer, Make $7,500.")

"It's really sad that these cats are being mutilated," Arpaio told the Arizona Republic on October 27th in reference to the fourteen victimized cats. (See "Sheriff's Office Searching for East Valley Cat Killer.") "They go home and their owners have to see this. These people love their animals. I don't blame them for being very angry."

Regardless of whatever happens to Tuffly, the problems associated with individuals keeping pythons as pets are not about to go away anytime soon. For example, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) on September 11th removed an eighteen-foot, four-hundred-pound pet Burmese python named Delilah from the home of Melvin Cheever in Apopka due to concerns over its size and the fact that it had previously escaped from its cage. (See photo above.)

"To me, it's a Goliath," the FFWCC's Rick Brown told the Orlando Sentinel on September 11th. (See "Wildlife Officials Seize 'Monster' Eighteen-Foot Python in Apopka.") "It's a monster of a snake."

Even thirty-nine-year-old Charlene Boush, who lives with Cheever, was afraid that Delilah was one day going to kill her dogs. "She (Delilah) got out last week. They had to put her back in. I don't let them (the dogs) go back there at all," she told the Orlando Sentinel.

Quite obviously, behemoths like Delilah have to eat and in her case it is rabbits. "I fed her this morning, gave her seven rabbits," Cheever told the Orlando Sentinel in the article cited supra.

That gruesome and barbaric tidbit of news brings up the seldom discussed moral dilemma of not only keeping pythons as pets, but more importantly of confining large carnivores in zoos, captive breeding facilities, circuses, and stage shows. In particular, sacrificing live rabbits, cats, chickens, sheep, goats and other domestic animals to caged carnivores is both unnatural and morally indefensible.

Wild carnivores belong in legally protected habitats where they are able to hunt their natural prey instead of being hand-fed domestic animals. The reason that these egregious crimes continue unabated is that wildlife biologists and conservationists long ago sold out wild animals to economic concerns and as a consequence most of them no longer have anywhere to live except in cages.

Delilah, who initially was entrusted to the care of a reptile specialist, has since been given to a zoo where she awaits an uncertain fate.

Even in locales where they are native pythons can cause problems. For example, Erik Rantzau of northern Australia recently got a scare when he lifted up the lid to his commode and found a three-foot-long diamond python curled up inside.

"Ich wusste erst gar nicht, was es war, weil die Schlange ganz eingerollt war und such nicht bewegte," he told Stern on September 7th. (See "Drei Meter-Python in der Kloschuessel entdeckt.") Fortunately, he was not injured and a reptile specialist was notified who came and removed the snake. It was later humanely returned to the bush.

Like their Burmese cousins, diamond pythons are non-poisonous although they do have teeth and will bite. Living on the outback has taught Rantzau to exercise caution, especially when going to the loo.

"Ich bin immer noch etwas beklommen, wenn ich ins Badezimmer gehe," he told Stern. "Ich bin jetzt immer vorsichtig, wenn ich den Koldeckel hebe."

A two-year-old girl named Shaiunna from Sumter County, Florida, was not nearly so fortunate when a nine-foot-long pet albino Burmese python escaped from its enclosure on July 1st and strangled her to death. Her mother, nineteen-year-old Jaren Hare, and the snake's owner, thirty-two-year-old Charles J. Darnell, were subsequently charged with manslaughter, third degree murder, and child abuse.

The little girl thus became the twelfth person nationwide to have been killed by various breeds of pythons since 1980.

Photos: Phoenix New Times (Tuffly) and George Skene of the Orlando Sentinel (Delilah).

Robin Hood, Who Survived a Near Fatal Bow and Arrow Wounding, Is Sent to a Sanctuary in Order to Live Out the Remainder of His Life

"We didn't want to send him back into the wild."
-- Abigail Appleton of the Humane Society of Pinellas County

Robin Hood, who was shot in his right front leg with a two-foot-long aluminum arrow in early summer, was transferred to a sanctuary in Sarasota operated by In Defense of Animals on October 22nd where he will be able to live out the remainder of his life. (See photo above of him in the back of his carrier upon arrival.)

He was discovered on June 16th at the junction of U.S. 19 and Whitney Road in the High Point neighborhood of Clearwater by feral cat caregiver Gail McFarland who promptly notified the Humane Society of Pinellas County (HSP). By that time Robin Hood already had been walking around with the arrow embedded in his leg for perhaps as long as forty-eight hours and surely would have died from either a loss of blood, infection, predation, or starvation if it had not been for McFarland's timely heroics and compassion.

Although he had to undergo a rather lengthy convalescence, he has now made a full recovery. (See photo below of him shortly after surgery.)

Initially, HSP had planned on putting him up for adoption but that plan was later aborted because of his feral nature. At In Defense of Animals, he will join other cats who have been victims of cruelty, abandonment, and sickness. Although not strictly limited to cats, the sanctuary has been caring for hundreds of animals in distress since its founding in 1989.

"We didn't want to send him back into the wild," HSP's Abigail Appleton told the St. Petersburg Times on October 20th. (See "Cat Shot by Arrow to Be Set Free in Sanctuary.")

Actually, almost any feral cat can be socialized to one degree or another provided that the appropriate amount of time and resources are invested in the project. There are not too many of them around, but there are nonetheless some extremely bright individuals who have the savoir-faire for such a demanding task.

Of course, HSP probably has neither the time nor the resources for such an undertaking. The best that therefore can be hoped for is that Robin Hood will have a long and happy life at the sanctuary.

At least he will be safe there against the machinations of those monsters who get their kicks by shooting down cats with bows. Nevertheless, it is a shame that no one could be found who was willing to have invested the resources needed to socialize him for domestic life. Considering all that he has been through, he most certainly deserved the special care that only a loving family is able to provide.

It is disturbing that no arrests have been made in this case. Despite the rash of cats who have been shot by archers in the Tampa area in recent years, neither the police nor humane officials can be prevailed upon to take these types of attacks seriously.

"For someone to be out there shooting him (Robin Hood) is just unimaginable to me," McFarland commented at the time of the rescue. "I don't know what kind of person does that. If they are going to hunt animals, what's next, children?" (See Cat Defender post of July 23, 2009 entitled "Robin Hood Is Wounded in the Leg in Yet Still Another Bow and Arrow Attack Upon a Cat in the Tampa Area.")

McFarland is making an important point. It is just too bad that the authorities are far too deaf to ever hear her.

Alles Gute, Robin Hood!

Photos: HSP and Bay News 9.

Stefan W., Who Publicly Boasted of Scalding Kitty to Death in a Washing Machine, Is Let Off by a Berlin Court with a Measly Fine

"Sie ist doch von alleine rein in die Maschine. Ich idiot hab' das im Park den Kollegen erzaehlt. Denunzianten!"
-- Stefan W.

With hatred of cats being as old and as widespread as it is, it is easy to be lulled into believing that human ingenuity has exhausted itself when it comes to the various methods of eradicating them. Ailurophobes cannot, however, be underestimated under any circumstances.

"All things were possible with cats because some people seem to regard them as fair game for any cruelty," veterinarian James Herriot observed in his book, Cat Stories. They are routinely drowned, suffocated, dumped on busy highways, electrocuted, frozen to death, shot with bullets, arrows, Tasers, and BBs, doused with acid, hideously mutilated, poisoned, snared in deadly leghold traps, and even run through wood chippers.

Shelters gas and poison millions of them each year, the Chinese, Swiss, and Australians consume their flesh and traffic in their pelts, vivisectors have a field day torturing the life out of them, and the diabolical South Africans killed thousands of them on Marion Island by deliberately infecting them with panleukemia. It is scarcely a wonder that cats are said to have nine lives because they certainly need all of them.

To this ever-growing list of feline eradication methods, scalding in hot water must now be added. Back in June, thirty-nine-year-old Stefan W. from the community of Steglitz in the borough of Steglitz-Zehlendorf in southwest Berlin was convicted of scalding to death his cat, Kitty, in a washing machine. (See photo of him above.)

Incensed over Kitty's incessant grooming, Stefan stuffed the small mackerel-colored cat into his washing machine along with a blanket and started the wash cycle. Amazingly, Kitty somehow survived this ordeal but that served only to further anger Stefan who subsequently put her through a second cycle which ultimately killed her.

He then froze her body, thawed it out, and finally buried it. He then went out and bought another cat.

In all likelihood, this monster would have gotten away with his hideous crime if he had not gone to the park and boasted of his evil deed to acquaintances who, to their credit, did the right thing and ratted him out to the authorities. "Sie ist doch von alleine rein in die Maschine," he is quoted by B.Z. Berlin on June 24th as saying. (See "Katze in Maschine totgewaschen.") "Ich idiot hab' das im Park den Kollegen erzaehlt. Denunzianten!"

At his trial, Stefan thought that he could escape punishment by mouthing an insincere "tut mir ja so leid," but the presiding judge refused to have any of that. "Sie haben Katze Kitty im Waschgang gewaschen, um sie zu toeten!" the judge fired back.

In the end, however, Stefan got off rather lightly in that the judge fined him only thirteen-hundred-fifty euros and barred him from owning any more cats. For such a despicable crime he should have been given life in prison without parole.

Just as Kitty failed to receive justice from a Berlin court, so too was the case with a Welsh cat known as Paws. (See photo above.)

The six-year-old deaf white cat was scalded to death in a washing machine on July 8, 2006 by then forty-two-year-old Diane Hannon of Old Colwyn in Conwy County Borough. The official cause of death was listed as a heart attack, but the cat also suffered severe burns and a loss of fur as the result of the scalding that it received.

At the time of the crime, Hannon was cat-sitting at the flat of her boyfriend, Duncan Carthy, while he was away visiting his son. Before he departed, the duo had argued about his ex-wife and children. (See photo above of her.)

In a jealous fit, Hannon then took out her frustrations on Paws. When Carthy later telephoned to inquire about Paws, Hannon is quoted by the BBC on December 19, 2006 as telling him, "I hate you! No, I've killed it!" (See "Pet Cat Killed in Washing Machine.")

At that time, Carthy thought that Hannon was having him on but when he returned home the next day to an empty apartment he discovered to his horror that she had not been jesting. In fact, she had not even bothered to remove Paws's scalded body from the washing machine.

This case is somewhat of an anomaly in that the perpetrator was a woman. In most domestic disputes involving cats it is almost always the man who takes out his wrath on his partner's cat.

That was what happened recently when former New York Mets' farmhand Joseph Petcka used a pair of steel-toed boots in order to stomp to death Sports Illustrated reporter Lisa Altobelli's cat, Norman.

At her trial in Llandudno Magistrates Court in November of 2006, Hannon readily admitted that she had indeed intended to harm the totally innocent Paws but not to kill the cat. Speaking in her defense, lawyer Peter Brown told the court that since she was suffering from depression she was not thinking "coldly and calmly" at the time of the incident.

Although he declared that this was the worst act of animal cruelty to ever come before him, District Judge Andrew Shaw ultimately bought into Brown's argument and let off his client with a four-month suspended jail sentence. Hannon was banned from owning any pets for as long as she lives and ordered to pay three-hundred pounds in court costs but those added punishments are too trivial to be of any consequence.

Despite the absurdity of the ruling, the RSPCA's Kevin Paton was pleased with the outcome. "This sends a strong signal to the public that animal cruelty will not be tolerated," he ludicrously crowed to the BBC on February 5, 2007. (See "Suspended Sentence for Cat Killer.")

If press reports are to be believed, a tomcat named Zorro from Hannover escaped serious injury this past July 31st when he inadvertently became trapped inside a washing machine. (See photo of him directly above.)

The unsuspecting cat allegedly climbed into the already loaded machine on July 30th and slept there overnight. At seven a.m. the following morning, three-year-old Can and four-year-old Deniz activated the machine without realizing that Zorro was inside.

Once Zorro started screaming, his plight came to the attention of the boys' twenty-one-year-old mother who inexplicably telephoned the Fire Department as opposed to simply shutting off the machine. Luckily for Zorro, the firefighters arrived a scant ten minutes later and freed him.

By that time the water temperature had reached thirty degrees Celsius on its way to a deadly ninety degrees Celsius. Although he outwardly at least came through his ordeal no worse for wear, Zorro was taken to Tieraerztliche Hochschule Hannover where he was kept for observation over the weekend.

"Kater hatte grosses Glueck," Michael Ferl of the university told the Hannover Reporter on July 31st. (See "Kater ueberlebt Waschgang in Waschmaschine.") "...sieben Leben kann man woertlich nehmen...beschreibt den Gesundheitszustand des Tieres...solche Faelle sind leider nicht selten..."

There are several obvious problems with this rather fantastic story. First of all, it is difficult to believe that the lads failed to notice that Zorro was inside the machine. Since it was a front-end loader, they had to close the door and lock it before the machine would start. (See photo above of the machine.)

Secondly, although cats are renown for their love of wallowing in warm clothing that has been recently removed from the dryer, there is little evidence to support the thesis that they are similarly attracted to smelly, dirty laundry.

Thirdly, the boys' mother could have interrupted the wash cycle at any time by simply either opening the door or turning off the electricity. Instead, she risked killing Zorro by allowing him to remain trapped inside for an additional ten minutes.

It therefore is conceivable that the lads deliberately locked Zorro inside the machine as a deadly prank. Consequently, humane officials should have launched an immediate investigation into this matter. Even more importantly, Zorro should have been removed from the home because this obviously dysfunctional family has proven itself to be incapable of properly caring for him.

Animal cruelty is no less egregious simply because the perpetrators are minors. Even boys as young as these two are nevertheless capable of all sorts of cruel mischief.

Photos: B.Z.Berlin (Stefan W.), BBC (Paws and Hannon), and Hannover Reporter (Zorro and washing machine.)

Essex Welfare Bum Who Sicced His Dog on Cats and Beat Them with His Cane Is Now Pretending to Be the Victim of an Assault

"They leapt out, pouncing on my dog. They were biting and scratching her. I tried to get them off but then they started scratching me. I had to hit them with my walking stick and they still wouldn't leave her alone. I did nothing to provoke them and my dog was terrified but they kept jumping at us."
-- John Randall

The outrageous lies concocted by cat-haters and disseminated by their buddies within the capitalist media just keep getting bigger and more fantastic with each passing day.

If fifty-two-year-old, arthritic John Randall is to be believed, he and his four-year-old Jack Russell Terrier, Scrappy, were strolling on Chatham Pavement in Pitsea, Essex, at around 11 a.m. on September 18th when they were ambushed by five feral cats who sprang from underneath a parked car. (See photo above of the pair.)

"They leapt out, pouncing on my dog. They were biting and scratching her. I tried to get them off but then they started scratching me," is how he described the encounter to the Daily Mail on September 22nd. (See "Pack of Feral Cats Terrorize Housing Estate Ambushing Pedestrians and Attacking Dog.") "I had to hit them with my walking stick and they still wouldn't leave her alone."

Of course, to hear Randall tell it both he and Scrappy were totally innocent victims. "I did nothing to provoke them and my dog was terrified but they kept jumping at us," he swore to the Daily Mail.

Randall, who not only claims to be disabled but also lives in public housing, is an old hand at playing the victim and thus conning the social welfare system out of every nickel that he can get. It therefore is not surprising that he has put those finely-honed talents to work at the cats' expense.

"I was really shocked. I've seen cats fight before but this was like a free-for-all," he continued. "In the end I pulled Scrappy close to me and got her away. I was left with scratches down my leg and Scrappy is (sic) really scared."

Anyone who cares to believe that this burly blighter armed with a cane and a Jack Russell Terrier was the innocent and victimized party in this altercation is welcome to indulge themselves in their delusions, but Randall is quite obviously serving up to the public a severely redacted version of events. A far more likely scenario is that as soon as Scrappy got a whiff of the cats' presence underneath the car she started growling and went after them.

After all, Jack Russell Terriers are notoriously pugnacious dogs that are well-known for their tendency to attack other animals. Even their admirers often refer to them as terrorists.

More to the point, it is highly improbable that Randall calls his dog Scrappy because she has a placid personality. Au contraire, he more than likely encourages her aggressiveness and eggs her on to attack cats.

The breed additionally has a rather checkered history when it comes to cats. For example, the scum-of-the-earth racist imperialists in South Africa used them in order to track down at least eight-hundred-ninety-seven cats on Marion Island between 1986-1989. The cats were then shot at night by marksmen carrying torches. That was in addition to the more than twenty-five-hundred cats that the South Africans either poisoned or deliberately infected with panleukemia.

More generally speaking, it is ludicrous for Randall or anyone else to maintain that they were attacked by a cat. Both experience and logic attest to the fact that cats, especially ferals, are scared to death of both people and dogs and only become violent after they have been attacked. (See photo above of one of the cats.)

Even Klare Kennett of the RSPCA is skeptical of Randall's lies. "It is not unusual to get communities of feral cats but it is unusual for them to attack someone," she told the Daily Mail in the article cited supra. "I can only imagine they had a litter nearby and felt threatened by the presence of the dog."

The most unfair part of this scenario is that whereas Randall is free to run his trap until the cows come home, the cats are unable to speak for themselves. If they were able to do so, it is certain that a far different account of events would soon emerge.

As Ernest Hemingway knew only too well, cats have impeccable integrity. "A cat has absolute honesty. Human beings, for one reason or another, may hide their feelings, but a cat does not," he once wrote.

The sensationalist English media likewise have contributed mightily to this injustice by simply accepting Randall's ludicrous assertions as gospel. It would have been easy enough for the press to have spent some time on the estate visiting with the cats and interviewing other tenants. From those interactions, the reporters surely would have been able to ascertain the truth.

It also must be noted that by Randall's own admission the cats have been living on the estate for at least six years and this appears to have been the first reported attack. If they are as prone to violence as he and the capitalist media allege, there surely would have been a multitude of prior assaults.

Sadly, logic, truth, and fairness count for absolutely nothing with either die-hard cat-haters like Randall or the moneybags media. Both are motivated by the same perverse desire: to do in cats at any cost!

A strikingly similar situation is currently unfolding in Minneapolis where eighty-two-year-old Lee Noltimier's nineteen-year-old cat, Hoppy, has several times felt the wrath of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control (MACC) for defending his turf against dogs. Not only has he been grounded for life, but MACC has vowed to kill him if he gets into any more scrapes with dogs. (See Cat Defender post of October 18, 2009 entitled "Minneapolis Is Working Overtime Trying to Kill an Octogenarian's Cat Named Hoppy for Defending His turf Against Canine Intruders.")

In Fairfield, Connecticut, five cat-hating women attempted in 2006 to have real estate broker Ruth Cisero's five-year-old polydactyl, Lewis, killed after he allegedly attacked them without provocation on seven separate occasions over a three-year period. (See photo below of Lewis and Cisero.)

Upon investigation, however, it was determined that in all of those instances it actually was the accusers who had attacked Lewis. In some of the cases, the women foolishly intervened in standoffs between Lewis and their cats.

An Avon peddler, who later sued Cisero for $5,000, either stepped on Lewis's tail or closed a door on him. Bird advocates also doused him with water and threw eggs at him.

One neighbor even illegally trapped Lewis and took him to a shelter to be killed. Fortunately, the shelter was closed that day and Lewis was later freed.

Thousands of other cats are not nearly so lucky. (See Cat Defender posts of June 15, 2006 and March 9, 2007 entitled, respectively, "Serial Cat Killer on Long Island Traps Neighbors' Cats and Then Gives Them to Shelter to Exterminate" and "Long Island Serial Cat Killer Guilty of Only Disorderly Conduct, Corrupt Court Rules.")

In the end, however, the truth did not matter one whit because a state court placed Lewis under house arrest for the remainder of his life. Cisero also was placed on probation for two years and ordered to perform fifty hours of community service.

"They (the accusers) want to kill a cat for a scratch. These people have to get a life!" is how Fairfield resident Marisa Sampieri described the absurdity and injustice of the situation. (See Cat Defender posts of April 3, 2006 and June 26, 2006 entitled, respectively, "Free Lewis Now! Connecticut Tomcat, Victimized by a Bum Rap, Is Placed Under House Arrest" and "Lewis Cheats the Hangman but Is Placed Under House Arrest for the Remainder of His Life.")

Ana De Vito's thirteen-year-old resident feline, Bingo, was similarly shortchanged by the Swiss judicial system back in April when he was grounded for life after biting a neighbor who had intervened in a dispute between him and her cat. (See Cat Defender post of October 17, 2009 entitled "Bingo Is Placed Under House Arrest for Defending Himself Against a Neighbor Who Foolishly Intervened in a Cat Fight.")

In 2007, forty-eight-year-old Ann Hogben of Ramsgate, Kent, found herself in hot water after her twelve-year-old cat, Blackie, was accused of assaulting thirteen individuals over a six-year period. (See photo below of her and Blackie.)

As it was later revealed, Blackie merely was protecting his turf against interlopers in that his victims consisted of five letter carriers from the Royal Mail, five paper boys, a construction worker, a fastfood delivery man, and a bobby. (See Cat Defender post of March 8, 2007 entitled "Blackie the Cat Has Postmen, Bobbies, and Deliverymen Looking Over Their Shoulders in Ramsgate, Kent.")

As was the case with Hoppy, Lewis, Bingo, and Blackie, the cause celebre in Pitsea is being driven by ailurophobia and nothing more. With there being up to fifteen unaltered and unfed feral cats living on the housing estate, that alone is bound to generate opposition.

In addition to Randall's blatant falsifications, the cats have been accused of destroying property, ruining gardens, keeping residents up at night with their vocalizations, and of rummaging through the trash.

"Every Friday the rubbish comes out and they just come out of the woodwork and rip open the bags, making an awful mess," Randall groused to the Daily Mail.

An unidentified fifty-nine-year-old female resident has accused the cats of damaging sheds and fences. "The situation has got out of hand," she complained to the The Sun on September 21st. (See "Feral Cat Pack Terrorize Town.") "It is like (Alfred Hitchcock's) The Birds around here but with cats."

Another unidentified fifty-seven-year-old woman has kvetched about being deprived of a few winks because of the cats.

While it is doubtful that there is much validity in any of those complaints, the rubbish situation could be easily remedied by properly securing skips and there are a multitude of organic, non-lethal methods of keeping cats out of gardens. As far as noise is concerned, it is doubtful that a few cats baying at the moon are in any way comparable to the dim churned up by Scrappy and other canines barking, vehicular traffic, stereos, and televisions.

In all likelihood, the cats were cruelly and irresponsibly abandoned by tenants of the housing estate and even if they were dumped there by outsiders they are still the estate's responsibility. Consequently, the estate should have long ago had them sterilized and provided with food, water, shelter and, if feasible, new homes.

If management of the estate had acted responsibly and humanely this situation never would have gotten out of hand in the first place. Even now the estate remains both obstinate and derelict in its duties and as a consequence the RSPCA, for better or worse, is going to be forced to intervene.

While it is at it, the organization should undertake an investigation into Randall's conduct. For siccing his dog on the cats and beating them with his cane, he obviously is guilty of the worst form of animal cruelty.

No one is required to like cats but the law should compel every member of society to respect their right to live. Likewise, whenever individuals, such as Randall, refuse to do so they must be held accountable for their crimes.

Unfortunately, there is not any legal redress for slandering and libeling cats. If there were, Randall, bird advocates, and wildlife biologists would soon find themselves in the dock with their wallets considerably lighter.

In conclusion, it is nothing short of revolting to see a young squirt like Randall living high on the hog at the expense of his countrymen. Instead of living on the dole and in public housing, he should be forced to earn his daily bread by the sweat of his brow.

He has a good fifty years remaining and as such should be put to work at some hard, back-breaking job, such as either mining coal or cleaning sewers. Perhaps such an arduous undertaking would sweat some of the lies and evil out of him and teach him to keep his hands and dog off of homeless cats.

Photos: Peter Lawson of the East News Press Agency (Randall and Scrappy, feral cat), Brian A. Pounds of the Connecticut Post (Lewis and Cisero), and Daily Mail (Blackie and Hogben).

Minneapolis Is Working Overtime Trying to Kill an Octogenarian's Cat Named Hoppy for Defending His Turf Against Canine Intruders

"Hoppy doesn't bite. He doesn't scratch. Gossip is easy. Where's the evidence?"
-- Lee Noltimier

Cats and dogs are, with rare exceptions, mortal enemies who have been scrapping for millenniums. Because of their superior size, strength, and viciousness, canines usually prevail in just about all of these tiffs and that is vouched for by the fact that whereas dogs kill hundreds, if not indeed thousands, of cats each year, no one has ever heard of a cat killing a dog.

That petit fait should count for something with thinking and fair-minded individuals but with Dan Niziolek of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control (MACC) it counts for absolutely nothing. That is why he threw the book at eighty-two-year-old Lee Noltimier's cat, Hoppy, back in June after he was involved in a scrap with a man and his dog outside his home on Drew Avenue South near West Thirty-Ninth Street. (See photo above of Hoppy.)

According to Russ King, he was walking his Maltese, Charlie, past Noltimier's residence on May 20th when out of the blue they were attacked by nineteen-year-old, jet-black Hoppy. After scooping up Charlie from the pavement, King was repeatedly scratched by Hoppy.

King then hightailed it to MACC screaming bloody murder where, not surprisingly, he found a receptive audience. MACC then dispatched its goons to Noltimier's house but he wisely refused to surrender his beloved companion.

MACC later sought and obtained a search warrant and Hoppy was subsequently arrested in June and carted off to the clink where he was held for several days. Although he was later released on June 23rd, he is no longer a free cat.

In addition to mandating that he be microchipped, given a rabies shot, and registered each year with the city, MACC ordered Noltimier to put him in a harness and on a leash whenever he is taken outside. The agency even had the unmitigated gall to require that Noltimier either confine him in a separate room or put him in a cat carrier whenever he receives visitors at his residence.

First of all, microchips have not only been linked to cancer but they offer cats absolutely no protection against motorists, wild animals, thieves, and ailurophobes. (See Cat Defender posts of September 21, 2007 and May 25, 2006 entitled, respectively, "FDA Is Suppressing Research That Shows Implanted Microchips Cause Cancer in Mice, Rats, and Dogs" and "Plato's Misadventures Expose the Pitfalls of RFID Technology as Applied to Cats.")

Secondly, since Hoppy can longer be allowed outside unless he is on a leash, both the microchip and rabies shot are superfluous. Moreover, because of his advanced age, both procedures could create potential health problems.

Requiring Noltimier to register Hoppy with MACC is likewise not only a form of harassment but, more importantly, a means of raiding his wallet. After all, the agency most certainly knows who Hoppy is and where he can be found.

Worst of all, MACC has warned Noltimier that if Hoppy is involved in another scrap it plans to kill him without further ado. Should that occur, that would mark the third time within two years that the bloodthirsty cat-haters at MACC have attempted to end his life.

In the autumn of 2007, Thomas Buchberger was walking his dog, Walden, past Noltimier's house when they became involved in a scrap with Hoppy. In the aftermath, Buchberger claimed that he was scratched and bitten by the cat.

Taking Buchberger's word as the gospel truth, MACC immediately took Hoppy away from Noltimier and initialed his death warrant. One way or another, Noltimier somehow was able to get the order overturned and Hoppy freed from death row.

To his everlasting credit, Noltimier is sticking by his companion. "Hoppy doesn't bite. He doesn't scratch," he told KSAX-TV of Alexandria, Minnesota, on June 25th. (See "Minneapolis Deems Cat a Dangerous Animal.") "Gossip is easy. Where's the evidence?"

The short answer to that question is that there is not any. Both King and Buchberger can speak for themselves whereas Hoppy cannot so MACC, believing what it wants to hear, has chosen to take their sides in this dispute.

The same thing occurred in Fairfield, Connecticut, in 2006 when a court grounded Ruth Cisero's cat, Lewis, for life. (See Cat Defender posts of April 3, 2006 and June 26, 2006 entitled, respectively, "Free Lewis Now! Connecticut Tomcat, Victimized by a Bum Rap, Is Placed Under House Arrest" and "Lewis the Cat Cheats the Hangman but Is Placed Under House Arrest for the Remainder of His Life.")

Just to prove that Americans do not have a monopoly on either ailurophobia or injustice, a Swiss tribunal followed suit in April of this year when it grounded Ana De Vito's cat, Bingo, based solely upon the one-sided testimony of a neighbor. (See Cat Defender post of October 17, 2009 entitled "Bingo Is Placed Under House Arrest for Defending Himself Against a Neighbor Who Foolishly Intervened in a Cat Fight.")

In all likelihood, King's and Buchberger's dogs got a whiff of Hoppy's presence as they were passing Noltimier's house and began menacing the cat. A standoff ensued and when both men intervened they were inadvertently scratched.

Inexplicably, there is no indication in the record of exactly where these disputes occurred. If Hoppy ventured out onto the sidewalk, then many would consider him to have been the aggressor even though in his own mind he was only defending his turf against an invader who sans doute was intent upon doing him bodily harm.

On the other hand, if either Charlie or Walden so much as stuck their noses into Noltimier's yard they were not only the instigators but trespasses as well. The same holds true if they started yapping at Hoppy from the middle of the sidewalk.

Despite all of Niziolek's bluster and pontification, he was not present when either incident occurred and therefore has no business of accepting King's and Buchberger's unsubstantiated accounts of what transpired. In the absence of corroborating evidence, history and logic must prevail and both are clearly on Hoppy's side.

The way in which the American media have falsely portrayed cats like Hoppy and Lewis is nothing short of disgraceful. By contrast, Blick, SF1-TV, and Le Matin went out of their way in order to understand and explain why Bingo acted as he did.

Of course, it goes almost without saying that Americans as a people are disgusting brownnosers and suck-ups. As long as it comes out the piehole of a man with either money or position they readily accept it as being the truth no matter how absurd.

Knowing a good thing when he sees it, Niziolek is not about to stop defaming and killing cats. In addition to Hoppy, he and his colleagues have labeled a cat named Ralph who lives on the 400 block of Beard Avenue South as "potentially dangerous." As was the case with Hoppy, he is ludicrously accused of attacking a dog.

Finally, in addition to learning to tell the truth once in a while, both King and Buchberger need to start behaving like adults instead of cry babies. Moaning and groaning about how they were manhandled by a cat serves only to make them look like wussies.

As for Niziolek and his cronies at MACC, they need to find some other form of amusement besides defaming and killing cats. The fact that they have targeted the cat of an octogenarian makes their conduct all the more reprehensible.

Photo: KSAX-TV.

Bingo Is Placed Under House Arrest for Defending Himself Against a Neighbor Who Foolishly Intervened in a Cat Fight

"Er merkt schon, dass er sein Territorium, sein Revier verloren hat. Er waere viel lieber draussen."
-- Stella De Vito

Bingo is not a happy camper these days. The thirteen-year-old castrated black cat had lived his entire life as an indoor-outdoor cat in the Maihofquartier of Luzern until he was placed under house arrest by a Strafverfuegung issued on April 17th by the Amtsstatthalteramt.

That was the culmination of his having been declared to be dangerous after he bit a female neighbor on August 22, 2007 and again on December 19, 2008. His forty-eight-year-old guardian, Ana De Vito, also was fined four-hundred-eighty Swiss francs (US$471.60) by the tribunal. (See photo above of her with Bingo.)

That precipitate designation was made over the objections of Gieri Bolliger of the Stiftung fuer das Tier im Recht in Zurich. "Das ist sicher nicht normal," he told SF1-TV of Zurich on June 2nd. (See "Busse wegen Buesi: Kampfkatze von Amtes wegen.") "Bevor so eine Strafverfuegung erlassen wird, muessten die Strafuntersuchungsbehoerden wirklich abklaeren, ob der Tatbestand erfuellt ist, ob das Tier wirklich gefaehrlich oder boesartig ist." (See photo below of the Strafverfuegung.)

At the request of Blick of Zurich, sixty-year-old animal psychologist Heini Meier examined Bingo and concluded that although the cat was indeed suffering from anxiety, he was not dangerous. (See photo below of him, Ana, and Bingo.)

"Er ist gestresst," he told Blick on June 7th. (See "So gefaehrlich ist Kater Bingo wirklich.") "Das hoert man an seinem Miauen, er heult ja fast. Man sieht es auch am Gang und dem gestraeuben Schwanz, den er hin und herbewegt."

As to the source of Bingo's alleged aggression, Meier confirmed what Ana and her husband, Mario, had known right from the beginning. "Vielleicht warf man mit Gegenstaenden nach ihm," he theorized to Blick.

True enough, the neighbor had foolishly intervened in several squabbles between her cat and Bingo and as the result was bitten. It therefore was she who physically attacked Bingo and, possibly, even threw objects at him.

That drew the ire of legal expert Doris Slongo who said, in effect, that the unidentified neighbor had no one to blame for her subsequent injuries except herself. Much more importantly, she contends that the De Vitoes are blameless. "Deshalb ist der Katzenbesitzer nicht haftbar fuer den Schaden," she told SF1-TV in the article cited supra.

As a practicable matter, Tomi Tomek of SOS Chats in Noiraigue recommends that cat owners who feel compelled to intervene in these types of disputes use water. "Il ne faut pas separer des chats avec la main ou le pied, mais avec de l'eau," she volunteered to Le Matin of Lausanne on June 4th. (See "Bingo: ce chat est une terreur!")

Actually, that is only partially correct. As long as there is not any blood or torn flesh it is best to let cats settle their disputes themselves. Although these tiffs can be extremely loud, they most always sound considerably worse than they are in reality. Besides, human intervention does not accomplish much and usually is resented.

This case bears a disturbing resemblance to the fate that befell a five-year-old, longhaired polydactyl named Lewis from Fairfield, Connecticut, in 2006. (See photo below of him looking out the window.)

In an equally gross miscarriage of justice, a state court placed Lewis under house arrest for the remainder of his life after he fought with five different women over a three-year period. His owner, real estate broker Ruth Cisero, also was placed on probation for two years and ordered to perform fifty hours of community service following her conviction for second degree reckless endangerment.

Although the court pigheadedly refused to take cognizance of the circumstances surrounding these incidents, Lewis was every bit as innocent as Bingo. In some of the instances he was only defending himself after cat-owners had intervened in standoffs between him and their cats. One of the victims even instigated hostilities by either stepping on his tail or closing a door on him.

Lewis also had been repeatedly abused by bird advocates who had thrown eggs at him and doused him with water. One cat-hating neighbor even went so far as to illegally trap him and take him to a shelter. (See Cat Defender posts of April 3, 2006 and June 26, 2006 entitled, respectively, "Free Lewis Now! Connecticut Tomcat, Victimized by a Bum Rap, Is Placed Under House Arrest" and "Lewis the Cat Cheats the Hangman but Is Placed Under House Arrest for the Remainder of His Life.")

Once he had completed his examination of Bingo, Meier wound up recommending that the De Vitoes send the neighbor, who has since relocated elsewhere, a bottle of wine as a peace offering. It is doubtful, however, that such a gesture will help much unless she can be prevailed upon to go before the Amtsstatthalteramt and convince it to rescind its Strafverfuegung.

He also counseled that they, who at last report were still contesting the fine, take out insurance just in case Bingo gets into any more legal scrapes. Thankfully the De Vitoes' neighbors so far have not called for Bingo's scalp as did Cisero's counterparts in Fairfield with Lewis.

Besides, it is a sure bet that the De Vitoes would strenuously oppose any such attempt. "Einschlaefern kam nicht in Frage," Ana declared to Blick.

After having been unfairly assaulted on so many occasions, Bingo understandably has become suspicious of strangers. It is, however, the loss of his freedom that he is finding to be the most vexing.

"Er merkt schon, dass er sein Territorium, sein Revier verloren hat," daughter Stella told SF1-TV in the article cited supra. "Er waere viel lieber draussen."

Mario, for his part, steadfastly maintains that the cat who sleeps under the covers with his children and loves Miau von Denner is not a threat to the general public. "Notre chat est adorable, il dort toute la journee," he told Le Matin.

As was the case with Lewis, it is a pity that there were not either third-party, impartial witnesses to these alleged attacks or surveillance cameras. If either of them had been in situ it is likely that they would have shown him to have acted in self-defense.

It is important to point out that Bingo is not an isolated case. In fact, hundreds of cats throughout Switzerland have been designated by the authorities as dangerous. It is not known, however, how many of them have been sent to the gallows as the result.

That is not really all that surprising in light of Switzerland's notorious mistreatment of the species. For example, like the Chinese, Australians, and Peruvians, the Swiss not only eat cats but traffic in their pelts as well.

Photos: Sabine Wunderlin of Blick (Bingo and Ana, Strafverfuegung, and Meier with Bingo and Ana) and News 12-TV of Norwalk (Lewis).