Mr. Krabs' Young Life Has Been Placed in Grave Jeopardy Because of the Malicious Lies Spread about Him by His Vindictive Former Owners

Mr. Krabs Has Been Incarcerated for Five Months on a Bum Rap

"Sieht so ein Schlägertyp aus? Wir können es uns kaum vorstellen."

-- Tierheim Köln-Dellbrück

When it comes to chronicling the mistreatment of cats it is often difficult to even know where to begin. The abuse is that widespread.

Whereas the en masse liquidation of hundreds of them at a time in such backwaters as Taiwan rightfully commands a lion's share of the attention of whatever remnants are left of the civilized world, the naked abuse meted out to them in their own homes by their brutal and derelict owners is almost universally ignored except in cases of hoarding. (See The Guardian of London, August 23, 2021, "Decision to Euthanize One-Hundred-Fifty-Four Cats Found in Smuggling Operation Sparks Outrage in Pet-Loving Taiwan" and KATV of Little Rock, June 3, 2021, "At Least One-Hundred Cats, One Dog Rescued in 'Largest Cat Hoarding Case in History of Arkansas'.")

Furthermore, it often it is not even the physical and psychological abuses that cats are subjected to at the hands of their owners that have the longest lasting impacts upon their lives but rather it is the malicious slanders and libels that they spread about those of them that they dump at shelters. Whereas words can wound even those cats who are not fully capable of comprehending their meaning, malicious lies cannot only harm their chances of finding new homes but, even worse, serve as the pretext for initialing their death warrants.

For example, in a cage at Tierheim Köln-Dellbrück (Kölner Tierheim) in Köln there currently sits a strikingly handsome cream-colored British Shorthair with beautiful turquoise eyes who has been ignominiously misnomered as Mr. Krabs. He is three-years and nine-months-old and he has been falsely imprisoned at the shelter ever since March 30th.

In addition to branding him with with such an outrageously insulting and derogatory moniker, his previous owners claim that he is violent and aggressive. They in fact hated him so much that they went far out of their way in order to make an utterly ridiculous production of surrendering him to the Kölner Tierheim.

"Diese haben ihn noch nicht einmal selbst gebracht, sondern mit Feuerwehr abholen lassen, weil sie Angst um ihre Kinder hatten," the shelter informed Radio Television Luxembourg (RTL) of Köln on April 22nd. (See "Sieht so ein Schläger-Kater aus? Mr. Krabs sucht ein neues Zuhause.")

Although there can be little doubt that they resorted to such drastic action out of a maniacal desire not only to fix Mr. Krabs' little red wagon but to fix it good, their fiendish plot ultimately backfired on them and instead served only to, Gott sei Danke!, raise red flags at the charity. "Wer weiß, vielleicht lag ja genau da der Hase im Pfeffer?" the shelter speculated to RTL.

(Da liegt der Hase im Pfeffer is a very old and quaint German Sprichwort that warns that something is not quite right and is usually translated as either "that is the fly in the ointment" or "therein lies the rub." It most likely is derived from the more mundane Hasenpfeffer.)  

"Sieht so ein Schlägetyp aus," the shelter rhetorically asked Tag24 of Dresden on April 23rd. (See "Besitzer lassen 'Böse' Katze von der Feuerwehr abholen: Was hat das Tier auf dem Kerbholz?") "Wir können es uns kaum vorstellen."

Im Gegenteil, it has an altogether different opinion of Mr. Krabs. "Bei uns verhält er sich bisher vorbildlich, genießt seine Kuscheleinheiten und lässt sich auch mehrmals täglich seine Äuglein säubern," it added to RTL.

The shelter has even gone so far as to label him as being a real sweetheart. "(Er) zeigt sich hier aber bisher hier äußerst liebenswürdige," it wrote April 21st on Instagram.

All of that is rather revealing in that shelters are certainly not known for bringing out the best in cats. Au contraire, it quite often is precisely those cats that have been unceremoniously uprooted from loving homes that have the greatest difficulties in adjusting to strange environments and being incarcerated in cages.

For staffers at the Kölner Tierheim to have brought about such a transformational change in Mr. Krabs is a pretty good indications that he surely must have been unmercifully abused by his former owners. Otherwise, they are guilty of spreading a pack of malicious lies about him.

Why, the entire notion that cats are aggressive and would attack two-footed monsters that are ten-times their size is patently absurd. "These intelligent, peace-loving, four-footed friends -- who are without prejudice, without hate, without greed -- may someday teach us something," celebrated authoress Lilian Jackson Braun pointed out in her 1998 novel, The Cat Who Saw Stars.

A cat accordingly will only use its claws and teeth on a human in self-defense, such as when it has been directly attacked, threatened, or the victim of past physical abuse. Besides, what the hell would any cat ever gain by attacking a human? Even if it were possible for one of them to bring down one of these Goliaths it would be all but impossible for it to consume its flesh owing to its rancid smell, poor quality, stringiness and, above all, high acidity content. 

That is not meant to imply, however, that it does not sometimes take time and effort for a new owner to gain the trust and confidence of a cat that has been abused. "We were told that she could get quite nasty but when we saw her (at the shelter), she took to us straightaway and we just said 'we want her'," thirty-nine-year-old Carly Jose of Madron in Cornwall related earlier this year about meeting her beloved cat Mini for the first time. "She was scared when she came home. She'd been abused and she thought we might do the same but she grew to trust us and she was so affectionate."

Despite Jose's best efforts to protect her, Mini's life ended tragically. (See Cat Defender post of July 1, 2021 entitled "Fourteen-Year-Old Mini Is Ripped to Shreds by a Pack of Vicious Hounds but Those Responsible Never Will Be Punished Because the Limeys Value the 'Unspeakable in Full Pursuit of the Uneatable' Far More Than They Do Her Right to Live.") 

Nor will it pass intellectual muster for Mr. Krabs' detractors to argue that he is simply putting on an act for the benefit of the staffers at the Kölner Tierheim; cats do not behave that way. "A cat has absolute emotional honesty," Ernest Hemingway once observed. "Human beings, for one reason or another, may hide their feelings, but a cat does not."

As it is almost always the case whenever these types of issues arise, the circumstances which precipitated these alleged assaults on the part of Mr. Krabs have not been even taken into consideration, let alone publicly disclosed. Equally importantly, it has not been revealed how long that he had resided with his former owners.

For instance, if he had lived with them ever since birth or shortly thereafter, it would be strange for him to have suddenly turned violent three years later on down the road. On the other hand, if he had always been aggressive it is unlikely that they would have tolerated his presence for such a lengthy period of time.   

It therefore is entirely possible that he could have been bandied about between multiple homes and, by extension, abused in either one or all of them. Only the Kölner Tierheim knows his past history and it is playing its cards close to its vest on that subject.

The only other known black mark against Mr. Krabs is that he apparently was adopted out at some point following his internment at the shelter and subsequently returned because of, once again, aggression. Unfortunately, the shelter has not disclosed any additional information about that fiasco and that in turn makes it difficult to speculate on what went wrong.

It is the sad lot of all cats but Mr. Krabs' detractors not only have him over a barrel but, even worse, in a totally untenable position. "Mr. Krabs selbst äußert sich zu den Beschuldigungen nicht," the shelter pointed out the obvious to RTL.

With that being the case, a human's word never should be accepted as the gospel truth without it first being backed up by incontrovertible evidence. Reprehensibly, cats have zero rights under the law and accordingly never have been afforded so much as a speck of due process.

Quite often both individuals and organizations are so blinded by all the static and confusion as well as the hustle and bustle that clutters up their busy lives that they are unable to see the forest from the trees and that certainly has been the case with Mr. Krabs. C'est-à-dire, the missing clue in solving this puzzle is not necessarily to be found by sifting through the charges and countercharges that have been leveled against him, but rather it is where it always has been and that is in his name itself.

Presumably, that derogatory moniker was given him by his former owners and since naming a cat is usually the first thing that new owners do, they surely must have taken an intense disliking to him at first sight. After that, it was all downhill for him.

As most fans of the Nickelodeon's long-running animated series SpongeBob SquarePants are already aware, Mr. Krabs is a fictional crab who owns and operates the Krusty Krab Restaurant in the undersea town of Bikini Bottom which is located below the real-life Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands. Much more importantly, he is a rather unsavory character.

For starters, he talks like a sailor and runs his restaurant as if it were a pirate ship. Not surprisingly, he is obsessed with making money but at the same time is a real tightwad.

He gouges his customers and charges his employees for the use of the services of his eatery. He even attempts to drive a rival restaurateur out of business. Worst of all, he got his start in business by killing all of his fellow crabs in Bikini Bottom which he then ground up in order to produce his best selling Krabby Patty. 

In everyday parlance, the word crab is slang for an irritating person. Even worse, when used in the plural it is used to denote pubic lice.

It accordingly is superfluous to point out that individuals who would so verbally slander a cat for life do not have any business owning one in the first place. Even more alarmingly, considering the amount of spite that his owners harbored in their malignant bosoms for him, Mr. Krabs is indeed fortunate that they elected to hand him over to the Feuerwehr instead of taking the law into their own hands and doing away with him.

"The naming of cats is a difficult matter," T.S. Eliot postulated in his 1939 magnum opus, Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats. "It isn't just one of your holiday games."

From that starting point, he went on to argue that a cat requires no fewer than three names and that none of them, most assuredly, should be in any way derogatory. There is first of all the "sensible everyday name" that the family uses, "such as Peter, Augustus, Alonzo, or James" und so weiter.

As far as a cat's second name is concerned, Eliot wrote the following:

         "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?" 

Try doing any of that with an appallingly insulting moniker like Mr. Krabs! Needless to say, that would be near impossible for a handsome and self-respecting cat such as him.

Eliot then continued as follows:

"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."

It is in no way germane to the inquiry at hand but for the sake of completeness, the third name that Eliot speaks of is destined to forever remain a mystery. For example:

"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!"  

It therefore is somewhat comforting to know that Mr. Krabs has been left with at least that much dignity and, more importantly, that no one can take that away from him.

Mark Twain also had a habit of bestowing highfaluting names upon the numerous cats that he cared for throughout the course of his lifetime but even he, apparently, came to belatedly realize the dangers inherent in overdoing the job. "They died early -- on account of being overweighted with their names, it was thought," he said of four of his departed cats in an April 2, 1890 epistle to the editors of the long defunct Echoes Magazine.

"Sour Mash, Appollinaris, Zoroaster, and Blatherskite -- names given them not in an unfriendly spirit, but merely to practice the children in large and difficult styles of pronunciation," he went on to explain. "It was a very happy idea. I mean, for the children."

If he is to be taken even halfway seriously it would appear that the objective would be to give cats dignified and distinctive names but not overly exaggerated ones. As far as the youngsters are concerned, they can surely find other means of practicing their pronunciation.

This is not any laughing matter in that for owners to publicly malign their former resident felines is not only harmful to them but also totally superfluous in that there certainly is not any shortage of groups who have dedicated their existences to doing exactly just that. For instance, ornithologists, wildlife biologists, and PETA only trouble themselves to breathe so that they can denigrate and kill cats.

There likewise is not any shortage of private individuals who have found their raisons-d' être in picking up that gauntlet. For example, in the spring of 2006 seemingly every cat-hater in Fairfield, Connecticut, spilled out of old mattresses in order to physically and verbally attack a five-year-old, longhaired, black and white polydactyl named Lewis.

They were so successful in their vicious campaign of slanders, libels, and outright lies that they were able to convince a local stench-of-the-bench to place him under house arrest for the remainder of his natural days. They were, mercifully, denied his scalp but his owner, real estate agent Ruth Cisero, was placed on probation for two years and ordered to perform fifty hours of community service.

Upon thorough examination, however, it readily became crystal clear that it was Lewis's enemies, and certainly not him, who were at fault. First of all, some of them were unmasked as amateur ornithologists who, as every cat-lover knows, are nothing but outrageous liars and unabashed criminals.

Secondly, some of his accusers idiotically intervened in standoffs between him and their cats. Thirdly, several of Cisero's neighbors physically assaulted Lewis with water, eggs, and other assorted debris.

Fourthly, others stepped on his tail and slammed doors on him. Fifthly, at least one of his detractors illegally trapped him and attempted to fob him off on a shelter to kill.

Mr. Krabs Is Hoping That Brighter Days Are Ahead

Fortunately for him, that feline extermination camp was closed on that particular day. (See Cat Defender posts of April 3, 2006 and June 26, 2006 entitled, respectively, "Free Lewis Now! A 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.") 

A few years later, a supposedly violent thirteen-year-old black tom named Bingo from the Maihofquartier of Luzern suffered the same fate when he was placed under house arrest by a local tribunal. His travails also ended up costing his owner, forty-eight-year-old Ana DeVito, CHF487.

As was the case with Lewis, DeVito's neighbors had provoked these incidents by foolishly intervening in spates between their cats and Bingo and by throwing objects at him. (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.")

Dogs and their owners likewise never have been anything but trouble for cats. For instance, on May 20, 2009 a nineteen-year-old black tom named Hoppy became involved in a fracas with a man and his dog outside his home in Minneapolis and that in turn led to him being jailed for three days by Dan Niziolek of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control (MAAC). 

Hoppy's owner, eighty-two-year-old Lee Noltimier, was eventually able to regain custody of him but not before MAAC had mandated that he be microchipped, vaccinated against rabies, registered with the city, and not be allowed outside unless he was first placed in a harness and walked on a leash. The overzealous agency even went so far as to decree that he be both caged and confined in a separate room whenever Noltimier entertained guests. 

As was the case with Lewis, MAAC vowed to seize and kill him if he got into any more scraps. The man and his dog, however, were allowed to get away scot-free with their violent and aggressive behavior toward Hoppy. (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.")

The situation is far worse for homeless cats who are hideously abused by dogs and their owners. For example, on September 18,2009 in the Chatham Pavement section of Pitsea in Essex a four-year-old Jack Russell Terrier named Scrappy attacked a colony of them. His owner, fifty-two-year-old John Russell, joined in the merriment by going after the cats with his walking stick. 

Even Klare Kennett of the RSPCA, which never has been known for either its integrity or smarts, had a difficult time swallowing Randall's outrageous lie that he and his dog had been victimized by the cats. That was especially case considering that the latter had been residing at the housing complex for at least five years without any prior incidents.

"It  is not unusual to get communities of feral cats but it is unusual for them to attack someone," she said. "I can only imagine they had a litter nearby and felt threatened by the presence of the dog."

That last statement of hers was pure baloney in that she knows as well as everyone else that dogs and their owners routinely attacks cats and other animals. Moreover, ornithologists, wildlife biologists, and other governmental officials employ Jack Russell Terriers as their feline exterminators of choice.

For example, the diabolical South Africans used them in order to track down and kill at least eight-hundred-ninety-seven cats on Marion Island between 1986 and 1989. The breed also is employed to hunt down and illegally kill foxes in England and elsewhere. (See Cat Defender post of October 23, 2009 entitled "An 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.")

A confrontation with a dog and its owner also played a part in a beautiful, four-year-old, ginger and white tom named Rocky from Rotherham in South Yorkshire being slapped with an Anti-Social Behavior Order (ASBO) by the local authorities back in 2014. Another resident provoked him by pulling his tail and yet still another citizen physically assaulted him while attempting to evict him through a window that he had carelessly left open so as to have allowed Rocky to have gained entry in the first place.

The only offense that Rocky was guilty of committing was that of scratching a fence. (See the Yorkshire Post of Leeds in West Yorkshire, June 25, 2014, "Safety Claws as Council Slaps ASBO on a Cat" and the Daily Mail of London, June 25, 2014, "Must Be Feline (sic) Pretty Antisocial: Cat Slapped with an 'Animal ASBO' for Biting People and Damaging Property in 'Campaign of Terror'.")

Abject stupidity is, arguably, even more disgusting than either body odor or incest and seventy-four-year-old Bruce Gough of Tower View Apartments in Chartham, Kent, certainly has plenty of that. For example, after he had carelessly allowed a cat to enter his pad through an open window he went totally berserk and started chasing and yelling at it.

When the quite obviously frightened to death feline took refuge underneath a bed, he went after it with a broom. Once he was able to have gotten his mitts on it he attempted to pick it up and was promptly rewarded for his effort by a scratch on his arm.

Afterwards the big crybaby ran to the capitalistic media blaming the cat that he had assaulted for his troubles and boohooing about the injury that he had received. While he had the wind up he also took the time to excoriate the cat for the loss of a Victorian ewer which had fallen to the floor during the melee as well as for having emptied its bladder and colon on his bedroom floor.

If Gough had ever considered using his head for anything other than a hat rack he would have realized that if he were being chased, yelled at, and beaten with a broom by a deranged monster he, too, probably would have pissed and shit in his drawers. Instead of doing that, however, he also called the RSPCA to complain but all that he received for his effort was a lecture and a rather public acknowledgement of his own unforgiving ignorance.

"We would advise anyone who finds a feral cat has entered their home to keep a distance and ensure they (sic) have a clear and easy exit route -- such as an open window or a door -- so they (sic) can make their (sic) own way out," the charity told Kent Online on July 3, 2014. (See "Devil Cat's Invasion Makes Life Hell for Couple Bruce and Eileen Gough of Chartham.") "The RSPCA is an animal charity and our donors expect us to use our limited resources on animals who are suffering or in distress or danger."

Quite obviously the RSPCA does not consider a cat being attacked by a maniac wielding a broom to be either suffering, in distress, or danger. Besides, what is it with Limeys and open windows? Are they on some kind of a fresh air kick? Have they never heard of burglars and insects? Or are they simply too cheap to purchase screens, latches, and bars?

In every single report of a cat allegedly attacking a human that has been looked into in recent years it has invariably been the two-legged beasts who have initiated the physical and verbal abuse. Moreover, they have attacked cats with flying projectiles as well as having illegally trapped them.

Some of them have been confirmed cat-haters while others have been unmasked as devious bird-lovers with their own agendas. Most of these incidences also have involved extenuating circumstances, such as the presence of other cats and dogs.

The only case that does not hold true to form concerned a twelve-year-old black tom named Blackie from Ramsgate in Kent who was accused of assaulting thirteen humans over the course of a six-year period. Five of the alleged attacks can be easily dispensed with in that they involved him swatting at letters and the hands of postmen as they shoved mail through a slot in the front door. Besides, it is dogs that are infamous for chasing and biting letter carriers but absolutely nobody ever goes to the media and the RSPCA whining about them.

Since none of the particulars surrounding his five run-ins with paper boys and one each with a bobby, a fastfood delivery man, and a construction worker ever were made public, it is impossible to know exactly what transpired on those occasions. Nevertheless, it would be surprising, not to mention both out of the ordinary and contrary to all logic, if there were not extenuating circumstances in all of those alleged attacks. (See Cat Defender post of March 8, 2007 entitled "Blackie Has Postmen, Bobbies, and Deliverymen Looking over Their Shoulders in Ramsgate, Kent.") 

Looking ahead, it is fervently hoped that Tierheim Köln-Dellbrück will not weary of Mr. Krabs' presence and thus throw in the towel on him, but rather that it will remain steadfast in his corner no matter how long that it takes in order to secure a proper home for him. Not only is that the correct course of action for it to take but he certainly is well worth the time, effort, and money.

That in no way, however, makes the shelter's job any easier. First of all, he is a cat who, like Charles Dickens' fictional Pip, has high expectations. Secondly, he needs a guardian who is knowledgeable about cats.

In particular, he must not be either crowded or harassed and an owner needs to be able to readily recognize whenever he is becoming agitated. "Die mir an der Nasenspitze ansehen, wann sie besser einen Bogen um mich machen sollten," the shelter confided to Tag24 on July 25th. (See "Böser Kater! Diese Samtpfote sieht aus wie ein Engel, doch hat es Faustdick hinter den Ohren.")

The presence of other cats might possibly be tolerated but children would not be a good idea. "Mit seinen Artgenossen hat er nichts am Hut und Kinder sollten aufgrund seiner angeblichen Vergangenheit nicht mir in Haushalt leben," the shelter added to RTL. 

Other than that the Kölner Tierheim is looking to place him in a home where he will have access to the great outdoors. It has not specified, however, if a fenced-in garden would suffice or if he requires more space in order to roam. He has been sterilized and that sometimes is a big help in keeping toms at home.

This is a vitally important matter because if he were to have a run-in with an individual not connected to his new family he easily could wind up in the same boat as Lewis, Bingo, Rocky, and all the other cats who have been falsely accused of being public menaces. If that were to happen it would be a case of Mr. Krabs having gone from the frying pan into the fire in that life at a shelter, no matter how horrible, is still far preferable to being forced to stand in the dock. 

Most shelters do not like cats in the first pace and they accordingly endeavor to get rid of them as quickly as possible whether it is via the back door in black plastic trash bags or out the front door in the clutches of totally unsuitable guardians. By contrast, what they should be doing is taking the time in order to learn all that they can about their past lives, medical history and, above all, personalities.

The notion that a cat is only a cat and that one size fits all can only be labeled as a prime example of stupidity working overtime. All of them have different histories and personalities. Aristotle understood that twenty-four-hundred years ago and even he was still two-hundred-years behind Pythagoras in his thinking.

Shelters and rescue groups who fail to heed that admonition run the risk of doing far more harm than good. In particular, placing a cat in the wrong home can not only be dangerous to its safety, but it also can so unnerve and stress it as to make it even less adoptable.

It therefore is imperative that the Kölner Tierheim take its time and do its due diligence before placing Mr. Krabs in another home. It already has botched one adoption and repeatedly bandying him from one home to another is sure to exact a terrible toll on him.

In a particularly sad and disturbing saga that began to unfold in December of 2016, Yorkshire Cat Rescue (YCR) in Keighley, West Yorkshire, took in a handsome thirteen-year-old, brown, gray, and white tom named Harvey after his owner had suddenly died. Over the course of the following year, the shelter unsuccessfully attempted to fob him off on no fewer than three owners and fosterers and that in turn led to him being returned to a cage at the shelter on four separate occasions.

It took YCR an astonishingly long time in order to figure things out but it eventually learned that Harvey had spent his entire life living alone with one owner and therefore could not tolerate the presence of other animals and children. By that time he also was rapidly aging, suffering from a wobbly gait, and exhibiting signs of  forgetfulness.

In early 2018, YCR finally was able to place him with a so-called permanent foster mother. It undid all of its good work a year or so later, however, when it hired a veterinarian to kill him off. (See Cat Defender posts of August 31, 2017, March 12, 2018, July 29, 2019, and October 27, 2020 entitled, respectively, "With His Previous Owner Long Dead and Nobody Seemingly Willing to Give Him a Second Chance at Life, Old and Ailing Harvey Has Been Sentenced to Rot at a Shelter in Yorkshire," "Much Like a Nightmare That Stubbornly Refuses to End, Harvey Continues to Be Shuttled from One Home to Another at the Expense of His Health and Well-Being," "Repeatedly Shunned, Maligned, and Bandied about from One Place to Another, Harvey Is Now Engaged in the Most Important Battle of His Life," and "Noble and Courageous Harvey Who So Desperately Wanted to Go on Living Is Instead Unforgivably Betrayed and Killed Off by His Foster Mother and Yorkshire Cat Rescue.") 

As far as Mr. Krabs is concerned, the most pressing issue facing the Kölner Tierheim is for it to immediately stop calling him by that simply god-awful moniker with which he was branded by his dastardly former owners. In fact, that should have been its first order of business after it impounded him.

The good news, however, is that it is not too late for it to correct that faux pas. Mr. Krabs is a beautiful young cat who richly deserves an equally sublime name.

The shelter additionally did him an immense disservice when it went to the media and repeated the same blatant lies and unfounded allegations that had been leveled against him by his former owners. On the one hand, doing so has only served to scare away qualified potential adopters while on the other hand such unthinking behavior is bound to attract precisely those types of individuals who do not have any business whatsoever of owning a cat in the first place. 

Denigrating and abusing cats and other animals is most definitely not any joking matter. "Boys throw stones at frogs in fun, but the frogs do not die in fun, but in earnest," the ancient Greek philosopher Bion of Borysthenes (325-250 BC) once correctly observed.

Reprehensibly, that is how that YCR repeatedly mistreated Harvey. While he was left to languish in limbo month after month, the charity was busily making fun of him on social media as being loud, wonky, difficult to get along with, and a troublemaker.

It is difficult to fathom how that shelters such as the Kölner Tierheim and YCR can expect to adopt out cats that they are all the time maligning and denigrating themselves. Rather, it would have been more than sufficient for the Kölner Tierheim to have simply changed Mr. Krabs' name and then to have introduced him to the public as a cat that had been previously abused and therefore now required an understanding owner who would be willing to provide him with the time and space that he required in order to recover.

His good looks then should have been sufficient in order to have sealed the deal. There never was any need for the shelter to have dredged up the old lies from out of his past.

Regrettably, no additional information regarding Mr. Krabs has appeared online over the course of the past five weeks but he, presumably, is still marooned at the Kölner Tierheim. In the photographs of him that have been posted on Instagram he certainly looks to be as healthy as a horse but being confined to a cage for such an extended period of time can take its toll on even the healthiest of cats.

In particular, the shelter's oblique reference to RTL on April 22nd about having to clean his beautiful eyes several times a day is a cause for concern but it is difficult to know what to make of that admission. Hopefully, he does not have anything seriously amiss with his vision.

There cannot be any denying, however, that all mass living arrangements are, invariably, reservoirs of disease and that is especially the case during a pandemic. The Kölner Tierheim therefore is far from being the best place for Mr. Krabs but another failed adoption would not do him any good either, physically or psychologically.

So, all that he can do for the time being is to hold on and to hope that there is at least one person in this big, wide world who possesses enough bon sens in order to realize just what an extraordinary cat that he is and the simply marvelous addition that he would make to either his or her life. He will be turning four years old on November 29th and hopefully by then he will be celebrating his birthday in a new home with a guardian who loves him to bits.

Should anyone be interested in relieving his plight, the Kölner Tierheim can be reached by telephone at 49-0221-684926 and by e-mail at tierheim-dellbrueck@gmx.com. Its web site is www.tierheim-koeln-dellbrueck.bmtev.de. Donations for his continued care at the shelter would also be very much appreciated.

Photos: Tierheim Kölner-Dellbrück.

Amazing Little Juicebox Overcomes Not Only a Near Fatal Mauling at the Hands of His Owners' Dog but also Penury and Being Cruelly Abandoned to Shift for Himself Inside the Snake Pit World of Veterinary Medicine

The Dog Chewed Up Juicebox's Face

"He has obviously been through and survived a serious trauma, but he has adapted quickly to the sutures that limit the use of his jaw and, through it all, he's remained an outgoing, playful and really friendly cat."

 -- Victoria Odynsky of the MSPCA

Most everyone is acutely aware of just how lethal unleashed and unsupervised dogs can be to kittens and cats. Not only do these neighborhood terrorists chase down and kill those that are allowed to venture out onto the streets but they also trespass into private gardens in order to carry out their savage attacks. (See Cat Defender posts of October 28, 2013, September 29, 2019, and July 1, 2021 entitled, respectively, "Slow to Recuperate from Life-Threatening Injuries Sustained in a Savage Mauling by an Unleashed Dog, Stubbs Announces His Intention to Step Down as Mayor of Talkeetna," "Sparkle Is Killed on the Front Stoop of Her House by an Unleashed Dog in the Latest of Centuries-Old Deadly Attacks That Bear the Unmistakable Imprimatur of the House of Commons," and "Fourteen- Year-Old Mini Is Ripped to Shreds by a Pack of Vicious Hounds but Those Responsible Never Will Be Punished Because the Limeys Value the 'Unspeakable in Full Support of the Uneatable' Far More Than They Do Her Right to Live.")

Moreover, it is not only lawless private individuals who allow their dogs to engage in this type of behavior but cops as well. (See Cat Defender post of July 2, 2015 entitled "After Allowing One of Their Dogs to Maul McGuire to Within an Inch of His Life, the Toronto Police Do Not Have Even the Common Decency to Summon Veterinary Help for Him.)"   

Owners who get their perverted kicks by deliberately siccing their dogs on cats are an even greater menace. (See Cat Defender posts of October 18, 2009, October 23, 2009, March 24, 2010, and July 18, 2015 entitled, respectively, "Minneapolis Is Working Overtime Trying to Kill an Octogenarian's Cat Named Hoppy for Defending His Turf Against Canine Intruders," "As 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," "Seven-Month-Old Bailey Is Fed to a Lurcher by a Group of Sadistic Teens in Search of Cheap Thrills in Northern Ireland," and "A Blackpudlian Thrill Seeker Who Sicced Her Pit Bull on Regi and Then Laughed Off Her Fat Ass as He Tore Him Apart Receives a Customary Clean Bill of Health from the Courts," plus the New York Post, January 25, 2021 " 'Mayor' of New York City Housing Authority Complex -- Cat Named Tuxedo -- Is Killed by Pit Bulls.")

All of that is common knowledge but that which is considerably less publicized is the myriad of near fatal maulings and outright killings that canines perpetrate against cats behind closed doors in private residences. 

Ever so often, however, the veils of secrecy which shroud these little known crimes from the prying eyes of the public slip in order to reveal the ugly and terrifying truth.

One such disturbing event occurred on January 20th when a handsome seven-month-old orange kitten named Juicebox was mauled to within an inch of his young life by his owners' resident canine. None of the particulars have been publicly disclosed but it is believed that the savage attack occurred within the family's residence. It likewise is not known if Juicebox's owners were home at the time of the attack and, if so, what if anything that they did in order to stop it.

Left bloodied and bruised with his face, mouth, and throat chewed up, Juicebox was in grave danger of dying long before he had even begun to fully live and therefore desperately needed a huge break if he were going  to pull through and thus make it to adulthood and that bit of Glück im Unglück occurred when he was delivered to the Massachusetts SPCA's (MSPCA) Angell Animal Center at 350 Huntington Avenue in Boston. Presumably, it was his owners who performed that act of mercy; otherwise, he owes his life to an unidentified Good Samaritan.

Upon arrival, the blood was cleaned up from his face and he was administered antibiotics, painkillers and, perhaps, intravenous fluids and a blood transfusion as well. After that diagnostic tests, such as radiographs, disclosed that he had have sustained multiple fractures of his tiny jaw and lacerations to his face and the palate in the roof of his mouth as well as unspecified head trauma. He additionally sans doute was in excruciating pain and perhaps even shock.

Once the surgeons had stabilized his condition, they next trained their attention on the dilemma of how best to put his mouth and jaw back together. Thanks to the innovative thinking of Dr. Alice Ekerdt of the surgery's dentistry staff, they decided upon anchoring the sutures in a quartet of colorful plastic buttons. 

Toward that end, a green and a red button were sewn into his cheeks. Another green and a red one were likewise sewn into the underside of his chin. Wires were added in order to hold the entire shebang together and he was outfitted with an Elizabethan collar so as to prevent him from pawing his face and thus undoing the veterinarians' handiwork.

"The buttons are attached to wires on both sides of his cheeks. And the buttons hold the sutures in place," Rob Halpin of the MSPCA explained to CNN on February 14th. (See "Cat Has Plastic Buttons Sewn to Its Face after a Dog Attack.") "But they also hold the jaw in place, so that it tracks while it heals."

Writing on Facebook, another member of the staff at the MSPCA gave a slightly different version of how the procedure is designed to work. "With certain types of fractures in specific areas of the jaw, like the type that poor Juicebox suffered, the fracture can be difficult to stabilize, and in some cases other implants can be difficult to size," that unidentified writer conceded. "The suture is what actually holds the jaw in place; the buttons improve comfort and prevent the suture from digging into the skin."

While there cannot be any denying the vital roles played by the sutures and buttons in the healing process, it  would appear that it is actually the wires that hold the jaw in place while it heals. After all, merely sewing up a kitten's face would hardly be sufficient even if the sutures were anchored in plastic buttons. Furthermore, there certainly is not anything new about wiring up the jaws of both animals and humans who have suffered fractures.

Regardless of the dynamics of the procedure, the important thing is that it worked so well that soon thereafter the MSPCA was able to get Juicebox out of his cage and into foster care. Best of all, on February 19th the charity was able to proudly announce that the buttons, and presumably the wires as well, had been removed and that he was "healing well." (See heavy.com of Manhattan, February 21, 2021, "Seven-Month-Old-Kitten Goes Viral after Plastic Buttons Sewn onto Face.") 

Owing to his tender years, he easily could have been killed by the dog but ironically it turned out to have been that same liability that aided him in his recovery. "Younger animals tend to heal a little bit quicker, just like younger humans do," Halpin testified to CNN.

Even so the month that he was forced spend with his jaw sewn and wired up surely must have been an exceedingly agonizing time for him. For instance, in addition to all the discomfort and inability to use his jaw and mouth, he had to be fed a liquid diet through either a straw, tube, or syringe. He in all probability also was placed on an intravenous regimen of fluids and vitamins.

Juicebox with Buttons Sewn into the Side of His Nose

Despite all the pain and suffering, Juicebox would appear to have come through his terrible ordeal as well as could be expected under the circumstances. "He has obviously been through and survived a serious trauma, but he has adapted quickly to the sutures that limit the use of his jaw and, through it all, he's remained an outgoing, playful and really friendly cat," Victoria Odynsky of the MSPCA marveled to MassLive of Springfield on February 9th. (See "MSPCA-Angell in Boston Uses Plastic Buttons to Help Kitten Heal after Dog Attack.") "We are relieved that we are able to provide urgent medical care for him, and we're glad to see him recovering so well."

Halpin fully concurred. "He's very social. He's very confident," he added to CNN. "And you know, he acts no worse for wear."

The charity's long-term goal was to get him out of foster care as soon as possible and into a new, canine-free home. Despite that latter restriction, at least one-hundred-fifty individuals had expressed an interest in adopting him by early February. Unfortunately, nothing further has appeared online concerning him so it has not proven possible to determine what ultimately has happened to him.

Nevertheless, his jaw and facial lacerations should have healed by now. The damage done to his palate remains a concern as does any undisclosed injuries that he may have sustained to his mouth and teeth.

If the veterinarians at the MSPCA have not abandoned him to his own devices but rather have elected to always keep the welcome mat out for him, he hopefully will be able to make a full recovery. There cannot be any denying, however, that he has had an extremely close call and is indeed lucky to still be alive.

As far as it is known, no charges ever were filed against his previous owners even though they clearly are as guilty as sin of gross negligence. In addition to perhaps holding them accountable under the law, it is possible that the courts might have justifiably banned them from acquiring any additional kittens and cats.

Even more urgently, since kittens not only generally come in litters but also have mothers and fathers, if the MSPCA has not done so already it should act immediately in order to permanently remove any and all other cats and kittens from the home. It furthermore would be sorely remiss if it did not open an investigation into the breed, temperament, and past history of Juicebox's attacker.

That is because it is entirely possible that the dog could be a threat to humans as well as cats. Although most people, especially dog owners, could care less how many cats that their dogs maul and kill, if Juicebox's attacker should some day go after either an adult or a child the MSPCA could have a lot of explaining to do.

Not only did Juicebox's former owners fail to protect him from the machinations of their dog but they also stuck the MSPCA with his more than US$2,000 veterinary bill. Considering that it was precisely their negligence that not only nearly cost him his life but also landed him at the MSPCA in the first place, they should have been more than happy to have paid for his treatment. Their cheapness has in turn forced the MSPCA to go begging to the general public for help in satisfying it.  

Their ingratitude is especially appalling in that the MSPCA let them off dirt cheap. Disbelievers need only to try and procure emergency veterinary care for their injured and sickly cats in order to realize just how badly that just about all practitioners stick it to them.

For starters, they charge an entrance fee of between US$150 and $US200. So-called supportive care, such as the administration of intravenous fluids and the placing of their cats on heating pads, can quickly add another US$300 to US$400 to their tabs.

The sods' real moneymakers, however, are the slew of mostly worthless diagnostic tests, such as radiographs, MRIs, CT scans, and complete blood counts, that they administer over and over again. If they are so valuable, why is it that in most instances the practitioners are unable (or unwilling?) to make diagnoses based upon them? 

 

Hospitalization runs to in excess of US$30 per night with the veterinarians tacking on exorbitant fees not only for the food that they give to the cats (whether they are willing to eat it or not) but also for the disposal of feces, urine, soiled gauze, and syringes. They are not even the least bit shy about charging an arm and a leg for cheap, plastic pill-poppers. It has not been confirmed, but the rumor mill has it that veterinarians are considering charging owners US$50 for every time that their cats sneeze and another US$100 every time that they so much as look askance at them.

Most vitally of all, it is doubtful that Juicebox's former owners even realize just how lucky that they were to have brought him to the MSPCA because it is without a doubt one of the very few veterinary surgeries in the country that is willing to, at least occasionally, treat injured and sickly cats without first being paid several hundred dollars in advance. Distraught owners can weep, wail, cajole, and beg all that they like but veterinarians do not have so much as a scintilla of compassion in their black hearts for either their sentiments or the sanctity of all feline life.  (See Cat Defender posts of July 16, 2010 and March 19, 2014 entitled, respectively, "Tossed Out the Window of a Car Like an Empty Beer Can, an Injured Chattanooga Kitten Is Left to Die after at Least Two Veterinarians Refused to Treat It" and "The Cheap and Greedy Moral Degenerates at PennVet Extend Their Warmest Christmas Greetings to an Impecunious, but Preeminently Treatable, Cat Via a Jab of Sodium Pentobarbital.") 

Even those guardians with moola to burn are not in all that much better shape; they are just bigger suckers. That is owing to the reality that all their cats ever receive in return for the wheelbarrows of greenbacks that they so gladly fork over to these charlatans are some small measure of supportive care, an array of worthless diagnostic tests, and a few nights in the infirmary.

Two Other Buttons Were Sewn into the Underside of His Chin

In the end, their beloved companions almost always die without their grief stricken owners ever receiving so much as a solitary clue as to what had ailed them. Even worse, their cats are forced to spend their final days being unmercifully poked and probed, bandied about from surgery to surgery and, in many cases, back and forth between the homes of veterinary attendants. Half of the time their worried to death owners are unable to find out even where they are, let alone if they are still alive.

Once owners finally get fed up with those cruel shenanigans and categorically refuse to give the con artists any more money, they pull out their trump card by generously offering to take their cats off of their hands by killing them for another US$300. Those conscientious owners who do not want any part of such barbarism are next subjected to a tug-of-war over the custody of their cats by veterinarians who refuse to relinquish custody of them unless they first sign forms absolving them of all liability.

In some instances, owners have been forced into calling in the gendarmes in order to get their cats returned to them. Individuals may naïvely believe that they are well acquainted with all the dishonesty, greed, and lawlessness that lurks in the hearts of men but they are in for another thought once they have locked horns with American veterinarians who, by comparison, make the mafia look like a society of gentlemen.

To be fair about the matter, most of them are capable of successfully inoculating cats although vaccine associated sarcomas are a major concern.  Also, being the consummate bloodsuckers that they are, they rake in a pretty penny by conning owners into shelling out for a wide array of totally unnecessary vaccinations.

Some of them are likewise capable of spaying and neutering cats but even then they botch an alarming number of these rather simple procedures. (See Cat Defender posts of February 26, 2008, July 2, 2010, and July 28, 2011 entitled, respectively, "The Dark Side of Spay and Neuter: Veterinarian Botched Surgeries and Back Alley Castrations Claim the Live of Numerous Cats," "Lexi Was by No Means the First Cat to Be Lost by Woosehill Vets Any More Than Angel Was Their Last Victim of a Botched Sterilization," and "Tammy and Maddy Are Forced to Pay the Ultimate Price after Their Owner and an Incompetent Veterinarian Elect to Play Russian Roulette with Their Lives," plus The Lancashire Telegraph, July 21, 2012, "Chorley Cat Is Neutered Twice" plus the South China Morning Post of Hong Kong, February 18, 2013, "SPCA Accused of Neutering Stray Cat Twice," and the Lippische Landes Zeitung of Detmold, September 22, 2013, "Fünfzehn-jähriger kastrierter Kater von Unbekannten weggefangen und sterilisiert.") 

Although they contribute absolutely nothing to the safety and well-being of cats, veterinarians have been lightning-quick to cash in on the microchippng craze that has been sweeping the world in recent decades. Predictably, they could care less about either the efficacy, safety, or their ability to successfully implant and properly service these devices. (See Cat Defender posts of May 25, 2006, September 21, 2007, November 6, 2010, April 28, 2016, June 23, 2016, and January 24, 2017 entitled, respectively, "Plato's Misadventures Expose the Pitfalls of RFID Technology as Applied to Cats," "The FDA Is Suppressing Research That Shows Implanted Microchips Cause Cancer in Mice, Rats, and Dogs," "Bulkin Contracts Cancer from an Implanted Microchip and Now It Is Time for Digital Angel ® and Merck to Answer for Their Crimes in a Court of Law," "Sassie Is Left Paralyzed as the Result of Yet Still Another Horribly Botched Attempt to Implant a Thoroughly Worthless and Pernicious Microchip Between Her Shoulders," "The State of North Carolina's Veterinary Division Is Covering Up a Savage Beating Dished Out to Cooper at the Rowan County Animal Shelter During the Course of a Microchipping Fiasco," and "Tigger Is Finally Reunited with His Family Despite the Best Efforts of the Administrators of a Microchip Database to Keep Them Apart.")

Taking a cat to a veterinarian for almost anything else, especially emergency treatment, is usually an expensive and exasperating waste of time. For example, some practitioners are so incompetent as to be unable to even properly set a broken leg.

A large part of the problem lies in the petit fait that they, like college professors, are some of the laziest sods on the planet. Specifically, it is only rarely that the person whose name is on the shingle outside is actually on the job inside; rather, the bulk of the labor is delegated to part-time veterinary assistants, substitute practitioners, and almost any flunky and imbecile who might be handy.

Complaining to watchdog groups about incompetent and dishonest veterinarians is about as futile as going to the Better Business Bureau about fraudulent merchants. (See Cat Defender posts of June 17, 2010 and January 19, 2012 entitled, respectively, "A Veterinarian Gets Away with Almost Killing Felix but Is Nailed by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons for Not Paying Her Dues" and "A Veterinary Watchdog Group Not Only Allows an Incompetent Substitute Practitioner to Get Away with Killing Junior but Scolds His Owner for Complaining.")

If additional evidence of the veterinary medical profession's ingrained hatred of all cats and the utter contempt that its members harbor in their malignant bosoms for their owners were still needed, one has only to look to the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) of Schaumburg, Illinois, which fervently believes that all homeless cats should be rounded up and killed. "The AVMA strongly supports reducing and controlling the number of free-roaming abandoned and feral cats through humane capture by local health departments, humane societies, and Animal Control agencies," the organization reaffirmed in 2016 as its official policy. "Free-roaming abandoned and feral cats that are not in properly managed colonies should be removed from the environment and treated in the same manner as other abandoned and stray animals in accordance with local and state ordinances." (See AVMA Press Release of February 10, 2016, "AWMA Revises Policy on Feral Cats to Encourage Collaboration" and AVMA.org, an undated article entitled "Free-Roaming Abandoned and Feral Cats.")

As if all of that were not already abhorrent enough, the bloodthirsty organization speaks with a forked tongue on the subject of TNR. "For colonies not achieving attrition and posing active threats to the area in which they are residing the AVMA does not oppose the consideration of euthanasia when conducted by qualified personnel using appropriate methods as described in the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals," it added in its 2016 anti-cat manifesto.

That pronouncement quickly garnered the endorsement of the American Association of Feline Practitioners in Bridgewater, New Jersey, the American Animal Hospital Association in Lakewood, Colorado, and Partners for Healthy Pets from parts unknown. The only thing that they even took mild exception to was the AVMA's clarion call for the killing off of TNR colonies "not achieving attrition and posing active threats to the area in which they are residing."

Often overlooked amidst the AVMA's morally despicable and totally indefensible bellowing about homeless cats is the even more sobering reality that its ingrained loathing for the species also extends to those that have owners. First of all, it is in full agreement with the cats indoors agenda of the American Bird Conservancy in The Plains, Virginia. 

Secondly, its policy that TNR colonies and, by extension, all cats be forcibly removed from wildlife-sensitive areas is taken right out of the pages of the playbooks of ornithologists and wildlife biologists. Thirdly, the organization is an exponent of sterilizing the species out of existence.

Fourthly, it advocates starving to death those cats that have not been sterilized by outlawing the public feeding of them. Fifthly, the AVMA desires to bring the entire species under the tyrannical control of Big Brother through its endorsement of compulsory microchipping.

Juicebox in Foster Care but Still With His Buttons and Collar

Sixthly, it wants to  criminalize the abandonment of cats and thereby to force owners into surrendering their unwanted companions at shelters and veterinary offices whereby they can be expeditiously dispatched to the devil. Once the AVMA's policies are properly analyzed it becomes perfectly clear that the only use that it and its members have for cats is the money that they can swindle out of their owners.

There are not many dissenters within the ranks of the veterinary medical profession but a handful of them  do exist. (See Cat Defender post of May 16, 2006 entitled "Five Kansas City Veterinarians Break Ranks with the American Veterinary Medical Association in Order to Defend Cats Against Bird Advocates, Wildlife Proponents, and Exterminators.")

Despite their ingrained disdain for cats of all socio-economic designations, veterinarians have not let that prejudice stand in their way of lining their pockets. For instance, although their haul from the administration of vaccinations, sterilizations, and the implantation of microchips is substantial, it is believed to pale in comparison with what they rake in by killing cats. (See Cat Defender posts of April 8, 2018 and October 27, 2020 entitled, respectively, "A Rare Behind the Scenes Glimpse at the Ruthless Murders of Two Cats by an Indiana Veterinarian Exposes All Those Who Claim That Lethal Injections Are Humane to Be Barefaced Liars" and "Noble and Courageous Harvey Who So Desperately Wanted to Go on Living Is Instead Unforgivably Betrayed and Killed Off by His Foster Mother and Yorkshire Cat Rescue.")

It accordingly is long overdue that someone pointed out that just as there is a huge difference between operating an extermination factory and dubbing it a shelter, there likewise is a world of difference between presiding over the operation of a slaughterhouse for cats and labeling it an animal hospital.  

Topping off this cruel charade veterinarians, aided and abetted by the loathsome capitalistic media, have the infuriating audacity to chastise owners for not allowing them to get their grubby hands on their cats more often. Wonder why? Could it possibly have something to do with the cavalier, dishonest, unethical, and morally bankrupt manner in which that they treat all cats and their owners?

The veterinary medical profession's outrageous shortchanging of cats and their owners is by no means confined to business hours but rather it also extends into after-hours as well. In particular, although surgeries seem to almost always be able to get their canine patients safely out whenever conflagrations erupt, they at the same time routinely allow their feline patients to be burned to death.

For instance, that is what happened to six cats who were interned at the Falconbridge Animal Hospital in Durham, North Carolina, during the early days of August of 2019. By contrast, the practitioners pulled to safety fifteen dogs and one bearded dragon. (See WRAL-TV of Raleigh, August 6, 2019, "Fire Rekindles at Durham Animal Hospital after Six Cats Die.")

That problem is even more pronounced at shelters. For exanmple, on June 9th Tierheim Wannigsmühle in Münnerstadt, three-hundred-nineteen kilometers north of München in Unterfranken, Bayern, got all of its canine inmates safely out but inexcusably left forty-nine of its cats behind to be burned alive. (See RTL of Köln, June 11, 2021, "Neunundvierzig Katzen sterben in den Flammen -- jetzt bittet das Tierheim Spenden" und in Franken of Bamberg, June 14, 2021, "'Sind uberwältigt': Nach Brand mit neunundvierzig toten Katzen -- Tierheim veröffentlicht emotionales Statement.")

Even this nation's veterinary schools, which are responsible for churning out these moneygrubbing moral degenerates, are little more than cesspools of outrageous abuse and exploitation where cats are routinely experimented upon and dissected for fun. Even the so-called scholarly papers that their professors so profusely produce amount to little more than cleverly dressed-up prejudices and outright lies.

For example, Mikel Delgado, Melissa Bain, and Brandon Han of the veterinary school at the University of California at Davis recently published a paper on the dietary habits of seventeen of the many cats that they are holding hostage and hideously abusing in their laboratories. Specifically, the cats were presented with the choice of either dining from a tray of prepared food or laboring to get their nourishment out a so-called food puzzle. As unbelievable as it may sound, the all-knowing eggheads expressed surprise that the cats chose the former.

"There is an entire body of research that shows that most species including birds, rodents, wolves, primates -- even giraffes -- prefer to work for their food," Delgado burped in an August 9th press release issued by the degree mill. (See "Cats Prefer to Get Free Meals Rather Than to Work for Them.") "What's surprising is out of these species cats seem to be the only ones that showed no strong tendency to contrafreeload."

First of all, any remotely savvy cat owner could have told them that and Maddie's Fund of Pleasanton, California, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, which footed the bill for this study, could have thus saved their precious shekels and told the greedy, good-for-nothing professors to have gone out and gotten real jobs for a change. Much more importantly, with millions of cats being systematically exterminated each year in the United States by shelters, Animal Control officers, veterinarians, the cops, and others, it is a rather telling indictment of the phony-baloney Maddie's Fund that it would much prefer to spend its money keeping the bums at UC-Davis in clover as opposed to putting it toward saving feline lives.

Secondly, it is very epitome of dishonesty for the eggheads to fail to point out the really significant implication of this study. Namely, that it is a repudiation of the outrageous lie disseminated so freely by ornithologists, wildlife biologists, and other assorted despisers of the species that cats are demonic killing machines who prefer to waste their time chasing down and killing small animals as opposed to eating the meals specially prepared for them and served to them on silver platters by their caretakers. 

Furthermore, as all practitioners of TNR know only so well, the cats that are patiently waiting for them to arrive each morning and evening in order to be fed are certainly not out hunting. The same holds true for those of them that spend their days lounging around in their owners' gardens without so much as a thought of chasing down their sustenance ever crossing their minds.

By deliberately failing to point out those rather obvious facts Delgado, Bain, and Han have not only tacitly endorsed the outrageous lies spread by ornithologists and wildlife biologists but also seized upon an opportunity to libel all cats as being lazy and freeloaders. Furthermore, considering that those charges are being leveled by a trio of consummate bums who have never done so much as a minute of honest work in their miserable lives really takes the cake.

Juicebox with the Buttons Out and Ready for a New Life

Rather, they live off of the tons of welfare money that the federal government so generously doles out to them and the degree mills that employ them. Plus, they flimflam billions more out of naïve students and their parents through the sale of their utterly worthless classes and degrees.

The additionally feed off of the billions that UC-Davis rakes in each year from its corrupt-as-hell athletic programs and through various admissions' scandals. Most reprehensible of all, the professors live high on the hog off of all the money that they make by experimenting upon and, ultimately killing, countless cats and other innocent and defenseless animals.

If there were so much as a scintilla of justice in this world the tables would be turned on them and they would be the ones in the cages being poked and probed, injected with deadly drugs, and having holes drilled in their warped noggins. Best of all, instead of dining like kings and queens all the time, big shits like Delgado, Bain, and Han would be forced into coaxing meager existences out of food puzzles.

If there is any value at all in education it lies in the ability of a liberal arts education to ennoble the soul and thereby instill in individuals an abiding respect for Mother Earth, the animals and, as far as it is possible, their fellow human beings. On the other hand, the degree mills, such as UC-Davis, churn out nothing but cat abusers and killers, liars, bums, and other assorted egotistical low-lives who fervently believe that the world owes them everything whereas the only thing that they in turn owe to either anyone or anything is the middle finger.

Furthermore, like all veterinary schools as well as the vast majority of degree mills, UC-Davis has a long and checkered history of abusing, killing, and defaming cats. (See Cat Defender post of March 3, 2006 entitled "A Cat-Hating Professor at UC-Davis and the BBC Call for the Extermination of Seventy-Eight Million Feral Felines.") 

It is not about to happen anytime soon but perhaps individuals of bon sens will one day wake up and realize that that the eggheads and the capitalistic degree mills that they pimp and whore for are a blight not only upon all truth and common decency but injurious to civilization as well. Worst of all, these thoroughly rotten and dishonest charlatans of the ivory tower are never satisfied unless they are abusing, killing, and defaming cats. (See Cat Defender posts of July 18, 2011 and October 9, 2015 entitled, respectively, "Evil Professors Have Transformed College Campuses into Hotbeds of Hatred Where Cats Routinely Are Vilified, Horribly Abused, and Systematically Killed" and "A Lynch Mob of Dishonest Eggheads from the University of Lincoln Issues Another Scurrilous Broadside Against Cats by Declaring That They Do Not Need Guardians in Order to Safeguard Their Lives.")

It is little known to the outside world but veterinary schools and independent practitioners alike are also big-time drug dealers. For example, between 2007 and 2017 the amount of opioids prescribed by the veterinarians who strut and preen for the University of Pennsylvania's Matthew J. Ryan Veterinary Hospital for Small Animals in Philadelphia increased by 41.2 per cent.

By comparison, visits by pets to that hideously overpriced opium den grew by only 12.8 per cent. The numbers are nothing short of staggering. Specifically, over the course of that ten-year period the veterinarians wrote prescriptions for a total of 105,183,689 tablets of tramadol, 97,547 tablets of hydrocodone, 38,939 tablets of codeine, and 3,153 fentanyl patches.

Although it is estimated that the opioid crisis has claimed the lives of more than half a million Americans, no one has even bothered to look into the matter of how many cats, dogs, and other small animals that practitioners at PennVet and elsewhere across the country have sent to early graves by poisoning their tiny bodies with opioids and other narcotics. That petit fait alone demonstrates conclusively just how little that veterinarians value the lives and well-being of cats and dogs. (See the Daily Pennsylvanian of the University of Pennsylvania, January 28, 2019, "Penn Vet (sic) Study Finds Increase in Pet Opioid Prescriptions over Past Decade.") 

Like PennVet, Long Island veterinarian Elizabette Cohen is an old hand when it comes to doping up cats and dogs. Not only does she do it in her practice but she has been attempting to convince the listeners of the "Healthy and Happy Pet" segments that she does every Saturday and Sunday on WCBS Radio 880 AM out of Manhattan of the wisdom of following her example. 

Furthermore, since she has been running her mouth on the air ever since 2004, the suits at CBS quite obviously agree with her. It thus is fair to conclude that neither she nor CBS have any more scruples than does the Sackler family which not only has pocketed tens of billions of dollars by doping up America but is to this very day still laughing all the way to the bank. (See the two-part HBO documentary entitled "The Crime of the Century.")

The picture therefore is crystal clear for all to see: the entire veterinary medical profession from soup to nuts is about as ailurophobic as anyone or organization can get without being either an ornithologist, a wildlife biologist, or a card-carrying member of scum-of-the- earth PETA. If that is the bad news, the good news is that there is a way out of this totally untenable predicament.

First of all, owners need to learn everything that they can about not only keeping their cats healthy and safe but treating them as well. Secondly, such essentials as heating pads, catheters, scalpels, syringes, needles, intravenous fluids, x-ray machines, und so weiter, can be obtained from medical supply stores and after that it should not be too difficult for them to set up makeshift surgeries in their homes.

Thirdly, although obtaining the prerequisite drugs, such as powerful antibiotics that are required in order to successfully treat ailing cats, is a huge obstacle to overcome, there is always the black market. Besides, given that there are plenty of individuals practicing veterinary medicine today for profit but without licenses, there certainly is not anything wrong with owners doing likewise is order to prolong and save their companions' lives. 

In fact, some pet owners have already turned to unlicensed veterinarians in order to escape the exorbitant fees demanded by their licensed counterparts. (See Cat Defender post of February 14, 2006 entitled "Special Agent Fred the Cat Goes Undercover in Order to Help Nab a Quack Vet in a Brooklyn Sting Operation.")

Photos: Massachusetts SPCA.