September 22, 2018

Brainwashing and Fear of Government Causes Rabies Shots

We don’t really know who actually said, “When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny,” but it doesn’t matter because the statement makes a lot of sense.

Fear instilled in the masses is a great tool to control those masses and along with it, we see an eagerness of those fearful people to give up their liberties in exchange for false security.

When you combine this indoctrination and propagandizing that has been undertaken with the American people, with another form of brainwashing resulting in animal perversion you have instances like the one in Maine where an obviously sick bobcat doing “weird things” and attacking people, and nobody wanted or dared to shoot the animal in order to remove the imminent danger as well as put the animal out of its misery.

The report claims that in the instance where one man got attacked, bit, and scratched, even though he had a gun in his possession, said, “Her husband, John, and their son went outside to confirm the cat was not a lynx, which is protected, and to keep an eye on the animal while John called the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to confirm that he could shoot it. Plowden said her husband had been armed but set the gun down to make the phone call.”

Now the son and father are undergoing rabies shots.

Share

Mixed Messages About Bears and Nuisance Wildlife And the Words of a Totalitarian

Not that most people actually care or are even positioned in any way to think for themselves anymore, but how can you expect people to “learn to live with wild animals” and other such nonsense when the messages being delivered by the indoctrinated authorities is all over the board?

Let’s look at some of the messages being delivered to the public by the Press from members of the so-called expert and authoritarian crowd, including government agencies.

In an article by an “expert” on bears, the expert addresses the fact that recently a professional runner (whatever that is) in Maine was attacked and chased by two bears. He wields the theory that the reason the bear chased the runner was for the same reason a dog chases a car…unknown. The runner decided, because he was a runner, I suppose, to attempt to outrun the bear. He did and ran into a building and hid behind a screen door. The expert says of this event: “Clearly if the bears wanted to get to him and all they had to do was lean into this flimsy screen door,” he says. “At that point the separation of this screen door was enough to say ‘the chase is over.’ Whatever signaled the chase to shutoff at that point indicating that this wasn’t a predatory attack. The initial event was over when there was a structure involved.”

The expert assumes, in his theory, that the bear is only motivated by the urge to chase something that is moving, a la the dog chasing a car theory. One thing wrong with this theory is that, according to the article, when the runner first encountered the bears, “…he encountered two charging black bears.” The two bears were charging not chasing.

What if the bears were actually looking for a meal? If I were to attempt to rationalized a bear’s behavior, as most people do, failing to accept the fact that an animal is an animal and a man is a man, I could say that the bears decided they weren’t that hungry and less effort would be expended by visiting a nearby garbage can or two. Animal behavior is unpredictable….period!

In this incident the authorities give the following advice: “Wardens advise people who encounter black bears to make themselves appear big, make noise and back away slowly. But they recommend people stand their ground if a black bear charges and say if the bear attacks, then fight back.”

A Maine wildlife biologist, whose job is to deal with encounters and interactions between people and wild animals says that he thinks the best thing to do is to find ways in which people can….wait for it…..here it comes….”learn to live with the bear…” or any other animal that is creating a problem.

I wrote recently about my thoughts on anyone trying to tell me to learn to live with wild animals.

Maine’s wildlife biologist suggests, instead of killing the nuisance animal: “would rather move the bear to somewhere else in the neighborhood and then “haze” it a bit, with noise, hit it with some rubber bullets, fire off some pyrotechnics and maybe even “some hound dogs barking nearby.” (Note: Authorities can legally harass and deliberately abuse a wild animal, hoping it teaches them to fear people. It is against the law for you and I to harass wildlife in this manner.)

According to the expert, relocating a wild animal, “About 50 to even 75 percent of them might die” anyways.

In Maine Government News we get a different story. Here we learn that the State of Maine has brought in the Federal Government agency APHIS (Animal Plant Health Inspection Service) who will distribute rabies bait vaccines in efforts to counter the prevalence of rabies in the Pine Tree State.

In the Release an attempt is being made to educate the public about how to deal with wildlife and especially wildlife that may be infected with rabies. The Government advises against relocating animals, even though they tell us in other media outlets that they prefer moving problem animals to other locations.

“Do not relocate wildlife because this can spread rabies into new areas.”

The last thing I need is some heavily indoctrinated totalitarian animal lover telling me to learn to live with predators and nuisance animals. If I, my family, or my property is being damaged or is in danger of harm or damage, killing the problem animal is about the only sensible solution to the problem. More than likely the reason any animal is intruding on you or your property is because there are too many of them.

Time to do a little house cleaning.

You do what you want to do to deal with such animal issues but don’t tell me I have to learn to live with it when I don’t.

Share

Why is Maine Reporting Higher Number of Animal Rabies Cases?

According to an article in the Portland Press Herald, the increase in the number of reported cases of rabies found in animals: “Generally, we see more cases in springs after mild winters,” is what the article says a wildlife biologist with the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) says. But with no explanation as to why that would be so and/or if there are other extenuating circumstances that would effect the number of incidences of rabies-infected wild and domestic animals.

As far as the “mild winter” (I’m not sure scientifically as to exactly what a mild winter is as it pertains to the rabies virus in Maine), here’s what might be some helpful information I found relatively easily Online: “…changes in epidemiology are expected to follow global climate change and are most likely to be detected in areas of climate extremes. This is being illustrated in Alaska, as increased viral transmission shifts from red fox to arctic fox populations following warming trends. Increased surveillance is needed to improve predictive models of epidemiology and human risk.”

Because our society is brainwashed, it will respond to such a statement by saying that “global warming” increases rabies. However, the above statement does not say that.

It uses the term “global climate change.” Global means exactly what it says – over the entire globe. Climate change is change. Climate change does not mean only warming. In addition, the epidemiology (the branch of medicine that deals with the incidence, distribution, and possible control of diseases and other factors relating to health.) is likely to be detected in “climate extremes.”

Is a “climate extreme” an occasional “mild winter?” Whether the climate changes – extreme – are warming or cooling, the epidemiology of rabies will change. MDIFW says they usually see increases in rabies transmissions following a “mild winter.” Do they necessarily see decreases in rabies transmissions following a “severe winter?”

In addition, it matters not about whether “climate change” extremes or otherwise, effects the incidence of rabies, if there are no host carries of the virus, or that there are increased carriers of the virus. In Science 101, in order to make any conclusions that state that rabies increases after a mild winter, then something ought to remain constant, i.e. the number of mammals that contract, carry and spread the disease. Without this to base conclusions on, we are left with anecdotal guessing.

Because there’s not a lot of science out there on the subject, it seems that it would be safe to say that changes in the conditions on the ground, in any given region, regardless of size, will have an effect on the epidemiology of rabies, not just a mild winter now and again.

Logical thinking might tell us that, in Maine, where a “mild winter” might involve little or no snow, certain mammals that can contract and spread rabies, can more easily move about. With increases in the number of wild animals, like coyotes, wolves, foxes and raccoon, logic should tell us this might increase the incidences of rabies. Combine this with more and more domestic dog ownership, which would also result in more unvaccinated domestic dogs and free roaming dogs, rabies incidents would increase.

It’s a bit unfortunate that more information wasn’t given in this report to explain why MDIFW thinks rabies incidents increase after a mild winter. Perhaps they really don’t know and would only offer conjecture, as I have done. However, it does nobody any good to leave readers assuming global warming causes increases in rabies.

Or maybe that’s exactly what they wanted us to believe?

RabiesRaccoon

Share

Monkeys, Wolves & BLUE

Guest post by James Beers

I read recently where a lady in Myanmar (Burma) died of rabies from a wolf bite. The report went on to say that there has been a large outbreak of rabies in Myanmar, especially in the cities. It went on to say that while this wolf had bitten the lady in one such city, and even greater source of rabid bites on residents came from monkeys that frequent the cities and towns routinely during the day in search of food.

This set me to thinking. The wolf was in a settled part of Burma and must have been living nearby in all likelihood, so other wolves are likely in the area habituating and learning how to find food and get by just like the monkeys. That the lady, just like a ranch lady in Idaho or a kid in New Mexico might just as easily do, blundered into a rabid wolf as she went about her daily routine and died.

Who is to blame? In Burma one can honestly say, no one since wolves have always been there (relatively speaking as in centuries) and people and their leaders have never had the wherewithal or the ability to remove the wolves and the threats and dangers they create. One can honestly say that they chose to live with wolves, monkeys and rabies in their midst; whether through ignorance, religious belief or tolerance for dictatorships I do not know. However, when such things happen in the Carolinas or Montana or Oregon or Arizona we cannot say the same thing. We can honestly blame and hold responsible the government and radical groups that have forcibly placed them in these areas after the people who live there and their ancestors had eliminated them at great cost of time and treasure to create the productive and healthy human-oriented settled landscapes of the Lower 48 States that we have enjoyed and benefitted from for nearly 100 years.

The Burmese native that has lived under successions of Kings, Generals and occupiers down through the ages is in great contrast with the Americans of The Lower 48 States who obtained their freedom, liberty and Constitutional rights over 225 years ago. This liberty was obtained at great cost and sacrifice but has been frittered away in recent decades as a growing national government and reticent State governments have taken away piece after piece of that liberty for their own benefit by making hollow promises of government benefit and government largesse for chunk after chunk of our rights. In few areas is this as nakedly apparent as the Endangered Species Act promises of “saving” (Nature?) and resulting in wolves and grizzly bears where people live, irrigation areas shut down, farmers and loggers out of work, dams destroyed, ranches shut down, and general mayhem throughout the formerly bucolic and productive (of many things) expanses of rural America. One need look no farther than the recent BLM assault (snipers, tasers, automatic weapons, rifles, handguns, helicopters, men on horseback, men in trucks and SUV’s, and enforcers that looked to all like NFL linebackers fresh from the weight room: all to round up and kill cattle on the Last rancher in the County around Las Vegas in the political backyard of a corrupt, federal politician that for all intents and purposes appointed his former political advisor as the head of the same BLM agency conducting this particular Rangeland Clearance.

Read The Highland Clearances (of Scotland) by John Prebble concerning the ruthless actions of British occupiers seizing all land from 1800 to 1856 for a blueprint of current federal government policies. Like those dispossessed Scots and their families, American farmers, ranchers, loggers and rural residents are steadily and forcibly being told to move into cities just as the Scots (like the Irish) were simply told to go away whether to offshore islands or roadsides to die or onto “coffin ships” hoping to get to America or Canada before starvation or disease destroyed them. As the BLM showed us, the government is now willing to use all their power on us as if we were terrorists plotting an attack on US soil from our hideout in Afghanistan in Iraq.

I submit that the Burmese lady died as she lived in the most freedom she ever knew in a world just like the one of her forefathers going back untold generations. However the American damaged by or attacked by or driven to bankruptcy by wolves forced on him by his own government is the true SUBJECT of tyrants. The American has lost his liberty and allowed others to return his children and grandchildren to the terrors and penury his forefathers worked so hard to eliminate.

May the Burmese lady Rest in Peace, and May God Help America!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BLUE

If you are interested in, understand or are sympathetic about what you just read, may I make a suggestion?

A Montana film maker, Jeffrey D. King, has made a 3rd video that I highly recommend as worthwhile. It documents a series of interviews and a trip around America aimed at explaining and demonstrating the agenda of The Green Movement and the government policies that I vainly try to expose in all I write. The people he interviews and the things he explains as he visits important sites are something you should share with friends, relatives, coworkers, churchgoers and everyone else you come in contact with in your daily lives.

The cost is minimal and I get nothing from this but the hope that some of you will go to his website and begin to become familiar with what he has done and what he is doing. This latest video, BLUE, may well be our future hope. Please, consider learning about it.

BLUE TRAILER: http://www.youtube.com/user/bluebeatsgreen?feature=watch

If you are on Facebook, please add Blue Beats Green as one of your “LIKES”. https://www.facebook.com/bluebeatsgreen

Jim Beers
15 May 2014

If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

The Stupidity of Animal Perversion

The society of the United States has grown to become one of animal perversion. People are obsessed with, if that even accurately describes the mental affliction, animals to a point where humans come in at least second in the grand scheme of priorities.

There is such a thing as having a “healthy” respect for all animals and even enjoying them at many levels but living with them, eating with them, sleeping with them, exploiting them for profit and even using them for psychological therapy, brings the human into a world of perversion as well as a distorted view of reality and the way life is intended to be lived.

One small example of this happened at Washington University where a woman, with a “traveling zoo” brought a bear cub on campus as a, “stress reliever during exam season.” Believed to help student relieve stress, one has to wonder how getting bitten by a bear putting humans at risk of contracting rabies and a myriad of other not so cool diseases can relieve stress. I suppose if you are just plain ignorant of things and believe the false claims made by other perverse animal lovers, nothing of importance much matters.

The owner of the traveling freak show says she is defending her “business practices.”

Share

Wolf Attacks People in India – Three Seriously

“VADODARA: A wolf believed to be suffering from rabies injured six people in a village of Shahera taluka in Panchmahal district. The canine had strayed into the village and later died due to the disease.

The wolf was spotted at Narsana village early on Saturday morning at around 7am by villagers. Forest officials said the animal looked visibly irritated and started attacking persons at the village.

Six people, who were in the farms or walking on pathways, were targeted by the wolf. Three of the victims — Moti Parmar, Balu Raval and Ganga Vankar — were injured seriously in the incident and had to be rushed to Godhra Civil Hospital for treatment. Three others were treated at Shahera community health centre.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

Rabid Wolf Attacks 10 People in Israel

“More than ten people across the city of Tiberias were bitten by the wandering animal before its reign of terror ended. The wolf was finally caught after attacking a father and daughter near Kibbutz Ginosar. An autopsy performed on the ferocious female revealed that it had been infected with rabies, Channel 2 said.”<<<Read More>>>(video available)

Share

Wolves Attack Humans

As reported by “Caravan” resident of the village, Tamara B., mechanic farm them. Krupskaya Nikolay Mihaylov came out of the barn, when suddenly he jumped behind the animal. The man began to fight back and at first thought it was a dog.<<<Read More Google Translation>>>

In another incident:

“I got up at 8 o’clock in the morning, went into the yard, and this time attacked me from behind the beast fangs dug in right lower leg. I began to beat him with their fists on the head, and he did not once, but escaped. I thought it was a dog, but then I learned that it was a wolf. Limped to the hospital, where I sewed the wound did rabies vaccine. Limp still, “- says Zhumabergen.

Later, at three o’clock, the predator attacked Aldashov Isayev. Wolf threw 89-year veteran of the war in the yard of his house and bitten.

On the same day predator pulled four sheep in the yard Birjan Fazylova.<<<Read More Google Translation>>>

Share

Are Wolves Here to Stay or Should They All Go?

redridinghoodWe are all pretty much aware of the old adage that history repeats itself, but what most don’t bother to think about is why that is so, if it is actually factual. The frontrunner in answering that question is that we repeat history, at least in bad ways(by somebody’s standards), because we fail to learn or willingly or unwillingly forget to remember. There is another possible reason for repeating history that, I’m sure, very few people even consider: we repeat history because that is what we are being programmed to do. All one really has to do is study history, I mean really study history, not the crap being shoved down our kids’ throats in our institutions of higher indoctrination, to gain an understanding of that truth.

If we know history and don’t err in forgetting that history and we actually learn from it, we discover that certain things occurred for a reason and had specific outcomes to them…..whether planned or not. Let’s examine wolves and their history for just a brief moment.

If we examine the word-of-mouth accounts of events surrounding wolves, i.e. journals, diaries, news accounts and anywhere official documents were kept of the days’ events, we learn that wolves existed in much of the territory of the Lower 48 states. How much, is still open to debate. Some believe in some sort of wildlife nirvana, pre-Columbian, but this theory doesn’t always or even consistently agree with the recorded events of the time.

Regardless wolves were on the landscape and I think few will argue that there have always been conflicts between wolves and people. Many years ago, as people sought better lives and there existed an expansion of populated areas, to coincide with a growing human population, settlers headed West and people headed deeper into the forest of the East to harvest timber, clear for farmland, etc. This brought on more conflict between wolves and humans, and other wildlife.

People discovered, sometimes the hard way, that wolves were not an animal they wanted around. Leftist, animal rights perverts tell us that the wolf is misunderstood and that stories such as Little Riding Hood were only fabricated to instill fear or just for entertainment value. However, real history places tales like Little Red Riding Hood, right in line with actual events on the ground. Disregarding of the truth is for sinister purposes only.

People quickly learned that wolves were dangerous, killed off their livestock and spread disease (rabies scared the dickens out of people then because they knew it killed most people and that wild dogs and other critters carried the disease. History also teaches us that wolves would bite unsuspecting children. Who wouldn’t be scared?). And thus began the effort to kill every wolf that could be found. In short, hundreds of years ago humans understood that wolves in human settlements was a terrible thing and something had to be done about it. And so, they killed them, nearly all, and it was a good thing.

Either we did not learn from history, we do not remember history or we are being programmed to repeat history, while at the same time being told non factual information (indoctrination/propaganda) for the purpose of misleading the people to gain public support for private agendas. Out of what appears to be ignorance, somebody came up with the idea that wolves and people could live together. It wasn’t ignorance. Can wolves and people live together? Can humans and wolves share the same landscape? Do wolves belong in wilderness areas only? Do wolves belong at all? And why should humans be forced to do this?

All the ins and outs of the so-called “Wolf Wars”, including the political wrangling, corruption, perversion, deceit and everything else that is no earthly good surrounding the existence of wolves, cannot be discussed in one article. I’m not even sure a full-length book could do it much justice, and so I’ll leave this part of it for future discussions as they present themselves.

However, from the moment the animal perverts began their assault on the rest of civilized humanity, wishing to force humans to live with wolves, refusing to consider history and the history of disease, bench marks, goals and lines drawn in the sand appeared around every corner. One of the grave mistakes, in my opinion, that the wolf perverts have done is never being satisfied with agreed-upon goals to measure success. An example of this would be the agreed upon number of wolves and breeding pairs that would be the benchmark of when wolf introduction would be a success and the nasty dog could be removed from protection under the Endangered Species Act. It didn’t stop there. It continued and shows no signs of ever stopping. As a consequence, more and more people are abandoning the stupid concept that humans and wolves can live together successfully.

Throughout the several years of debate, there has always been talked about the “what ifs” of when the first human in modern times, in the Lower 48, would be killed by a wolf or wolves. I’m not sure that there existed any official “line in the sand”, but often the talk would involve the tragedy that would exist, not if, but when, the first humans would be attacked and killed by wolves.

During the past few years I have been one of those who claimed that there would come a day when somebody and/or somebody’s child, would become table fare for a pack of wolves. What I was never able to come to terms with, is how such an event would effect how I felt about wolves.

In general terms, at least to this point in time, I came down on the side that wolves should not be extirpated, as they had been by early in the 20th Century, but that there needed to be strict control to keep numbers to a minimum in order to keep at a minimum the conflicts with humans, including but not limited to personal and private property injuries/destruction, spread of disease, and destruction of prey bases. I certainly don’t think I am in a minority of any kind with this kind of thinking.

How will that change, if at all, when the time arrives that wolves begin killing humans?

Such a terrible event may have already happened. One of the problems with being able to learn what precisely did happen, is there exist almost no news coverage of the particulars of what happened to two women in Idaho, supposedly out for a weekend of hiking. Amy Linkerts and Dr. Jo Elliot-Blakeslee have both been found dead at Craters Of The Moon National Monument & Preserve. Details are sketchy at best and to this point nothing at all has been released about those details and any autopsies that were performed. There are people demanding answers but, to my knowledge nobody else has any information other that the scant reports that can be found on line – here, here, here.

I have withheld any comment on the event until there at least exists official statements of cause of death and the events leading up to their deaths. I will not speculate on what might have happened.

What I will share is how, just reading about this event and knowing there is a possibility they may have been attacked by wolves, I felt about the entire event. I think it helped me to come to terms with whether or not my position on wolves, and how they should be controlled, would change. I have given this a few days so that I am not writing from a knee-jerk reactionary cause and have had a moment to think about it.

I am now seriously considering that once the day has come that any human in this country has been attacked and killed by wolves, that my attention and efforts will go toward an extirpation of the wolf…again. The animal is NOT extinct or any where near such globally. Wolves exist all over the world by the thousands and they have no place whatsoever living in close proximity to human beings.

Having now made this statement, and also stating more than once, that it’s only a matter of time before a human is attacked and killed by wolves, why is it that I/we must wait until somebody dies first? Yes, people have, for centuries, been attacked and killed by wolves. However, myself being guilty of what I accuse others of, this strikes close enough to home to cause changes of thoughts and consideration.

Perhaps it is the eminent death of some loving mother’s and father’s child that will be the wake up call but it shouldn’t have to be. It was a bad idea from the very beginning to force a nasty, historically unwanted, disease-ridden wild dog on innocent people.

I can only speak for myself when I say that I value one human life over that of every wild or domestic dog, or any other animal on this planet. It’s time for changes of thought and consideration.

Share

Bobcat Attacks Man….But Pay it No Mind. Watch Out for Skunks Though

An article that appears in the Boston Globe begins as a comedy and the rest of the story of a man being attacked by a bobcat, could be a series of comedic events if it wasn’t such a potentially serious event.

The headline reads, “Bobcat lunges at Mass. man, is shot to death.” I must assure readers that the Mass. man was not shot to death. It was the bobcat.

Before the man who was attacked by the bobcat was able to get enough lead into the animal, I was beginning to think he may have to contact the Department of Homeland Security in order to get enough ammunition to get the bobcat killed.

The man was not seriously hurt and testing is underway to determine if the bobcat was rabid. What ends the article in snickerable fashion was the following:

The estimated statewide bobcat population is about 1,200 to 1,300, said Tom O’Shea, assistant director of wildlife at the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife.

‘‘Most of the time they’re shy and secretive, and the only time they show aggression to people is when they’re rabid,’’ he said.

In January, a bobcat attacked a man and his teenage nephew in Brookfield, about 15 miles from Holden. That animal tested positive for rabies.

Still, O’Shea said there’s no need for alarm.

‘‘People should be more wary of raccoons, skunks and even stray cats,’’ he said.

Forgive me for exercising a certain amount of unrestrained speculative thinking and logical deduction but with two attacks by bobcats within 15 miles of each other, even though testing isn’t complete on one dead bobcat, isn’t it safe to be wary of the idea that perhaps there’s a bit of a problem with rabies in bobcats? And so, the advice is to pay no mind to a bobcat hanging out in your yard, or in this case attacking you. Instead look around and see if there are any skunks, racoons or stray cats about.

You can’t make this stuff up.

Share