Requiem for a Squirrel

I find this article disturbing: ☕️ REQUIEM FOR A SQUIRREL ☙ Sunday, November 3, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

An American SWAT team sent to remove an injured pet squirrel from a compassionate family who provided loving care to the animal, because the family did not submit the necessary paperwork for a permit to keep the animal, after which the terrified animal is mercilessly executed for biting one of the brutes that rough handled him.

The article reads like a horror story – is this where a global compassion-free culture ultimately lands? With such “official” inhuman treatment of animals and people (in my mind, one leads directly to the other). Whom would I want as my neighbour – the compassionate family who are kind to injured squirrels, or the brutes in the SWAT team (and their policy and order-giving managers)?

These days, I’m no longer sure whether what I’m reading is true or made up, and I sure hope this story is made up… Nevertheless, one thing I have observed: whatever is done to animals, however they are handled by a culture that cranks out policies devoid of compassion – that is EXACTLY how humans are eventually regarded and treated in that culture, and it has been like this throughout history. The way to get this ugly (anti-animal, anti-nature, anti-human) transhumanist thing off our backs is by resolutely developing a culture where animals are regarded as sacred divine beings and are accorded with sanctity and compassion.

4 Likes

And, they’re proud of the injustice done.
The more innocent; the more happy they are.
Does being inhuman, have its heartless benefits?

1 Like

Being heartlessly inhuman certainly has a lot of material benefits.
Being compassionate, has immaterial benefits, and it is these immaterial benefits that are brought to light in all the ancient spiritual wisdom teachings, and which people don’t seem to ponder, value or appreciate.

I find it bizarre that people have to sign “papers” from some inhuman authorities that grant them “permission” to care for a creature in need of human compassion. What the heck?!

(This bizarre policy trend also reminds me of the cold-hearted way that older people were treated in care homes during the covid operation – family members were not “allowed” to visit them — the masking of young children in the playgrounds — the “granting of permission” for someone to see one’s loved one in a hospital only after that person takes a poison injection).

Unfortunately, we live in an era where people will do anything for money. They will follow all kinds of bizarre orders for their paycheques or material rewards. What would our world look like, if the order-followers said to the order-givers: “No way, no way am I doing that! If your order does not involve extending the highest compassion and benefits to others, especially those affected by the order, I won’t do it and you can stick your orders up your nose!”

I think to turn things around, it will have to come down to this: As Below, So Above!

1 Like

This is a really weird article:

“At the time of his death, Peanut enjoyed performing for half a million followers.”

Don’t think that’s really an accurate statement about a squirrel being video recorded.

2 Likes

Narrative warfare - to see who controls the framing.
How about just writing, as if one were a human being; not a soldier of fortune?

2 Likes

This is a major problem in Australia with wombat joeys when their mothers are killed by cars, there are several certified orphanages that help raise the youth to be prepared for adult lives in the wild. They usually do a “soft release” to allow the animal to leave voluntarily when they are ready, which is usually better than hard release not allowing them to return to orphanage when they are adjusting to independence.

Wombats can’t be kept as pets same with other wild animals is not a good idea to try that even if animals don’t want to leave on their own.

3 Likes

“Half a million followers” may not be an accurate statement of the number of viewers, but if Peanut is the one featured in this video, it is possible, as the Dodo gets a lot of viewers, and I think there were more than one video of Peanut posted to that platform:

1 Like

I was talking about the Squirrel’s awareness that half a million people know about him.

That part of the story (about the squirrel’s awareness that he was being viewed on the internet) didn’t jump out at me at all – I didn’t read any of that from how the article was worded.

What interested me most was that such a story could even take place. How we now find ourselves in a society that tolerates:

  1. Needing to have a permit from some “authority” in order to “be allowed” to have a caring and compassionate friendship with another creature (which is a normal human instinct); and,
  2. That if one is caught having a Verboten, unauthorized caring and compassionate friendship, then a gun-loaded SWAT team can descend upon your home and seize and kill your friend.

That we all find ourselves in such a “normalized” dystopian culture that tolerates being told there are limits to caring and compassion is what jumped out at me.

I did find it interesting, too, that this somehow made it into the radar of President Trump and Elon Musk before the election.

1 Like

Who do you think is behind the narrative warfare, and why is it so important that it gets framed in a certain way?

1 Like

Good question for Dr. Farrell
A vidchat question?

1 Like

This whole stupidness is because we have sat back and allowed “department of (FILL IN THE BLANK)” to tell us what we can and can’t do and then charge us for it. The idea that I have a high fenced area in which I protect and feed white-tail and Axis deer and then have to pay the state of Texas to control their population (I am going for a land patent so good Effing luck after that) is simply stupid. If I feed them, then they aren’t wildlife anymore, are they? I am the steward and I really should only be answering to God, not the usury department.

Once the squirrel became “rescued”, he was no longer wildlife. That is my story and sticking to it.

4 Likes

Power begets madness.
Especially, in small bureaucrats.

3 Likes

Let’s not forget the survivors of Helene in NC/TN!! Many of them are living in tents as their homes were simply washed away in the flood!! A reputable relief op called Helping Hand is out of Central Global Methodist Church, 300 S. Main St., Asheboro, NC. (336-629-1425)

1 Like

Being caring and compassionate is usually good, but there can be some risks of that with wildlife.

The eastern fox squirrel is one of the largest in Oregon, between 18 to 24 inches long with reddish-brown fur and a tan to orangish belly. They were intentionally introduced to urban areas in Oregon during the 1920s as pets and watchable wildlife. The population quickly exploded out of control due to its advantages in reproduction — they are notorious for breeding “out of season,” meaning they reproduce nearly year-round with the exception of winter. They are also “aggressive,” meaning they aren’t afraid to approach humans in search of food.

“They aggressively compete with native squirrels for food and nesting habitat, require far less territory to persist, and can spread disease to native populations,” said the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife of the fox squirrels and similarly invasive eastern gray squirrels.

The western gray squirrel was first noted by Lewis and Clark as they passed through The Dalles. The species is the largest native tree squirrel in the region, and are known for being shy. If you stumble across one in a park, it will likely run up a tree and give a hoarse chirping call.

They range in size between 17 to 24 inches, and have silver “gunmetal” gray fur, with pure white on the underside. The tail is long and bushy. The western gray squirrels prefer to travel from tree to tree, only venturing down to the ground to forage for seeds and nuts.

The species is threatened due to habitat loss, road-kill mortality and disease.

2 Likes

We have the eastern fox squirrel here in Texas. We refer to them as Tree Rats. They will chew up anything you have on your porch, like a plastic container or the plastic cap on anything, including the cap to the fuel storage for our generator. We have fed them enough (bird seed that hits the ground) that if we are starving, we have created a year supply of protein, easily retrievable. Just saying.

5 Likes

Thank you, all of you who replied to my post, for sharing your thoughts about the squirrel story! I appreciate your thoughts, also because I couldn’t make any sense of how a swat team could show up to someone’s door like that, just because a lad made friends with a squirrel. It seemed like a Psyop to me. Some speculative musings came to mind from your posts, and, given that much action takes place on this Forum, I hope you don’t mind my replying to you all, in one (longer) post.

First, Morrisville: Thanks for the info re: people needing relief help in NC. That may get buried in this thread (about the squirrel) – and if you like to share that info more widely, then might a separate thread on Hurricane Helene Relief help reach more people (who would otherwise skip this thread and might also wish to help out)? A few weeks ago, I was heartened to read about some amazing relief efforts.

Robert, you are a wonderful poet, and I used a quote from you to inspire my speculative thoughts! “Narrative warfare - to see who controls the framing.”

Justawhoaman, you are spot on about any Department X (you name the department) telling us what we can and cannot do, and then charging us for doing what we want to do! And, then, on top of it all, we pay taxes for that department to exist and create and enforce those policies in the first place. Where we live, up in Socialist Wokada, you need a license (and certification paper) for just about everything – even to paint people’s fingernails! Businesses here are feeling stifled. Soon one may even need a license to pick one’s own nose, the license/certification creep has advanced that far. But in this case, where a young fellow simply made friends with a little animal in need (and the animal was offered freedom but chose to return and stay with the human family instead)– the State stepped in and said: “Verboten – you need papers!" and exterminated the creature for no good reason.

What jumped out at me in that article was not that the squirrel belonged to a class of beings that are considered “pests” or that the young fellow “owned” the squirrel (as a “pet”) – what I saw was that there was a genuine and mutual and unique friendship between him and that particular individual animal, and the State felt it had every right to interfere, and with violence. The violence is there to transmit a not-so-subtle message to other people that unauthorized mutual friendships are considered Verboten. During WWII, any German caught having friendships with people of the Verboten Class, was also likewise dealt with. When the State steps in and controls your friendships, then there is something behind that – an unspoken “Warum?” hiding behind a dark curtain.

Making friends with an animal – here’s my Hypothesis: The ruling technocratic pushers do not want that. OK, for “pets”, as, in their books there is still a “Master–Underling” relationship (besides the massive $ industry behind pets), and that industry is useful for a widespread public mind-mapping program. But, absolutely no friendship with any other kind of animal individuals – as the ruling class needs animals to be seen either as “commodities” or as “pests” (their gargantuan commercial enterprises depend upon both scenarios). If people are living harmoniously with animals, the ruling technocrats will never find people to kill and process animals, nor will they find people willing to exterminate them. And from that point, they will never find people who will be willing to harm or kill other people or interfere with their freedoms – something on which the ruling class absolutely depends for their unrelenting and absolute power.

About “invasive” species – I have, for some time, wondered if this is part of a mind-mapping psyop. I have seen such policies for decades, and, wonder if this too – just name the wildlife in a given area, and fill-in-the-blank – is a blueprint for an “invasive species – must be managed/exterminated” mind map. At some point, I get the sense that anything that is not a human is mapped in our minds as being invasive, anywhere the human decides he wants to settle. If it’s not the grey squirrel, then pick your species – bullfrog, wolf, seal, dolphin, vole, gopher, raccoon, cormorant, goose, rodent, rabbit, cat, horse, fox, cougar, bear, crow, sheep, boar, kangaroo, elephant, pigeon– you name it. Every year, Canadian and American “Wildlife Management Services” (and worldwide) killing agencies are on a widespread rampage killing whatever they can (this killing spree is big business). I wonder if this is a blueprint for a perpetual exterminator culture, and if it is kept going year by year, generation by generation, then once the call comes to cull other “different classes” of people, one readily finds people ready to perform those services, as the minds have been thus mapped. (In Wokada, a certain race of people are now being perceived as invasive species to be dealt with via Diversity-Equity-Inclusiveness programs and are being guilted and shamed, owing to the colour of their skin, into bearing sole psychological responsibility for the invasions and brutal colonization history that happened a few centuries ago.)

We, ourselves, don’t invite wildlife into our home, as we like a clean home, and know that feces harbour bacteria that we don’t want. And, we tolerate the squirrels and raccoons that raid our garden. This year, raccoons ate all the grapes. (Justawhoaman, it sounds like you’ve found a seed decoy to help with the fox squirrel raids at your place!) Any friendships we’ve made with wildlife outdoors are on the individual’s terms, at least those who don’t flee from us, often just amounting to being peacefully in a mutual space at a given time. We don’t restrict their freedoms or even touch them – just maybe talk with them and give them eye contact. We respect that other people do develop unique inter-species relationships, on an individual basis, often after helping injured animals to recover, and these things are by chance, and we don’t like to see permitting systems and swat teams getting in the way of what would otherwise bring authentic joy into peoples’ and other creatures’ lives, and make our beautiful world a more humane place for all.

It comes down to Robert’s phrase: “to see who controls the framing”. And how does framing get controlled? My guess is via large-scale mind-mapping like the swat team psyop and policies that designate animals (and ultimately also people) as “pests” that must be “managed”.

1 Like

That’s an interesting idea, you may be on to something.

Natural ecosystems have been massively disrupted by colonialism, but in the wake of that today not great to justify mass killings of any specific species that has been labeled as “invasive” after it’s been established for over a hundred years.

Bullfrogs are really loud bullies that eat native frogs in the Pacific Northwest. Plant species like canary reed grass can make streams impassible to salmon.

Who/what frames an idea/narrative/perspective is important, things have gotten quite strange with that. One of the weirdest ones to me is the term “consumers,” hearing people refer to masses of population with that term is really degrading to human dignity.

If you’re looking at how different species relate based on food source, some animals will just flock to any food source as “consumers” without much regard for other species. That can be true of plants also and can be heavily disruptive to natural ecosystems if they are introduced from other continents overseas.

This is a sad story about Peanut the squirrel am rambling away from that. If he is an eastern grey squirrel then that is probably native to the New York State region where this takes place.

2 Likes

Thank you for all of your thoughts on this, Bahri. Some people may not be interested in a topic like this, because “it’s only a squirrel”. You seem to have a soft spot for some kinds of creatures, including also wombats (?).

Fifty years ago, during my younger years I, too, was schooled into perceiving certain “others” (including creatures like bullfrogs) as “invasive pests”. And you are correct – when people (who like to eat them) bring bullfrogs into an area, they can push out other creatures (as in our area, tree frogs – although, I have to say, the tree frogs are still here…). This whole realm of eating and the harms that come from that activity under certain commercial systems – that is a topic about which many philosophers have shared some very interesting and diverging ideas, through the ages (and perhaps an altogether separate post one of these days).

As I grew older, I started to wonder why is it that I am automatically seeing just about every other non-human creature as being some kind of invasive pest? And, from there, a several decades journey of exploring my own thinking, exploring “from where am I getting such ideas” began. It has been an interesting journey, through which I’ve worked to try to reframe my own thinking, and once the shift happened, I found that whatever I valued in the past just has very little value to me now, and I value very different things these days. Not least of which are the intangible things like having a beautiful marriage, like experiencing authentic friendships, like experiencing through different senses the beauty and brilliance of the natural world, like being in a park, like those precious moments where I can be next to another living creature (plant, animal, mushroom, stream) and just experience that creature’s presence, like hearing lovely music, or simply being somewhere and seeing something beautiful.

In my older years, I do think that Life is something to care about, and on a deep, multi-layered level. Stripping away one’s individuality, killing him or her because he or she has been classified and then deemed a “pest”, completely disregarding a human being’s relationship with that individual (and note here: I repeat: individual) – to me, that is the essence of (collective) harmful existence, and it underlies, as a foundation, this inhuman anti-life culture that we’re all experiencing, and in which we’re role-playing as a result of mind-mapping projects in which we have learned not to regard other individual living beings (including also human beings) as being profoundly sacred.

2 Likes

1 Like