Thursday, July 26, 2018

Censorship of my blog on Google and Twitter

Charles Danten, former veterinarian


Forest of the Dead at Katyn

I’ve known about censorship on Google and other internet platforms for a long time, but I never thought I would be the victim of it for my views on animals and other related subjects. 

It seems Google doesn’t want me to criticize the pet culture in any way shape or form. Do they have financial stakes in the pet business? Is someone paying them not to reference me? Or maybe they don't like my link between bolshevism and the pet culture? I don't know for sure why they are doing this, but they are doing it.

So Google doesn’t even reference my blog and any of the articles I have recently published. What you find on their search engine when you do a search of my name is old articles dating back to 2003, 2011 and 2012. 

They even have in the second place of the first page of a search, the only bad article about me and my work written by an old crazy cat lady who went ballistic when I wrote an article on Hitler’s love for animals. 

You can see this in the two screen shots below. 



The screenshot above of the first page of a search on DuckDuckGo lists my new book, my blog on the first page as well as an article recently published by Animals 24-7. 



While the screen shot above of the first page of a search on Google doesn’t list my blog or any of my recent articles. It doesn't even list the new version of my book published on Amazon. Most of the results listed go back to 1999 and end in 2012. The book in French listed in the first place is no longer in print. There's one recent reference from a vegan group, but that's it.

You can see in second place the bad article with the word "nazisme" in the header. This same article doesn’t appear anywhere in a search on DuckDuckGo or any other search platform for that matter. Why is it placed in second place? 

Same for Twitter, many of my tweets never reach their destination. 

So basically, I am shadow banned from the Internet and probably surveilled by a "commissar" of some sort. 

Free speech doesn’t exist anymore in our multicultural world which is supposed to enrich us. If you speak outside the box, you are just plainly ignored. Might as well shoot me in the back of the head if I can't speak freely. That's what censorship feels like symbolically.

And what will be the next step? When these bolsheviks at heart  gain enough power, will they come and get me at home and bring me to one of their killing fields where they will shoot me for real like they did during the Red terror in Russia in the 1920s and in Katyn

Given the right circonstances, we know what these people are capable of doing. Didn't they assassinate, torture, and starve to death more than 30 million people in communist Russia? Take a look at the following article if you think I'm exaggerating: Your Schoolbooks Lied to You: What Happened After the Bolshevik Revolution

Monday, July 23, 2018

The Love Argument

Charles Danten, former veterinarian

The King of the Urban Jungle

The notion that other species should have the same rights as humans is another dangerous fallacy. In the United States and elsewhere, in the name of equality for every species, parks and protected ecological sites, for example, are trampled and desecrated by pet owners who feel they have every right. On a good day in San Francisco’s Fort Funston, reports journalist Michael Schaffer in his book, One Nation Under Dog, there can be up to 400 dogs off-leash, spoiling the home of endangered species like the bank swallow or the western snowy plover. In the name of love and anti-specism, Peter Singer advocates everywhere are waging “dog wars” to gain free access for their dogs to rare and protected land.

Near my home there is a small, pristine forest, a protected national treasure, where dogs are admitted only on-leash and where walking outside the trails is prohibited. Unfortunately, a number of dog owners use it as an exercise park and a toilet for their pets. On one occasion, I saw as many as half a dozen dogs running loose in the woods, barking, trampling rare plants, and scaring birds away. The trails are often littered with feces. Plastic bags containing excrement are thrown in the underbrush and left hanging on the entrance gates. Whenever I have asked dog owners to keep their dogs on-leash and respect the law, I have been treated with contempt and derision, even verbal threats and physical intimidation. One day, an aggressive pet owner, out of her wits after I had told her to put her dogs on leashes, actually shoved my sister out of her way as she continued along the trail. The comment I most often hear is: “If you don’t love animals, why don’t you move to another neighbourhood!” I’ve complained many times to City Hall, and several of my letters on the subject were published in local newspapers, but to no avail. The love argument is a powerful one.


Of course, there are selfish reasons behind this unruly behaviour. Pet owners feel guilty about locking their animals up most of the day while they go about living their lives. Affection-slavery comes at a moral price. They find some solace by treating them like "kings," 
hiring a dog walker or trainer, buying their pets an expensive brand of food, playing ball with them on the week-ends, or letting them loose for a few minutes in the woods or with their own kind. Some make these outings into social events. But everyone knows the road to hell is paved with good intentions.