“Blaming Immigrants For Eating Pets Is An Old American Urban Legend,” reads a Sunday Forbes headline. We hear, too, that all the current stories about Haitians dining on cats and dogs is driven by “racism.” (Unsaid is that this accusation itself is driven, in part, by immigrationism.) But amidst all the cute cat memes, political imperatives, and ad hominem attacks, something is missing: intelligent conversation. And here’s reality:

Many cultures do have dog and/or cat on the menu. Would it be so surprising if at least a few immigrants from those cultures, at least for a time, continued this behavior?

In point of fact, there have been verified mainstream media news stories — out of California and Germany, for instance — of immigrants eating, respectively, a dog and a cat.

Moreover, it is a fact that animal sacrifice has become a growing problem in places such as New York City. In other words, there is a problem, however limited or widespread, involving some immigrants and animals.

No Longer in the Mouse-catching Business

Before addressing the other matters, let’s discuss the current allegations: pet-eating in Springfield, Ohio. Donald Trump and his vice-presidential running mate, J.D. Vance, an Ohio senator, have said that some Buckeye State residents have complained about Haitian migrants stealing and eating their pets. The media claim this is “baseless.” But what are the facts?

Inspired by a video purporting to show a cat being cooked on a grill in urban Ohio, journalist Christopher Rufo did some sleuthing. He found the man who shot the video. The individual wanted “to remain anonymous but confirmed its time, location, and authenticity,” relates the reporter. “He told us that he was picking up his son last summer, when he noticed the unusual situation,” Rufo continues. “‘It was some Africans that stay right next door to my kid’s mother,’ he said. ‘This African dude next door had the damn cat on the grill’” (video below).

Rufo confirmed other aspects of the story as well. For example, an African-immigrant neighbor of the cat-cooking family said that “the father would find meat in the neighborhood.” (It’s doubtful, too, that she meant he found a wandering steer or was hunting deer in that urban hood.)

To be clear, this didn’t occur in Springfield but the closest major city to it, Dayton. Moreover, it doesn’t prove that (im)migrant pet consumption is a pervasive phenomenon. But as Rufo points out, it “does break the general narrative peddled by the establishment media and its ‘fact checkers,’ who insisted that this has never happened, and that any suggestion otherwise is somehow an expression of racism.” (Note: The man who shot the video is black.)

Stories From the Land of “Never Happened”

So, yes, it refutes the general narrative. So does this:

“’What’s wrong with eating a cat?’” reads a 2014 Daily Mail headline. “Vietnamese man in Germany admits killing and barbecuing his neighbour’s pet — but doesn’t understand what’s wrong with it.”

Then there’s this: “Two Cambodian Refugees Face Trial After Killing Dog for Food,” the Los Angeles Times informed in 1989. “Sokheng Chea, 32, and Seng Ou, 33 … decided to eat a 4-month-old German Shepherd puppy that a co-worker had given them as a pet,” the paper related.

Again, for those scoffing at these older headlines, the above doesn’t prove pet consumption is widespread in the U.S. It does prove that the mainstream media are peddling misinformation when claiming it’s a complete urban myth.

Moreover, what’s the probability that the cases we’re hearing about are the only ones that have occurred?

Culture Tells the Tale

Though revolting to the average Westerner, these stories won’t surprise the more sophisticated among us. After all, eating cats and dogs is common in some countries (see relevant World Population Review data here). Just consider the following video about cat consumption in Vietnam:

There’s also this AFP news segment, about a Vietnam eatery that can serve cat “to over a hundred clients” daily. The felines are “killed by drowning,” the AFP states. It then quotes the restaurant manager. “We eat dog meat at the end of the lunar month,” he said, but “cat meat at the beginning.” He explained that some people believe consuming cat at the lunar month’s opening “brings good luck.”

And below is a video about wolfing down canine meat in Vietnam. It’s estimated that the “country consumes around five million dogs a year,” states the narrator.

All this said, some (im)migrants are making sacrifices for our country — or, at least, in it. To wit: “Animal sacrifices on the rise in Queens with chickens, pigs being tortured in ‘twisted’ rituals.” The preceding is from a New York Post article published just nine days ago. The piece also informs that a dead dog was found, too — “with its neck snapped.”

What Does “Diversity” Really Mean?

This brings us back to Haitian newcomers. While the current controversy concerns the eating of pets, what of animal sacrifice? Is it inconceivable that this could explain any possible disappearance of pets in Ohio? Note here that a “‘common saying is that Haitians are 70 percent Catholic, 30 percent Protestant, and 100 percent voodoo,’” related National Geographic in 2004. Nat Geo also states that animal sacrifice is sometimes part of voodoo’s rituals.

The point is that oft-touted “diversity” relates to “differences.” Yet its proponents recoil at any suggestion that even a few of these differences could be unflattering. That’s impossible, apparently (unless it’s the diversity of Western culture).

Moreover, can you identify any group that reaches our shores and completely relinquishes its culture and, in particular, its religion?

None of this is to say that other cultures’ stomach-turning (by Western standards) culinary practices can’t have an upside. Just consider the YouTube videos showing, graphically, how certain Far Eastern villagers cook and eat rats. (Trust me, if you’re faltering with your weight-loss diet, these videos can, uh, quell your appetite.) I mean, having enough of these people in NYC could really put a dent in its rodent problem. And then we could, finally, quite sincerely say, “They’re doing jobs Americans won’t do!”

What the Media Won’t Do

But then there’s what the media won’t do: their job. President Trump certainly has a penchant for exaggeration. Nonetheless, when boldly saying at the presidential debate that some (im)migrants were eating pets, he didn’t specify the problem’s magnitude. Yet most media have met Trump’s possible hyperbole with complete denial. The facts I’ve presented, however, could be easily found by the mainstream reporters. That is, if they only cared about Truth more than about shilling for a certain major political party.

There’s an irony here, too: The media’s behavior could be described, in a word, as feline.