Pamela Geller, a blogger from New York who spends the fortune she inherited from her fraudulent ex-husband to run an anti-Muslim hate group from her living room, ran a story on her blog this week that epitomizes how she, and so many of her ilk, take tragic tales where Muslims happened to be involved, and exploit them to whip up hatred towards all Muslims.
This week, in Filer, Idaho, a police officer named Tarek Hassani, showed up to handle a disturbance call about dogs causing a ruckus in the street. One of the dogs was a service dog for a man with Parkinson’s Disease. Hassani got out of his car and kicked both dogs before firing shots and killing one. It was ignorant, inhumane and could have been handled much differently.
For Pamela Geller, though, the tragic story was a goldmine. She assumed from the officer’s name that he MUST have been a Muslim, and so that changed everything. The headline on her hate site read: “Idaho Muslim Police Officer Kicks, Shoots and Kills a Disabled Man’s Dog.”
Why did she feel the need to put “Muslim” in the title? Outrageously, she suggests (erroneously) that because Muslims “revile” dogs, that must have been the reason the cop killed the dog. Because everybody knows a Jewish cop or a Christian cop would have never done such a thing. Or would they?
Unsurprisingly, a simple Google search is enough to pull up dozens of instances where other cops have done the exact same thing.
Here is a story where a California cop executes “Max,” a pet dog that was on a walk with its owner in Hawthorne.
Here is a story from Arundel, County, Maryland where cops killed a family dog, Vern the Labrador, while investigating a burglary.
Here’s a story where police in Danville, Virginia shot and killed a 12-pound miniature dachshund.
Here is a story where a 300-pound probation officer in Georgia shot and killed a 12-pound Jack Russell terrier, named Patches.
In that vein, filmmakers Patrick Reasonover and Michael “Oz” Ozias tallied news stories of cops killing dogs across the country and suggest that every 98 minutes a police officer shoots a dog.
So why did Geller not post those stories too? Because the cops involved don’t have names like Tarek or Muhammad. She assumes they’re not Muslims, likely believing that they subscribe to some other faith. When non-Muslims do bad things, they’re just idiots, lunatics, or are psychologically impaired (you know, like Anders Breivik, the, ahem, terrorist who gushed of his love for Ms. Geller). When people with names like Tarek or Muhammad (presumably Muslim names) do bad things, though, they are acting on behalf of their religion, which she believes animates their every action.
Here’s an exercise that illustrates precisely the kind of prejudiced logic that Geller advances:
So, based on Geller’s prejudiced logic, a possible headline may read: “Jewish Dog Hater Abuses Baby Pup in Florida Street.”
The article would be followed by scriptural references stating that dogs are noisy [Psalms 59:7-14], greedy [Isaiah 56:11], stupid [Isaiah 56:10], filthy [Proverbs 26:11] or that the term “dog” is applied as an insult to humans [I Kings 22:38]. The term “dog” also appears as a derogatory designation for male prostitutes [Deuteronomy 23:19].
Alas, this is all very ironic coming from someone who once co-owned a corrupt automobile dealership that supplied a car used by thugs who murdered two New York City Police Officers.