Today one of our associates, who will remain nameless, pointed out that Jeromie Williams, the Director of Operations for Pet Pardons Canada, and Managing Editor of Pet Pardons News, has posted outrageous anti-American comments.
Back in January, I noted that Jeromie has posted derogatory comments about the Canadian province of Alberta, disparaging nearly four million Albertans as “rednecks.” His apparent misogyny has also been well–documented here.
And now, on August 15, Jeromie smeared all Americans as racists, homophobes, and anti-Canadian:
Of course, it is not 1960.
Jeromie appears to have forgotten that Americans elected an African American as their president in 2008, and that he appointed an Hispanic Supreme Court justice. A rather odd thing for a nation of anti-black, anti-Hispanic bigots to do, isn’t it? Which is not to suggest that racism no longer exists, just that smearing all Americans in this way is unacceptable.
And with respect to Canadians and gays, or gay Canadians, I have to say I think Jeromie is confused. Americans don’t object to gays or Canadians per se, only the criminal ones, like Montrealers Rocco Luka Magnotta and Jeromie himself. No, they don’t want someone guilty of killing animals and people (Magnotta), or even of threatening to kill animals and people (Jeromie) in their country, let alone their backyard. But for the record I’m fairly certain this has nothing to do with either nationality or sexual orientation.
UPDATE (August 23, 2012): Well, perhaps Jeromie was right after all. His associate, Pet Pardons Contributing Editor Cayr Ariel Wulff (email), has just written yet another disgusting post, this time utterly Sinophobic and xenophobic. Wulff acknowledges that while dog food imported from China helps to “feed the 78.2 million pet dogs in the U.S.” (nearly 100 million pounds are imported per year), there have been “2,000 reports of illnesses or deaths in U.S. dogs that ate jerky treats made in China.”
Inexplicably, based on this, Wulff claims that:
“To date, they have still not been able to pinpoint a specific toxin to blame, although a link between illness and ingestion of the treats has been proven.”
Either Wulff is simply ignorant of basic laws of statistics and logic, or she is knowingly and dishonestly conflating a correlative/temporal link with a causative link. As Wray Smith has explained, while there may indeed be evidence of the former, there is no evidence of the latter, and to infer otherwise is to commit the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy (“after this, therefore because of this”).
Nevertheless, Wulff quotes fringe Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, saying that he “would pull them all off the market.”
The comments show that if Wulff was trying to stir up public alarm and outrage against the Chinese, well, Mission Accomplished. Many ask why any imports from China are allowed. Tina Robershaw takes it a step further and asks why any imports from China are allowed, since “they have tryed [sic.] to kill us our children and our pets”:
Terie Vass illustrates the post hoc fallacy in her post. I am sorry her dog died, but the fact that it happened four days after eating a single Chinese treat does not prove that the dog died because of the treat, or that it came from an “obviously poisoned bag!”
The other complaints about imports of Chinese clothing give you some indication of what this is really all about: American dog treat manufacturers want to destroy any competition from China, and how better to do that than by spreading false stories about dangerous toxins in Chinese treats?
Pet Pardons, of course, is associated with the American dog treat manufacturer Rosie’s Barkery, which no doubt would benefit if Chinese treats were banned.
I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.