By Steve Pomper
I thought we were over this moronic nonsense, but I guess not. However, that this incident happened in San Francisco makes a strange sort of sense in a nonsensical way. What do I mean? A business still refusing to serve cops would be in San Fran, right?
According to the San Francisco Standard, the San Francisco Police Officers Association (SFPOA) accused Reem’s California café of “anti-police bigotry” after an employee refused to serve a uniformed, on-duty police officer, citing the restaurant’s cop-hating policy.
Reem’s acknowledged the incident and said it was a “polite interaction” between the officer and the employee who refused to serve him coffee. Instead, they served him this nonsense: “All officers are welcome to come to the establishment when they are unarmed and/or off duty.” But not while they are risking their lives for the community.
The Standard interviewed a “Black [sic]” customer who agreed with the ban, reportedly saying, “I’m deeply triggered seeing a cop in uniform.” He’s deeply something. Who talks like that?
In defense of its anti-police policy, the business issued a statement that reads as radical as it is predictable and boring.
The company posted on Instagram:
Reem’s has a deep commitment to uplifting social and racial justice in our communities. This includes fostering an environment of safety for our staff and customers. In a time of increased gun violence — particularly impacting people of color, youth, and queer people — we believe that maintaining a strict policy of prohibiting guns in our restaurant keeps us safer.
Many members of our community have been impacted by gun violence, whether that be an experience on the streets of San Francisco or Oakland, having come from war or occupation, or having increased fear due to a growing climate of political extremism. All too often, Black [sic] and brown people, and poor people are the victims of this violence. At Reem’s, we aim to provide a space where people can eat delicious Arab food and work together to strengthen our community without fear of violence or harassment. We invite our community to step up and join us in creating that culture of care and resilience.
Gag!
Again, what kind of people talk like this in real life?
“Uplifting social and racial justice…?” “[S]afety for our staff and customers” (safer without cops?). Rose-colored glasses firmly donned, they “believe… prohibiting guns in our restaurant keeps us safer.” Even when the guns are carried by police officers.
Ironically, unless they have armed security searching every single customer as they enter, “prohibiting guns in their restaurant” does nothing. It’s just like school “Gun Free Zone” signs and policies do nothing to deter shootings in schools. Instead, they broadcast to the world: this place is filled with sitting ducks.
Reem talks about the community being “impacted by gun violence…” in San Fran or “from war or occupation… [Middle East] or having increased fears due to a growing climate of political extremism.”
Isn’t it funny when people think they’re describing you when they’re describing themselves? These folks are walking, talking, non-cop-serving advertisements for political extremism.
Confirming their policy is anti-cop and not simply anti-gun violence, they say Reem’s is a place where people can eat “Arab food… without fear of violence or harassment.” They must mean “violence or harassment” from armed, uniformed police officers, right?
The management attempts to make their policy sound innocent, even admirable. But the policy is hate-filled and bitter toward the SFPD police officers who, if Reem’s were being robbed or otherwise mistreated by a criminal, would help them without consideration of who they are. Ironically, even if they hate the cops helping them.
But, if you look into these folks even a little, their behavior is not surprising. In 2017, Reem’s had a mural painted in honor of a Palestinian (PFLP) terrorist convicted of murdering two Jewish university students in a bombing at a grocery store in Israel in 1969.
David Lange @Israellycool (on Twitter/X) challenged Reem’s over their terrorist worship. “I’ll quit making a stink over the terrorist #RasmeaOdeh mural if you hang this up as well ([pic of] her victims).
By the way, Odeh, who had become a U.S. citizen, had her citizenship stripped, and was deported, according to ICE, “following a federal immigration fraud conviction [in 2017, during the previous administration].”
Back to the issue at hand, attitude is everything. I live in the Pacific Northwest, a few miles north of Seattle. Hardly a haven of conservative thought. However, I go down to a local coffee shop several days a week to write. I often run into the local constabulary and chat. Without exception, I’ve seen only friendly interactions between the employees and the cops, including warm greetings, goodbyes, and thank yous. This even includes the baristas who find it necessary to taint their nametags with their “preferred pronouns.”
This discrimination against cops is a clear virtue signal from radical leftists, likely Marxists, to other radicals. We’ve seen businesses refuse to serve on-duty police officers in leftist cities all over the nation, including Portland, Seattle, Chicago, and New York City to name only a few.
Still, there may be some positive signs. Not long ago, Molly Moon, an ice cream shop in Seattle infamously announced an anti-cop policy similar to Reem’s, refusing to serve armed police officers. However, recently, an expansion Molly Moon location opened in the Seattle suburb of Edmonds and went out of its way to assure police they are welcome at their establishment—armed—and in uniform.
Molly Moon is still anti-gun/anti-Second Amendment, and their general policy is as a gun-free zone, which, like Reem’s, they pretend keep staff and customers safe, which is their right as Americans. Still, the business confirmed that, “Cops are allowed to have their weapon on them while on duty when they come in for ice cream.” How noble of them.
As for Reem’s California café, their website announced they are temporarily closed and say they will announce a “grand re-opening” soon. The closing doesn’t appear related to this incident, but with them, who knows? This isn’t the first time they’ve closed after a controversy only to re-open later.