“Fashion statements may seem insignificant, but when they lead to the mainstreaming of violence — unintentionally or not — they matter. Ignorance is no longer an excuse.” — Michelle Malkin.
Thanks to Malkin’s relentless campaigning, and the threat of a boycott, Dunkin’ Donuts has withdrawn its horrifying TV ad. You saw it, right? The commercial where the thug in a balaclava pistol whips a school bus of kindergartners into eating glazed doughnuts until rainbow sprinkles pour out their noses.
Okay, no. That’s not what she means by “the mainstreaming of violence.” She’s talking about the ad where Food Network host Rachael Ray stands in front of cherry trees, urging folks to try DD’s iced coffee, wearing a snazzy gray T-shirt and a fringed paisley scarf.
Dunkin’ Donuts pulled a television spot featuring talk show host and Food Network personality Rachael Ray this weekend after a Fox news commentator associated it with terrorists.
In the ad, Ray is wearing a scarf that Michelle Malkin said in her nationally syndicated column resembled a kiffiyeh, Middle Eastern garb that is “popularized by Yasser Arafat and a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos.”
It’s also worn at some point by virtually all guys from Morocco to Dubai, and has been for at least a hundred years, not to mention that it’s popular with British soldiers and even with some American G.I.s stationed in the region. Listen. I ain’t a fan of Yasser, much less of jihadis. I would never choose to wear a keffiyeh to make a political statement. I wouldn’t wear a Mao T-shirt, either. Or a Che Guevara shirt, except the one on which his beret is replaced with a propeller beanie. But Malkin’s vitriol was a preposterous overreaction. Either that, or it was or a fearmongering stunt. Because, in the ad, Ray isn’t making a political statement, “unintentionally or not.” She is not wearing a keffiyeh. She’s wearing a silk scarf. But thanks to Malkin and the craven executives at Dunkin’ Donuts, any neckware with fringe and checks shall now be screamed at as the deadly TERRORSCARF.
Malkin is pleased: “In post-9/11 America, vigilance must never go out of style.”
Next for the eternally hypervigilant: (1) McDonald’s is boycotted for pricing Big Macs using Arabic numbers, and (2) cowboys are barred from the rodeo circuit for wearing fringed jackets and TERRORCHAPS.
(Via Andrew Sullivan, who says: “Words fail.”)
5 responses so far ↓
Ken // May 29, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Michelle Malkin needs to come to SA to see what can happen when people get caught up in xenophobic stereotyping. My heart has been heavy because of the senseless acts of barbarism perpetrated by people who believe that displaced Zimbabweans are reponsible for their plight.
Well known SA Author, Margie Orford wrote the following in respinse to the violence;
A MEDITATION ON SOUTH AFRICAN CITIZENSHIP
If being a South African means beating on the red door of a shack and demanding to see a green identity book – the dompas of citizenship, then I am a foreigner.
If being a South African means dragging a woman into the road to push up her skirt and drive my boot between her legs, then I am a foreigner.
If being a South African means sharpening my machete to split the skull of a man returning home from work, then I am a foreigner.
If being a South African means ripping an infant from the swaddling on its mother’s back to spit in its face wizened by terror, then I am a foreigner.
If being a South African means dropping concrete blocks on that mother’s head until it bursts like a ripe watermelon on the dry dust of my street, then I am a foreigner.
If being a South African means arrogating the roles of policeman, prosecutor, judge and executioner, then I am a foreigner.
If being a South African means hanging over my garden fence and watching the smooth skin of a man blister as he burns alive, then I am a foreigner.
For that skin was an infant’s once, caressed by a mother’s marvelling hand.
That skin is a man’s, and a lover’s hand passed over it, marvelling at its smoothness. That skin is a father’s, reached for in the night by a child afraid of the dark.
That burning skin was a man’s and if being a South African means I cannot feel that skin as my own
Then I am a foreigner.
gargoyle // May 29, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Malkin apparently wasn’t getting enough attention, so she had to make up a “crisis” to bring to our attention.
I’m very disappointed in the DD execs for not telling her to shut her yap.
Patti // May 29, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Unless jihadis have gone for a whole new look, that ain’t a keffiyeh. Sometimes a scarf is just a scarf.
Richard // May 30, 2008 at 2:56 am
Here’s a picture of Malkin wearing a Mao hat!
http://www.the40yearplan.com/img/032307_Malkin.jpg
I guess she’s a communist!
Meg // May 30, 2008 at 9:10 am
Ken, thank you for posting Margie Orford’s essay. The violence against Zimbabweans has been horrifying. It greatly saddens me that after all that is being done to destroy that beautiful land, this is happening to people who have fled for their lives.
And you’ve hit the nail on the head about Malkin’s campaign. I didn’t say it, but you did: it’s xenophobic. I know full well that a black-and-white keffiyah — Fatah colors — can be worn as a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinian cause or support for the Intifada. But Malkin is the one who is “mainstreaming” the notion that this very common, very traditional bit of clothing should itself be feared and rejected — and in fact the keffiyeh is a stand-in here for Arab.
Richard: Have you sent that shocking photo to Fox News?
Leave a Comment