This has to be the most absurd story I have seen for quite a while. Dunkin Doughnuts have pulled an add because a rabid Republican blogger believed it offered symbolic support for Islamic extremism. Apparently, the choice of scarf worn in the add by poor Rachel Ray, a fetching black-and-white checked scarf, was to much for the blogger as it resembled a traditional Arab keffiyeh. The innocuous scarf, chosen by Ray’s stylist, apparently evoked extremist videos?
You really couldn’t make it up. Rachel Ray supporting Islamic extremism. Is the krispy kream the real dirty bomb. After all, cholesterol is the number one killer in America. Perhaps Alkieda are behind the resurgence of Dunkin Doughnuts and this is bio-dietary terrorism? Somebody really should do a study of deteriorating dietary habits of the US and the rise of extremist terrorism. Am I the only one who can see the connection! Come on people, wake up!
I am pretty sure Michelle Malkin, the blogger in question, is oblivious to the true meaning or representation of such a scarf. I am also pretty sure she doesn’t care. The word hyperbole was invented for people such as Malkin. All she knows is that she has seen something similar around the necks of Islamic terrorists on the evening news (well, Fox News anyway, as she guest hosts for that intellectual and cultural heavyweight at Fox, Bill O’Reilly) and therefore assumes all terrorists wear such scarfs and ergo all scarf wearers are terrorists.
It staggers me that this kind of xenophobia is allowed to permeate the mainstream without being checked. Is this how Malkin identifies people? Scarf wearer – terrorist? Surely sympathizers or appeasers at the very least! Hell, lets just come out and say it: If you don’t dress at Abercrombie & Fitch you are probably a terrorist!
Quite how wearing a scarf is offering symbolic support for Islamic extremism I do not know. If that were the case millions of people all across the Muslim world and beyond would be supporting terrorism! Unfortunately, I fear that is precisely the myth that Malkin and her extremist cohorts would like to perpetuate. She conveniently forgets the thousands of western students and fashionistas that choose (or chose as I’m not sure of it’s continuing popularity now Rachel Ray has taken to wearing one) to wear such scarves. Hell, even Top Shop sell them and I haven’t seen anybody putting pressure on them? Of course Burberry is famous for their checked scarfs, but I’m sure Mrs Malkin doesn’t mean those sort of checks or that type of scarf. After all, that would mean most of the royal family were offering symbolic support to Islamic extremism. Imagine, the royal family, the ultimate sleeper cell!
If we are to follow the simplistic misguided logic of Mrs Malkin, shouldn’t we all stop wearing socks, trousers or even clothes all together, as, I’m pretty sure terrorists wear clothes. And we wouldn’t want to be seen offering symbolic support for any of those clothes wearing Islamic types would we! Of course, there could be a nudist terrorist organization that has passed under my radar!
Quite why these lunatics are afforded the oxygen of publicity is beyond me. Although I don’t begrudge Mrs Malkin her voice in the blogosphere and on the rabbid news networks that support people like her, such as Fox. Does this really have to make it onto the BBC, CNN, et al? Is this really news? Although, as I have just written over 600 words on the subject maybe I should shut up…………..