There is a Monty Python bit (and it may have been an album-only1 one), in which a fellow is ranting on about communists everywhere. He can’t take a bath without six or seven communists jumping in with him and Koysgin was in the kitchen eating his wife’s jam. Brehznev may have been in their with him as well, I can’t recall and I cannot find a transcript of the thing online (curse you Google!). I do distinctly recall, however, that there were communists peeping out his wife’s blouse at him.
At any rate, I think of this bit practically every time I have an encounter with the paranoid rantings of Michelle Malkin. Examples include seeing capitulation to terrorists by the UN because they used Legos in a poster. Then she sees the Reconquista because the Texas Rangers wore “Los Rangers” jerseys on Cinco de Mayo a few years ago.2
Now she is seeing terrorist capitulation because Rachael Ray wore a black and white scarf in a Dunkin’ Donuts ad. No, seriously. Malkin doesn’t see a black and white scarf, she sees “hate couture” and “jihadi chic.” Today she writes:
Anti-American fashion designers abroad and at home have mainstreamed and adapted the scarves as generic pro-Palestinian jihad or anti-war statements. Yet many folks out there remain completely oblivious to the apparel’s violent symbolism and anti-Israel overtones.
Or, just as a flagpole is often just a flagpole, so, too, is a black and white scarf just a black and white scarf.
Charles Johnson (amongst others) was all over the story as well. The title of his post on the subject was “Mainstreaming Terrorism to Sell Donuts.”3
By the way, here’s the scarf:
Which was supposedly a mirror image of this:
As James Joyner noted this morning:
The terrorists have won. Or maybe we’ve just gone collectively insane.
Perhaps not all of us, but clearly some of us.
I noted the story the other day over at Arms and Influence, but never got around to commenting on it, but then today I see that Malkin isn’t the only one seeing terrorists jumping in the bathtubs and peeping out of blouses, because Dunkin’ Donuts pulled the ad. Via the BoGlo:
Said the suits in a statement: ‘‘In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.’’
Really, the paranoia here is remarkable.
Sphere: Related Content- For the youngsters in the audience, album were big black rounds things with holes in the middle that one played on an odd device that spun in circles [↩]
- Good thing she missed the Spurs-Suns game this year when the Spurs wore “Los Spurs” jerseys! [↩]
- Update:: Yet another example, is Pam Geller at Atlas Shrugs, who called Ray a “Jihad Tool” and writes “Have you seen Rachel Ray wearing the icon of Yasser Arfatbastard and the bloody Islamic jihad. This is part of the cultural jihad.” Utterly amazing. [↩]
We know what albums are. In fact, they are selling turntables in department stores now. Lots of the youngsters prefer the sound of vinyl.
Comment by B. Minich — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 10:13 am
What about that Audrey Hepburn? She wore the terrorist headscarf! Her “American” image should be reexamined!
Comment by B. Minich — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 10:18 am
Looks like I picked the wrong day to wear a tie with black and white squares….
Comment by boz — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 10:53 am
[...] now that I have been altered to Rachael Ray’s terror chic, I see via Debbie Schlussel that things are more insidious than [...]
Pingback by PoliBlog (TM): A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » More Terrorists! (Meghan McCain, Italian Restaurateurs and Little Girls) — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 1:11 pm
Malkin has lost her mind.
Comment by Captain D — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 2:22 pm
Dang, just realized how retro I am. I know what a vinyl album is AND who Audrey Hepburn is.
Comment by B. Minich — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 2:25 pm
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 2:36 pm
[...] and it is something that has occurred to me as well, and was even something I almost commented upon this morning, i.e., that it is all an act meant to generate revenue: Malkin and Johnson seem to have [...]
Pingback by PoliBlog (TM): A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » Malkin & Co.: Crazy Like Foxes? — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 2:39 pm
Esta mujer está loca!
Comment by David H. — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 2:59 pm
[...] commentary from Dr. Steven Taylor: There is a Monty Python bit (and it may have been an album-only1 one), in which a fellow is ranting on about communists everywhere. He can’t take a bath without [...]
Pingback by Americans Have Been Saved From Terrorist Scarves | Comments from Left Field — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 3:08 pm
Why thats as crazy as thinking planes might come out of the sky and crash into office buildings or something…..yea, she’s a real nut job. I wanna get something for my wardrobe reminiscent of the guy who ordered the trigger pulled on Cleo Noel and George Moore, too!
What, are we trying to date ourselves? How about Waxie Maxie’s, 45’s (before your knees go weak, I mean “records”, not Colts) and the old VM high-fi. But, I gotta stop, that’s all a part of American Culture, which we aren’t allowed to have any more acording to Those Who’s Mission It Is To Make Sure We Don’t Offend Anybody By Being US.
Question for the Professor: Is “generating revenue” a good thing, or a bad thing?
Comment by Bob F. — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 8:41 pm
Why thats as crazy as thinking planes might come out of the sky and crash into office buildings or something
No, suggesting that a chick wearing a scarf in a donut ad has anything to do with such actions is illogical, paranoid and xenophobic, however.
I gotta stop, that’s all a part of American Culture, which we aren’t allowed to have any more acording to Those Who’s Mission It Is To Make Sure We Don’t Offend Anybody By Being US.
It is unclear to me how any of that is relevant here-indeed, the only people who are offended in this context are people like Malkin, Johnson and Geller.
Question for the Professor: Is “generating revenue” a good thing, or a bad thing?
I’ll assume that that is an attempted dig at the notion that I must be “left wing” because I don’t get hysterical about scarves.
I think you are referring to my other post here-and while I am all for capitalism, I do think that there is it possible to be untoward in generating revenue, don’t you?
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 9:06 pm
Absolutely! I was just trying to figure out how the revenue statement fit in, it sorta smacked of some issue with making money. But I’d say guys like Bush’s McClellan (off topic, sorry) could be considered “untoward” in their efforts.
Pretty heavy assessment regarding Malkin’s comments. Ask a gang-banger if his bandanna might not make an identity statement. It’s a bit of a reach to challenge a person’s mental health, reasoning ability, and identify them as racist, all based on a fashion commentary.
Comment by Bob F. — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 10:39 pm
Actually, I called her xenophobic and paranoid, not racist, and I base that assessment on a number of observations over the years, a few of which are linked in the above post.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 28, 2024 @ 10:53 pm
It amazes me how truly small-minded people like Michelle Malkin can be. “Everybody who wears this is a terrorist.” Its plain old witch hunting. Anybody who spends time on columns such as her Dunkin Donuts one is only degrating the art of journalism. Now I can’t take anything she writes seriously.
Comment by Anonymous — Thursday, May 29, 2024 @ 8:05 am
Malkin is trying to achieve fame and fortune by playing on fears and provoking others, all at our expense.
Its more of a reach to compare Rachael Ray wearing a scarf to a gang banger. Who even knew what a keffeyeh scarf was before all this?
Comment by Greg — Thursday, May 29, 2024 @ 8:20 am
I am glad you cannot see well, since that is very, very funny.
However, her scarf is paiselys, not Arafat (or Cambodian civil war, where that color was preferred by Lon Nol’s people and light blue was Sihanuk’s, if I recall correctly) chic.
Paisleys were Ottoman, and mostly traded by Armenians.
Comment by Jenda — Thursday, May 29, 2024 @ 11:54 am
I am glad you cannot see well, since that is very, very funny.
More to the point: Malkin can’t see well.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, May 29, 2024 @ 12:22 pm
[...] the default for the conservative blogosphere. Merri (a long-time Rachel Ray watcher) and plenty of others have more. But I guess sanity doesn’t sell in the blogosphere, does it? Pig [...]
Pingback by Keffiyeh Controversy = Pig Vomit Episode | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy — Thursday, May 29, 2024 @ 3:55 pm
the only people who are offended in this context are people like Malkin, Johnson and Geller.
And Debbie Schlussel, which should tell you everything-she thought Fred Thompson was kowtowing to Islamists because he had Spencer Abraham as an adviser (ZOMG, he’s half Lebanese!!).
I sort of consider them a pretty reliable barometer of nutty overreaction, although Johnson is usually much less paranoid (he’s pretty rough on the paranoid right in most cases).
That Michelle Malkin includes Meghan McCain in her rant is no surprise; she IS the daughter of the terrorist- and NAU/Reconquista-loving scary
John McCain“Juan McAmnesty,” after all./eyeroll
Comment by Beth — Thursday, May 29, 2024 @ 5:19 pm
While I agree this is ridiculous because her scarf looks simply like a scarf, I’d like to play the devil’s advocate. We must remember symbols have always represented an important part of all cultures throughout time. Had Rachel Ray worn a swastika arm band or white hood the world would have been appalled. I am amazed that certain forms of dress have become en vogue. As an expatriate from the U.S. it disturbs me that we can be so insensitive especially after 911 and I can only attribute this to ignorance. For many of us living elsewhere in the world, we see up close what these symbols represent. These organizations and governments actively support the suppression of women, the banning of freedom of religion and speech, and the tacit acceptance of violence against innocent human beings all in the name of a cause or belief. Have we become so P.C. that we refuse to tell the truth or are we somehow hoping that our own human/democratic values are also shared by all? Read, listen and observe. Actions always speak louder than words. Remember, symbols are powerful messages!
Comment by betty — Friday, May 30, 2024 @ 1:05 am
But here’s the real crux of the problem: the type of scarf in question is not exclusively worn by terrorists, but rather is worn by normal people who live in a desert climate. Indeed, it is my understanding that some our own troops in Afghanistan wear them. the whole thing is ridiculous and clearly xenophobic.
Along those lines I would recommend this post at Electric Venom.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Friday, May 30, 2024 @ 11:01 am
[...] (Thanks all that is Good and Right that he wasn’t wearing a scarf!) [...]
Pingback by PoliBlog (TM): A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » Prepare for Another Malkin Meltdown — Friday, May 30, 2024 @ 12:19 pm