The posting below is from a diary at the liberal site Daily Kos by a user named JeffLieber .  It’s a reaction to the news that a Dunkin Donuts ad was pulled after Michelle Malkin complained Rachael Ray was wearing a keffiyah in the commercial. I made a couple small edits to the original, but I found it amusing, and thought I would share it with you.

BREAKING: Rachael Ray strip searched at commercial reshoot.

Worried that Rachael Ray might wear “terrorist undergarments” similar to the “terrorist keffiyah” she wore in the original version of her online Dunkin Donuts commercial (see above), conservatives, led by Michelle Malkin stormed a film set and insisted the TV chef submit herself to a full and complete cavity search in order to ensure that the Islamists not win.

After the inspection, guard dogs were brought in to protect against the possibility that roadside-costumers might attack Ms. Ray and somehow fit her with a jaunty “terrorist skirt” or even an “off-the-shoulder terrorist halter”, which, beyond emboldening the enemy… is so VERY last season.

Unfortunately instead of protecting Ms. Ray, the canines got addled and started to bark at the naked and now addled coffee and donut spokeswoman, causing her to cower in the corner of the room.

The Malkinian-fervor got so out of hand at one point that two fans doused one of the production assistants in kerosine and set her aflame when they mistook a tabouli recipe for a passage from the Koran.

In the end, the conservatives, sure Ms. Ray’s writhing was a signal for an imminent terrorist attack, huddled to discuss ways of protecting themselves, the donut franchise, and children everywhere.

After a long deliberation they settled on a plan to allow Ms. Ray to film the advertisement as long as A) there were no actual pastries seen on screen B) she would agree to be clothed completely in black and obscure her face.

Once the conservative’s demands had been met, the commercial resumed, though a Dunkin Donuts’ spokesperson question whether or not the advertisement will be suitable for broadcast.

Michelle Malkin proudly announced that the brave conservative movement had won another battle in the war against terrifying inanimate objects.

10 Responses

  1. zipity

    I figured she’d just wear a Mao hat, a Hitler mustache, an SS guard uniform with a Che’ t-shirt underneath. It’s only cloth, it doesn’t really mean anything after all… Next week a white robe with one of them pointy mask/hats… what fun that will be! And by the way, nice try Dunkin Doughnuts, but I’ve had paisley, and worn paisley, and that sir, is not paisley…..

  2. Eick

    Zipity, the symbols you are comparing this too are totally different and hardly relevant to this discussion.

    There’s a difference between being a conservative and being a moron, so this is a good chance to change your tune on this and show you are simply a conservative, but open to facts and reality, not blindly beholden to following Michelle Malkin.

    First off, it’s not a keffiyah that Ray is wearing, it’s a “large print silk scarf” which was purchased at Urban Outfitters (who actually stopped selling actual keffiyah’s after protests):

    Second, Megan McCain has worn a very similar scarf:

    Third, the keffiyah is worn by many troops in the British army:

    Fourth, U.S. Soldiers serving in Iraq use keffiyah’s “to keep sand and dust at bay.”

    So there you have it. Megan McCain, British soldiers and U.S. soldiers all wear keffiyah’s.

    Are you ready to take back your ludicrous and ridiculous remarks?

    Because if you don’t, and you continue to suggest that anyone who wears a keffiyah is a terrorist sympathizer, then you are suggesting that the brave men and women in the British and American army who are serving admirably in Iraq are terrorist sympathizers.

    Is that really a position you want to stand behind? Or are you ready to change your position on this?

  3. zipity

    Hmmm… Careful with the stogie around that straw man, I hear they are pretty flammable. I never suggested “that anyone who wears a keffiyah is a terrorist sympathizer.” As for “The symbols you are comparing this too (sic) are totally different and hardly relevant to this discussion.” Really? I fail to see how one can completely dismiss the symbolism inherent to this item. And context does matter, I don’t react the same way to this “scarf” on a US soldier the same way I would to one of Michael Moore’s “Minutemen” planting an IED or blowing himself up along with a number of innocent men, women and children in a crowded market, or lobbing rockets into schools in Serdot. This looks/smells like yet another casual thumb in the eye to the “Evil Jooos” for no other reason than some wackadoo director or producer thought it would fly. It’s one thing to disagree on this, it’s quite another to be willfully obtuse. Let’s leave it to the experts: “The kaffiyeh is a visual extension of our struggle, a way to be a thorn in the silence,” says Ahmad Habib, Iraqi refugee and a member of the Arab Cultural Resistance music group. “Everywhere, from the Arab world to Toronto, people dress up to paint the world with conformity and indifference. The kaffiyeh stands in the way of that.”

    The transition of the kaffiyeh from the Middle Eastern version of a baseball cap to a symbol of solidarity came with the occupation of Palestinian land. The kaffiyeh became a symbol of national identity for Palestinians. From the ‘60s on, Palestine Liberation Organization officials and members, such Yasser Arafat, wore the kaffiyeh everywhere they went.

    International coverage of the first intifada often showed pictures of Palestinian civilians throwing stones with kaffiyehs around their faces or necks. But afterward, the kaffiyeh was popular only amongst activists and Palestinian refugees.

    During the second intifada in 2000, sympathy for Palestinians began to grow and the kaffiyeh became a way of displaying solidarity.

    “Ideally, I want everyone to wear the kaffiyeh,” says Habib, “but if it’s just worn for the aesthetic value, without the spirit of resistance wrapped up in every thread, then they might as well not wear it at all, and if it becomes appropriated by commercial interests, then that’s even worse.” And I’m not “blindly beholden” to anyone, Michelle Malkin or even you. Clearly you have some issues with Ms. Malkin that appear to be clouding your judgment, so I’m afraid on at least this one, we are going to have to agree to disagree

  4. Eick

    Hey if you want to criticize a garment worn by U.S. troops serving admirably in Iraq, that is your own choice.

    I for one think that a scarf worn by millions of people all over the world is an absurd thing to make a big deal out of.

    I’ll side with the U.S. soldiers who need protection from the sand and wind on this one, if you want to take the side opposite of the troops, then so be it, that’s your choice.

  5. Eick

    Also, I love how your idea of an “expert” is an “Iraqi refugee and a member of the Arab Cultural Resistance music group”

    Oh part of the Arab Cultural Resistance MUSIC group? Well then he must be an expert.

    A) Rachael Ray wasn’t wearing a kaffiyah
    B) Millions of people (including U.S. troops) around the world wear it as an article of clothing with no symbolism attached to it

    I have no personal issues with Malkin, but when she says things that are flat out moronic, I’m going to call her on it, just like when anyone liberal does something flat out moronic I’m going to call them on it too.

    It’s just the height of idiocy to attack Rachael Ray for this.

  6. zipity

    Wow, you really have a h**d on for that straw Man. I take issue with a commercial spokesperson wearing what appears to be a clone of a an Arab terroristic symbol for no apparent reason (have you seen her with it before, does it not look a bit out of place in the image?), so I don’t support the troops. If your looking for moronic, you might try a bit closer to home….

  7. Eick

    Just because you say it is a straw man argument doesn’t make it so. I think looking at the millions of people who wear it – including U.S. soldiers, is perfectly valid in deciding whether or not to criticize the garment.

    If it’s good enough for American soldiers it’s good enough for me.

    I’m sorry you don’t feel the same way.

  8. zipity

    OK. Just because you say it’s not a terrorist icon, doesn’t make it so. I’m sorry you don’t feel the same way.

  9. Eick

    It’s only a terrorist icon if you allow it to be considered one. I am unwilling to criticize a garment worn by U.S. troops on the battlefield, but if you want to continue doing so, that’s up to you.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.