Pribek

Have you heard this deal about Dunkin’ Donuts pulling an ad because, in it Rachel Ray was wearing a scarf that some people say is a political statement?

Here is what we are talking about.

From Fox News.

The coffee and baked goods chain said the ad that began appearing online May 7 was pulled over the past weekend because “the possibility of misperception detracted from its original intention to promote our iced coffee.”

The “possibility of misperception”; some say that the scarf looks like a “kaffiyeh”.

Here’s how the Merriam-Webster defines kaffiyeh in their online dictionary.

kaffiyeh

: an Arab headdress consisting of a square of cloth folded to form a triangle and held on by a cord

So, what Rachel is sporting above; kaffiyeh or not a kaffiyeh?

If it is a kaffiyeh then, that’s bad according to Michelle Malkin.

The kaffiyeh, Malkin wrote in a column posted online last Friday, “has come to symbolize murderous Palestinian jihad. Popularized by Yasser Arafat and a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos, the apparel has been mainstreamed by both ignorant (and not-so-ignorant) fashion designers, celebrities, and left-wing icons.”

I’ve seen Rachel Ray cooking stuff on T.V. She always seems cheerful and interested in food. I would never have made the connection to Yasser Arafat. Thanks for that Michelle Malkin.

A statement issued by Canton, Mass.-based Dunkin’ Brands Inc., however, said the scarf had a paisley design, and was selected by a stylist for the advertising shoot.

“Absolutely no symbolism was intended,” the company said.

So, Dunkin’ pulled the ad and Michelle Malkin and presumably the rest of the people who possibly perceived or misperceived are happy.

Malkin, in a posting following up on last week’s column, said of Dunkin’s decision to pull the ad, “It’s refreshing to see an American company show sensitivity to the concerns of Americans opposed to Islamic jihad and its apologists.”

See, I have a hard time with the notion that Ray, drinking a cup of coffee, trying to sell some coffee, is trying to align herself with this guy and his beliefs.

This whole thing, it seems a little silly and unimportant in the Grand Scheme.

Actually, it’s not so benign. It’s a form of censorship based on symbolism. A group of people have decided that a clothing object symbolizes a set of beliefs. So, anybody who wears that clothing object, is now subject to repercussion.

An object of clothing isn’t a symbol until someone decides it is. It’s designed to be clothing.

Maybe Michelle Malkin has some inside beef with Rachel Ray. Maybe, she’s run into Rachel Ray at a goat cheese party and, through personal conversation, has surmised that Ray sympathizes with the murderous Palestinian jihad and, that she must be stopped.

It doesn’t add up.

If you decide that an article of clothing “has come to symbolize murderous Palestinian jihad” then, you are doing two things. You are empowering that piece of clothing to be a symbol for people who do actually believe that and, at the same time, running a witch hunt on people who are wearing the piece of clothing to serve a function and don’t follow that belief.