Category: News

Another big victory for Michelle Malkin over the forces of terrorism!

Dunkin’ Donuts recently released an ad featuring celebrity chef Rachael Ray. Innocent enough, right?

Terror sleuth and columnist Michelle Malkin discovered the hidden message in the ad – a message meant to offer support for the “murderous Palestinian jihad.”

In the ad, Ray wears a scarf around her neck and holds an iced coffee. Malkin, complained that the scarf looked similar to the black-and-white checkered kaffiyeh, the traditional Palestinian scarf. Malkin explained:

The kaffiyeh “has come to symbolise 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.”

Dunkin’ Donuts told AP the scarf had a paisley design, and was selected by a stylist for the advertising shoot. “Absolutely no symbolism was intended,” the company said.

But the Dunkin’ Donuts ad was pulled because “the possibility of misperception detracted from its original intention to promote our iced coffee,” the Associated Press reported.

Malkin savored her victory with a cup of 7-11 coffee, since she had earlier given the axe to Starbuck’s.

In her victory statement, Malkin declared: “It’s refreshing to see an American company show sensitivity to the concerns of Americans opposed to Islamic jihad and its apologists.”

Earlier today, we ran a story from ABC, “FBI: Al-Qaeda Tape to Call for Use of WMDs.”

But we, along with ABC and the FBI, were “punk’d” by a “jihad fan.”

Noah Shachtman of Wired quotes Evan Kohlmann of Counterterrorism Blog that “The intel community appears to have (once again) fallen victim to poorly researched open source news reporting,” and continues

In recent days, several fringe media organizations have published stories about a video recording posted by anonymous Al-Qaida miscreants on extremist Internet chat forums. The video consisted of a remarkably amateurish mash-up of Discovery Channel documentaries, widely published sermons by radical clerics, and stolen propaganda footage. While it is perhaps true that the video offered subtle encouragement for nuclear attacks on the United States, it featured no original content and could have been clumsily strung together with little more than two VCRs. The video was meandering, boring, and difficult to follow — and it certainly was not the product of Al-Qaida.

The Washington Post has an article today on the number of Ron Paul’s relatives who worked for his presidential campaign.
I will be curious if there are other analyses of how the Paul campaign spent $30 million.
The Post article quoted Paul campaign spokesman Jesse Benton saying that Paul would be “continuing a positive, respectful campaign to influence the policies of the Republican Party.”
How can one run a “respectful” campaign when the opponent favors quasi-genocide?
At what moment did the Ron Paul campaign decide to begin pulling their punches?
According to one insider, Ron Paul is now focusing primarily on negotiating with the Republican National Committee to get a good speaking slot at the Republican Convention in September.
Instead of bringing down the roof, is Ron Paul now angling for a seat at the table?

UPDATE: Some folks are questioning whether Congressman Paul is focusing on getting a speaking slot at the GOP convention. The Washington Post reported on May 6 that “Paul’s campaign hopes to turn such support into upward of 50 delegates for the party’s national convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul in September, where he is gunning for a speaking slot.”

The Paul campaign did not dispute this report when it was published earlier this month.

Here is a great Washington Post photo of Bush strutting at the White House as he receives visitors from the Rolling Thunder veterans motorcycle group.

It is obscene how the same politicians who send Americans to die in unnecessary wars are treated like heroes on Memorial Day.

One would hope that this day, above all others, would be a time for condemning those whose lies and failures resulted in thousands of their fellow citizens being killed.

I am puzzled how Vietnam Veterans could have anything but utter disdain for politicians, considering how they were sacrificed for the convenience of LBJ and Nixon.

Instead, the Rolling Thunder crew proudly presented Bush with one of their leather jackets. Bush told them: “I want to thank you and all your comrades for being so patriotic and loving our country as much as you do.”

The Post article on the Rolling Thunder riders has evoked a tidal wave of comments, including comments from veterans furious to see Bush being treated like a hero by their fellow soldiers.

After 6 ballots, the Libertarian Party national convention has nominated former Congressman Bob Barr. Barr has turned around on many major issues since leaving congress. He now favors:

— Ending the Iraq War, withdrawal of all American troops from all foreign countries.

— Ending the federal War on Drugs.

— Repealing the Defense of Marriage Amendment, which he had authored.

— Repeal of the PATRIOT Act and Real ID.

Amid renewed speculation after President Bush’s Knesset speech last week that he may yet order an attack on Iran before he leaves office, particularly if Sen. Obama should win the November elections, it appears that the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is preparing the case for why an attack — either by the U.S. or Israel — on Tehran’s nuclear facilities might not be as calamitous as most analysts, including top Pentagon brass, believe. WINEP, of course, was founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and has acted as an integral part of the so-called Israel Lobby since its launch.

The case is previewed in an article by Yossi Melman that appeared in the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz Thursday. It consists mainly of an interview of WINEP’s Patrick Clawson, co-author with another WINEP analyst, Michael Eisenstadt, of an upcoming paper entitled “The Last Resort.” Clawson concludes that fears about possible Iranian retaliation are exaggerated and that, in fact, “Iran’s options for responding are limited and weak.”

To Helena Cobban, the estimable Middle East analyst whose blog, www.justworldnews.org, is widely read here in Washington and in the region, the paper smacks of “cakewalk” all over again. Cobban, who also works with the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) and who just published a new book entitled Re-Engage! America and the World After Bush, critiques the argument here. I would note that I received alarmed e-mail messages from three experts in the region — one Israeli and two Arabs — that referred me to the Haaretz article and suggested, like Cobban, that it could mark the launch of a new propaganda effort.

Meanwhile, Gen. David Petraeus, in his confirmation hearings Thursday, offered the latest official Pentagon view of Iran, repeating Sec. Gates’ recent remarks about needing to gain “leverage” with Tehran to engage it in a serious way diplomatically. (Last year, Gates and Rice were talking about not want to engage Iran as a “supplicant;” this year, it’s all about “leverage.”)

Here’s the view of Adm. Fallon’s replacement of Centcom commander:

“Iran continues to be a destabilizing influence in the region. It persists in its non-transparent pursuit of nuclear technology and continues to fund, train and arm dangerous militia organizations.

“Iran’s activities have been particularly harmful in Iraq, Lebanon, the Palestinian territories and Afghanistan. In each location, Tehran has to varying degrees fueled proxy wars, in an effort to increase its influence and pursue its regional ambitions.

“Even as we work with leaders in the region, to help protect our partners from Iranian intimidation or coercion, however, we must also explore policies that, over the long term, offer the possibility of more constructive relations, if that is possible.

“Together with regional and global partners, we need to seek ways to encourage Iran to respect the integrity of other states, to embrace non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and to contribute to regional stability rather than regional instability.”

That’s from Petraeus’ prepared testimony which must have been cleared by Adm. Mullen and Sec. Gates. In answers to questions, he expressed doubt about the usefulness of new rounds of negotiations with Tehran under current circumstances.

Visit Lobelog.com for the latest news analysis and commentary from Inter Press News Service’s Washington bureau chief Jim Lobe.