Did you send them the pictures you have here of the scarf. "nothing more nothing less" well yes, I am sure thats their intentions, however, the political representation cannot be overlooked. Would they have Glen's Hitler T shirts in their front window for example?

These scarves are also available to buy online at Kiwi Disposals, a military surplus store.

Who shops at Hallensteins anyway? Full of shocking t-shirt designs and rubbish shirts.

Good reply I thought from them.

Don't shop there is your answer Sandi.

Their response to my letter...

"Thank you for your email regarding our retailing of Keffiyeh scarves

These scarves are currently quite popular as indeed are, from time to time, many items of classic, functional clothing and accessory items from many different countries & cultures around the world.

These practical items are as old as time and are of interest due to the attractive combination of classic designs & colours in a season where scarves are a popular accessory.

Nothing more, nothing less"

Black Power and Mongrel Mob patches (I assume you mean the patches rather than the jackets) have "Black Power" or "Mongrel Mob" written across the back of them as clear as day. Totally different. If keffiyehs come out enblazened with "Allah Alakba" or "Terrorism Rules," I'll be right with you.

It isn't totally different at all, Olivia. The Kaffiyeh associated with the anti-Israel jihad are quite distinctive, just as are the jackets associated with the Mongrel Mob. Whether sewn on, or dyed in, is irrelevant, whether it says Allah hu Akbar, or nothing at all is irrelevant.

Because he was being intimidating and I felt protective over my son, I got angry and told him to fuck off or I'd kick the few teeth he had left out of his dirty mouth. He did.

Good for you for telling the guy where to get off. That took guts.

Blue and white polka dot scarves and red and white polka dot scarves had been around a longer time than either Black Power or Mongrel Mob. Just because they'd adopted them, should I not wear one out of recognition that in this town they had a sinister meaning to a bunch of barbaric thugs?

You should wear them if that's what you want to wear, but the mongrel mob is a whole other ball game to the Islamic supremacists. We are not really at war with the Mongrel Mob. They are not a global ideological movement planning and plotting to bring down western civilisation, and their red and white polka dot scarves are hardly the loaded symbols that Palestinian Kaffiyeh is.

They would've liked that kind of acquiescence I'll bet.

Sure, like all bullies they like to see the fear in your eyes, so they like acquiescence. However, showing disdain for a symbol of Islamic oppression is not acquiescence.

What do you mean it's become "associated"?

I mean that that particular patterned Kaffiyeh is politically loaded, so much so that it's become a symbol for the "Palestinian cause", ie. the Jihad against Israel. 

If the vast majority of the public make no mental connection with the scarf pattern and jihad against Israel then it's redundant as a symbol.

No, it's not redundant at all, it simply means that the vast majority are unaware of it being used as a symbol. 

Isn't this a good thing?

No, it's not a good thing that so many are unaware. To win wars, we need awareness, not unawareness.

Why push the idea that the two have to be connected?

No ones pushing the idea that they have to be connected. They are pointing out the fact that they are connected. That's the case independent of anything Sandi might say.

Shouldn't we be trying to neturalise potential symbols of aggression from individuals hostile to the west any time we get the chance?

If by neutralising a symbol you mean pretending that it's not politically loaded or doesn't even exist, then I don't see how that helps anyone overcome anything. We certainly should give no moral succour to the enemy, and that, as far as I'm concerned, includes treating their symbols with disdain. There's one situation where it would be apt to sell their Kaffiyeh on SOLO though. And that would be to mock.

I just have to keep agreeing with Olivia. Fuck them, they don't own a pattern just like the Mongrel Mob doesn't own pocerdots.

Yes, they don't any kind of formalised ownership of it, but that's pretty much irrelevant.

If we're naive it's only because the practice hasn't been widespread or concentrated enough to establish the desired effect of public association of scarves to jihad. Once again, I view this as a positive

Would it be a positive for the public to be unaware of any association between nazi symbolism and the ideology of the nazis during their rise in the 30's? 

I had morning tea earlier with an associate of mine who is a reasonably large shareholder of Hallensteins..(no, it wasn't Tim)...and raised this subject with him.

His response was that as the shareprice is down nearly 20% since the start of the year, anything the company can do to earn a quid should be encouraged.

I then decided to take his reasoning a step further by asking about Nazi regalia and he replied "oh don't be silly that is quite different"...*sigh*

Seems a lot of chaps simply do not equate some things as being as bad as other things, something I attribute to a compliant socialist media, but there we are. 

Elitism, forever!

I'll admit, you're starting to sway me now. I've just seen the State of Israel draped in the Keffiyeh on a Fattah anniversary poster.

here

Thank you for the considered response.

"The particular pattern we have here is the one that's become associated with the Jihad against Israel."

What do you mean it's become "associated"? If the vast majority of the public make no mental connection with the scarf pattern and jihad against Israel then it's redundant as a symbol. Isn't this a good thing? Why push the idea that the two have to be connected? Shouldn't we be trying to neturalise potential symbols of aggression from individuals hostile to the west any time we get the chance? I just have to keep agreeing with Olivia. Fuck them, they don't own a pattern just like the Mongrel Mob doesn't own pocerdots.

"And that is true, but it doesn't alter what those scarves are in the
eyes of those who are aware. The fact is, these scarves are donned as
symbols of the cause, and worn by people in the west as support for the
cause. There are people who are naive about this, such as Hallensteins,
and yourself."

If we're naive it's only because the practice hasn't been widespread or concentrated enough to establish the desired effect of public association of scarves to jihad. Once again, I view this as a positive and, in this case, awareness as a negative. Why should we allow such mundane things to be associated with such vicious hatred if we can avoid it?

"Yasser Arafat, who popularized it, didn't "occasionally wear the
pattern" he constantly wore it every time he was in the public eye."

Once again, what do you mean by popularized? If the imagery isn't widely recognized then nothing has been popularized.

"As to your argument that if it ever does become widely associated with
terrorists it will be because of the hysteria of loose units such as
Sandi and myself, that argument is pretty much the same as the one that
says distrust of Islam has grown because of Islamophobes such as Sandi
and myself. "

It is the same argument. In this instance the argument is valid in the other it is not (by a very long shot). those aggressive towards the west have, in my opinion, failed to establish an association between the scarfs and anti Israeli sentiment. If you push the association by boycotting Halenstines then you remedy their failure. Correct?

I was careless with my language in the last part of the reply. Neither of you are suppressing anyone. Retracted.

P.S. Elijah, A keg night (or party) is a party which I and other commoners occasionally participate in. It involves a communal drum of beer which all party attenders use to fill plastic cups with said beer. They then drink from the plastic cups and repeat this practice throughout the night with the desired effect of emptying the 'keg' by nights end.

Gosh, Olivia, that sounds dreadful ...how awful for you.

What kind of a world are we living in when chaps like that are allowed to annoy normal people going about their day to day business?!?!

(Keith Holyoake would never have allowed it) 

Elitism, forever!

If Hallensteins were selling Mongrel Mob, or Black Power, or Hells Angels jackets, it would be in bad taste. There would be a huge uproar, and Hallensteins would promptly remove them from their shelves. I doubt that even Olivia would defend Hallensteins on the grounds that everyone wears jackets.

Comeon Richard, this is getting ridiculous.

Black Power and Mongrel Mob patches (I assume you mean the patches rather than the jackets) have "Black Power" or "Mongrel Mob" written across the back of them as clear as day. Totally different. If keffiyehs come out enblazened with "Allah Alakba" or "Terrorism Rules," I'll be right with you.

But I'll give you an interesting parallel.

Years ago when I lived for a stint in Pukekohe, South Auckland, I often wore a red polka-dot bandana around my neck. Pukekohe was Black Power territory and they wore the blue and white polka dot scarves. So here I was a young twenty something white woman doing my shopping innocently wearing a "Mongrel Mob" bandana. This old, stoned, native Black Power member started hovering around me and my little son - he kept muttering the phrase "Dog Shit ! After a while I said: "Excuse me mate, are you calling me Dog Shit?" He responded "Yep, you're dog shit," and pointed to my red polka dot scarf. I noticed his blue and white Black Power scarf and clicked to his meaning (someone had mentioned this bandana difference to me before but I'd taken no notice as it was too far away from the world that I occupied). He was insulting me for wearing a Mongrel Mob piece of regalia.

I asked him if I looked like a Mongrel Mob wife? He just looked the other way smirking and continued to mutter "Dog Shit." Because he was being intimidating and I felt protective over my son, I got angry and told him to fuck off or I'd kick the few teeth he had left out of his dirty mouth. He did.

Blue and white polka dot scarves and red and white polka dot scarves had been around a longer time than either Black Power or Mongrel Mob. Just because they'd adopted them, should I not wear one out of recognition that in this town they had a sinister meaning to a bunch of barbaric thugs? They would've liked that kind of acquiescence I'll bet. I'm not going to bend to mindless tribal monopolies of that nature... it's rubbish.

Richard (and Bosch)- I don't regard this scarf as a venomous snake or a pink elephant.

Of course it's not a venomous snake, Matty. It is what it is. A is A. 

I regard it as a scarf.

A particular style of scarf that has become a symbol of the "Palestinian" cause. 

A scarf which has a pattern that is very popular in Arab countries.

The patterns vary from country to country, region to region. The particular pattern we have here is the one that's become asscociated with the Jihad against Israel.

Now I've explained several times that I don't think these scarfs are explicate indicators of support for jihad

And that is true, but it doesn't alter what those scarves are in the eyes of those who are aware. The fact is, these scarves are donned as symbols of the cause, and worn by people in the west as support for the cause. There are people who are naive about this, such as Hallensteins, and yourself. 

( Now while I don't think the vast majority of the public would associate my wearing a scarf like that with support of terrorists I do think that if one day they do it will be because of hysteria like what's surrounding the dunkin donuts ad and not because of any natural association pushed by terrorists occasionally wearing the pattern.

Yasser Arafat, who popularised it, didn't "occasionaly wear the pattern" he constantly wore it every time he was in the public eye. As to your argument that if it ever does become widely associated with terrorists it will be because of the hysteria of loose units such as Sandi and myself, that argument is pretty much the same as the one that says distrust of Islam has grown because of Islamophobes such as Sandi and myself. 

Why give things this trivial such power?

We're not giving it any power. You are, which is why Sandi's comment below is so apt. 

Is this suppression of a fashion trend doing anything to further the cause of freedom?

If by suppression you mean expressing moral condemnation, then of course it furthers the cause of freedom. It does so by raising awareness. 

What on Earth is a "keg night"?!?  

Elitism, forever!

At no point have I apologized for the murderous bastards blowing up buses and coffee shops all over the world. You know damn well I haven't. You know perfectly well that we're not having a discussion about weather or not terrorists and oppressive dictators are all that bad so I'll thank you to not insult my character and stay on point.

If you want to argue about the significance of the scarfs that's fine but just going in circles with pictures of woman draped in burkas and klansmen having a keg night proves nothing and dodges any kind of progression in the argument. It's intellectually lazy and rude.

Remember we're fighting a culture that spits on self expression

SOME of us are Matty.

Sandi- What was that? Relevance? What are you insinuating?

Richard (and Bosch)- I don't regard this scarf as a venomous snake or a pink elephant. I regard it as a scarf. A scarf which has a pattern that is very popular in Arab countries. Now I've explained several times that I don't think these scarfs are explicate indicators of support for jihad (neither in reality nor in mainstream public perception) and so far all anyone has done is repeat that it's bad to wear things in support of evil. Well thank you very much but the contention here is weather the damn scarf has any kind of real or perceived meaning comparable to a swastika in the 30s.

Now while I don't think the vast majority of the public would associate my wearing a scarf like that with support of terrorists I do think that if one day they do it will be because of hysteria like what's surrounding the dunkin donuts ad and not because of any natural association pushed by terrorists occasionally wearing the pattern. Why give things this trivial such power? Is this suppression of a fashion trend doing anything to further the cause of freedom? Remember we're fighting a culture that spits on self expression.

Fear itself indeed.

My reasoning perhaps, but not my premises. I am reasoning from different premises than you.

You have a point there about women, Mark, but in doing so you've shown yourself to suffer from the same malady

 I'm reasoning perfectly well, and without hysteria. This is not about the Kaffiyeh, which everyone wears right across the Arab world. This is about the Palestinian Kaffiyeh, the ones which have become a symbol of the Palestinian cause and go hand in hand with the thugs and savages at the heart of that cause. If Hallensteins were selling Mongrel Mob, or Black Power, or Hells Angels jackets, it would be in bad taste. There would be a huge uproar, and Hallensteins would promptly remove them from their shelves. I doubt that even Olivia would defend Hallensteins on the grounds that everyone wears jackets. There is absolutely no difference here. The only difference is that people don't see the parallel.

Your reasoning is laid out in the words you wrote. If you have more to add, fire away.

"Everyone wears these scarves"

Just another scarf

Just another burqa

"Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." - Qur'an:9:5

Just another scarf (note the red alternative features in both pictures)

Just another HOODIE for just another "Hoodie DAY"

Perhaps you're just not 'reasoning' very well Commander, because I took exactly the same line to your 'reasoning as did Olivia?

Are you a mind reader?

At the risk of getting all mystical, which seems to be the theme this Sunday morning (looking out of window for full moon), have you met a woman who wasn't?

Why do you tell me what my reasoning is rather than ask me what it is, Olivia? Are you a mind reader?

.... so too should the selling of the uniform of the Jihadis.

They don't have uniforms. EVERYONE in A-rab world wears these scarves.

Your reasoning goes like this:

This group of bad people wear these.
Therefore, never wear these or you are supporting the cause of this group of bad people.

I wonder how many Italians still sincerely steer well clear of black shirts?

Speaking of Nazi regalia, Oskar Schindler wore a Nazi party pin. Did he support their cause? No. He worked directly against it whilst still wearing his Nazi Party pin.
We judge people by the words they speak and the actions they commit, not by how many ants they watched fucking.

 I stand by my reasoning that you shouldn't let thugs define anything. From clothing to philosophy, I'll live my life by my own terms thank you very much.

Amen.

Whoops. Yes!

Before the Lord my God, I sayeth unto thee:

 Matty: To sell part of the Jihadi uniform on SOLO would be a blasphemy.

 To which I say, count me out of this language assault, I ain't no mystic.

Ditto, Richard, well put.
http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

Just as any selling of Nazi regalia as fashion accessories during the 1930's rise of the Nazis would have been rightfully condemned by anyone who values decency and individual rights, so too should the selling of the uniform of the Jihadis.

Matty: To sell part of the Jihadi uniform on SOLO would be a blasphemy.

why let the enemy define what clothing means?

This reminds me of the Department of Homeland Security's policy of not calling a Jihadist a Jihadist. A is A - a venomous snake does not become a pink elephant just because you call it a pink elephant.

Ye gods, those types of quotes should be saved for the big stuff - or they themselves become subject to a process of desensitization. When used in trivial contexts they reek of demagoguery. We're talking about scarves for god's sake! Keep some perspective or you run the risk of becoming a conspiracy nut.

"Civility in the face of evil is no virtue"
- Perigo

“The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.”
- Einstein

I agree with your fashion sensibilities Olivia, I wouldn't wear one. I'm not a scarf wearing type of guy and if a were I certainly wouldn't spend 25 dollars on one. I still think Ms. Ray carried it off nicely though.

Back on point, I again agree with Olivia. The fact that many jihadists wear the scarf is incidental to the fact that they're very popular in the middle east in general. I have nothing against secular middle eastern culture integrating in to the west. Middle eastern food is all good with me and I imagine many jihadists enjoy that too, why should fashion be any different?

Now I'm not going to initiate a social scarf experiment Bosch, for reasons stated above.I will however hypothesize that next to no one would think twice about it if i did wear one. A safe presumption I would think seeing as they're popular enough to become a featured item in stores like Halenstines and a major corporation like Duncin Donuts-- which must have some kind of high priced PR firm combing through everything they put out-- can produce a nationwide commercial featuring the scarf and go without noticing anything potentially offensive to anyone until reactionary bloggers like Michelle Malkin get riled up about it. I'm just still not convinced that this supposedly widespread imagery association exists. If it does, and more than a fraction of a percentage of people would associate my wearing that scarf with support of Jihadists they're more than welcome to ask me about my thoughts on terrorism. Alternatively, they can go to hell.

I stand by my reasoning that you shouldn't let thugs define anything. From clothing to philosophy, I'll live my life by my own terms thank you very much.

You used the phrase “promoting and glorifying terrorism.” It is this I have an issue with. The article you posted condemns it as a support of Palestinian Jihad. But variations of these scarves have been around for centuries and are worn by everyone from terrorists through to Bedouins, to protect them from sun and sand - Lawrence of Arabia wore traditional keffiyehs when he was fighting for the British against the Ottomans.

It may be a fashionable statement of Palestinian solidarity at this present time to some, but they don’t have a universal meaning like the face of Mao or Che Guevara, a KKK hood or Swastika… and even then a Swastika means something entirely different to a Jew than to a Hindu.

Keffiyehs as a *categorical* symbol of terrorism support, so much so that you would condemn and heckle a shop for selling them? That’s drawing a long bow.

Would I wear one? Of course not - unlike Matty I think they’re ugly and common.

Matty Orchard wrote: 'I've got half a mind to go out and buy one right now out of protest!'

Yes, but would you do it with a full mind?
Seriously, these have become essentially the jihadist's favorite scarfs, that's worth considering, implication-wise in wearing them. Your attitude about it comes off as simply contrarian, but I suggest you that you actually do get one to put your idea to the test that this scarf has no meaning outside of itself.

http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

"This type of scarf has been made famous by Muslim terrorists, so the connotation should be enough for us to stay clear from them."

Going along with your theory that most people do actually associate these types of scarfs with terrorism, why let the enemy define what clothing means? I've got half a mind to go out and buy one right now out of protest! Perhaps you should consider making an addition to the SOLO store Linz.

It's like the Freemason rings. Freemason law says you can't wear a Freemason ring if you're not a Freemason but I can wear a Freemason ring because I'm not a Freemason so those laws don't apply to me.
[not my joke, Penn Jillette made that observation]

This type of scarf has been made famous by Muslim terrorists, so the connotation should be enough for us to stay clear from them. Also, since it's become increasingly 'fashionable' to side with the 'palestinians', wearing one of these could suggest that one's in solidarity with their 'cause', whether one's aware of it or not. This is insidious, no matter how seemingly harmless.
I think I'll have Pigman throttle one of them with it.

http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

The scarf pattern has no specific religious meaning. It's just a pattern. Hell, I think it even looks kind of cool on Racheal Ray.

It's simply a fashion trend in the middle east that's catching on in the west. What's the big deal?

UPDATE:

It's not even new. Here's a list of instances the scarf has showed up on celebrities from Wikipedia:

• Actor Charlie Sheen wears a keffiyeh in the 1990 film Navy SEALs.
• Nine Inch Nails singer Trent Reznor wears a keffiyeh in the video for "Survivalism".
• The 1981 film The Cannonball Run has a sheikh, played by Jamie Farr, who wears a keffiyeh.
• The 2007 Transformers film features the tan Special Air Service pattern Keffiyeh in the Qatar sequences.
• The character Syd, a British soldier, in the 2006 film Children of Men wears a keffiyeh while he is undercover transporting the 'fugees'.
• In Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Henry Jones, Sr. dons a keffiyeh-like cloth at the end.
• Jeremy Clarkson wears a keffiyeh in an episode of Top Gear.
• An anonymous person wears one at the end of Method Man's video "M.E.T.H.O.D. Man".
• Kanye West dons one in his music video "Homecoming"
• Rachael Ray wears a paisley scarf which is mistaken for a keffiyeh in an online Dunkin' Donuts ad.
• FT of Amtgard is normally seen wearing a keffiyah.

How about plastic explosive attachments for belts?

Swastika badge?

KKK hood?

You are apologising as with the rest of the lefties on a
similar issue.

all those A-rabs pictured above also wear suit jackets, glasses, shoes, socks and undies too - some are wearing common balaclavas which any good Army Surplus or Hunting Shop would sell.

It is too much of a leap in my book to condemn a shop for "promoting and glorifying terrorism" because they're selling merchandise that also happens to be worn by evil terrorists. Somewhere there, my friend, you've done a logic leap.