Wed Sep 21, 2005 5:17 pm
Wed Sep 21, 2005 6:56 pm
'Jihad' Threat Forces Burger King to Change Ice Cream Logo
This article was written by Patrick Goodenough, CNSNews.com International Editor
In the latest example of Western business interests giving in to pressure by offended Muslims, Burger King reportedly has withdrawn an ice cream product after complaints that a label design looks like the Arabic script for "Allah."
British media reported at the weekend that the fast-food restaurant chain pulled the "BK Cone" and pledged to redesign the label after Muslim customers complained.
The product label bears a pattern representing a stylized swirl of soft serve ice cream. But some customers looked at it sideways and thought they could see something else.
A London tabloid, The Sun, said Burger King fielded "dozens of complaints."
Another paper, the Scotsman, said Burger King "is being forced to spend thousands of pounds redesigning the lid." It quoted a Muslim Council of Britain spokesman as commending the company for "sensitive and prompt action."
Other business interests that have run afoul of Muslim sensibilities in similar circumstances include sportswear giant Nike, Chanel designer Karl Lagerfeld and food and homecare manufacturer Unilever.
In 1997, Nike pulled tens of thousands of basketball shoes after it was told that the logo - the word "air" in flame-like letters - looked like "Allah" in Arabic when viewed from a certain angle.
Newsweek reported in July of that year that Nike had launched a program of "sensitivity training on Islam" and gave a donation to an Islamic school.
A year later, Unilever scrapped a new logo it had begun to use on Walls ice creams in the Middle East - again after Muslims said the intertwining red and yellow hearts looked like "Allah" in Arabic, when viewed upside down and backwards.
In 1994, Lagerfeld designed a dress incorporating a pattern he had copied from Arabic lettering on India's Taj Mahal monument. The lettering included the phrase "They are the ones who found guidance," used a number of times in the Koran.
German supermodel Claudia Schiffer received death threats after wearing the dress, prompting her mother to make a public plea for her safety. The designer apologized and burned the garments. He also destroyed photographs and negatives of the dress.
Coca Cola has for years struggled to dispel the rumor that the soft drink's trademark swirly-writing logo, when seen at a particular angle, looked like the Arabic script for "No Mohammed, No Mecca."
The company's website has a "myths and rumors" section where it contests the charge, arguing that "the trademark was created in 1886 in Atlanta, Georgia, at a time and place where there was little knowledge of Arabic."
"The allegation has been brought before a number of senior Muslim clerics in the Middle East who researched it in detail and refuted the rumor outright," it says.
Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:20 pm
Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:42 pm
Luuk wrote:Wouldn't it be nice if all religion would vanish and the world ruled by intelligent people instead of religious idiots?!
Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:51 pm
Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:09 pm
Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:27 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:56 am
Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:58 am
likethebike wrote:I wouldn't say McDonald's decision was based on any effort to be tolerant of the Muslim religion. They want Muslims eating their ice cream. If there were say 10 people in the Muslim religion instead of billions they would have told the guy to take a walk.
likethebike wrote:That being said the hardcore Muslims need to realize that tolerance swings both ways. They really take offense (as do some hardcore Christians) to too much. I'm not being flippant but I seriously think the world would be a 100 times better off if more people- from hardcore aetheists to hardcore Muslims to Christians to Jews- would just LIGHTEN UP. It seems to me there is a large group of people spread across political and religious spectrums that just go around looking for things to offend them. I guess if you're complaining you know you're alive.
Objections to a poster, for a lap-dancing club, that showed a woman wearing only underwear, lying down and facing forward with her head and shoulders raised. An American flag was visible in the background. The poster stated "THE WORLD FAMOUS ... SPEARMINT RHINO GENTLEMEN''S CLUBS THE NATURAL CHOICE FOR ELEGANCE & EXCELLENCE NOW OPEN". The complainants objected that:
1. the poster was unsuitable for display outside a mosque and
2. the poster was offensive and unsuitable for public display, particularly in an area with a large Muslim population.
Codes Section: 5.1 (Ed 11)
The advertisers stated that they had been using the image in the poster for four years and had not received any complaints. They asserted that they were unaware of any changes in standards of decency and believed the complaints were a result of changes in sensitivity. The advertisers said they wished to be socially responsible and would withdraw the poster and be more careful with the placing of similar posters in future.
1. Complaints not upheld
The Authority noted the advertisers'' decision to withdraw the poster but considered that, because the poster was not explicit, it was unlikely to cause serious offence among Muslims if placed outside a mosque. It did not object.
2. Complaints not upheld
The Authority noted the poster had been placed in an area with a large Muslim population. Although it recognised the poster would cause offence to some Muslims, the Authority considered that merely placing the poster in an area with a large Muslim population did not automatically mean that it would cause serious or widespread offence. It considered that the poster was unlikely to cause serious offence in general and concluded that it was not unsuitable for public display.
Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:43 pm
Icouldn't disagree with that last point more. The idea that human beings need a higher power to behave in some sort of civilized manner is extremely disrespectful of human intelligence. Empathy and self-preservation should be enough to get by. I also think sometimes we get caught up in this idea of a fantasy land that never existed. We weren't any moral in 1950 than we are now. Elvis and the Beatles (and the beats etc.) did push a lot of things out into the open and made society more tolerant as a whole. Were some very good things lost? I would say so. But I think on a whole we are better off...
Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:44 pm
Luuk wrote: And only some 40-50 years ago we got rid of the straight grip religion had on people thanks to Elvis and The Beatles and hippies.
Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:51 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:55 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:59 pm
Gregory Nolan Jr. wrote:likethebike wroteIcouldn't disagree with that last point more. The idea that human beings need a higher power to behave in some sort of civilized manner is extremely disrespectful of human intelligence. Empathy and self-preservation should be enough to get by. I also think sometimes we get caught up in this idea of a fantasy land that never existed. We weren't any moral in 1950 than we are now. Elvis and the Beatles (and the beats etc.) did push a lot of things out into the open and made society more tolerant as a whole. Were some very good things lost? I would say so. But I think on a whole we are better off...
It's funny how just the mere acknowledgement of religion's positive
and even key "glue" effect on U.S. society since 1776 sets off those
who fear we're going to see the second coming of Cotton Mather.
The U.S. has an equally counterpoint tradition of respecting independent
thought. But to listen to some, we're always on the tipping point
of imposing "Higher Powers" on people. I really don't think we're
hurt by having kids cite the pledge (with a mention of God) nor does
it hurt things for it to be on our currency.
I just think as someone who once was more liberal than I am today
that civility alone isn't what it used to be. Take a look at public schools
in the U.S.
Yes, I know that funding isn't fair (rich districts vs. poor) teaching is underpaid, etc. but talk to people who teach in urban districts today.
Maybe it's a cultural thing, too. Our public schools are full of kids
who are disrespectful and vulgar. I'm no prude, but much of our popular
culture celebrates that and has for decades, except now, nothing is out of
bounds. Couple this with a more secular society ,and you have what we have. By that I mean that morality and civility were at least a goal
of society then and it did act as a brake on our worst urges, whether one
wants a higher power or not.
Yes we were more racist and probably beat women and kids more but
I'm telling you that the '40s and '50s had a class that we lack today.
I'm not even going off on a religious tear. For the record I was
raised Catholic and am a nominal one today with agnostic
I just think religion in the US did have a "civilizing" effect.
Secularism (especially one imbued
with a "if it feels good, do it"/ "don't judge anyone" sentiment isn't working so well. It's not just economics, which I agree also
effects the public square. (We've shipped our manufacturing and other jobs to Asia, etc.)
You don't have to be a religious nut to think our culture is polluted.
And we've always had the poor. Have we ever seen of a basket-case
form of dysfunction as we see in the U.S.' brand of poverty? I cringe to
say that, but it's true, as witnessed by some of the looters (stealing
electronics while in flood waters!)in New Orleans. I saw one
guy rapping while looting.
I hope I'm wrong, but I do think the right has a point about what
Hollywood and the "two coasts" (NY & LA) foist on the public at large.
As long as Democrats sneer at moral values or whatever one might
call it, we're never going to achieve the economic goals we want
fellow citizens to have in terms of good jobs, good schools, health care, etc.
As for Muslims and McDonalds, of course, they did it for economic
reasons, but don't tell me they don't want to be accused of "offending
someone." PC-ism has affected even corporations, if not especially.
Our biggest problem is almost that you can't say some of what
I said above without being labeled as "insensitive." It'll be
the death knell of our once great country.
Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:07 pm
I just think religion in the US did have a "civilizing" effect.
Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:08 pm
genesim wrote:Hey now...that is enough harping about my tie-dye shirt .....
Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:26 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:14 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:32 pm
Graceland Gardener wrote:Luuk wrote: And only some 40-50 years ago we got rid of the straight grip religion had on people thanks to Elvis and The Beatles and hippies.
Thank Elvis for singing Gospel music in public and private, and quoting Scripture in public and private, reading the Bible, and praying.
Are you sure you want him on that anti-religion list, Luuk?
Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:54 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:06 pm
When Elvis started, kids started to rebel against society (i.e. church).
Until then the wildest music was Perry Como, Dean Martin and such.
When Elvis did a show in Canada, girls from a catholic school were expelled because they attended an Elvis (= the devil) concert.
DJ"s broke Elvis and other rock and roll discs because "rock and roll has got to go".
It was very wise of The Colonel to have Elvis sing a gospel on national TV. That way "the rebel" was acceptable by the parents and the parents also started to buy Elvis' discs.
But in 1956 rock and roll was "the devil's music" and Elvis with his (their words, not mine) deleted - see guidelines #2 music was the worst of all.
Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:08 pm
Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:20 pm
Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:27 am
Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:34 am
That's where America and western Europe got our notions about not murdering, stealing, lying, coveting, respecting the aged, condemning adultary.
Hosted by ElviCities