An Egyptian sheikh has declared Chevrolet products “haram” (or forbidden, in Arabic) but the culprit this time isn’t the “Zionists”. It’s Christians.
According to the sheikh, the Chevrolet bowtie logo looks too similar to a cross. Egyptian TV presenter Amr Adeeb railed against the silly fatwa, noting the extreme, delusional narcissism of the sheikh by rhetoricallly asking
Is it any surprise that the same religious authorities who condone flying jetliners into buildings think like petulant, narcissistic children? Apparently, the Chevrolet Cruze is a pretty bitchin’ car in the Gaza strip, and Saudi Arabia has gotten small-block Chevrolet Caprices (aka Holden Commodores) for years. If there are any Arabic speakers above familiar with the Egyptian dialect, feel free to translate Adeeb’s rant against the fatwa.
If only they had a fatwa against airplanes, what with their cross like wings.
Or crossroads for that matter. When viewed from above, they too look like… crosses.
Also the ‘+’ character. Additions can henceforth be written only as subtraction of negatives.
But didn’t the Arabs invent math? (Or was that the Indians?)
They can blow up their addition tables like the Towelieban blew up Bamiyan..
F–king primitive screwheads..
They do. That’s why they destroy them by flying them into buildings.
I thought it was something about wallpaper?
“According to the sheikh, the Chevrolet bowtie logo looks too similar to a cross.”
GM couldn’t buy PR like this for the domestic market. Unless they did?
SOOOO glad I live in the Western Hemisphere…
Like when there was a claim that the NASA logo was an Arabic crescent (perhaps Michelle Malkin, or someone like her)?
Nope, you just made that one up. Want to try again?
No, you might be thinking about the official NASA/MUSLIM outreach policy
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7875584/Barack-Obama-Nasa-must-try-to-make-Muslims-feel-good.html
where Charles Bolden, Nasa administrator said he was charged by Obama with 3 things:
“One, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.”
He added: “It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim [nations].”
It’s all a matter of self esteem.
Guys, Google is your *friend*.
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/07/nasa-logo-makeovers-new-arabic-sensitivity-administration/
Wrong.
She never said that.
She asked for readers to submit designs that ridicule NASA because of the link I posted. No where does she say the NASA logo was an Arabic crescent. Your link proves that in the 1st sentence:
“MichelleMalkin.com readers have answered the call of duty! Last night, inspired by reader Duke, I put out a call for NASA logo redesign Photoshops to mock Team Obama’s Muslim-pandering makeover of the space program.”
I see the words mock + redesign.
The logo:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NASA_logo.svg
Yes, Google is your friend.
Funny, I’m also seeing the words “…Muslim-pandering makeover of the space program.” attributed to Malkin in your evidence that she said no such thing. Try Googling the phrase “in so many words”.
Google is your *friend*
The logos are intended to be satirical. The whole exercise is overwrought, but no one who produced the contents in your link is claiming that that logos are legitimate.
Speaking of MM, how do we know she isn’t an illegal or a terrorist?
After all, she is Filipina – and all those Filipino terrorists killing and kidnapping people, including Americans.
Jimal,
Try finding that phrase in this thread, other than in your own post. Why google something unrelated to the discussion? How does the link to Malkin’s website do anything other than disprove ruckover’s assertion? What sort of circles do you run in where repeating an obvious falsehood in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary serves a purpose? Ah, the left.
rodface’s link appears to just be her attempt at satire, but it wouldn’t be the first (or even the second) time in recent memory that a right-wing pundit engaged in logo-based tinfoil-hattery:
http://www.thelogofactory.com/logo_blog/index.php/islamic-crescent-missile-defence-logo/
http://www.mediaite.com/online/fox-and-friends-highlights-obamas-curious-crescent-logo-controversy/
Try finding that phrase in this thread, other than in your own post.
It’s in Dejal1’s post, which was made seven minutes prior to Jimal’s post. Both of them took it from the same source, namely the Malkin blog post.
That being said, Jimal may have misunderstood it. The “logos” were submitted by her readers. They were intended to be humorous.
But Ruckover was right, as MoppyMop points out. Unlike Malkin, this clown from the New York Post (another Murdoch rag) isn’t kidding (“I am certain the crescent-like design of the logo is not a coincidence, especially at an event where Iran’s nuclear ambition and al Qaeda’s search for a bomb are prime topics.”)
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/forever_in_our_debts_VenykFKMS487rDCXhdsz1I/1
Fascinating. MoppyMop claims that a “right-wing pundit engaged in logo-based tinfoil-hattery” for something that is just political based humor. Do we ever hear of “left-wing” based tinfoil-hattery, whether logo-based or otherwise? Of course not. Those guys and gals are just being smart and funny. Harmless fun I tell you.
MoppyMop claims that a “right-wing pundit engaged in logo-based tinfoil-hattery” for something that is just political based humor
No, that is not what he said.
What he pointed out correctly is that Ruckover provided the wrong link. There was some right-wing nutty hullabaloo over the logo, but it wasn’t coming from Malkin.
Pch101,
The phrase, which Jimal quoted and said to google, was “in so many words.” Now it is here twice, the second time with me writing it out for you in the vague hope that you’ll begin to understand how a real argument works.
The phrase, which Jimal quoted and said to google, was “in so many words.”
You’re very confused. Go back and read it, slowly if necessary.
Pch101,
Hit control-f and start typing ‘in so many words.’ Do it at whatever speed you want. You could also look for the phrase ‘try googling.’ Have fun in your next spin attempt.
Hit control-f and start typing ‘in so many words.’
You are very, very, very confused. It’s no wonder that you have so much trouble with these things.
I shouldn’t have to explain the obvious, but the quip re: “in so many words” was sarcastic. Jimal’s quip was intended to be an insult, as Jimal believed that Malkin was sincere and he was attempting to rebut Dejal1’s points about Malkin.
Now, as it turns out, Dejal1 interpreted Malkin correctly and Jimal did not. But you’re not making this any better by misinterpreting Jimal.
What we’re left with:
-Ruckover was right on the facts, but posted the wrong link
-Dejal1 was correct in his interpretation of Ruckover’s link, but apparently wasn’t aware of the other legitimate examples
-MoppyMop did post a good link, as did I
-You’ve been confused. Hopefully, this dispels your confusion, although I’m not holding my breath.
Obama’s crescent logo isn’t the NASA logo, which is what Ruckover asserted in his first post. He was wrong with his claim, wrong about Michelle Malkin, and chose a link that only proved there error in his beliefs. You’re trying to sidestep that and rehabilitate his bs by pretending that Obama’s crescent logo is the NASA logo, or that someone looked at a NASA logo that didn’t have a giant crescent and imagined one.
You’re trying to sidestep that
You need to sharpen your reading schools. I not only didn’t “sidestep”, I specifically corrected him.
However, the poster called MoppyMan did point to the right story. Ruckover had the right idea, but chose the wrong example. In your efforts to cover up for your own errors, you’re ignoring the accurate links.
I see that you don’t want to admit that it happened. But I quoted one of these claims directly, so it’s a bit hard to pretend that it didn’t happen.
You’re trying to sidestep that
You need to sharpen your reading skills. I not only didn’t “sidestep”, I specifically corrected him.
However, the poster called MoppyMan did point to the right story. Ruckover had the right idea, but chose the wrong example. In your efforts to cover up for your own errors, you’re ignoring the accurate links.
I see that you don’t want to admit that it happened. But I quoted one of these claims directly, so it’s a bit hard to pretend that it didn’t happen.
This kind of stuff happens more frequently than we think. I recall one of my customers from a certain conservative middle eastern country arrived for a factory inspection. As a gift, we gave him a small, classy inukshuk statue as a reminder of his first trip to Canada. He refused it because it looked like a cross.
American companies, such as Ford, have been targeted by various Christian groups for being what those groups consider to be too gay-friendly. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8047423/ns/business-us_business/t/another-swing-pocketbook
Proctor and Gamble has been accused at times of having a Satanic logo.
This isn’t much different. These hotheads are often seeking publicity; it might be better to just ignore them.
Gosh. GM can’t catch a break… Just as the Christians are starting to think maybe GM isn’t haram, the Muslims declare that it is.
The Dodge “Cross-Hair” grills look much closer to a …. Ohhhhhh Nooooo.
I wonder what they think of the Alfa Romeo Logo?
http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/alfa-romeo-history/4437-meaning-ar-badge.html
Actually, seeing how part of this is based on the City of Milano’s crest, there was considerable trouble a few years back when one of the two football clubs played in white shirts with the city crest on it (for the clubs centennial) – and were set to play Turkish club Galatasaray. If I recall correctly, it was strongly suggested they use a different shirt, and they did.
The difference of course being that in the city crest, there -is- an actual cross intended to be a cross…
Dodge “Cross-Hair” nothing. What about the original Dodge Brothers double delta? I bet they are glad they don’t use that anymore!
Had to Google that one. Came across this site and found it towards the bottom.
http://www.cartype.com/pages/413/dodge_related_emblems
Yeah, that would be very problematic!
He’s just noticing the Chevy bow tie? It’s only been around for many years. According to one website, it has been around for about 100 years -first suggested by Billy Durant (founder of GM).
I hear “Young Frankenstein” can be seen in Egypt. They just cut out the “Putting on the Ritz” scene because of the bow-ties.
They probably shouldn’t look too closely to the oval crusifix Toyota logo.
Lincoln is doomed as well
“Hotheads” is what Gorbachev called the protesters in Tiananmen Square just before the tanks went in… the word you were looking for is inbredbraindamagedcavemen.
On topic- will they be replacing the crosshairs on their rifles with maybe, crescents ?
I work for a home building company, and we get the same complaints from Asian buyers. Anything that has two lines intersecting at a right angle looks like a cross.
Uhh, Asian like Koreans and Filipinos are predominantly Christian and the ones who aren’t – tend to not give a crap about religion.
Yeah, I’m sure the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in Southern Phillipines is pretty neutral about religions….
Muslims in the Philippines are a small minority (more than 90% of the country is Christian, mostly Catholics); there are Muslims in the US and Canada – so what’s your point?
In other news, he also banned use of the English lower-case letter “t” when using the Comic Sans font.
if you guys are paying attention to this guy, then you should be fair and listen to Pat Robertson and all other quacks and what they have to say.
obviously, there are nuts in every religion. this just happens to pertain to cars, that’s all.
Come on, it’s just one Salafi sheikh. How many people in Egypt even care about his judgements? Was he an influential cleric? Is this television presenter trying to whip up some kind of conflict for the ratings?
We sit here, comfortable in our secular orientation in the public square, and fervently wish that only a few people in Egypt cared about this kind of nonsense.
The unfortunate reality is that most of them do agree with and believe this stuff. They really believe it. Yelling “Allahu Akbar!” in the street doesn’t have the same meaning as a Westerner casually saying “God bless you” when somebody near him sneezes.
Muslims are not Presbyterians with funny headgear.
The unfortunate reality is that most of them do agree with and believe this stuff. They really believe it.
Well, that would certainly explain why four of the ten best selling cars in Egypt during 2011 was a Chevy. http://bestsellingcarsblog.com/2012/01/28/egypt-full-year-2011-hyundai-verna-1-new-elantra-excels/#more-14202
@dukeboy: Have you been to Egypt? I doubt it, because what you say is not true. The only people who get their panties in a knot about such things are people like the Salafi sheikh himself. Unfortunately, they’re the people who get their opinions aired.
As my grandmother used to tell me, “it’s the empty cans that make the most noise”.
Maybe you’re confusing Egypt (in Africa) with Pakistan. This type of idiocy is much more common there.
He’s our version of Pat Robertson.
Correction: he’s their version of Pat Robertson.
IIRC, the Middle East Chevrolet Caprice is the same Holden Caprice/Statesman, which is kind of a LWB version of the Commodore.
And regarding the main article… *rolleyes* I guess when is this religious BS going to end? From all sides.
Urban legend says that our local mall was intentionally built in the shape of a gun pointed at downtown Erie, PA under the direction of the mafia.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Millcreek_Mall_aerial_photo%2C_April_2005.jpg/220px-Millcreek_Mall_aerial_photo%2C_April_2005.jpg
Global culture war! Yaaaay! (not)
Seriously… what the hell does this article have to do with cars, other than the fact that the logo in question happens to be affixed to one?
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed TTAC becoming more wingnutty with each passing week?
Yes.
This article is off-topic. Its only goal seems to incite the B&B to point and laugh about misguided religious fervor.
In part, I read TTAC as an escape from the stuff I can get elsewhere. This story doesn’t serve that purpose.
Christians – of which I am one – continue to provide plenty of comedy material due to their silly conduct. It doesn’t help their cause (or the ‘Zionists’, either) to make fun of this fellow.
Same here.
I can understand the relevance of this article because someone is attacking a car logo based on religious grounds. What I don’t like about this article is when the author ties this fatwa to the 9-11 attacks without providing evidence that the sheikh did likewise.
If you want to meet a Muslim man really fired up about Chevrolet cars, you should meet my friends Dad who left his 327 Camaro behind when he fled Iran, and then bought a lemon of a Chevy Celebrity.
That Camaro is probably restored and in good condition. I shot a couple of mint 75 when was there.
Now that would be a story.
Good luck finding a suitably Kosher – make that “hallal” car to buy. Unless, of course, the good Imam is not by Buddhism, then I suppose he could drive Japanese cars. But not Korean ones, as Korea’s heavily Christian.
The thing is that Christians, Jews and Muslims are worship the SAME God, the god of Abraham; they just all do it a little differently.
The Iman should have more of an issue with autos made by Hindus, Buddhists, Shinto-ists, etc. since they truly are the “infidels.”
But you all know how religion works, the good Iman probably would have a problem with a car built in Iran b/c those Shi’ites are the worst of all.
He obviously doesn’t think the near $2 Billion the US gives them a year is Haram.
2 billion bucks worth of “In God we trust”, proudly written above what might, to some, look like a suitable landing strip for one of those darned flying crosses we insist on harassing crazy clerics with.
I bet they hate Swiss flag or anything of Swiss nature.
What’s really shocking is that someone in the Muslim world is actually pushing back against this idiocy.
Here’s to more free thinking in the Muslim world.
I don’t care what this guy says, my Chevrolet is rugged.
I will cling to my old rugged cross, and exchange it one day for a (Toyota) Crown.
The cross Jesus and other people were hanged on didn’t have a top piece like you see on the traditional cross. Real crosses that people were hanged on looked more like this: T