Dutch Islamists post cartoons depicting Anne Frank, Hitler in bed, Haaretz

[Coastie for Truth]

A Belgian-Dutch Islamic political organization posted anti-Jewish cartoons on its Web site in response to the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed that appeared in Danish papers last year and offended many
Muslims. The cartoons were posted on the Arab European League's site on Saturday. It was not working Sunday morning because of exceeded bandwidth.

The cartoons depicting Mohammed wearing a turban-shaped bomb were first published in Denmark, and then in newspapers elsewhere in Europe in a show of solidarity with press freedoms.

The Islamic site carried a disclaimer saying the images were being shown as part of an exercise in free speech rather than to endorse their content - just as European newspapers have reprinted the Danish cartoons.

One of the AEL cartoons displayed an image of Dutch Holocaust victim Anne Frank in bed with Adolf Hitler, and another questioned whether the
Holocaust actually occurred.

<<<SNIP>>>

As a dues paying member of the -- - I support a Free Press and Free Speech and will not picket or burn anything in effigy.

[crikkett]

1. that's the best they can come up with? n/t

[Coastie for Truth]

2. I am not going to picket or burn anything

But my mini-boycott. Instead of having baklava as the finger food for Super Bowl, I'm getting some PoppyCock -- YUM.

[ret5hd]

3. you'll be a big hit with poppy!

oh god, i kill me! :rofl:

[Joanne98]

4. It's the war of the cartoons! HAHAHA!

They should have did this in the first place. Now where's the insulting "Baby Jesus" ones?

[bemildred]

5. Exactly, fight cartoons with cartoons. nt

[Wordie]

10. They do seem to make a good point. It also appears that some free-speech

advocates who have spoken so loudly just recently, saying the European cartoons about Mohammed MUST be published, due to free speech concerns, now find themselves in a quite a dilemma. Will they support this exercise of free speech, too? Or do they only support those exercises of free speech which are critical of Muslims?

:popcorn:



Note! I personally find the cartoons on both sides offensive, and I feel a conflict between my belief in free speech and my desire to be respectful of the religious beliefs of others. This post is not an endorsement of the cartoons, but as you point out, bemildred, better cartoons than violence.

[bemildred]

12. I expect to be informed of "terrorist cartoons" anytime now.

So as to circumvent the obvious "moral equivanence" of stereotyped
caricatures of different ethnic/religious groups.

[Igel]

43. I wasn't aware that

Muslim illustrators were in fear of illustrating a book about Moses for Muslim kids.

This is a reaction against oppression by immigrant Jews in Muslim societies, chilling their free speech?

Who knew? Just sounds like more Jew-baiting intolerant hatred. Nothing new there.

What's fascinating is their obsession with Jews: Danes offend Muslims, Muslims must respond against Jews. Now *that* says something about their psychology.

[Violet_Crumble]

70. I just wish they'd make them funny and well-drawn...

I'm positive if all these duelling cartoon idiots sat down and watched every episode of South Park back to back, they'd be inspired to come up with something that was bigoted, offensive, and so wrong it's funny. But I guess they're too busy basking in the massive amount of attention they've gotten that they don't feel the need to add the bwah-hah! ingredient to their 'work'...

Violet...

[bemildred]

75. True, they all tend to suck, hackwork almost by definition.

Some of the stuff from China in the time of Mao, or the Nazis, or early US newspapers, is amazingly bad art, as well as being offensive. I'm sure one can find plenty of the same sort in most places in the world, varying only in content.

[UL_Approved]

6. What about the Torah?

Where is that Gary Larson comic of baby Moses parting the waters of his bathtub?

[Boojatta]

7. Just wondering

A Belgian-Dutch Islamic political organization posted anti-Jewish cartoons on its Web site in response to the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed that appeared in Danish papers last year and offended many Muslims.

Among all the possible cartoons that they might have posted, why did they choose to post cartoons that are anti-Jewish?

The Islamic site carried a disclaimer saying the images were being shown as part of an exercise in free speech rather than to endorse their content - just as European newspapers have reprinted the Danish cartoons.

Do they mean that the images are shown not purely to endorse their content, but also as part of an exercise in free speech?

[ArtH]

8. Cartoons

Surely you do not doubt the good will of the Religion of Peace??!!

[ret5hd]

9. why drag xtian fundamentalists into this argument?

[bemildred]

11. I would assume they are trying to be as offensive as possible.

The better to make their point about the cartoons
that denigrated and offended Muslims.

Of course, it may not have the intended effect.

[Wordie]

13. That's how I read it too: those insulting Islam were called "free speech."

so they are trying a bit of turnabout to make their point. It appears they are asking, "Shouldn't these cartoons be defended as "free speech" too, then?"

[TomClash]

14. Free speech means freedom from government coercion

In that regard, all of these cartoons should be protected as free speech. Free speech doesn't mean people cannot express their dismay at the cartoons or ostracize their creators.

[Coastie for Truth]

18. Spoken like a true student of the Federalist Papers

[bemildred]

20. Right, free speech means we ALL have a right to say whatever we like.

Sort of like the internet, but in real life.

[Wordie]

23. True, but you miss my point. I predict that many who loudly proclaimed

that the cartoons bigoted against Islam were a legitimate excercise of free speech rights, will not take the same position on these cartoons. Most likely, they will remain silent on these, or complain about them, unaware of the contradiction.

Why would they fail to make the same vigorous defense of free speech in the case of these cartoons as they did about the ones depicting Mohammad? That's my question.



And while I personally also highly value and support the right to free speech, rights must be accompanied by responsibilities or chaos will ensue. I don't think publishing the cartoon of Mohammad was a responsible act. Exactly where the line should be drawn is something that I am having problems determining. This is not a simple issue, imho.

[pelsar]

25. on the contrary....

it was precisly what should have been....free speach and the ability to draw and write what you want without fear of you life (as per many people in denmark these days) is a basic freedom.

for those who dont understand and/or accept it...well they have no place in western democracies....one doesnt restrict ones freedom of speach just because of threats...the opposite is what you do...you face those threats head on and tell those who are intolerent that they had better get used to it, because thats the way it is in western democracies, and then you print some more and more and more and you throw in some jesus and moses just for the helluva it maybe a budda or two


as a side note: israeli arabs are also protesting...but not burning down, destroying anything, hence its not an "arab/muslim thing"...its more of a "national subculture" thats doing the destroying

[Wordie]

28. You also missed my point. Please read thru the sub-thread again. eom

[pelsar]

30. i got it.....

your questioning if the printing of allah was a responsable act...i am saying that it was....and that for those who are intolerent of western democratic values-my response is: UP YOURS

because freedom of speach is also freedom of threats if you print something your neighbor doesnt like.

"running away", wondering if you can print or not because someone might blow your head off, or torch an embassy is not part of western democracy. Making a movie about a religion and then getting knifed (denmark, van gogh) for insuting islam is not part of western culture....it has to be removed

more so, western democracy with its civil rights and freedoms IS superiour to other forms of intolerent cultures and it doesnt not have to pretend to be sensitive to the intolerent.

[Wordie]

32. LOL...no you didn't. eom

[Tom Joad]

33. Surperiour Culture?

I am sure you are not going to burn the embassy.
However, Israel will:
Demolish Homes
Destroy Crops
Shoot Children
Imprison Children, Women, Men
Torture Prisoners...

In short, what Israel has done for decades. Can't say that "my" country will do much better, given the news out of Iraq..Haiti.. beyond.
Instead of just calling one culture superior and another inferior, why not just do a little more communication, a little more humility, try for a little more understanding. It needs to work both ways, of course.

The extremists, want nothing more to condemn the "other side" to hell.
They insist that they are surperior in every way. That won't work at all.

[pelsar]

34. no i dont believe in pretending....

cultures that are intolerent of the "other", which make laws that make people cover themselves from head to toe, where they cant drive cars because of their sex, where homosexuals are hung for being homosexuals, where rape victims are killed for dishonoring..you want to tell me how your going to be "understanding" of that culture? (and explain it to the lady before they stone her to death)

i believe those cultural traits and those that toss "virgins in volcanos" have to be removed....with no "understanding"

your list is totally out of context....if you would list what the palestenains do as well, then it would be in context and we could make an index of violence and try to figure out who is worse....otherwise its part of being intolerent of the "other'.

btw....does your wish to be understanding extend to the talibans culture as well?

[Tom Joad]

35. So, you suggesting what? Removed? Exterminated?

Be more specific, please.

[pelsar]

37. not accepted in the democratic world...

in real terms it means modifying the UN....only democratic states get a real say in whats going on...the dictatorships and other pseudo democracies, etc get to observe and participate etc....but have no real voting power.

thats the quick version. Though i havent given it full thought as to the details the principle of not accepting dictatorships and cultures that dont bide by western democracies shall not have the same rights.....they're illiberal methods have to be removed, preferably by their own....as far as the use of force, well thats rather complicated as history has shown, sometimes it will work and other times it wont. Its not so much that i am against overthrowing by force a dictatorship, but history has shown that what takes its place may infact be worse (irans present and afaganistans taliban)

[Colorado Blue]

39. War - what is it good for?

This thread isn't about Israel, please.

These comments are completely out of context, thank you.

[Tom Joad]

40. This thread is not about Israel.... Posted in Israel/Palestine forum

is not about Israel??? Don't blame me for posting it here, if it has nothing to do with Israel.

[Spinoza]

42. Be careful, Colorado.

You are being monitored. Better watch what you say.

[pelsar]

49. intolernce

and just for the record:

why not just do a little more communication, a little more humility, try for a little more understanding. It needs to work both ways, of course.

i noticed that you have very little tolerence, no "understanding" and a negative communication to the israeli narrative....perhaps you should try to show a bit more understanding to the israeli side of things?

sort of "put in to action your beliefs or communicating and humility?

[Coastie for Truth]

76. Tom, I know your are good person,

but can be easily misunderstood by those who don't know your true inner humanitarian values.


Please check out these two links:

1.

2.

Just one little click on will accomplish more for you and humanity then all of the ad hominem attacks on Zionists - especially and http://bringthemhome.btvshalom.org/t-io_call2_txt|More Left Wing Zionists> and and our neighbors in Berkeley - it is better to light one candle then to curse the darkness.

[Coastie for Truth]

36. You are making a lot of incorrect assumptions about posters at DU

You said

I predict that many who loudly proclaimed
that the cartoons bigoted against Islam were a legitimate excercise of free speech rights, will not take the same position on these cartoons. Most likely, they will remain silent on these, or complain about them, unaware of the contradiction.

I closed my append with

As a dues paying member of the -- - I support a Free Press and Free Speech and will not picket or burn anything in effigy

Don't forget, you're the guy who recommended that I spend my money buying "America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order" by Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, although you also directed me to which was worthwhile.

But don't make too many assumptions. True progressives think about all facets of an issue and try to see all sides.

[Wordie]

45. My comments weren't aimed at you, Coastie. You signed the petition

at Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace , and so have been significantly raised in my esteem (despite my continued annoyance with the "oil" comments). But there are "progressives" to whom my comments do apply.

[Colorado Blue]

56. I agree with you Coastie. I don't hear anybody saying the

ugly cartoons about Anne Frank and the Holocaust aren't protected by free speech.

What I ALSO don't hear are people defending Jews from the bigotry routinely expressed in the Arab press, and elsewhere.

In fact, a few months ago when a discussion about "The New Antisemitism" arose in this forum, and link after link was published showing a steep and alarming increase in global antisemitism, and especially concerning the brutal speeches, sermons, TV shows, cartoons, website articles, etc, in the Middle East - and I asked, ok, what do people think about this, about this stuff enamanating from the M.E. - NOT ONE POSTER EVEN RESPONDED.

[Violet_Crumble]

69. What I've NEVER heard...

..was a few posters here who call just about everything about Israel bigotry* say that the Danish cartoon was bigoted and offensive. In fact, some of them went even further and jumped on the free-speech bandwagon and trumpeted their belief that Muslims should just get over it. Here's a question: if you (that's a rhetorical *you*, btw) refuse to see that portraying Mohammed as a terrorist is a nasty negative stereotype of Muslims, why should *you* demand that anyone agree with *you* on what you insist is bigotry when there's no consistency at all in how the standards are being applied?

Violet...


*someone once tried to inform me that referring to the Zionist movement's attempts to settle Jews from around the world in Israel in the first few decades of the 20th century as colonisation was anti-Semitic. How is a person touting that sort of ultra-sensitivity and inability to separate 'Israel' from 'Jew' supposed to be taken seriously?

[Wordie]

61. Also, Coastie, you might take another look at this thread, now locked:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=114337&mesg_id=114337

[Coastie for Truth]

62. I read it, appended in it, and this beak nosed K (slang for Hebrew)

went to Irvings (across El Camino from Stanford, half a block up from California Street the Hallal Deli and the Palo Alto Masjid) and got a Kosher Danish pastry and a latte. Yum.

[Colorado Blue]

38. Complaining isn't the same as burning embassies and

threatening people's lives.

[Wordie]

46. You also missed my point, CB. eom

[Colorado Blue]

57. Please see post #56. eom

[Violet_Crumble]

71. I read it., CB and you still missed Wordie's point...

n/t

[Igel]

44. But most of those

condemning the Danish cartoonists fail to appreciate the context.

You're saying it's better to leave in fear, and not print or produce something that's respectful because a minority might do something violent to you or your family. That grants the minority a de facto veto over the rest of society; the more intolerant the minority, the greater the tolerance of their intolerance that's demanded, and the less tolerance of competing and possibly offensive views is allowed.

I found the Danish cartoons to be mildly offensive. I find many anti-Xian cartons (to use a term I generally eschew) to be much more offensive. But the government should not be in the business of banning such things.

And the idea of the cartoonists being in fear because a minority of Xians might attack them ... merits printing anti-Xian cartoons, just to assert that the right does exist to publish them, and the other side doesn't have the right to intimidate.

[Wordie]

47. Nope...you missed my point too (hint: it was about consistency).

[Igel]

48. Consistency is important, but consistency within context is

required. Otherwise, it really is a hobgoblin.

A previous example I tried to propose would involve having a group of angry blacks marching through a white neighborhood in the US, hurling accusations of racism and bigotry. Out of context, this would be uncalled for. It would be wrong, and a provocation to less tolerant whites. It would certainly be condemned. I would condemn it, and a parallel (and reverse) group of angry whites marching through a black neighborhood.

However, if I were told that a black man had been beaten in the white neighborhood with the assailants yelling "n****r" at him, and the police's reaction was that the black guy just didn't belong there, the march would be warranted. Approval would ensue, not condemnation. And I'd say the same for a march by whites in a black neighborhood, if a white man had been beaten by blacks yelling "honkey" at him, and the black police force in that area had merely said that the white dude shouldn't have been there.

In this case, the Danes were reacting to intimidation and threats; protesting narrow minded, bigoted, hateful intimidation is warranted. The Arabs are not protesting this: they have spouted racist hate-speech towards Jews, and few people have threatened to kill the authors. They're denounced, but they do not live in fear, and few Arab cartoonists would decline such a commission out of fear of physical harm.

I note that in Jordan many are content with the government's reaction to the Jordanian editor: he was arrested for the crime of insulting Islam for printing--with commentary--three of the cartoons.

[40ozDonkey]

52. Consistency, huh?

If consistency is your thing then lets see people on these boards who were defending the Muslim reaction over the past few days offer their full support to Jews for whatever reaction they give in return - violent, destructive, or otherwise.

Strange. Those people haven't found this thread yet.
Must have caught them on a day off, I guess.

:sarcasm:

[bemildred]

53. He means consistency in advocating free speech.

I'm not aware of anyone here saying rioting is a good thing.
But don't let that interfere with your pompous self-righteousness.

[Wordie]

58. That's exactly what I meant. Thanks, bemildred. eom

[Igel]

63. They're allowed free speech.

I don't think Arab News should be firebombed because they have anti-Semitic cartoons. Especially if their cartoonists felt intimidated by the radical Judaist minority in their midst, and feared for their safety. And the cartoons expressed that threat: for example, if one showed a picture of an Arab cartoonist drawing in secret, looking over his shoulder in fear.

Boycotts are fine. But if it turns out that there's no Judaist minority causing the Sa'udi cartoonists to fear for their safety, then the anti-Semitic cartoons either merely express hate or to arouse race-hatred, or are there to give offense.

The Danish cartoons fall into the former category. They refused to yield an essential liberty for temporary safety, and made a point: no minority should intimidate people into silence. Moreover, that minority's Muhammed apparently espoused violence in the name of Islam, and was so depicted. This has resolutely and stubbornly been taken out of context, and spun to express only a different point: Crusaders hate Muslims.

Responsible free speech should not give offense, but it must be informed. Most of the speech about the Danish cartoons has been sadly uninformed, whether here, or in Syria. The difference isn't in level of ignorance, but in how that ignorance plays out.

[Andromeda]

73. Welcome to DU...

:hi:

[TomClash]

51. I understand your point

And I agree though two pro-Israeli posters on this Board supported the right to disparage anyone anywhere.

Free speech has no content limits - it is one of the inalienable rights of man. They apply to everyone - jews. christians, muslims, hindus, atheists, agnostics. IMHO, those rights are more important than the Koran, the Bible, the Talmud or any other religious proclamation.

[pelsar]

54. interesting point...

its the jews/israelis here who are for unmitigated free speach...and yet it us jews and israelis who have been at the receiving end of the cartoons, charactatures etc for the last 2,000 years.....

just an interesting note.

[Coastie for Truth]

55. Since my original post had two links to the ACLU-

and a solicitation to join the ACLU - I assume that I am one of

two pro-Israeli posters on this Board supported the right to disparage anyone anywhere.

But let me put it in another context. One of the nightmares of every Jewish parent is the story of .

I assumed that Edgardo Mortara's story was just another "urban legend" fed to me by my Grand Mother.

But, back to the thread - what would be the reaction to a porn flick based on the story of the kidnapping of Young Edgardo Mortara with a heavy dose of 21st Century clergy pedophilia?

Let me add, I put the line at libel, slander, defamation, "yelling fire in a crowded theater", and pedophilia porn.

[Wordie]

59. But you wouldn't use the "N" word to refer to a black person, would you?

...or support the "free speech" rights of someone who did? I am sure you would not, as you are a poster on a progressive site, and as such, you realize the deep offense and injustice to another human being that such a word would represent. But why should the situation with the cartoons be viewed any differently?

What I think is that this isn't really an issue of rights per se so much as the need for self-imposed self-restraint and responsibility that ought to go along with those rights. Further, it appears that the original publisher of the offensive cartoon may have been a highly conservative anti-immigration Danish newspaper. Are you sure you want to side with those sorts of values?

(Please don't misunderstand me here - I in no way think that you would be likely to use the "N" word.)

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wordie]

64. We've come a long way in the United States in the last 5 decades or so.

Back in the 50s and even into the 60s there was little recognition of just how offensive some of those words really are, and consequently there was little self-restraint in their use. I can even remember my father once telling me that a Jewish friend of his had told him that "some Jews are kikes."

Today, things here are different. Most progressives, I believe, would not agree that the use of such words would be OK, even considering free speech issues. This is in no way to suggest that these progressives don't support free speech, but that they realize that some terms go over a line into hate speech, and as such require that enlightened people apply self-restraint and do not use them. I see the Danish cartoons as falling into the same category.

It's interesting that you say that words like "nigger" and "jewboy" should be acceptable under the right to free speech, while I myself will alert on their use by those few DU posters who use them.

[pelsar]

65. the essense of free speach....

is to be tolerent to those words that offend....otherwise there would be no need to even discuss the issue

(btw those cartoons were so "unoffensive" compared to the everyday affairs in the arab press...it reaks of hypocrasy)

free speach is not divided into "progressives" and the "other" freespeach is for all, from the bigot to the liberal......for those that want to practice self restraint, that is a sign that their govt is doing its job in educating, for those societies that dont......its a sign of a repressive society.

what it comes down to is this:
education vs censorship......tolerence vs intolerence.

censorship replaces education in a repressive society as does intolerence......neither are to be given in to, no way, no how, not ever.

btw if your for even "soft censorship" i would be interested to know who defines if something is satirical or insulting or both.....(moral squad?)

and as far as the word nigger goes, i can recall "people of black colored skin" calling each other that...kind of muddles the issue abit" (yes i know its insulting for a "whiteboy" to call a darker skinned person that...)

[Wordie]

66. You're confusing the legal right to free speech, which I wholeheartedly

defend, with the issue of the wisdom of exercising it. To say that the inflammatory exercise of free speech is highly unwise is in no way censorship. Remember, what I'm advocating in this case is self-restraint, not a legal restraint. In other words, just because you have a right, doesn't mean you are compelled in every case to use it. When good sense suggests the use is highly likely to cause tremendous harm, I would urge self-restraint.

[pelsar]

67. self restrain...

i agree with....but i also agree with the professions of cartoonist whos job is to make fun of our sacred cows....and that includes all gods, religion, politicians etc. And if they cross the line, let the letters and emails start coming in.

the response from the islamic sector has been so disgusting that i am for every paper in the world to print the drawings on their front page. Their intollerence and hypocrasy is simply absurd.

Newspapers, artists etc should not be cowered by those very loud, noisy and violent minority....

[Scurrilous]

68. An honesty test: Are you enjoying the Danish caricature affair?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtml?itemNo=679378&contrassID=25&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=1&listSrc=Y&art=1

<snip>

"All this talk about the freedom of the press is nonsense. Newspapers do not print everything ? that's exactly the reason why we have editors.

Simplistic by nature, caricature tends to generalize, provoke and offend without explanation. Caricatures need editing ? not a journalistic editing, but one of common sense.

It's perfectly OK to think that a racist caricature should be censored."

[pelsar]

72. yes i am......

because it exposes the hypocrasy that exists within much of the arab world ( and the "progressives). Cartoons that lambast jews and israel are run of the mill....a little fun with allah and we see the Danish embassys being burnt down. (the most tolerant of societies)


Englands award winning cartoon, with all the classic features of the anti semetic cartoon is deem "fine" by the "progressive society"....a satirical cartoon with allah...and all of sudden, the cartoonist are bigots...just slightly hypocritical


More so, i find fascinating the "need to understand" something which i also find very hypocritical....theres is no real "need to understand" intolerence...but that i find rather amusing. (Understand violent protests against cartoons, but NO understanding toward the settlers and their "sacred cows".....as i find here.)

so yes i find it rather "amusing"....especially the irony: allahs is deemed violent...so the protestors, who protest that caricature to prove their point go and burn down embassies.

can i go on?
now iran wants to "prove a point" with cartoons of the holocasut...big deal. The response in the west should be to ignore them or at least yawn, why bother, wont be anything new that hasnt already come out iran or saudi arabia, etc

even more amusing, is, the Danish print cartoons, and what are the iranian protesters chanting? death to israel - go figure.

so yes, i find it rather amusing...i like it when hypocrisy is exposed....and then some people will try their hardest to explain how it isnt....

[Feenicks]

77. Well said!

even more amusing, is, the Danish print cartoons, and what are the iranian protesters chanting? death to israel - go figure.

The disjoint here cannot be emphasized enough. Seriously, what has this whole brouhaha to do with Israel??? Absolutely NOTHING!!!!

so yes, i find it rather amusing...i like it when hypocrisy is exposed....and then some people will try their hardest to explain how it isnt....

Yes, it is a very good thing when clarity is brought to an issue. We must rethink, not rationalize.

[pelsar]

15. go for it...

how about hitler screwing jesus on the ten commanadments?...

oh i got one..the red sea being split while jesus give moses a bjob.......

those are too easy...not disgusting enough, how about a christian baby being aborted and some jews are just waiting to eat him/her (a playback on the jew libels)

__________________

far better for the muslims to make disgusting cartoons than to burn down embassies...if thats what turns them on (btw those arent anything new to what is shown in the arab press anyway...)

[bemildred]

17. Such an imagination ....

I really like that first one.

[channa18]

21. Except.....

theyre doing both.

Its really only a matter of time before these riots will lead to death....or murder.


It wont happen by maybe israel can condescendingly and patronizingly lecture europe about showing 'understanding' and 'restaint' in dealing with this violence .

[Boojatta]

16. First the "Discover Islam Center" and now the Arab-European League

(slogan on the website of the Arab-European League is "Standing for the Rights of the Arab and Moslem communities in Europe") creates the perception of a connection between Islam and anti-Jewish sentiment.

Put Up Your Dukes
"A former U.S. Senator is to arrive today in Bahrain to lecture on 'behind the scene influence of the Zionist lobby on U.S. politics,' at the invitation of a local religious centre," the Dubai-based Gulf News reports. Actually, this isn't a former U.S. senator at all, but a possibly résumé-padding former state senator from Louisiana, David Duke.

Mohammed Zuhair, who heads the Discover Islam Center, "an educational institute," says of Duke that "he is a mainstream politician, a member of the Republican Party." The report adds that Zuhair "said Duke was not being invited because of his perceived anti-Jewish stand but because he has recently authored a book that 'exposes the Zionist agenda for world domination.' "

Source:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110002612

[pelsar]

19. YES...world domination.....

and i cant wait....i shall RULE THE WORLD...and probably toss in jail all those here on the DU that have crossed my path...heh, heh.....watch it guys...us zionists.....shall have no mercy!!!

[channa18]

22. Wait a minute !!

I thought we agreed that JIM was going to rule the world.


:rofl:

[Andromeda]

74. ROFLMAS.....

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Coastie for Truth]

24. I am writing a book that describes a cabal

of Texas and Oklahoma oil company executives and some Saudi royals to thoroughly discredit small cars, hybrid cars, electric cars - until they drive the US industry out of business. Then they will finance (through Carlyle and Kingdom Holdings) a Chinese takeover of the US auto industry,with American workers working under Chinese prison labor conditions.

(How do he oil company execs make money - monetizing and arbitraging the takeover by the PRC)

:sarcasm: ? Maybe - maybe not.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Coastie for Truth]

27. If you'll support me, and cover my medical insurance.

(Actually, I'm in minuscule niche fields of chemical engineering)

[Boojatta]

29. Is someone paying you to mention oil in this thread?

[Coastie for Truth]

31. No. This is my own opinion.

They are paying me for some pathology lab equipment design and some direct digital process control.

[Spinoza]

41. Okay, Jews

that did it. Its time to riot, make death threats, burn down embassies, force the cartoonist above into hiding for his life, scream abuse, call for violence and bloodhsed, and......well, I guess thats enough to start with. Obviously, all Jews now--- around the world---have the right to go beserk. What else can be done?




I guess I have to say......the above is satire.

[pelsar]

50. we figured that one out.....n/t