STRANGE BEDFELLOWS
Coleen Rowley and former Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan David Duke are communicating their support for Cindy Sheehan.
Duke [or Puke] is supporting Sheehan because she said her son was killed for " lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel." Source: David Duke's European America home page
Duke says "from the beginning, this war was orchestrated from top to bottom by Jewish Neocons that saw the war as one for Israel’s strategic objectives. They ramped up the war through Jews such as Perle and Wolfowitz, the false intelligence through CIA analyst Stuart Cohen and by Israel’s Mossad, and had a compliant Jewish-dominated media to cheer on the war. The truth is the Iraq War has inflicted incredible damage on America and the American people. It is war against America rather than in defense of America."
Do Rowley and DFL Party Chair Brian Melendez agree with Duke?
Duke [or Puke] is supporting Sheehan because she said her son was killed for " lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel." Source: David Duke's European America home page
Duke says "from the beginning, this war was orchestrated from top to bottom by Jewish Neocons that saw the war as one for Israel’s strategic objectives. They ramped up the war through Jews such as Perle and Wolfowitz, the false intelligence through CIA analyst Stuart Cohen and by Israel’s Mossad, and had a compliant Jewish-dominated media to cheer on the war. The truth is the Iraq War has inflicted incredible damage on America and the American people. It is war against America rather than in defense of America."
Do Rowley and DFL Party Chair Brian Melendez agree with Duke?
10 Comments:
come on mde. As a jewish man opposed to this war..you are coming awfuly close to insulting myself and many others...this is a bit much even for you
This post has been removed by the author.
You know what, trillin, you bringing out the jewish card all the time is getting a little old. It's like you do it to shut everyone else up. In this case, I don't see how MDE is coming close to insulting you when the post concerning David Duke is almost entirely A QUOTE FROM DAVID DUKE. That means these are David Duke's words, not MDE's.
If Duke stands with Sheehan, we should be allowed to ask if she and those standing with her agree with Duke. I mean, if it is okay for the left to ask if President Bush believes in racial segregation because he is supported by folks at Bob Jones University, I think this is surely fair.
I had a typo in my previous comment.
I think it's a very fair debate. David Duke is supporting Sheehan for her comments on Israel.
Why should we ignore her comments?
I can't imagine losing a family member in combat and I think she has right to be in Crawford. It's Democracy at it's best.
But her statements are just plain wrong.
I think I better explained my argument over at Republcian Minnesota and will attach it below. As for the "jewish Card" I am not playing a card. But when I am lumped with a racist who is anti-jew, I do believe I am allowed to be insulted, sorry.
here is what I wrote:
As i stated on MDE, I ask that you rethink this tone in the future. As a jewish man who is against this war and backs Ms. Sheehan, I find your tone regarding David Duke coming awfuly close to insulting.
I agree with you that Mr. Rowley is choosing a less then ideal way to show her support, and is clearly trying to use this issue to her benefit, and that is upsetting to me as well.
But Sen. Laurey and Ms. Sheehan deserve better then this.
Just because a racist supports them for reasons you and I both know they do not agree with, is not cause to try and lump them together.
David Duke ran for office as a Republican, do you therefor agree with all of his racist remarks as well? of course not.
This debate deserves more class then this, so I would only ask that you keep that in mind in the future
Trillian:
What you are forgeting is that Sheehan received Duke's support for statements she made.
His support is based on her statements about Israel.
Since I have always enjoyed our debates and I respect your passion, please explain to Republican Minnesota and me why her comments on Israel should be ignored.
I must have missed Ms Sheehan's comments on that, where can I find them?
http://www.davidduke.com/index_print.php?p=350
I found the link on RM. Interesting, I hadn;t heard this yet. very troubeling that she said this and honestly leave me perplexed on how to respond.
I had thus far taken a stance that she and other parents who lost children in iraq should be off limits, but in this case I would say you are correct. She should respond to if she accepts david Duke's support.
I for one would like to know now.
Personally, I never saw this as a war for israel, but a war of revenge for this white house, by men who wanted to coprrect what they saw as a mistake at the end of the 1st iraq war.
As such, i will back off my comment of earlier as I was underinformed of the situation.
And twords "party opposite" this is how a civilized conversation goes. There is no need to get all pissy. I wasn't trying to shut anyone up. I was disagreeing with something that was written. In this case, i may have been wrong, and after a civil discussion with MDE, whith whome I agree about .0000000001% of the time, I agreed that I needed more information too.
There is no need to such annimosity when people disagree.
I honestly do not understand this debate. David Duke has run for office under the name of both parties and been elected to Louisiana office as a Republican. Do Republicans in general support him?
I certainly support nothing about David Duke. Ms. Sheehan, in all likelihood, supports next to nothing about David Duke. Rowley and Melendez, unless many are absolutely wrong about them, support nothing about Duke. Why is this even a question? Because Rowley and Melendez support a grieving mother who lost a son in Iraq? Because they believe in having the President of the United States answer for the mistakes he has made?
Post a Comment
<< Home