Why would someone as reasonable as David Duke be a KKK leade

Post Reply New Topic

I read an article by David Duke, and I am totally astonished by how reasonable he sounds. After all he has absolutely nothing against blacks, all he wants is to whites to have the same right. There is nothing wrong with black ppl forming clubs for the sake of diversity, why can't whites do the same? There is nothing wrong with black pride, why can't you have white pride?

There is just one thing I don't get, why did he preside over cross burning? Yah, why would somoene as reasonable as David Duke preside over cross burning? Thats totally beyond me.

Relevent article: http://www.davidduke.com/index.php?p=32

The reason that he presides over cross burning is because he is racist. You don't actually believe them when they say all that 'separate, but equal' stuff, do you? The reason they say those sorts of things is to get people like you and me to believe them. They aren't reasonable - they are liars, and they are racists.

easy answer - he isn't reasonable, he's a disgusting racist pig. thankfully, he obviously can't resist showing his true colours.

nice reply, Bec - very nice indeed.

Even racists can write good articles. I sometimes wonder which is the worst: "racism" or the systematic destruction of your country and it's peoples' way of life to make way for a bunch of foreigners hell bent on Jihad.

But that's obviously in a European context.

If he hadn't mixed himself up with the KKK, he probably would have been President material.

That may be true, but he's held the essentially the same views since at least Jr. Highschool.

Of course he promotes racism in the same way that a sleazy used car salesman attempts to sell you a car promoting it as being owned by a sweet little old lady, without telling you that the Sweet little old lady that owned it thought that she was Dale Earnhart (Micheal Schumacher for those of you worlwide), and that she put 170,000 miles on the car before trading it in.

--But then again, the ability to do such a thing makes for good presidential material, doesn't it?

Ascan, go back home to your all-white hole-in-the-ground and leave the vast majority of law-abiding Muslims alone.

I wish...

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-11-05T141008Z_01_KNE228332_RTRUKOC_0_UK-FRANCE-RIOTS.xml
http://www.channel4.com/news/content/news-storypage.jsp?id=1620760

The Paris riots are simply the beginning of the Revolution, Ascan. People have had enough of Capitalism. It has nothing to do with race.

No, it's ungrateful Muslim immigrants getting pissy because Europe ain't all it was cracked up to be by the guy on the banana boat!!

Actually David Duke is the one who defends Muslims. He blames 911 on American support of Israel.

http://www.davidduke.com/index.php?p=13

That doesn't make him non-racist Roman - he's just anti-semitic.

I agree.... I simply had to mention it because some ppl stereotype racists as universal anti--muslims (which was the context of the last few replies) and that is actually not true becasue a lot of them are anti-semitic instead which makes them pro-muslim.

I had noticed.

You seem to be forgetting that France is Socialist. The riots in Paris are being caused by a bunch of terrorist insurgents looking to make Europe into another opresive dump like the ones they came from. It was stupid for the Euroean countries to let them in ins such large numbers to begin with.

He doesn't say "separate but equal". He is NOT saying we aren't allowed to have mixed/multicultural clubs. All he says is that if there is at least one black only club, there has to be at least one white only club. If you are to call white only club "racist" then call black only club racist as well.

In other words he isn't asking for antyhign to be separate but equal. He just points out that there is anti-white prejudice. So the "only" thing he wants is to get rid of anti-white prejudice. Thats why I said he is reasonable.

Last edited by Roman on 06 Nov 2005, 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.