David Duke's Heated Interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN Situation Room

[drizzle]

Wolf Blitzer's heated interview with David Duke on today's Situation Room is a must-see. Here's the video and the transcript.

At the start of the interview, Duke said he resented his introduction because "you mentioned the Ku Klux Klan 11 times." Then he attacked Blitzer, saying "I think you're biased because you're a former lobbyist for AIPAC. You're a Jewish extremist, supporter of Israel, so you want to bias anyone who criticizes Zionism."*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KvYHkGcQHI&feature=player_embedded

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnn/on_cnn_david_duke_calls_wolf_blitzer_israeli_agent_points_to_past_job_at_aipac_49267.asp"

What do you think about his claim that Zionist control the media?/what’s your thought/s on his opinion about his description of the current situation?/who really benefit from current/possible wars in the ME?

 

[Astronuc]

What do you think about his claim that Zionist control the media?/what’s your thought/s on his opinion about his description of the current situation?/who really benefit from current/possible wars in the ME?

The people selling arms/weapons certainly benefit.

Lots of people makes claims. We (PFers) require evidence to substantiate any claim.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Duke, a former member of the KKK, makes a strong point when he said that the KKK was mentioned 11 times in the introduction. The KKK is a repugnant group and the fact that Duke was a member of the KKK is disquieting at best. However, he is no longer a member of the KKK and so it isn't necessary to bring the KKK into the discussion. It seems that while Duke is no longer a member of the KKK, he still espouses the ideals of the KKK. So it might be worthwhile to mention his membership in the KKK so that we can better understand why he talks as if he were still a member of the KKK organization.

Disclaimer: I used to be a member of the American Eagle Marching Band.

 

[Cyrus]

Did you notice that they put on the banner at the bottom: "from KKK member to Iran" after he brought that up. Before that, it simply said "David Duke."

 

[Proton Soup]

the funny thing about AIPAC is not only are they a group lobbying our government on behalf of a foreign government, but they even brag about how much influence they have.

 

[vociferous]

the funny thing about AIPAC is not only are they a group lobbying our government on behalf of a foreign government, but they even brag about how much influence they have.

I guess that is one way to interpret it, but by the same token, a group that say, advocates the lifting of sanctions on Cuba or the increase of foreign aid to Haiti to help them deal with their humanitarian crisis would also have to be characterized as, "lobbying our government on behalf of a foreign government," a characterization that I ultimately feel is false.

 

[Proton Soup]

I guess that is one way to interpret it, but by the same token, a group that say, advocates the lifting of sanctions on Cuba or the increase of foreign aid to Haiti to help them deal with their humanitarian crisis would also have to be characterized as, "lobbying our government on behalf of a foreign government," a characterization that I ultimately feel is false.

i guess if you want to make a case for israel being a humanitarian crisis, then sure.

 

[Andre]

What do you think about his claim that Zionist control the media?/what’s your thought/s on his opinion about his description of the current situation?/who really benefit from current/possible wars in the ME?

My two cents? In the far archeologic past men probably learned that defending themselfs against all lethal threats was to group up. Two were stronger than one etc. Therefore group bonding was very important and for that it's very important to have an enemy. That's our nature. So as a kid, we learn from our parents who our friends are and who our enemies and that's our biased truth, from where we have to pick things up. Maybe it will be very late if ever, before some of us come to the age of understanding that the others are humans too, with their families and happiness and tragedies. They are just like us. However most of us are not interested: Our group must win that war so they have to lose.

For some people this urge for bonding is probably stronger than for others. Obviously, it's likely to find them at the more extremist sides of the groups. Anything goes that intensifies the enemy image. Claims in that direction, without clear neutral evidence, and not really peer reviewed should be considered with great skeptism, regardless, if it's the right or the left or whatever extremist side.

In my opinion there are no winners in a war usually, sure there is the party that created the most havoc to the other and the odd profiteer, the 'arms salesmen'. But every form of aggression seeds more hatred and urge to revenge, in a next decade or so, contributing to the violence spiral up; up until a point where both parties cannot have any other idealism than mutual eradication.

We don't need that paleo-instinct anymore of group bonding and enemy creation, but is there a way to get rid of it and to get out of such a spiral?