You generally wouldn't think of something like this coming from people associated with the Klan. Maybe they were self-loathing Klan members. Sure, they hate Jews, but they hate themselves more, so they sell to the people they hate (Jews) to injure the people they hate more (themselves). It seems to have worked.

Maybe, maybe not.

Klan members are able to prioritize their hate to suit their concerns.
David Duke of the KKK hates Jews/Zionists more than blacks
United In Hate? Fmr. KKK Leader David Duke Endorses Black Anti-Zionist For Congress

There are many Muslims in the United States as recent immigrants. As Klan members they could be expressing the traditional Klan hatred towards immigrants. Or maybe the Klan has decided to add a new line item on the hate list. They might have an added incentive since New York was the target of half of the 9/11 attacks, and maybe the 10 year anniversary planted a seed. I doubt that some identifiable group attacking the US would fill the Klan with love for them. After all, in the Klan's eyes, Jews may be the hidden cabal controlling the world, but they aren't openly killing Americans by the thousands. There was also the "Ground Zero mosque" controversy. I expect more will come out at the trial.

Looks like they both had jobs.

KKK Member Tried to Sell X-Ray Weapon to Kill ‘Israel’s Enemies’

Given that the KKK tends to hate Jews as much, or in some cases more than blacks, you have to wonder if they really intended to benefit Jews? It seems unlikely. Perhaps they intended to sell them sabotaged devices, or would turn one on them after taking their money. Or maybe their thinking was that it would in some manner discredit Jews generally if an anti-Muslim plot that could be linked to some Jewish people or organizations was found out by authorities. Hard to say. Very strange though. I certainly wouldn't expect genuine racist Klan members to willingly advance the interests of Jews.

David Duke of the KKK hates Jews/Zionists more than blacks
United In Hate? Fmr. KKK Leader David Duke Endorses Black Anti-Zionist For Congress

Need I remind you: Kids! Don't try this at home!

Once can be an advocate for Wikileaks, and other work done by Assange, but not be a defender of his behavior regarding the alleged treatment of Swedish women and his flight from justice.

Ecuador, which nobody really confuses with countries that truly value personal liberty and civil rights, almost certainly gave Assange refuge since he is a fellow leftist that damaged the United States.

Members of the US Congress and TV commentators don't set government policy, nor can they approve assassination, or other adverse actions.

Assange isn't wanted for "mere questioning," it is a formality before changes can be filed and a trial started. You keep ignoring the difference in the Swedish legal system from others which you are more accustomed to. You complain that I see the world in black and white, but dismiss facts inconvenient for Assange's position.

It seems apparent that Assange has colluded with people with people engaged in espionage against the United States that resulted in useful intelligence information getting into the hands of the Taliban and al Qaida, not to mention foreign nations that are adversaries of the United States. This has had repercussions.

Many of the oddities around this are due to the fact that Assange has engaged in unusual behavior, and performed unusual deeds. He has done unusually notable things. Some of the notable things he has done are not creditable.

  Wikileaks is arguably a meaningful accomplishment, and special. Assanges behavior regarding his behavior in Sweden, much less so.

It should also be noted that Britain has its own extradition treaty with the US. If this was all just a ruse, it would be far more straight forward for the US to ask Sweden to drop the extradition request and request extradition to the US. That isn't happening. The allegations against Assange in Sweden would seem to be almost certainly genuine. The question is will he face trial and be convicted. It seems unlikely that he will be able to remain there forever indefinitely, and would seem to have little chance of another escape.

There are indeed special and unusual aspects of this case. But do you hold that they justify denying justice to two Swedish women that allege that they were sexually assaulted? Is Assange that special so as to justify that?

After all, Hans Reiser did go to jail, didn't he? Hans Reiser must pay kids $60 million

Its typical for to seek extradition for fugitives from justice. When he violated his parole and fled lawful extradition, what did Assange become?

Britain has its own extradition treaty with the US. If this was all just a ruse, it would be far more straight forward for the US to ask Sweden to drop the extradition request and request extradition to the US. That isn't happening. The allegations against Assange in Sweden would seem to be almost certainly genuine. The question is will he face trial and be convicted. It seems unlikely that he will be able to remain there forever indefinitely, and would seem to have little chance of another escape.

I think I answered much of this I the other branch of this subthread.

Advocates for Assange understand everything except why he should be treated the same as the vast majority of people that go before the Swedish legal system.

If they are going to try him they have to charge him. To charge him they have to question him. If they go to the UK to question him, which will cost and waste money, time, and paperwork, and then charge him, he will still be in the embassy, only on charges not questioning. Nothing really changes. Assange will still be in the embassy. Assange's advocates will continue to proclaim his innocence and that bringing him before the Swedish legal system is all a big plot. What the Swedish government is doing, waiting him out, makes perfect sense. The British government is responsible for delivering Assange to Sweden as he was in their custody. No need for Swedish prosecutors to take time away from other work to travel to meet with his excellency, Julian of Wikileaks.

You can also understand why the British government has warned given a certain issue in a former British Crown colony.

Britain to airlines: Don't let Edward Snowden fly to U.K.

Hmm, Britain, sex, and Sweden.... sounds familiar.

Then you fundamentally misunderstand al Qaida's goals.

Terrorism from Al Qaida and company will probably be around for at least another 10-40 years. There isn't much getting around that, they have a vote. They are pursuing their own goals, and there isn't really anything we can do to make them happy other than convert to Islam, implement Sharia law in place of the Constitution, and join them. Their goal is world conquest for the glory of Islam, and reestablishing the Caliphate dissolved in 1923, even if it takes 1,000 years. There isn't much room to give there. Let us hope those extremists come to understand the problems in their counties, their civilization, in a more insightful manner. They are on a jihad to chop off more heads and hands when they would do far more for their societies by engaging in a jihad for better sewers and schools.

I assume you misspelled elk as ilk since you're having a cow over nonsense.

Silly hyperbole. A pat down, when they occur, is not "getting molested." It's been happening on and off since the '60s or '70s and the rash of hijackings by the Palestinians and those desiring unplanned Cuban vacations.

That's been going on since the Clinton administration, at least. I don't think its a good idea, but the courts haven't seen fit to ban it. Also note that sort of thing is used at either particular events, or far more widely on politically correct campuses as part of the PC speech code. You might think about donating to Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

I'll repost my answer from the other post in the thread:

Do you think there might be a big hint in that? (Hint hint - he is going to be tried, for which he will need to be present.)

You can face at least questions over "throw away" statements.

As to Assange, you misunderstand the system in Sweden. He will have to answer those questions before charges can be filed. The Swedish legal system has a different process than the English system. There are a number of EU countries with processes that differ from the English system.

And you are free to have your own opinion about it. But you should be aware that some legal systems treat those as threats for which you can face at least questions if not prosecution.

Do you think there might be a big hint in that? (Hint hint - he is going to be tried, for which he will need to be present.)

Why would this topic be different than any other? Many people on Slashdot have been denying for more than a decade that terrorists exist, conduct attacks, get arrested, and have their own independent motives for doing so apart from anything done by anyone in the West. The whole Assange affair is no different. People regularly misstate ordinary and readily obtainable facts of the matter because they don't like the current and most likely outcome.