I think there's something fishy about the protest signs at the recent Islamic fundamentalist riots. Were the protests hijacked by inserting anti-Newsweek rhetoric??
Take a look at this collage of signs from the Islamic protesters. These images were AP photos from the Yahoo News photo section.
First, the slogans on the signs seem somewhat anomalous to the situation. Why are their statements so tame? I would expect to see angry and hateful epithets such as "Death to America" or "Bush is Satan" not eloquent semi-sensitive statements such as "Newsweek Deserves to be Banned" or "Bush Should Apologize For Desecration of Quran". Whoever designed these signs was skilled at English and used soft words like deserves and should. Random anti-American wackos don't just come out of the woodwork with statements like that.
Now, take another look at the collage of signs. Wouldn't you expect to see crudely written signs in sloppy paint? Here the edges of the letters are smooth and the brush strokes look computer enhanced. I mean no disrespect but where do a bunch of poor Muslims get all the equipment to produce such classy uniform signs? Kinkos? American anti-war protesters' signs don't even look half as nice. Here are some more anti-war protest images from around the world.
Afghans had already been protesting their government over their miserable political conditions before the Newsweek story broke. My bet is that someone strategically hijacked their protests by infusing it with the Newsweek rhetoric. Where were these protesters a year ago when the Abu Ghraib story broke? These protests were highly organized and strategically implemented but by who?
I smell conspiracy....THIS IS KARL ROVE! THE CIA GAVE THEM THE SIGNS, THE SIGNS LOOK TOO NICE TO BE MADE BY THE PROTESTERS......