...born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad

 A word to the unwise: What’s the deal with CIJA Jews and their ongoing devotion to state censorship? Why do the likes of Tammy, Leo, Hershell and Frank (who, really, should know better) continue to hold onto their tattered security blankie, the one that has enabled them to “fight” the phantom menace of local “Nazis” via a genuine menace—our anti-Western, anti-democratic, anti-freedom totalitarian court system? Well, you could say it comes down to a matter of words—or, rather, a misunderstanding about words—and the role that words, “hate speech,” played in the genocide of Europe’s Jews. As far as these gentlemen are concerned, the “hate speech” came first and, as a direct result, the Holocaust followed hard on its heels.

Leo Adler explained how it worked to the Canadian Jewish News:

Levant, however, dismissed that line of argument. Hitler, he said, gathered strength in the Weimar Republic, which had legislation against hate speech.

“What killed Jews in the Holocaust was not hate speech.” As well, he noted, the Shoah was preceded by the Nuremberg Laws and the removal of Jewish rights to property, self defence and even life itself.

“We’re foolish if we think that controlling speech will protect us from real violence,” he said.

Why do we have censorship in Canada? In large part it’s because influential Jews like Mr. Adler have misread and misunderstood the historical record. I would direct these machers to Saul Friedlander’s masterful history of the Shoah, The Years of Extermination. It makes clear that the catastrophe didn’t “start with words.” It occurred because an ambitious, power-hungry, charismatic leader who had designs on the world and an irrational obsession with the Jews gained power over a powerful nation. This leader used hate propaganda—“words”—to help him fulfill his agenda of ridding the planet of the blight he thought threatened to destroy it, “the Jews.”

In other words, “words” didn’t cause the Holocaust. Hitler and those who got onside with his eliminationist agenda, caused it. And those good people who remained silent and impassive, thereby allowing evil to triumph, abetted it.

You can see the same sort of irrational obsession—and another eliminationist agenda; hello, Durban II—in operation today. Only now the obsession is not about the blight of the Jewish people and how it threatens to "contaminate" the world, but about the Jewish state and how its "immorality" and "racism" are "contaminating" the global scene, and why it must be extirpated before doing any more harm. And the agenda is being driven not by a totalitarian dictator with grandiose dreams, but by the international organization that arose from the ashes of  a world devastated by war in order to prevent the recurrence of another catastrophe like the Holocaust; an organization that takes its marching orders from its largest voting bloc, which denies that the Holocaust happened and is obsessed—obsessed—with Israel.

Ironic, no?

So how does curtailing free speech in Canada translate to helping Jews and others put the brakes on what now seems inevitable—the elimination/destruction of the Jewish state by the world community on “moral grounds”? It doesn’t. It can’t. It won’t. All it has done is spark a backlash against Canadian Jews, since they are rightly perceived as being responsible for subverting our most valuable freedom. It has also led to a truly perilous situation: if we dare to speak out about the irrational obsession and the looming threat of Israel’s destruction (along with the threat to Western civilization as a whole) and end up “hurting” the feelings of those pushing the eliminationist agenda, we risk being silenced and punished by a powerful nomenklatura of useful idiots. Now, when more than ever, Jews and all freedom-loving Canadians need to be able to use their words, we aren’t allowed to—in no small measure because some well-meaning but misguided Jews continue to believe that “words” are the problem and censorship is the solution.

There's only one word for such people: fools!

Posted by: scaramouche at 11:28 | link | comments (5)

Comments:

#1  23 September 2008 - 12:25

 

I recommend that you take this thread verbatim, and submit to as an unsolicited op-ed piece to every print media in Canada. It is that good. Don't let it die here in obscurity.

Anonymous

#2  23 September 2008 - 18:38

 

You seem to be saying: words didn't cause the Holocaust, people did it.

But how did those people learn the lies that drove them? They got them from books and newspapers and public speeches.

So words were a factor in fomenting hate. I was hoping that you would define propaganda's exact role but you didn't.

Anonymous

#3  23 September 2008 - 20:03

 

Excellent piece.

Jews, as the chosen people at the birth of monotheism, have of course suffered from Judeophobia for millennia. It's true, in a sense, that the Holocaust was the outgrowth of that history, though it was by no means a necessary outgrowth.

Anyway, those millennia of hate speech were a necessary but not sufficient condition for the Holocaust.

One rarely sees the sufficient conditions for the Holocaust spelled out convincingly. One reads about Hitler and beer halls, his imprisonment, Mein Kampf, Nuremberg rallies, Kristallnacht, etc. But the Holocaust, proper, was none of these. In fact, the post-1941 "final solution" was carried out without publicity, with the hope eliminating not just the Jew but the very need to remember he ever existed. There would be no tales of the heroic German soldiers battling the dastardly Jews to the very last. No newsreels, no Nazi novels. Holocaust denial existed before the fact. Free speech was not the operative principle.

What Hitler knew while his appeasers slept was that his central motivating desire - the impossible dream of overcoming his resentment for the Jews by eliminating all the Jews along with any memory of their final days - could only be realized in the context of a total war. Not only did he need war to invade the lands where Jews lived, but there was no way he could get his fellow Germans to play their part in giving up and destroying all the Jews, steeling their minds to quietly and efficiently go about this great duty, unless and until their horizons were so narrowed or veiled by being immersed in a war for their nation's very survival, a war on at least two fronts.

If one actually pays attention to Hitler's hate speech one will see the incessant demand that the latest generation of Germans live up to the sacrifices of Hitler's own generation in the trenches of WWI, the sacrifices spat on by Versailles and the International Jew-Masonic conspiracy. His totalitarian vision, his outrageous narrowing of the possibilities of the present to a single imperative to redeem a scandalized past and build the only acceptable future, could only be realized in the context of total war.
To try to understand the possibility of the Holocaust outside the emergence of the conditions for total war is to fail at the intellectual task. No mythic "freedom of speech" in Germany, circa 1941, had anything to do with it.

The fact that our Jewish "leaders" can't see that the Utopian project of ridding Canada of all "discrimination" has a lot more in common with Hitler's Utopian project to rid the land of vermin, and that it is just this "anti-racist" project that does more to racialize our politics and push us a little closer to the apocalyptic conditions of WWII, than does promoting a present of maximum freedom - a freedom that, however messy and ugly at times, would constantly resist the totalitarian narrowing of the present to a single historical imperative predicated on overcoming a past national tragedy - is more than a little shocking.

It is a sign of the failure of our educational systems to create leaders capable of real thinking. And one might suggest that that failure is rooted in a desire to worship victims rather than the reality that victimary figures allow us to see.

It seems to me our Jewish "leaders" are more than a little involved in a war to deny the lesson that Hitler learned in World War I: a single death is a tragedy, a million is a mere forgettable statistic. We cannot redeem the millions by turning them into a single holy figure - beautiful life - to be protected from latter-day "nazis" as the permanent lesson of Auschwitz. On that score, evil Hitler was right. It seems to me we can only let the millions live again in all their fallen, good and bad, humanity... we can only give them again their freedom that they may be able to fight the necessary fights, be variously wrong and right, without anyone being able to convince us all of the need to envision a final apocalypse...

Anonymous

#4  23 September 2008 - 20:16

 

First commenter: Thanks, but can you think of a single Canadian paper that would be inclined to publish it? I can't.

Second commenter--I'd say the "role of propoganda" is obvious--to get people onside with the eliminiationist agenda (Hitler's as well as the OIC's; you see not a whole lot has changed.)

Third commenter--Thanks for your intelligent and well-written comments.

scaramouche

#5  23 September 2008 - 23:52

 

Submit it to the NP, under a nom de plume if need be. GET THIS PUBLISHED!

-Commenter No. 1

Anonymous

Comments: