ahhh...so THAT'S the origin of the meme, "the holy hand grenade of Antioch."

wanna bet CBC is trying to get the broadcast rights so they can compete with LMOTP ??

Before Assud, Hamas' use of a Mickey Mouse character called Farfur to preach hate gained worldwide condemnation.

Oh yeah. Worldwide. Like it was on the CBC and in the Globe.

Nice! My first HT.

Isn't it racist to be pointing these things out to JQ Public? We're creating hatred and fear of muslims by showing these things.

So say the leftist idiots who sometimes come by here to post.

You know what Hamas should do next?

Send around a Holocaust tattoo photo, and then reveal that they actually faked the photo. You know, as a joke they were trying to pull on a guy who's fighting anti-Semitism.

I found it strangely satisfying when the "Jew" beat the living crap of Fartfur in the last episode that he was "martyred" in.

This some of the most blatant propaganda I have ever seen. Anyone with half a brain would see right through it.

I guess that's why most Islamic terrorists are not too bright.

You know what Hamas should do next?

They should totally fake a Holocaust tattoo, take a photo of it, then send it to a prominent Canadian blogger who works for the Canadian Jewish Congress and actively tries to counter anti-Semitism. And then they should reveal it was a prank, designed to make the guy look bad! He'd be sooo embarassed! (And, at the same time, you've totally devalued Holocaust memory and victims - a twofer!)

What's even more ingenious is that when people call Hamas on faking the tattoo, the Hamas guys just have to look all innocent, shrug their shoulders, and be like all, "What? It was just all a bunch of numbers? That Jewish-loving guy assumes too much!"

It's a move fit for a bunch of terrorists and anti-Semites, I'd say.

But what say you?

Ringo,

That you can't see the difference between the two makes you the demented leftard you are.

Your comment says far more about your lack of reasoned analysis of reality than it does about anyone else.

That kind of moral blindness is the reason our society is in the peril it is.

And I hope you don't think Kinsella is fighting anything. He ain't done jack. He and the worm are harassing nobodies because that's what bullies do.

Johnny,

Your right, and they would be roundly criticized for it, but not for the Bunny cartoon.

Actions reveal where the priorties lay. So protecting someones web honour is more important than them actually living up to their pre billing.

Funny, the CJC seems to think Warren's done quite a bit, actually. I guess you'll have to take up your complaints with them.

Now go back to defending Kate's fake Holocaust tattoo photo. Or, sorry, that photo of the numbers that had nothing to do with the Holocaust.

If we send more aid, perhaps the production values will increase.

Are the CJC the same group who thinks Hamas killing Jews is none of its business but saving Darfur is?

Is the CJC the same people who fight Nazis by crushing the liberties of Canadians in the same way that fascists and communists and other totalitarian thugs do, by eliminating free speech?

Funny, I seem to have read many criticisms of the CJC by other Jewish organizations and Jewish writers.

The CJC is an organization of Canadian Jews who speaks only for themselves. That they just happen to be Jewish gives them no more right to speak on behalf of all Jews than NAC has the right to speak on behalf of all women. There is no one official "voice" of all Jews any more than there is one official group who speaks for any other group. There are just self-interested groups claiming to.

And hiring Kinsella isn't there finest hour.

Kate, I think this is much ado about nothing. I mean, really. If Islamists posed as much of a threat as you seem to think they do, Warren would have posted cell phone photos of their washroom graffiti by now.

[deleted. You don't get to insult your hostess on her dime. ED]

JohnnyRingo wrote:

"You know what Hamas should do next?

They should totally fake a Holocaust tattoo, take a photo of it, then send it to a prominent Canadian blogger who works for the Canadian Jewish Congress and actively tries to counter anti-Semitism. And then they should reveal it was a prank, designed to make the guy look bad! He'd be sooo embarassed! (And, at the same time, you've totally devalued Holocaust memory and victims - a twofer!)

What's even more ingenious is that when people call Hamas on faking the tattoo, the Hamas guys just have to look all innocent, shrug their shoulders, and be like all, "What? It was just all a bunch of numbers? That Jewish-loving guy assumes too much!"

It's a move fit for a bunch of terrorists and anti-Semites, I'd say.

But what say you?"

What say I?? Very little, for here I sit, slack jawed in amazement at this lunatic attempt at moral equivalence.

Terrorists and anti-semites? You wouldn't know either if they flew a jumbo jet into a skyscraper .... Oh wait .... never mind.

Isn't it funny that in the face of real anti-Semitism, real hate, real violence, all the leftards can do is bash Canadian conservatives for fictitious evils which dwell only in the poisoned minds of the delusional?

What the posted story is about is real. This is the most vile, evil propaganda and all the infantile left can do is equate this with a prank. I found Kate's prank a little over the top but to equate it with teaching violence and hate to children is the work of a defective mind.

When we accuse the left of moral blindness and relativism, this is what we refer to. It's indescribable, really.

Not one of you has stated: even though we reject Kate, what Hamas has done is pure evil. You lot can't even do that. Pathetic vermin scum you all are. You yell Racist! and Hate! all the time but obviously don't understand either concept.

Perhaps this disease is one of comfort. We in the west have been so lucky for so long that we no longer understand human nature and the lessons of history. We've never come face-to-face with real evil so we have to invent a child's fantasy of evil to fight while ignoring what the rest of the world suffers as normal. It's like the left are permanent children - unable to grow up.

I don't expect a rational, intellegent or mature response from the likes of Ringo or Volik - they're incapable of it.

I just wish some shrink would do a study to try and cure their stupidity.

Johnny,

So what level of condemnation is required for those who are disrespectful of the memory of those who suffered in the Holocoust. And what positions might be considered inappropriate for them...just curious.

There's no moral equivalence. I just think it's a move that Hamas, given their nature, would likely emulate. I mean, you've got the whole using the Holocaust for an online prank thing down; you've got the attack on a guy who fights anti-Semitism well established; meanwhile, you've got a campaign of unrestricted free speech that, by the by, benefits Nazis and puts minority groups at risk with the removal of Human Rights Commission well underway...I mean, think about it. What Islamofascist wouldn't think it's a great idea?

SDA...it really is your one stop shop.

Ringo illustrates my point quite well, I'd say...

Yup, without thought Nazis, the 4 stormfront losers would be runing the country in 10 minutes throwing minorities into gulags.

Yup. Without crushing fundamental freedoms, our priviledges are at risk.

You haven't figured out that free speech helps you, too, have you? The left yelling "nazi!" at everyone who isn't a leftard could be hauled in front of some kangaroo court, too. You ever think of that? Of course not.

You're contemptable.

And hamas wouldn't make fun of the holocaust as they deny it took place at the same time they want to finish what Hitler started. Idiot.

Stephen,

Something tells me Kate will be better suited to answer that question. Ask her now...and then ask her in a week.

Johnny,

Are you offended by the song "Spring time for Hitler" also?

There's more in all its wretched glory here.

Why would I be? It was in a satirical film, produced by a Jewish guy named Mel Brooks, that was aimed at, among other targets, anti-Semites and Nazis. Context, people, context.

Holy mary mother of god, do you guys miss the point of everything?

Context, people, context.

Yup. What is context for me is anti-semitism for thee.

Consistency, people, consistency.

"Context, people, context."

Johnny, you're just too funny. For a guy who doesn't get context (if you did you wouldn't still be ranting on about how Warren punk'd himself), now you're going to lecture us about context... You know you're not even in the game don't you?
BTW, making a comedic satire about one of the most heinous mass murderers of our time is very disrespectful of his victims, don't you think? Or is it ok because a Jew made it? Let's be consistent here.

BTW2 "guy who fights anti-semitism well-established" You talkin' about WK? Warren follows the paycheck. He'll fight for whoever is prepared to drop the coin. The CJC and WK and anti-sem are simply the cause du jour. I thought you knew your history?

Tell ya what, I think what Kate is interested in, at this point, is notoriety. This is her way of saying "Bite me!" OK. So we are all aware that Kate is her own girl and she rides a motorcycle and she has the right to promote as much illwill as she likes. Good.

I would love to hear Kate come out of the closet, though, and take a little responsibility for what she's doing. I mean, someone here the other day suggesting I am a "link whore", so can I fairly suggest Kate is an "attention whore"?

Warwick, I get that you're just fine with making light of the Holocaust to pull one over on ole Warren. I get that. But you know, a whole lot of people don't get that.

Before this week is out, I've a funny feeling that a whole lot of people - outside of the blogosphere, that is - are going to know exactly what was pulled here. If Warren is good at anything, he's good at getting his message out to a whole lot of people. Take this thing public, and a lot of people are going to be wondering who in the heck thought it was a good idea to perpetrate the image of a Holocaust tattoo for laughs.

Because, at least in my opinion, that doesn't fly in society. Go ahead, back up your arguments with the whole HRC/Levant/Steyn approach. In fact, I'm pretty sure ole Warrsy is begging for you to make that argument, loudly, in public. I humbly submit that most Canadians - you know, those millions of Canadians who don't spend their days with you in the echo chamber - will wonder why the heck you want to gut human rights protections, and ensure that Nazis have the same right to free speech as you or I. People will listen to you, sure - and then they'll ask what planet you're from. Throw the Holocaust tattoo prank on top of that, and they'll soon be asking questions about public safety and involuntary committal laws.

And, I suspect, Warren knows this only too well. So do his friends in the media, the government and across any number of interest groups.

I could be wrong. He may have written off the whole thing...but I doubt it.

John D, remember, Think, before action. Think. You keep getting the order wrong... dyslexia can be something of an impediment for a wannabe writer.

Daly,

You can say you want to have sex with lab rats for all I care.

As for Kate's responsibility, don't make me laugh. For the people who missed the point and reverted to the perpetually offended at the risk of noticing their own hypocrisy, suck it up.

I didn't hear any of you yell "anti-Semite" every time some leftard university department or union sets up a new boycott of Israeli scholars. Especially in light of their lack of a boycott to the people who brought you the Jew-Hating Bunny for 4 year-olds.

How's that for context?

Why is the left perpetually inventing fictitious evils at the same time ignoring real evils? Are you that blind? Is it masochism? Stupidity? Paranoid delusions? What?

The movie "Life is Beautiful" was a comedy that used the holocaust as a backdrop. I don't see it as different than what Kate did. In neither case was the Holocaust the point.

Mel Brooks made comedy about the Nazis because he is smart enough to know that ridicule is the best way to counter bad ideas. Kate was going after a pretentious windbag who would crush our rights and liberties. She didn't go after the Holocaust.

Why are leftards so thick?

Ringo, again, you're just too cute. You do realize that you guys lost the last election don't you? The word is already out that WK got his ass handed to him this weekend. Even his friends are snorkling behind his back, if not to his face, about how badly he botched this. You keep trying to make this Kate's problem. Its not. Its Warren's spitball, not hers. Warren dragged in the holocaust, not Kate. Warren got indignant, not Kate. Warren got egg on his face, not Kate. Take your threats and stuff 'em. Some of the people who play on SDA are media, the government and across any number of interest groups... capiche?

"soon be asking questions about public safety and involuntary committal laws." LOL! Leftard twit.

Now, to get back to the thread - see the elephant in the room yet?

Warwick-well said!

Ringo,

"will wonder why the heck you want to gut human rights protections"

Well smarty-pants, point to the Canadian Charter of Rights and tell me what section contains the right not to be offended.

Then look up the part about Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Association and notice that they are not regular rights but FUNDAMENTAL human rights. These are also in the UN equivalent of which Canada is a signatory.

You want to continue a system where real rights are crushed in favour of group privileges. Your delicate sensibilities are NOT more important than FUNDAMENTAL human rights.

Clearly you need to look up what human rights are. You clearly don't understand the concept.

"Before this week is out, I've a funny feeling that a whole lot of people - outside of the blogosphere, that is - are going to know exactly what was pulled here."

I doubt it. The media will say what it wants to say which is rarely correspondent with the facts. The "public" are sheep. Exhibit A is the poll in the UK where people thought Winston Churchill was a fictional character. The public will continue to be spoon-fed the pabulum the elites want them to know.

Oh please, not another day of troll-feeding.

The carnivorous bunny "speaks for itself".

JohnnyRingo said:
"Canadians ... will wonder why the heck you want to gut human rights protections, and ensure that Nazis have the same right to free speech as you or I"

thereby demonstrating that he is a little unclear on the concept. [And by a little unclear I mean clueless.]

I think Kate's prank was tacky, but I'll take her understanding of human rights over JohnnyRingo's every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

And while I'm at it, I'll just point out that the Enriching Their Folklore post was the perfect follow up to Silence Wikipedia. The juxtaposition of the responses to two examples of objectional or offensive use of free speech is the real lesson here.

Would you and the other self appointed thought police allow regular people to speak of gay's once you have ruled your Nazi topic "unspeakable", Johhny Dingo Ate My Baby?

How about muslim people, or Islam?
Would you ball licking jackbooted freaks allow us the dispicable topic of, dare I say it, Indians?
Black people? (Out loud I said it)
Which identifiable group wouldn't you pimp yourself out for.

You are a Nazi idiot.
Hitler would have been a zit on the ass of human suffering if it wasn't for totally partisan crack lickers like yourself, who would silence all dissent, by the use of government force.

I will gladly die, like my brother before me, to protect my freedom from coward PsOS like you.
GFY

Warren was punked. It was funny. Take a pill y'all.

(I'm a jew by the way)

I thoroughly enjoyed The Great Hoax of 2008, but I'm getting an equal amount of enjoyment from the pissant whining from people like ringo and daly.
Good point, Skip. Even people that side with kinsella must be wondering why their Machiavellian (Mickey-avellian?) backroom boy got his butt handed to him. This is the big time strategist that kicks ass?
From the start of this feud he's responded with nothing but abuse, threats and crude sexual innuendo. There's your poster boy, libs.

I will just be glad when Israel stops pussy footing around and takes out Hamas and the Hezzassholes.

Not only are the right, right, we have to protect the snivelling cowards on the left.

There are days when you just want to say fuck it, let the muslims bring in sharia law and literally beat the left into the ground with it. The left are so stupid they believe the muslims with just use sharia law against each other, won't apply to them. The left are ok with the muslims treating their females like dogs, and killing the gays within the muslim community. So dumb they don't understand it is the infidel they really want a go at.

Do you suppose when the stoning to death of females for being females, and watching gays on fire hanging by one leg off a bridge comes in vogue, the left will realize their stupidity?

Warwick - let it go. Yes, what Kate got Warren to do to himself was righteous, appropriate, and well-deserved. The "tears on command" crowd refuse to acknowledge it because they would then have to stop living in the past and be forced to confront the present.

Now, to the point: why should the racism of Hamas elicit a racist response from us? We ghettoize the Jews (many still do it to themselves) by accepting the Hamas/Islamofacist bloodlust as merely a Jewish thing. This is a flat-out lie: it is a human thing – no quibbles, no categorization. Some people want to murder, in some of the most horrible ways possible, other people. I’m people too. I object. If you think the present “unpleasantness” in the mideast is “a Jewish problem”, or that the holocaust was “a Jewish problem”, then you are merely timid little racists hoping to duck the problem a little longer. Hey, maybe the horse will sing!

A salute to our hostess for busting the racist chains of our social pieties and refusing to bow before the current gods of the marketplace.

Let the dead bury the dead. What are you going to do for the living?

Will this Hamas video make it into the Canadian Human Rights Museum?

Methinks not...

Tenebris,

I sure as hell hope you didn't also refer to me in your second paragraph.

No one said Hamas is only a Jewish thing - or was 9/11 not a hint? Islamic fascism and imperialism is a threat to all groups including the rights of their own people. No one said different.

Kinsella isn't fighting against anti-semitism; he's fighting only for his own ego. And he does this by aligning himself with parties that self-define themselves as Warriors, as Heroes Against Evils..such as racism.

That's the Liberal Party, which based its electoral victories in large party by balkanizing immigrants into separate Groups (known as Identity Politics). Then, it funded these Groups to remain unintegrated and unassimilated and adversarial with everyone else; it funded their separate schools, foundations, 'cultural' centres. And in return - it got their votes. Lots of votes.

Did the Liberal Party give a damn about the ethical and human rights values of any of these groups? Not a bit. All were equal, all were valid voters and workers in the election campaign. So, whether it was Hezbollah or the CJC, the Liberals were there.

Kinsella operates the same way. He wants something, which is to be thought of as a Hero, a White Knight. He's for all and every minority group. That requires publicity - eg, the swastika in the boy's washroom, which to him, meant The Nazis are Coming.

But think about what he did to retain his hero status. He rejected changing Section 13.1 of the Human Rights Act. We've been all through why it's a violation of human rights in itself. But Warren, rather than arguing about it, set himself up as the Savior of Minorities Who Feel Offended, by a totally false analogy.

Compare:
Dogs are animals
Cats are animals.
Therefore dogs are cats.

Warren told us:
Ezra Levant/Conservatives are against Section 13.1
White Supremacists are against Section 13.1
Therefore, Conservatives are racist White Supremacists.

That's what Kinsella wrote on his blog.

There's no need to rush to defend Kate or any conservative as being against the Holocaust. It isn't the issue. What IS the issue, is Kinsella and other Liberals who, without thought, without evaluation, support each and every claim of 'hurt feelings' via the HRAct Section 13.1.

.....will wonder why the heck you want to gut human rights protections, and ensure that Nazis have the same right to free speech as you or I.

They should. There is no right corresponding to free speech that one gets protected from being offended, you numbskull.

I'll give you a "why", because with our heritage of English Common Law evolved over a thousand years our speech is free and absolute. It's not for you or me or the state to decided who is shut up. If a handful of idiotic Nazis want to post garbage in a newslettler, on the internet or take their case to talk radio, then, let them. It's words, not bullets. They've been around for 60 years and haven't so much as taken over a gas station or given anyone a heart attack with their statements. Are they offensive numbskulls, sure, and obviously 99.9% of the population ignores them. That's the point in a free society. We decide what to ignore rather than the state censors speech.

The University of Colorado did not fire Ward Churchill for his bilious remarks. He was fired for blatant plagarism. Fire.org, a conservative watchdog organization protecting free speech on campuses, would have defended him if he was fired for his statements only. The ACLU, an organization over-represented with Jewish attorneys, years back defended a Nazi march in Skokie IL, in spite of how disgusting they viewed them, because the right to free speech trumps the speech itself. You don't arbitrarily give that right away to the state.

Little numbskulls like yourself are truly more dangerous in a free society than a handful of sad little Nazis sympathizers.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".....Voltaire.

Apologies up front for the length of post.

JR,

I just want to understand something.

If the use of symbol or a word (in a non satirical way) is considered offensive and worthy of banning. And those who use them, either directly or indirectly through promotion are not worthy of protection and are somehow equivalent to Nazi's and their horrendous ideology.

What Should I to make of this given the above.

http://www.warrenkinsella.com/index.php?m=11&y=07&entry=entry071121-093959 proudly and prominently displayed, rightfully so because the music was damn good.

Lets get a closer look

http://cgi.ebay.com/JOY-DIVISION-LOVE-WILL-TEAR-WHT-BORDER-25x36-POSTER_W0QQitemZ200199549402QQihZ010QQcategoryZ108824QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem#ebayphotohosting

And lets look at a definition of the name

http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/joy-division-(world-war-ii)/

And lets take a look at the cover of their first EP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Ideal_for_Living

Hitler Youth as far as I can tell.

So applying the same equation we end up with the same hypocrite answer. Am I to assume that we should conclude that Mr Kinsella doesnt take the Holocoust as a serious matter because he prominently displays in his office a poster with a band name that makes frivolous or attention grabbing reference to an alleged use of holocoust victims?

It is about context, because Joy Division was a band and the name was to attract attention to its music. There were controversies about them, significant ones and the same arguments were had when they hit the music scene. Apparently the arguments dont matter now because it really didnt mean anything because Joy Division or their quasi Nazi named follow up band (New Order) werent about Fascism or anti semitism.....

The purpose is to demonstrate the faux outrage going on. It is really is a little much

So warren deserves his props for being a racism fighter (I really mean that, it is a sincere comment) But the contradictions are huge, which when someone is so vigourous in their request to limit general rights, has to make you wonder what the motivatition is when there are inconsistent applications.

You ask a question do Nazi's have the same rights to free speech as you and I. Well I think there are similar LIMITS, since my right to free speech isnt absolute (fire in a crowded theatre, threats etc) I assume their limits are the same. The discussion is about where does the threat begin in their communication, since we all agree that threats of death are limited speech. And are the sanctions on those threats evenly applied to all threats regardless of source.

The best laws are general, apply to all, rather than point solutions, targetting one group. White Supremicists and neo nazi's hold repugnant ideas that deserve condemantion when they gather any prominence, but we should be able to contain and starve these ideas with laws that are equally applied, which means it shouldnt be able to be used for unintended targets, which appears to be happening at this time under Section 13. Even Mr Kinsella has said the law needs reform since the driftnet appears a little large.

The prank, has a context. Everyone can make their own decision if it was funny or not, clever or not in good taste or not. What I am surprised at is that there would be a threat..."wait a week"....however the threat, I am assuming legal action, is the right of whoever brings it.

This isnt about agreeing with the noxious ideas of Nazi's and white supremicists, and the sophomore rhetoric trying to tie people Nazi's is unbecoming, I really think the responsbility about the level of debate is quite equally shared.

The goal should be about ensuring that there isnt an abuse of law that brings the law itself into disrepute, which comes from inconsistent application and/or over application.

I wish white supremicists didnt exist, quite frankly I dont believe there are many of them around. But you'll never eliminate all of them and the process of trying to do that will cause a backlash. Warren knows this, which is why he is properly concerned about the Macleans and Levant cases (specious, his word)

So where does that leave us. Section 13 is in need of reform or elimination, of that there is general agreement....which option and how far to take it is the real question.

Seems Ringo is still angry over being born.
,

Stephen,

If your post was for Ringo, you waste your time.

Otherwise, good post. I'm not sure I'd assume that Kinsella would know of the controversy of Joy Division or its meaning (I wasn't and I own their compilation album as well as a bunch of New Order from the 80's.)

New Order was launched by airplay by the Gay community so purhaps Kinsella only knows part of the story. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt he wouldn't extend to others.

Thanks Warwick. I am sure WK knows the source of the name, being an afficionado of the music scene he would be keenly informed.

As well, you couldnt be on a campus in the early 80's and not be aware of the criticism, especially if you are concerned about things that are potentially anti semitic.

The point is, there is no point. You can generate outrage, concern and fury (in an hour no less) about many things. The question remains not whether there is a right to express the outrage, there is, but where the state steps in.

It is a problematic which outrages, as defined by the outraged, that the state should become involved in. Better as a general rule. This is the essence of the problem. As demonstrated in my earlier post, you can spin whatever you want based on spewing allegation and and pointing to relationships or common positions.

Warwick, Skip, Stephen et al:

How dumb are you guys? I know it'll be a surprise to you but you might want to consider that Ringo, John D and others might possibly be trolls. Keep on feeding them and taking their sucker bait and they'll be with us forever.

While Kinsilly continues his Pita Tear with the Humous Right Trubunals and their friends, Kate slips in behind and gives him a 'snuggy' every once in awhile.

Why not we have a little real entertainment whist shredding the idiot foot soldiers of the left?

I have noted the right has a lot more smiling faces than that sour puss saints on the left. Why is that?

I'll tell you why ... Life is what you make it. We like life on the right. It's a challenge and a joy. Maybe that is why we are generally Pro Life!!

BCer~ they ain't dumb. It is just very difficult to let the false assertions of small minds stand. The small minds think they've won (and then hype the faux win on their own blogs), because they cannot grasp that they are not worth noticing.

Believe me, I Know how hard it is to stop. It took six years of arguing with my best friend before I learned the lesson.

The useful idiots are sometimes, well, useful. Occasionally a good troll baiting actually brings a discussion to a worthy plane. Rarely, you even get an opportunity to open a mind to independent thought. Rare, but does happen.
Trolls like KEvron, however, are not redeemable, and contribute nothing to the value of society. JR shows a bit of promise, Daly needs a some work. Time will tell if there's any merit to either of them. That's the odd thing about free speech - they're entitled to their opinion, just as others are entitled not to have to put up with it.

That video is just another example of Radical Islam and it's unadulterated hatred, if it isn't inborn than they teach them young to hate the Jews and us Infidels. Utterly sickening, but hardly surprising.

As for Kate Punking Whinezallot, most of understood there is and was no picture of a Holocaust Surviver's tattooed arm it was a picture of an arm with numbers. Prison imates and gang members have similar tattoos, if he had of taken a breath and thought about the picture he'd of realised it was a fake. In his zest to publish a picture of a victim of Nazism he didn't bother to investigate the picture or the context of the picture. Similar to the SSS HRC lack of investigative tecneques when persecuting Christians and Jews and Authors. A picture is just that, in his mind it was a sign of Nazism. To me it reminded me of prison immates I've met, also gang members. Perception is in the eye of the beholder, if you are narrowly focused on one thing like he is he never sees the real picture..

Kate gave Kinsella a wedgie on the web.

I laughed until I stopped.

Well, apparently I'm a "Nazi idiot" for supporting human rights legislation, and for speaking out against...wait for it...allowing Nazis the ability to spread their hate.

Ah, well. You know, there are millions of people who had tattoos on their arm, courtesy of the Nazis, who might have appreciated a few more people keeping Hitler and his scum sucking followers from spreading their hate back in the '30s. But I digress...it's now fodder for online pranks, courtesy of Canada's most popular blogger. I might as well count myself lucky I'm allowed to comment on this blog, despite the name calling and attacks.

At any rate, I'm not threatening anyone with anything earlier on. It's called speculation, and I'm not privy to anything Kinsella, the CJC, the MSM, or anyone else may or may not do. Kinsella may drop it, as I suggested. This could all fade away. He got burned hard, and after a few days, perhaps he'll figure it's better that fewer were reminded of that particular brand of vulgarity.

Or not.

Frankly, I can't see Kinsella dropping this. I threw a week out there, simply because I assume that's how long it'll take Kinsella and others to get their ducks in a row on this one. Campaigns take time, and I would bet that's how long it'll take before you hear something more, on a far larger level than the blogosphere. Time will tell.

Based on the that not-so-subtle threatening tone of his earlier post, I'm wondering if Ringo actually is WK...or maybe maybe Lucy W.?

Ugh....just got a horrible vision in my head of Lucy and WK trolling hand-in-hand in boys' washrooms, cameras at the ready....ugh again!

Maybe sitting side-by-side in adjacent stalls: "WK, can you pass me some paper?" "Sure, Lucy, just let me photograph this swastika!" (Overly-long touch as the tissue is exchanged)

The Evil One

Oh, almost forgot, Warren:

Drop the 'punk rocker' routine. No-one's buying it; it's absurd in the extreme. Also:

YOU GUYS SUCK!!!

And your name really is apt. Oh, plus boring!

Hahaha - "Machiavellian" power-broker, lobbyist and lickspittle to corrupt and venal 'statesmen' by day; rebel punk rocker/pseudo-anarchist by night,,,,only a narcissist and egomaniac could attempt that.

Yours Truly,

EPW

Warwick - sorry...a two-part post. The latter half was aimed at those with a more liberal mindset, like the whingers that fixate on ballpoint tattooes.

Leave it to conservatives to get all giggly about men and their bathroom escapades. I feel so safe knowing the forces of righteousness are being manned by the likes of evilprinceweasel.

Skip, I appreciated your words earlier, hence the explanation of what I was saying regarding Kinsella's (still very likely) follow-up. People make a mistake dismissing me and Daly and others as mere trolls. We have dissenting opinions, but for Chrissakes, we're not the enemy.

JohnnyRingo - what part of the Third Reich ending in a ball of flames 60 years ago are you not getting? 60 years later and their remaining legacy is handful of anti-social misfits that trash talk, so obscure in numbers that it's laughable. Drunk drivers are a bigger threat to society. Give it up.

You aren't a "Nazi idiot", you're just a garden variety idiot if that's a comfort to you.

Not likely to be an episode of Little Miscue on the Prairies.

Cal2, yes, Kate did give Kinsilly a wedgie and I'd bet he was wearing one of the red thongs handed out at the Librano convention! Precious memories, his man Dion won.

This reminded me of the following that I found today:

Muslim children being trained for Islamic terrorism - the video

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/ChildrenTraining

...like JohnnyRingo, who still does not get it.

Yes, Johnny - by advocating special laws for identifiable groups, you are guilty (perhaps with good intent) of racism/discrimination.

Kate's got more patience than I do (or more time) - you guys are clueless.

CS,

Yes, and recruiting child soldiers is a war crime. Yet another inconsistency, why aren't the charges at the Hague being drawn up as we speak?

Guess those rules only apply to some.

Johnny wrote: Frankly, I can't see Kinsella dropping this. I threw a week out there, simply because I assume that's how long it'll take Kinsella and others to get their ducks in a row on this one. Campaigns take time, and I would bet that's how long it'll take before you hear something more, on a far larger level than the blogosphere. Time will tell.

We wait with bated breath for part two of Warren crusader and persecuter of the Stupid White Man, mean while the Islamic Radicals as well as Political Islamists are working away behind the scenes (not really but the left don't believe they exist) to do real damage to Living Breathing Jews globally. If we speak of this we are Islamofacist, yet to do nothing and not stand side by side Israel we are no better than Europe when the systematically did nothing whilst the Holocaust took place. Sorry but stupid white men don't strap bombs on mentally ill women, Islamic Terrorist do. Stupid white men, hate people of color and us Natives far more than the Jews.

The Jews are in danger in Canada but it isn't from White Supremacist, it's radical and political Islamists who want then harmed. This is a battle worth fighting, taking pictures of walls in the loo well that just stupid.

Oh Johnny boy, we all know who you are. Give it a rest, you scare no one anymore with your big bad Nazi Hunter Tiara anymore. Waste some paper, and add to global warming, and send out some Notice of Intent asshole.

"it's now fodder for online pranks, courtesy of Canada's most popular blogger"

Ringo, this is what makes us dismiss you as a troll. Had Kate deliberately misrepresented the image as a holocaust tattoo then you would have a point. She (or whoever sent it) did not. While she probably had no specific idea what WK would do with it when he got the picture, I'm sure even she didn't expect Warren to do what he did. Warren is supposed to be far too sophisticated for that. I repeat, for the umpteenth time, it was WARREN who made the leap to the holocaust, who published it on his. It was only AFTER Warren tried to make another graffiti score with it that it became a holocaust issue, and, again, only with those who see anti-semites everywhere. If you find it tasteless, the person you need to speak to, is the new legal advisor for the CJC, Warren Kinsella. He was the one who made the connection, not Kate. Warren's a big boy, he can take his lumps - least, that what he likes to tell everybody.

Anyhoo - that's the last out of me on this issue of Punk'd!. Kate is the least of your concerns as far anti-semitism is concerned. You've got mucho bigger problems on the near horizon, as the topic of this post illustrates...

...was going to comment about if Rabbits are found in the Middle East.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit

Rabbits are ground dwellers that live in environments ranging from desert to tropical forest and wetland. Their natural geographic range encompasses the middle latitudes of the Western Hemisphere. In the Eastern Hemisphere rabbits are found in Europe, portions of Central and Southern Africa, the Indian subcontinent, Sumatra, and Japan. The European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) has been introduced to many locations around the world, and all breeds of domestic rabbit originate from the European. Nearly half of the world's rabbit species are in danger of extinction; many are among the most vulnerable of all mammal

"Ducks in a row and friends in the media etc etc etc"

Oh Oh, Let me guess...Krista Erikson is going to show up with a camera at Kate's house....with a streaming feed to Jason Cherniak's site.

Ringo (WK if that's really you). Just one word:

LICKSPITTLE!

Out of work now? I hear Mr. Burns is hiring....

Warwick and Skip: I'm gonna dispense with the insults, ok? Moonbat, leftard yada yada, I don't know if you are up to it Warwick, but let's take a stab at this without that junk. Skip-you are kinda ominous with your "think" message, like I'm gonna start puking green pea soup soon if I don't reach the same conclusion you do. Think about what, exactly? Or perhaps it's more-think what, exactly...

And I know, once again, how Kate operates, having been to school here for a few days. She is very...behind the scenes? She's like a puppeteer, posting pictures of guys with bombs and stuff, and then y'all have a go. But I think Kate ought to give a brief presenation on the events of last weekend. Or else I am going to think (don't worry Skip I'll really think hard...) she is sort of hoping to let things blow over so she can enjoy the attention and not have to commit herself in any way, shape or form...

Come to think of it, that's what you should rename your awful band:

The LICKSPITTLES!

The question of the day has got be where are all of these alleged nazis? In Canada? Where? The only thing even resembling, maybe, a nazi, would have been those pathetic punk rockers from the 80's.

For anyone to suggest that there is a "nazi" problem in Canada, is pure moonbat stupidity.

Nazis in Canada.......please!

well, Kingstonlad -

We've got KKKaty here, who thinks the holocaust was such a trivial thing that she can make it the basis of a joke...

That's pretty close, isn't it?

John Daly seems to think Kate "is sort of hoping to let things blow over so she can enjoy the attention and not have to commit herself in any way, shape or form..."

John - If Kate's perspective is not utter apparent by now, you need to be committed.

I do not doubt that she gets some mild consolation from the reasonable number of people that pay attention to the material she provides us to think about, but I strongly suspect this is couterbalanced by the despair that so many are utterly clueless.

This is why I rarely blog. The ROI is much to low.

I love it that Hamas has a Jew killing rabbit on TV, but all the Leftish types can talk about is how Kate burned Warren Kinsella on the weekend.

If you wonder why we call you retards, this is why. Brilliant joke played on pompous idiot does not equal Jew killing rabbit on TV.

You know what? If Pierre Eliot Trudeau himself came down from Heaven on a golden chariot with an angel choir to run in the next election and the CPC candidate was a stuffed dog, I wouldn't just vote for the dog, I'd contribute money to its campaign. Because the Liberal Party consists of jerkoffs like Warren Kinsmellya and its supporters are the likes of volik and the Johns.

You people absolutely slay me.

Oh, and BTW the stupid schmuck that complained to the AHRC against Ezra Levant? He's backed out. Suck on that, retards.

Good God, look out -

Phantom's nuts!

"Brilliant joke played on pompus idiot does not equal Jew killing rabbit on TV"

What the hell does that even mean?

And don't ya love the standard "retard" in the middle of it.

"RetardS!" he yelps, spraying out a geyser of spittle as he slurs: "You're all..a bunch a...retards!"

Has anyone else here noticed that the John Daly troll appears to have a raging case of multiple personality disorder? The writing style and use of language varies quite dramatically from post to post. Some are quite literate, and well-crafted, despite their leftward tilt. Some are more colloquial, even stream-of-consciousness (if indeed that is not an oxymoron) in style, like 9:28 above here. And still others look like the work of a non-English speaker.

Maybe "John Daly" is the log-in name of a communal computer in a crack house?

What's a matter volik, your English to Newspeak translator glitch out on you? Try plugging it in.

Retard.

Volik illustrates the difference between a Daly and a Ringo and a troll.

I don't agree with the latter two but they aren't trolls. Dead wrong and missing the point, but not trolls.

As for Ringo,

"Well, apparently I'm a "Nazi idiot" for supporting human rights legislation, and for speaking out against...wait for it...allowing Nazis the ability to spread their hate.'

This is the wrong point. No one here is defending Nazis. We are defending a fundamental liberty. The reason we do this is that if you crush the rights of those who may well deserve it, who's to stop the government from crushing the rights of those who don't once the precedent has been set?

What if the HRC's went after Kinsella for bashing Christians instead of a handful of petulant losers who amount to nothing just because they're offensive?

What happens when they decide Che shirts are reason to persecute you?

Do you not think that if one can be banned, that the other can't? Don't you think the history of thuggish bureaucracy is lesson enough? Do you not think that trust in faceless state thugs who have the power to persecute you is trust misplaced? The state is the biggest threat to free society. The state is the violator or rights. That is why power must be diluted and kept in check. You've heard the line about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely? The Charter rights are there to protect the citizen from the state. If you erode it for a good cause you've eroded it for bad ones, too. Have you not also heard the line "the ends don't justify the means?" Nazis are contemptable. But the state violating even their rights is worse.

Let's put it another way. We'll go for threat assessment.

1) Stormfont. Let's just say that there has been exactly zero cases of these losers actually doing any real harm. There are no problems with killings in this country by these marginalized losers. The threat of these people is so small it doesn't enter the chart. You give this band of contemptible creeps far too much credit that they don't deserve. There are more people who think that Elvis was abducted by aliens and brought to the alien home planet to entertain them than there are people who think stormfront is a good idea.

2) HRC's. They go after MacLean's. The media. They go after businesses. They persecute real people. Not hypothetical - real, actual harm. They have actual power and they use it to violate charter rights - rights the charter refers to as fundamental. The right to speech, press and association are the rights that all other rights depend on. Lose them you lose them all. These people at the thought police central are a far greater threat to the public than a handful of immature children will ever be.

3) All the real threats you on the left ignore. Let's start with the killer rabbit and move on to the fact they just arrested a bunch of wanna-be killers who were going to behead a Dutch cartoonist. This is a real threat and you ignore it in favour of fantasy threats which exist nowhere but in your imagination.

So, you don't care about real threats but throw a hissy fit about losers clinging on to a fight that was won 60 years ago. That make zero sense to me.

The way you deal with the stupid ideas of marginal losers is to ridicule them, not turn them into martyrs to their foolish "cause." When you do the latter you elevate people who should be ignored - and you divert attention from real problems.

This is why we bash you. You totally and completely missed the real issue, the real point of the entire conversation.

Warwick, I think Kinsella's uncritical posting of an unsolicited picture of somebody's arm says all that needs saying about the dangers of Neo-Nazi groups inb Canaduh. Like, that he was really, really worried that the dangerous Nazis would do something mean to him. Not.

Probably why he doesn't go after the Hamas bunny, he knows those guys are serious. Doesn't have the stones for a real fight so he goes after the easy target.

Still, there's no talking to the Lefties. We have our reality, they have theirs. I wonder what colour the sky is on their planet?

Phantom,

Correction, we have reality, full stop.

What they have is delusions and fantasy.

Wrong Ringo....you are the enemy,you and every left wing lunatic who's hijacked this country by voting in to power the biggest thieves around,ugly liberals.

Warwick, that's a quote from Carlos Santana. Got it from some article or other I was reading a couple years ago. Santana was losing an argument with a conservative on TV and he says "Well, you've got your reality and I've got mine."

Pretty much encapsulates the problem we have talking to Lefties.

Santana is also a big fan Che and Castro (and showed up at an award show in a Che shirt.) He's spoken lovingly of Castro and thinks Cuba is some sort of paradise (yet hasn't move there...)

I guess he's got his rich and famous reality so is not interested in Che and Castro's victim's reality.

Santana is vermin scum. No better than stormfront fascists but more popular.

Isn't Phantom weird?

He lurches around, slurring "Retard!" as if that's some kind of an appropriate response to an argument.

It's like that's all he's capable of, as if he really can't formulate a response beyond that.

It's almost as if he's...

...the very thing he calls others?

I think so!

Of course you do volik. That's what makes you a retard.

You get that translator plugged in yet?

"You're a retard!"

Gee, it's fun to argue the Phantom way.

"You're a retard!"

I can see the appeal - none of that nasty thinkin' has to go on.

"You're a retard!"

You know, if I was an ignorant right-wing racist who had to believe all his personal failures were the fault of 'foreigners' and 'leftards', I could really get into this way of 'arguing' too!

"You're a retard!"

Annoying isn't it? Now you know how we all feel about you. This is what you do post after post.

Retard.

"No!"

"YOU'RE a retard!"

volik,

boom boom boom
you don't stop - do you?
mister - you are one tough nut - like a bunny on steroids actually... in the theatre of the absurd?

but some things do make sense - what about warwick's "patience-of-a-saint" clear and cohesive post at 10:30 am on feb13? served up on a platter and it doesn't get much better than that. not hungry?

i mean, like, seriously volik... hey man your credibility is like, totally at stake dude.

may the mustaches of a thousand smiley faces rain down on your drum. applause. volik exits stage left.

i think the phantom has got you down to a **t***
you sir are a wascal wabbit.

JohnnyO, you've preempted my blistering comeback: "I know you are but what am I?"

Then there's the classic:

volik argues like a giiiiirrrrrlllll! (Sorry Kate!)

Meanwhile time marches on, and Hamas continues to teach little Palestinian kids to kill the Jews using cartoon rabbits ripped off from Warner Brothers.

I think that's a -bad- thing. Kids being used as sacrificial bomb carriers? Brainwashed into it by toxic propaganda on TV? Double plus ungood! (Can you Newspeak?)

But that's what makes me "an ignorant right-wing racist who had to believe all his personal failures were the fault of 'foreigners' and 'leftards'" All the good people know that Hamas are noble freedom fighters, and no tactic they use even approaches the eeeeevile perpetrated upon them by their oppressors.

Right volik? Retard.

Alright, johnnyonline -

I'll bite - only because of the Bugs Bunny allusion in your post.

The post you're referring to is the one were Phantom gets up on his hind legs and makes his most concerted attempt at semi-coherence yet. He explains his whole HRC problem - the post is to him as "To be or not to be" was to Hamlet, or "My Way" to Sinatra, or the drunken anti-semitic rant was to Mel Gibson.

Unfortunately, Phantom is, of course, completely wrong for two very important and defining reasons:

1) Phantom claims that the HRC is an abrogation of freedom of speech by the state, which can't be trusted with such things. He posits "what if next they decide to prosecute anyone wearing Che shirts?"

Yet freedom of speech is not an absolute. Phantom would likely object to a TV station broadcasting child porn every night at 8pm.

There are laws in place which forbid such a thing. Why? Because child porn is against the law, for the reason that children are abused during its making, and because to 'normalize' aberrant behaviour by distributing it widely is not something society wants.

In response to the forbidding laws Phantom does not say "First they ban child porn - next they'll ban all that's sexual, and then anything remotely suggestive! Our freedom is being attacked!"

Why does he not say this? Because child porn has nothing to do with other depictions of sexuality or anything of a sexual nature. It's evidence of a sick, aberrant illness which has nothing to do with sexuality, or with anything we understand as healthy behaviour.

It's the same as racism. Racism - 'the expression of hate for people based on identifiable characteristics known as the basis of discrimination' according to the HRC (paraphrasing) isn't an opinion, or a thought, or an exercise of free speech. It's an irrational sickness, like the need to engage in child porn. Like with child porn it's demonstrably destructive - and it has the same relation to real, free intellectual discourse as child porn does to real sexuality.

Racism has been shown to be destructive throughout history, so why allow it to become normalized? It is like a virus, a disease, and when it is found to be festering in discourse it needs to be excised and destroyed before it's allowed to perpetuate itself.

It isn't something to be discussed, because it isn't rational. Unlike other irrational behaviour people engage in, it is always destructive. It's one thing for a person to believe they can fly if they leap from the roof of their house. But it's another if they try to convince others, particularly children, to do the same.

It's the same with racism. It should not be allowed to infect succeeding generations with its poison, with its destructive irrationality.

When a person engages in racist behaviour, slandering and dehumanizing an entire group of people because of their skin colour or race, he's creating an atmosphere of hatred for innocent children of that race not even born yet. It's not about 'hurting someone's feelings' or 'the right not to be offended'. It is a demonstrably destructive act which perpetuates a sickness - like child porn - and like child porn, should be banned. Like child porn, it is not a victimless crime.

2) Even if Phantom were able to argue successfully that 'freedom of speech' means acceptance of racism (by the same reasoning the concept of sexual freedom would mean an acceptance of child porn!), and even if he could demonstrate that the HRC's intolerance towards Nazis is worse than Nazism itself (I hadn't noticed the HRC concentration camps), he would still be wrong, because he's arguing for all the wrong reasons.

I don't get a sense of a crusader for freedom of speech from Phantom's posts. I get a sense of a hatefilled person referring to "idiots" and "retards". He feels as though he's in an existential fight with them that comes down to whether he can make questionable remarks about other people's race or religion. If he can't, his 'freedom of speech' is being violated

Frankly, this is the sense I get from most of the posts here. Never have I read the term 'retard' so frequently. Never have I encountered a more bitter, self-pitying, hateful group of people.

That's the problem: the free speech crusade of Phantom and the rest of you would be infinitely more convincing if it were not found on a site where Natives are called 'lazy and useless', Japanese people are called 'nips', where people say black people should go back to Africa and Muslims should be banned - all in the last 2 weeks.

In this context, Phantom and the rest don't seem like free speech crusaders worrying about unchecked gov't. power - but rather like people panicked that their own racist statements will fall under scrutiny. The hated 'politcal correctness' which makes them hide their questionable attitudes in public now is invading the site here where they once could skulk and indulge in their racism. They fear it will be taken away from them.

As well, you'll note that Phantom's ideological opponents are always 'retards' and 'leftards' - he dehumanizes them as well, with an unreasoning, adoloescent inability to accept another viewpoint. It's just another form of hatred, which he sanctifies, considering it a noble act, part of his mission.

Yet his words reveal him: retard. Children are born every year with mental retardation, tragically. Yet to Phantom it's his favourite term of derision to his enemies. It's distasteful, gross - imagine how the mother of a retarded child would feel, knowing that to Phantom her child's condition is a pejorative levelled to express hatred at his enemies.

That the term is distasteful, gross and objectionable are the very reasons Phantom uses it, for in his mind where his hatred is sanctified, nothing can be bad enough to describe his enemies.

There's the problem: what one sees in Phantom, and others here, is someone getting off on their hate - and the racist stuff is only part of that hate, though it comes from the same impulse. The sense is that no trick to play is too low in order to take revenge on their enemies, no name is too distasteful to call them (retards).

This dynamic can be seen in full play in KKKate's little trick: trivializing the holocaust was secondary to humiliating Kinsella, but it was by no means a mere byproduct. Her main goal was to ridicule his 'Nazi-hunting' mission and to do that she had to use the holocaust as a prop; her hateful audacity in doing so merely increases the pleasure the rest of the hate junkies here get off on. Kinsella's perceived self-righteous piety has taken a hit and if the holocaust is reduced to the punchline of a joke...well, that'll serve him right, too - he's too pure and holy about the Jews and the holocaust anyway...

Always, here, hate and spite take the front seat, and the racism along with the blind hatred of enemies (leftards, environmentalists, Kinsella) tells anyone who cares to notice that none of you are crusaders for free speech, but merely haters who get off on hating, who live to hate, and are panicked that another outlet for your hate will be taken away from you.

So, johnnyonline, these are the reasons that Phantom and the rest of you who think as he does are, and always will be, wrong.

volik,

in deference to your hard work at the keyboard - let me say it is much appreciated because an old gasbag like me occassionally likes to get off the porch and run with the big dogs. wanna here my impersonation of marlon brando - as in - i coulda bin a contendah. no? ok, then allow me to bite back:

let me pick up where i left off.
(and i should warn you that i can hear the phantom in the background sharpening his scythe: forewarned is forearmed.)

even though i can hear him, i didn't see the phantom's next post coming but was sure that "your mother wears army boots!" wasn't far off. still, you must grudgingly accept that "I know you are but what am I?" is at least #3 on the top ten zinger list of all time. "penis breath" from steven spielberg's movie e.t. - it's easily one of my favourites even though i no longer use it in polite company. but these are after all is said and done, just words - like insult, riposte and jeer. on with the show, this is it.

first and foremost - your post ends with an assertion "these are the reasons that Phantom and the rest of you who think as he does are, and always will be, wrong." my incredulous indignation demands i pose this question: who died and why did they make you chief architect of the inquisition? i mean i can plainly see that you're a sensitive and well-intentioned person but always seems a little on the long side. haven't you ever felt there's the remote possibility that you and your friends' thoughts might lead you to falling on your collective asses - what with slippery slopes and all. you cannot deny this, we've seen it before. as we all know denial is not a river in egypt. ba-dump-bump.

questioning other's thoughts before having a look inside is a vanity few of us can afford. i urge you to take a really hard look because the issues facing western society in 2008 (besides the ones you have mentioned) are quite possibly going to require some serious choices; fence-sitting allowed but not recommended.

while it's true that you have come down firmly on the "other" side of the fence re: speech and hate crimes - i am equally firm in my belief that "good fences make good neighbours" and it's not going to stop us from discussing the weather. ready?

whether the weather be fine
or whether the weather be not
we'll weather the weather
whatever the weather
whether we like it or not.

i admit that i got more than i bargained for when you posted - i didn't expect it - your reply (especially the length) caught me off guard. i'm confused but you have not caught me entirely flat-footed. you said a lot of stuff there.

i would characterise it as a roller coaster poster toaster. are you suggesting we need more laws against some of this racism/childporn/hate/infect/distasteful/gross/irrationality/slandering/dehumanizing/sickness/aberrant/suggestive/destructive/stream of consciousness stuff. honestly, i don't know what to make of it other than i find it disturbing that you attribute things not said?
In response to the forbidding laws Phantom does not say "First they ban child porn - next they'll ban all that's sexual, and then anything remotely suggestive! Our freedom is being attacked!"

i am definitely not being disingenuous and would suggest to you that the individuals posting here have reached the age of majority and are quite comfortable expressing their opinions and needless to say, fully understand that the state has placed limits on freedom of speech. on the other hand, i think it's safe to say that the majority of posters here passionately feel that over-reaching limits and suspensions of charter rights arbitrarily imposed by hrc tribunals (the very tribunals that you seem so comfortable to defend and promote) are odious.
are you surprised then that in this environment you are a walking talking lightening rod?

volik - on these two things about canadian rights and free speech we agree: there are limits and we have the charter to guide us. that's it, that's all folks - in conclusion, i can only express my undying gratitude that you are not, never have been nor will be a judge on the bench of the supreme court. and better than that - the charter will not be subject to your interpretation.
oh don't get me started on activist judges.

johnnyonline:

Ohh, Phantom's sharpening his scythe,is he? Scaary!

If you're referring to his wit as s scythe it's a very dull scythe indeed.

John, please spare me the faux concern of "who died and made you...?" On a site where people routinely post that anyone to the left of them are 'retards' you're saying that I come off too all-knowing-certain, judgmental? Please! "Haven't you considered the remotest possibility...?" Knock off the baloney. Why don't you use that tone with your pals who post that "all Natives are useless and lazy, etc."?

And how do you feel about sharing a site/point of view with them?

You use terms like "roller coaster poster toaster"...hey you wanted me to post something substantial. You got it. You're kind of disingenuous, John.

I was using the comparison of "next they'll ban Che shirts" with the hypothetical but logical extension "next they'll ban all sexuality".

Anyway, don't insult black people simply for the reason they're black, or Muslims only because they're Muslims and you'll be fine. Is that so hard to restrain yourself from doing?

With all you guys' talk about your 'enemies' leftards, people of other races, etc., it's funny you can't see that youhave a lot in common with the Hamas bunny fulminating against Jews, or Bin Laden bitching about the 'infidel'. Like you they're bitter, hateful, and obsessed with their enemy.

And you're all anachronisms, or should be. For the rest of us, there's a big multicultural world out here, with people of different races and beliefs living in mutual tolerance and acceptance. Every day.

It's too bad you guys and your spiritual brethren around the world can't see that. But believe me: the rest of us aren't prepared to let your hate fester and grow and do harm. It's our world too.

Well, I must say I'm pleasantly surprised to get something other than "SILENCE INFIDEL!" out of volik. Sad that its only a list of reasons why the infidel Phantom is wrong and must be silent.

However:

1. Kiddie porn is not speech in the sense that is meant by the idea "freedom of speech". It is photographic evidence that a heinous crime has been committed. Profiting from crime is also a crime. Obviously making, selling or possessing kiddie porn must be unlawful in a decent society.

When it comes to all manner of adult pictorial perversion, it has been decided in Western society (N. America, Europe, etc.) that the cost of attempting to ban this is worse than allowing it in society.

Meaning government should not have the power to jail you for making/selling/having porn, because that's worse than the corrosive effect porn has on the public. In my opinion this is not unreasonable, but it all depends how corrosive porn turns out to be. Jury is still out, we shall see what the verdict is in a couple or three more generations.

Now to the point: racism is an -opinion-. (One that I do not share, incidentally.) Beating somebody is aaction. Stealing their money is an action. Kiddie porn is evidence of an action. Hating somebody is not an action. Its an emotion, a feeeeeeling.

Should the government have the power to jail you for expressing an opinion? Only if that expression causes something bad to happen, making it an action. So treason, sedition, libel, and etc. are treated as actions and are thus considered bad.

In Canada "spreading false news" is illegal too, which is stretching it because the government gets to decide what "false" is. The Hamas rabbit is an example of a government deciding that the Holocaust didn't go far enough. This is the problem will allowing governments too much latitude.

So after all that, finally the question, is the social cost of making expressions of racism illegal worth the potential benefit?

It is upon this small point that we disagree. It is my opinion that as distasteful, objectionable and disgusting as hard core racists are, the social cost to the average citizen (me) of having a government censor to shut them up is absolutely not worth it.

My evidence for this opinion is the current HRC actions against Steyn and Levant. These actions are unreasonable, and have been brought by unreasonable men for unwholesome purposes. Such things cannot be allowed to stand in a free nation.

So obviously I'm a Nazi supporter, right?

2. I don't make racist comments about Muslims. I take note of obscene behavior committed by Muslims (like Hamas and their rabbit) for which they are given a pass by our deluded, imbecile government and main stream media in the name of multiculturalism. I also take note of comparable things done by other groups with PC Most Favored Status, such as the Mohawk Warriors, gay activists, gang members in Toronto, and etc.

Which makes me a Nazi supporter again, I suppose.

Now as to calling you a retard, as you may know dear volic the word is derived from the medical euphemism "retarded development". Which was adopted as being more polite and kinder than the term "cretin". Its possible cretin was also a euphemism for stupid and/or village idiot, I haven't looked into it that far.

Retard having been adopted with relish as wonderfully insulting by school children everywhere, the Forces of Correctness have moved on through "cognitively disabled" and "mentally challenged" to who knows what tortured circumlocution in vogue at present.

Personally, when I work with children who have birth defects or other brain injuries I call them by their names. The pejorative "retard" I reserve for adults of normal brain function who have no damn business believing in things as stupid as the things you seem to believe in.

Such as that the basement dwelling Jew haters of Stormfront are a bigger, more dangerous problem than Hamas.

Retard.

Aw, Phantom

And here we thought that your constant belching of "Retard!" was your cute little equivalent of "Silence, Infidel!"

Actually since I do find it offensive to use a term referring to a terrible affliction millions of people have to endure as a derisive epithet, I have a new, more suitable one to describe you:

"Bottom-feeding emotionally-stunted ignorant racist who hasn't been laid since 1974"

Rolls off the tongue nicely, don't you think? And so much more accurate for you.

(BTW thanks for the lecture on the origin and mutations of the word 'retard'. It's so funny when you dimwits decide to show off your 'erudition' and lecture others. Cute - like a chimp proudly plucking out a tune on a toy piano)

Racism, Phantasm, isn't an 'opinion' but a mental illness. As one who suffers from that illness I don't expect you to recognize that. But a person who believes in things that aren't true, and continues to believe them though they demonstrably cause harm to their society and other people, is mentally ill.

Believing that black people or any other people are less than human is a harmful delusion. An 'opinion' does not automatically cause harm. Racism does. It's never a good thing.

If you believe someone's evil, that's an opinion. But if you believe all Chinese people are evil, that's a harmful delusion the like of which has been shown to create tragedies throughout history.

That doesn't mean you can't say a particular Chinese person is evil, Phantasm, or that you can't disagree with a particular black person.

But whenyou say that all Natives are lazy and useless, like a poster did here, well, we're going to take away your shovel and pail and give you a time-out.

'Kay?

Oh and Phantasm, why make the false charge that I think Stormfront is a bigger threat than Hamas? I've never said that.

Obviously Hamas is bigger - but they both really stem from the same sick impulse that we see displayed so often on this site, don't they? The need some people have to dehumanize others.

But Phantasm, why make such a false argument to begin with?

Oh - I know: because you have to invent stuff in a laughably pathetic attempt to bolster your 'argument'

Right, bottom-feeding emotionally-stunted ignorant racist who hasn't been laid since 1974?

"Racism, Phantasm, isn't an 'opinion' but a mental illness."

Man, I don't have to do anything here. This is great stuff volik. Usually people in a hole stop digging, but you went and got yerself a backhoe!

Carry on, by all means. I'm just going to lean back and watch.

Yeah Phantasm

Racism's an 'opinion'.

"It's my considered opinion that black people are less human then the rest of us."

Something to be debated and discussed at the men's club, huh?

No. It's a mindless delusion proven destructive throughout history.

So glad that your anachronistic mindset is on the way out.

volik,

i know you're not - but what am i?
you do not think - therefore i am?
i do not think - therefore you aren't?

your hard-core innuendo is disconcerting. your convoluted referrals to "hypothetical but logical extension" even more so (do you like the three i knocked off above). your holier-than-thou hand wringing is just plain strange. you will find me in ottawa on april 12th with some goofy sign like "censor the censors!!!" or something to that effect. how about "live free or die" or "don't tread on me". or something to that effect. those last two have a certain ring that i damn well like and i'm not even a yankee. i'll probably settle for something tamer and more tolerant like "oh no please don't do that - i'm illiterate and can't read the charter".

my reference to the phantom and a scythe was as much an invitation as a reminder that there are posters who intensely dislike your tough crusading ways. me, i admire a man of his convictions. i like the phantom's direct approach when you post maliciously. i might have some lessons to learn from him when dealing with individuals who are prejudiced because the next time (oooh i'm on a roll) you suggest that i should be lumped in with the likes of hamas... well i'll feel justified in asserting that you have taken leave of your senses. something like "insert useless insult here".

anyway (BOO!) - what's to be scared of?
opinions and ideas? and if you replied yes to this question volik, well then.... now you've gone and done it - you've hurt my feelings. you're killing me man - get off your high horse. this is not "faux concern" - it's more along the lines of....

does your arrogance have no bounds?

will you not renounce your mean and offensive ways?
that last one sounds pretty official, eh?

on a serious note, volik (here we don't go with the names again) - you strike me as a truly committed modern socialist with the best of intentions. your talents are being wasted here. not only are there no fish to fry here - but there are truly big fish to fry elsewhere. islamabad comes to mind (and before you call me a racist - please hear me out). i don't imagine you'll take my word for it but, contrary to what you have stated and/or truly believe this space here (kate's blog) is an excellent example of individuals, just citizens, exercising their right to freedom of speech under the charter. i'm sorry that you are a fish out of water here; that your fishing expeditions are frustrating. to be a fisherman you will need to take the road to damascus.

further down the road, i hear the weather in waziristan can be tough but for a determined fellow such as yourself these things can be overcome with zeal and perseverance. you can rest assured that you would receive my respect and admiration forever - if - if you could prevent just one lethal attack on innocents. truly.

"sticks and stones may break your bones -
but, names will never hurt you."
you can use it - it has served me well.

I bow to your art, sir. ~:D

johnny

your posting in small case letters and going on surrealistic wordtrips does not hide the fact that you don't have much of a point. truly.

oh. except. oh yes. your quotes:
"does you arrogance have no bounds"
and "renounce your mean and offensive ways"

are both quire laughable on a site where your hero 'phantom' regularly farts out "retard!" to anyone who disagrees, and as i said before

this site is the biggest collection of hateful racists i've seen in a long time - you don't find the racism of yr spiritual brethren mean or offensive. but you get sad 'cause i pick on poor little phantom! good for you, john!
(guess phantom prevented a lethal attack on
innocents!)

Phantom

After receiving a rimmer like that, I'm sure it's not only John 'art' you bow down to!

volik,

i know you believe everything you have said in your posts. and like so many others here - i defend your right to say them - but just to a point and volik - no thanks necessary.

you continue to amaze me with your ability to twist and torture the messages here. for the record - i do not like what you write - i find it well... twisted and tortured. in any case, in a surreal debate, my dad, with both arms tied behind his back, could beat your dad. HA!

good luck in your career as witch hunter.

good luck on your present career as defender of racists, johnnyonline!

i do not, i have never and... solemnly do promise not to ever defend racism or racists. happy? and please - no more of your logical extension hooey. it stands the same chance of cutting ice around here as a snowball's chances in hell.

get it. got it. good.

on the question of defending my right to freedom of speech - well mark me down as indefatigable.

to return to the theme where this discourse (Feb 13 9:27 PM) - my discourse with you started (and i hope we can share a smile on this... as in what's up doc?) i offer this gem.

i tot i taw a puddy tat - i did - i did tee a puddy tat!

and last but not least - words from paul simon's graceland tune "you can call me al"

"Don't want to end up a cartoon
In a cartoon graveyard"

the rest of the lyrics here. enjoy

johnnyonline:

"i do not...defend racists" - Feb.16 6.05pm

"this space here (kate's blog) is an excellent example of individuals,just citizens, exercising their right to freedom of speech under the charter." - Feb.16. 3.42am

*This* site? Where citizens post that all black people should go back to Africa, that Japanese people are'nips', that Native people are 'lazy and useless', that Muslim people should be 'banned'?

Sounds like a defense of rrrrrrrrrrrrracism!

Amosts reminds you of roger rabbit from WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT

volik

you do the racism and i'll do the freedom of speech. i'll be responsible for what i say and you can be responsible for what you say.

anyway, we should agree to disagree at this point and take our opposing viewpoints up on another thread at some point. i've got this funny feeling that the opportunity will present itself because one man's ceiling is another man's floor.

i copied the editor's comments below and feel a little guilty about this "extended debate" that's clearly in contravention.

Take your extended debates and/or flamewars to private email.

a+