Terrific column. Says it all beautifully. The fight is for freedom of the individual. To think, to question, explore, to test, to debate, to dissent, to agree.

Kinsella and his buddies within various groups, ie, the CJC, the Islamists, the Liberals, simply don't understand freedom. Freedom rests on individuals. Individual power. Not state power.

Kinsella and the other groupies insist on group power. This is actually tribalism. Their Chosen Group is dominant. It is self-defined as The Best Way To Live. All others must exist within the authority of the Chosen Group.

So, Kinsella will insist that such-and-such group is not allowed to speak out; we aren't allowed to hear, debate and reject their beliefs. The Chosen Group makes that decision for us.

What is interesting is that Kinsella's theory operates in exactly the same format as those he asserts he despises. It's fascist. Kinsella is basically a fascist, operating within the same belief system of a rejection of individual freedom, a focus on a group-based Chosen Perspective, and rule of that perspective by force and repression of other ideologies. Kinsella, the fascist. Heh.

Did we fight in WW i and WW II Korea,vitnam and of course the American Revolution and Civil war just to have a bunch of treasonus politicians turn our nations over to illegal aleins i say NO NAU

I have to agree with ET, it is tribalism. A few, very few in proportion, members of the Liberal Elite, have held this Country in thrall for the last forty years.

What is the membership of the LPC, a couple of hundred thousand? And the show is run by their godfather in Quebec, Paul Demerais, the real Liberal grey eminence.

As one of the peasants, thank you for this post.

*
clive said... "You're all about labels and nothing of substance."

zing... another bullseye on kinsella's bullshit... i love it.

remember when special k set himself up as "supreme arbiter" of
the "ten smartest female canadian bloggers"?

*

Freedom of speech has meaning only when it comes to speech with which others disagree, which can include offending others. Of course, there's a temptation to suppress speech with which we disagree. We must resist that temptation. Code Pink, Hezbollah, International ANSWER, et al, turn my stomach, but I will still support their right to speak out and to demonstrate in public. I believe that it is necessary for any nation's survival; more important, I believe that it is the morally correct thing to do.

Teriffic post indeed! There is no one as intolerant as a lieberal. that is the whole problem in this country, a political party that is elitest in focus,supports terrorist organizations, and then says that the consertives are "scary" of course that now has been changed to a never ending spewing of crap on the MSM of Cadman, suicidal scammers in Mexican prisions, all dished up as the "truth" Good one Kate. Thankyou.

Kinsella is well past his best before date. I'm sure he has a double bowl of stupid for breakfast most mornings.

I'm not sure who is more disgusting . . . Denis "Hezbullah" Coderre of Taliban Jack Layton. Neither of them are worthy of even licking the boots of our troops serving in Afghanistan. And Kinsella is in the same category.

Yes Fred - and neither Lucy nor Worn have served in the Armed Forces. Worn likes to talk about the "War Room" - but it would be interesting to find out what scenarios they practice?

'Flying a Desk' and playing Video games at home during the long night searching for evil Nazis on various websites and toilets doesn't count.

Let's hope W.K. doesn't find out about Kate's Florida retirement plans.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SWASTIKA_BUILDING?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

Actually, the staff who ran the concentration camps, the extermination camps, and who composed (initially) most of the Einsatzgruppen (those who shot Jews) were from the SS--not legally part of the state machinery but rather Nazi party organizations.

Mark
Ottawa

War room. What a joke. One explosion from one mortar shell would have any of those progressive's pissing their pants and running home crying to mommy.

I had the misfortune to encounter a few leftards(reservists qualifying at the ranges, etc)in the military, and they were typically coward desk jockeys who could not hit the side of a barn with a shotgun from twenty feet.

They wore the uniform only as a job requirement, and all they cared about was their entitlements.

Cowards who hide behind HRC's and who don't have the balls to stand on the line with a weapon in their hand have no right to claim to know why real men stand and fight.

Why don't these 'greater than thou' nanny state, Hezbo supporting Liberals take a deep breath, pinch themselves, quit looking for Nazis in dark places and look into what is going on right here in Canada:

"Edmonton police detectives have laid charges against six men who attacked and robbed a 19-year veteran police officer while he was riding his bike to work early Friday morning."

'The following men each face one count of robbery:

Mohamed Ibraham Abdi, 24 years-old
Abdullahi Ahmed Dahir, 18 years-old
Ahmed Abucar Isse, 25 years-old
Ismail Abucar Isse, 20 years-old
Abdul Kadir Mahamoud, 23 years-old
Ahmed Jibril Osman, 24 years-old "
http://tinyurl.com/yon7ow

mark collins

""""" (those who shot Jews)""""""

this "thread" is about freedoms, such as freedom of speach, so I invite you to freely mention the gypsies, the gays, the german desentors, the poles, the physically and mentally handi-capped that were also shot, often in greater % than the jews

there were possibly as many as 6 million of these hardly-ever-mentioned, slaughtered !!!!!!

The focus on the National Socialists, aka Nazis, and the monorchid Hitler, is a deliberate tactic to change/switch the focus from the communist/socialists.
The greater danger to freedom and democracy is from the communist/socialist ideology, aka High Stalinism.
...-

Beria: Stalin's first lieutenant
http://tinyurl.com/37k5yb
Canadian Journal of History

"Actually, the staff who ran the concentration camps, the extermination camps, and who composed (initially) most of the Einsatzgruppen (those who shot Jews) were from the SS--not legally part of the state machinery but rather Nazi party organizations.

Mark
Ottawa"

This is true, Mark, but the camps were the end-game. The police who rounded up the Jews, Gypsies, Gays and others to be exterminated were not Nazi Party, the railway workers and administrators who did the transports were railway employees and the businesses who provided the extermination chambers and ovens were civilian.

Truly a State effort, not just Nazi Party.

Yes, maz2, Hitler was a piker compared to Stalin. Communism has turned out to be far worse than Naziism, as it was exported around the world, with deadly results. Of course that was America's fault, like Viet Nam, where history never speaks about North Vietnam, aided and armed by Soviet Union and China, invaded and ravaged South Vietnam.

Fortunately in the end, freedom has won out; and it will here too, notwithstanding the nonsense coming from Kinsella, Warman and others, with their velvet totalitarianism.

Kinsella is indeed a fascist. Liberals support statism above individual freedom. How else would Scott Reid blurt out to the press that Canadians, without their Liberal overlord central planning, would spend the $1200 child care benefit on "beer and popcorn"? This is the scorn they hold against individuals and freedom. It is inherent.

Meanwhile, as Sounder pointed out, real enemies are running amok, bringing about the devastation and disease from their inhuman and anti-civilization ideology. The Kinsella's of Canada are protecting their right to inflict chaos, ostensibly because they are a victimized, religious minority. Under this protection, they become bolder, abusing our law and culture and now brazenly attacking the very symbols of our freedom.

Fortunately, it appears that some Canadians are waking up and naming the enemy. Is change coming?

"Communism has turned out to be far worse than Nazism"

Only because Nazism was short-lived; sufficiently egregious to attract a worldwide effort to stuff it back in the bottle. Rather than an explosion out the top, communism/socialism is a slow leak - not readily noticed until its drags you down when it begins to stick to your feet. We haven't the fight (yet)to gather it up and cork it.

Kinsella appears to be typical of the Liberal Party inside crowd. He will say -anything- if he thinks it will get him ahead on the power ladder.

He's against all the right things and he's for all the right things. Any dissonance or logical breakdowns involved are of no consequence, because his heart, or I should say his mouth, is in the right place.

It is my opinion that Kinsella, like most Liberal apparatchiks, reveals almost nothing of his true beliefs in public. No Liberal will ever say anything against freedom as a concept, but they do things like create the Human Rights Commissions.

They say these Commissions exist to protect our human rights, but what actually happens is that a bunch of unelected, unaccountable Liberal Party loyalists decides who shall have human rights and who shall not.

That's not the kind of people I'm willing to put up with in a government, frankly.

My definition of a liberal, symbolism ,style and perception over substance, a planned excuse and an eventual screw up.
In my generation are we going to go from brown shirts and Heil Hitler to green shirts and Heil Suzuki?
The fundamental part of the "machinery" is allready in place, the MSM and HRC. All that's needed is the next "liberal" to follow in Hitler's footsteps?
Socialism in one form or another seems to have been around for a long time if the following was indeed a quote by Socrates. Those things that are looked after by the most seem to be the least well cared for.

Skip, truth is there's no -functional- difference between National Socialism and Communism. They differ in rhetoric, historically the results are identical.

Do you want to be run over by the red steamroller or the black one? Its so hard to decide!

Fred: Of course you're right.

GYM: I did not mention who were killed in the camps. All those you mentioned were (except the physically and mentally handicapped--that was a distinct program, "T4") but Jews in much greater numbers, as you well know. The overwhelming majority of Einsatzgruppen victims were also Jews.

The state machinery was almost exclusively responsible for the huge numbers of non-combat deaths in POW camps (or en route) for Soviets, especially in 1941, run by the Wehrmacht:

"In the first six months of the war, about 2.5 million Soviet soldiers were taken prisoner, nearly 700,000 of them in the first weeks of the Battle of Moscow. About 2 million prisoners had died by the end of the year from German neglect."

Varying other figures are given but the scale was horrendous. Much more here.

Mark
Ottawa

The irony is that it isn't "getting him ahead" in the power ladder. Indeed, that's likely at the root of the escalation of his rhetoric. As fewer and fewer take him seriously, he becomes ever more strident.

Let's review:

"Where are they now?".

In this corner:

Warren Kinsella, whose political career peaked with an appearance on CTV with a child's toy and crashed with a non-mention in the political memoirs of the man he most idolizes... now reducing to posting screeds and washroom swastikas on the internet.

And in the other corner:

Stockwell Day MP, Minister of Public Safety.

That kind of says it all, doesn't it?

Great blog Kate. When you have 40+ YEARS OF RULE BY liberals, It will take 40+ years of free thinkers to straighten it out. Hopefully that the present Conservatives can make a difference in their run of power. It will take blogger's like Kate to change the way that the fer left thinks. It is OK to to govern a country, but it is not OK to say what the people will "think, act, pay, be taught in schools, be medically looked after" without peoples input. The Liberals have being getting away with this for far to long. This is not even touching on provincial political systems. That is far to long of a conversation for one blog post. I hope that the new premiers in Alberta and Saskatchewan will work closely together and improve both provinces. As far as BC is concerned I am in doubt about it. A quote, " all a Liberal stands is an NDP in a hurry". Merle Underwood.

shamrock

"""""where history never speaks about North Vietnam, aided and armed by Soviet Union and China,""""""

Ummm, no,fact it the chinese faught a border war with N.Nam in the late 60T's (I think it was, but not sure of the actual year) and invaded N.Nam,but were eventually driven back by the vietnamese and lost the war. Unless you wer refering to captured chinese hardware!!!!

fact it the chinese

should be "fact is the chinese"

Merle, fast track liberals as I call them and I hope the time frame isn't that long. The biggest hurtle in change is the MSM in my opinion. A large percentage of voters are sheep and just follow what they see and read.

The Nazis Didn't Carry Out The Holocaust
The German state did that.

Do you mean the Christian German state?
So much for the right wing small dead dogma that says atheism is responsible for the holocaust.

State enforcement of a code of belief (or a code of non-belief) is tyranny, plain and simple

Like having the christian deity refered to in the Constitution?

Man, something screwy happened after Western Canadian posted. Can't make any sense of it, only know that it is GIGO.

Just like kinsellout.

It happened twice!!1!

The Phantom said "truth is there's no -functional- difference between National Socialism and Communism. They differ in rhetoric, historically the results are identical".

The only observable difference between the two was that the Nazis had better tailored uniforms.

"Like having the christian deity refered to in the Constitution?"

And just how do you think that this equates to state-enforcement of a belief?

Without God as the foundation of moral sense, tyranny is just as moral as freedom, and taking lives just as moral as saving them.

In fact, the Christian God is the Source and Security of all legitimate human freedoms.

You may hate God, but it is God who grants you the freedom to do so.

Yes DFFDSAF - but 'Lucy' is a civilian employee - a priority placement perhaps?

God help us if he is allowed to make military intelligence decisions?

Kate, no fair bringing reality into the conversation! This is the Liberal Party we're talking about, facts have no place here.

Besides, being an idiot never hurt anybody in the Liberal Party, Dion is living proof of that. Kinsella could be a stuffed walrus, just the fact that Kate McMillan chewed on him a couple times would get him a job in a new Liberal government.

He supports the CHRC because he knows that's what his bosses want. He's hoping one of the big Liberal cheeses throws him another bone like this Canadian Jewish Congress gig.

That, above all else, is what makes Warren what he is and the Liberals what they are. Sleazy, slimy and out of power.

Edgar Cayce stated 100 years ago the world would be based on the masonic order. Members helping like members no matter what the circumstances may be.
From EdgarCayce.org

In fact, the Christian God is the Source and Security of all legitimate human freedoms.

How can superstitious nonsense be the source and security of freedom? And what are legitimate human freedoms?

Well manny,

I think you are destined to find out when your mortality reaches it's expiry date.

Good luck with that.

What a terrific post! I agree that the label means nothing in itself be it Nazi, communism or whatever. They are all the same in suppressing individuals' freedoms and rights. Whatever you call it you have a regime that decides what one can say, think, eat, do and just about everything and that is what we are up against. It comes in many forms: Islamism, Communism, Nazism, Fascism, Socialism or whatever else - they all seek some kind of total control.

manny - I'm an atheist, but I don't define Christianity as 'superstitious nonsense'. I think there's a great deal, an enormous value in developing an ideology that teaches one how to get along with oneself, the natural world, and with other human beings.

The fact that Christianity, as does any textual religion, also includes pre-text, pre-monotheistic belief systems (ie, so-called 'pagan' beliefs) is natural. You don't drop your old beliefs in the power of the sun, the rain, the death of nature, the rebirth of nature, the reality of evil etc...

What are 'legitimate human freedoms'? Good question. Since we, as a species, are uniquely endowed with the capacity to reason, using symbols (words, diagrams, images)and come up with descriptive and predictive analyses about ourselves and the natural world, then, I think that legitimate human freedoms are those that...socially legitimate or validate those capacities.

The capacity to reason requires free speech and free thought. The capacity to describe ourselvs and the world requires freedom of movement and interaction. The capacity to predict causality requires some measure of control over ourselves and our envt; that requires a right to life and a right to interact.

I think the Declaration of Independence says it well: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Good enough for me.

"How can superstitious nonsense be the source and security of freedom? And what are legitimate human freedoms?"

Without a God who stands behind the cosmos and who created our minds, emanations from our uncaused, undesigned, minds, including immaterial concepts such as our senses of freedom, sense/nonsense, and morality, are arbitrary, irrelevant, and, ultimately, in a purely material, uncreated universe, themselves nonsensical.

Gee, I posted on Warrens site the addy for him to go to Doggeral and look at this post and he didn't allow the comment. Isn't that odd?

Horny Toad

Do you mean the Christian German state?

There still remains much confusion about the spiritual beliefs of the Nazis. Whatever else they were, they certainly were not Christian. This video is a good one to watch considering the question "Why We Fight". It also answers the question regarding Christian belief from about 15:20-18:30 and, especially from 17:15-17:35. The 20 second clip between 17:15 and 17:35 should leave no question in any honest person's mind as to what the Nazis were not. So then, what were they?

So much for the right wing small dead dogma that says atheism is responsible for the holocaust.

You are correct in this one. Although atheism has its own terrible record through (mostly) Communism, the Nazis did not claim to be atheists. Himmler did envision that the SS should be "godless" but he had something besides atheism in mind. They were, in fact, New Age.

Edgar Cayce stated 100 years ago the world would be based on the masonic order. Members helping like members no matter what the circumstances may be.
Yes, that is true to some extent. Like all fraternial organizations, the masons do support one another in times of personal need. The masonic order has a long and storied history of supporting freedoms and brotherhood,whether or not you are a member of the craft. I have to disagree with the last part of the statement when he says " no matter what the circumstances may be". Masons believe in the freedom to live, work and worship, no matter what political stripe a person is. Only in a Fascist or Communist state have they been vilified. Cayce got part of it right, notwithstanding the fact that he was a moonbat.
The declaration of independence and the US constitution were based on masonic values. Feel free to vilify those, if any one of you choose to.

Kate, You've done it again! Absolutely nailing those anti-democratic liberals where they live.
Thanks,

I tried to ask Warren what my grandfather fought against in WWII.

My grandfather fought in WWII at Hong Kong. Not a lot of Aryan Guard at Hong Kong.

Strangely, he didn't allow the comment.

Richard Ball,

"concepts such as our senses of freedom, sense/nonsense, and morality, are arbitrary, irrelevant, and, ultimately, in a purely material, uncreated universe, themselves nonsensical."

That's a complete anti-intellectual cop-out and contrary to the concept of free will. Wrong-doers who believe such doctrinaire piffle can say, "Gee, the devil made me do it" or, if one successfully completes a project, "It was the Lord who gave me the strength to persevere."

Give me W.E. Henley : "I am the master of my fate."

"Meanwhile, his political brothers-in-arms march in our streets under the flag of an ideology dedicated to wiping every last Jew off the map - and he remains deaf, dumb and utterly complicit."

Yes sir-ee there's a new picture becide the Canadian dictionary's definition of hypocrite

"Give me W.E. Henley : "I am the master of my fate."
Posted by: Zog at March 23, 2008 5:29 PM"

Get back to me once you've overcome the law of gravity and lived to be a thousand.

Manny I hate to burst your bubble having as much fun as you are trying to discredit Christianity but it is impossible for a state to be Christian.

The people in the state may be Christian but that in no way makes the state Christian. Christ never laid out any formulation of statehood nor how the state should behave toward its citizens.

In fact Jesus dismissed any temptation for personal political power.

As for personal beliefs, reading historical accounts of the beliefs and practices of the Nazis, I would tend to believe that if one could discern a religion it would be closest to what we now call secular humanism/New Age. Christianity had lost much of its influence in Germany prior to WWI.

Richard Ball,

Just what are you trying to say? That biblical gibberish is equivalent to physical laws?

Of course, proto-believers long ago overcame the restraints of the physical universe, including the aging process. Just read Genesis for the "faks".

That biblical gibberish is equivalent to physical laws?

No actually it is superior. Heaven and earth shall pass away but the word of Lord remains forever.

Zog if you can even be honest for a second you will realize the gibberish you just spewed when you claimed to be master of your destiny. We are very much creatures of our circumstance.

Many years ago my father stopped to chat with a few buddies, got in his car to drive to his next worksite and after driving across the parking lot drove into a nearby gravel pile. He was dead from a heart attack.

A friend kissed his kids goodnight and crawled into bed with his loving wife. A few hours later he awoke unable to move. He had suffered a stroke as he slept and now lives in a nursing home unable to recognize his wife or kids.

The Bible provides a coherent and plausible explanation (and ground) for the very concepts you extoll -- free will, moral sense and accountability, etc.

It is the atheist who is in trouble here. Concepts such as immaterial consciousness, free-will, and morality, are extremely difficult to justify in a universe that is undesigned, unintended, and materialistic.

Furthermore, while morality may seem to exist to the human, without God it cannot exist in any objective sense. It is nothing more than the product of chemical drips in our uncreated, undesigned brains, a cruel illusionary trick of evolution. In a godless world, killing a human being is of no more importance than whether a green leaf should remain on a tree or fall to the ground and wither. It is entirely inconsequential. My killing of another human being is of no more moral consequence than plucking a leaf from a tree and tearing it to shreds.

If this bothers you, it is because you have, common with other human beings, a persistent, deeply ingrained moral sense. Christians have a coherent and reasonable explanation for this moral sense. Atheists do not.

It is part of what is meant by being created in the image of God -- an idea found in the very book of Beginnings which you despise.

One of the more objectionable and ahistorical posts I've seen on here.

Mr Collins has basically put paid to the thesis but I'll add a bit.
If you are going to blame the German state then please point out the atrocities of the Weimar Republic or the FRG of 1955? No? Good. Then we can safely say the Nazi and their ideology was the problem not a state. After all most of the wingnuts here will argue that guns don't kill people people do . Well states don't kill people racist/religious/whatever ideologues do.

Christians have a coherent and reasonable explanation for this moral sense. Atheists do not.

The christian explanation is coherent and reasonable in the same sense that Kipling's stories are a
coherent and reasonable explanation for how the camel got his hump and the rhino his skin. The golden rule covers a lot of moral and ethical ground and can be explained coherently and reasonably from an evolutionary point of view quite adequately, without reference to hocus pocus.

richard ball. I'm not sure to whom your remarks are addressed.

I'm an atheist. I don't think you understand atheism. It doesn't reject design; it rejects an Agential Designer.

Because the universe is without intentionality doesn't mean that its development is random.

One cannot consider a plant, without being aware of the intricate design of that plant. One cannot consider the network of relationships that plant has with all other existential realities, without acknowledging the complex relations of such a network. That doesn't mean a metaphysical Agential Designer. It means that the system itself, the materialization of energy, has developed and continues to develop a complex network of relations.

The interesting thing about energy transforming into mass, is that it always does so within patterns, within designs. And these patterns enable that mass to interact with other entities. Life is all about enabling relations!

As for morality and free will, these are attributes of reason and judgment, factors that are specific to our species, homo sapiens, the most complex form on this planet. No need for a metaphysical Agential Authority to tell us what is moral; our reason enables us to make those decisions.

I'm an atheist, but I don't define Christianity as 'superstitious nonsense'.
You may not, but I do.

I think there's a great deal, an enormous value in developing an ideology that teaches one how to get along with oneself, the natural world, and with other human beings.
But is it really necessary to create gods to achieve that end?

When Christians talk about legitimate freedoms, I cannot help but think that they are refering to freedoms only that they themselves approve of.

Nice column. I have to agree with Clive. I spent nine years in the army -- never had to fire in anger thank goodness, but (I hope) would have if I'd had to, and was a pretty respectable shot. And I've visited Yad Veshem, the holocaust museum in Washington and, most sinister of all, Dachau. I've read numerous books about the holocaust and met survivors. And I defend, absolutely, the right of those 24 imbeciles to shout to the world, at the top of their lungs, their imbecility, as well as the right of the 200+ to point out that imbecility. I'd rather the 24 imbeciles advertised. I want to know who, and where they are. I want to know their "idiot" flavour of the day. It's easier to track them when they advertise. And, more importantly, I am far more concerned about the state machinery that must be constructed to definitively shut them up for once the machine is built, it can take all comers and can respond to all operators. That was what my rifle was aimed at.

Some very interesting philosophies being discussed here. And thanks ET for being civilised.
Until we identify with the Cross of Christ and the Empty Tomb we all have our own philosophies, our own moral compass, our own explanations.
Not everyone gets to the Truth.

Shorter Kate: "I'm no Nazi - *you're* a Nazi!"

"It is the atheist who is in trouble here. Concepts such as immaterial consciousness, free-will, and morality, are extremely difficult to justify in a universe that is undesigned, unintended, and materialistic."

There is no proof that immaterial consciousness exist. Consciousness is the result of billions of neurons firing chemical reation in your brain. It is purely a physical thing.

The same thing with "Free Will". There is no proof that "Free Will" exists. Think of the brain as a computer made into organic materials with a software running on it. Free will is just a illusion. Physics laws cannot explain free will. Physics is determinic (Newton) or probabilistic(Quantum). There is no room for Free Will.

Morality is the product of evolutionary social darwinism over millions of years. It can be explained scientifically. Social natural selection.

I had to leave this at Jasons site, as i believe that he really doesn't get the gist of the post..nor does he really 'get' some aspects of the Nazi party and its battles for control of the state, ongoing from 1933 to 1937, never taken for granted, and certainly not a fait accomplis upon seizure of power..

"It's Kursk, Steve V..

Have you even read the post?

I suggest you do, then have a discussion based on fact and not partisan ranting..

As a start, if you want to read something apropos, regarding the Nazi party and its use of the state (as a seperate entity, wholly apart from the party apparatus..) read this..

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ringler2.htm

Here a party theorist discusses using the machinery of the state to do the parties bidding..in this case, he is specifically referring to the role of party propaganda post seizure of power, and after the 1934 party congress...this theme occurs again and again in National Socialist literature, and applies equally to all areas of the one party state all the way through to the final solution, in many different forms.

Hugo Ringler states " From this it is clear that the struggle for the German people and the propaganda for the National Socialist state can never be a task of the state, rather must ever be solely a matter for the party. The movement has the people who are ready and willing to put the National Socialist thinking and will of the state into action. They will use the means of the state.."

The Nazis knew that even with political control of the state, it still had to rely on using the entrenched apparatus of the state to effect its policies.That meant a gradual nazification of all the civil service, the veterans groups, stenographers, muscians, railway personel, foreign service, youth groups, crafts guilds etc. etc..

This did not come about directly upon the seizure of power, but was mostly in place by 1936/37..

If you want to argue the policies of the Nazis, fine, but please have an idea of what you are talking about."

atheist quebecois separatiste - jerking off all the time doesn't make you a Casanova. Someday, maybe, you'll know the difference ... until then, happy pulling!!!! ... take pride in what you do best!!!!

Hector what say may be true in what the intent of the masonic order is to be based, but it as with religions can be abused to serve personal gain and to subvert individual rights as noted in a number of acusations made by individuals from the UK. There actually is a movement against the masons and their strive for wealth. Yes the US tea party reportedly was started by the masons and the large number of US Presidents were masons. But you cannot construct without the worker bees. Their constructs, though are timeless. Where is the balance, you need wealth and control of the society to build greatness?

Without the state apparatus extending their authority to all arms of bureaucracy, enabling suppression of all criticism and dissent, the National Socialists would have had no more capacity to order the round up and mass murder of their fellow citizens than the national executive of your Kinsman club.

Those who would support state control of those whose speech they deem hateful are guilty of no less than the recreation of a system tailor made for the next extremist governing class to make its way to the top of the political heap.

Once you have the populace indoctrinated with the notion that certain thoughts are verbotten, and that it is perfectly reasonable to subject disagreeable persons to police investigation, interrogation and prosecution, it is but a small step to reconfigure and expand what constitutes "hate".

Like all utopians, their perfect world of perfectly appropriate human rights defined thought comes complete with themselves in the role of ajudicator.

It amazes me, sometimes, that those who are my most vehement critics, and staunch defenders of the HR industry have never stopped to imagine themselves on the other side of the human rights commission table, with myself in the role of interrogator.

They would find the prospect chilling, I wager, but they seem immune to the possibility that such a scenerio is only a government appointment away.

It is intellectual bankruptcy to argue that you can imbue the state with powers to control the expression of the individual, while at the same time pretending that there is no danger, no risk, no possibility, that the same machinery will some day be utilized to lay the societal groundwork for a new holocaust, a new killing field, a new ethnic cleansing.

Indeed - state control of speech is as much a part of the dna of orchestrated genocide as the executioners bullet. It is precursor, enabler and enforcer and those who cry 'historical revisionism' in criticism of my comments are treading on wafer thin ice.

As to Cayce as a moonbat, he most likely has had more influence on the world than what is known and will be known. People are making large amounts of money off his readings in books published today. You can make appearances on Oprah with these self help books. Everyone gained but him and are still gaining.

I dunno, child porn is verboten, right? Nobody's sayin' that because child porn is taboo that'll make it a cinch for the New Nazis to come in and set up another holocaust...

Why's child porn taboo? Because it victimizes and devalues children. Why should racism be taboo? Because it victimizes and devalues people of all ages.

How about keeping your mouth clean and you'll have no trouble? :)

Rolik, I am sure that you will agree that your comments often victimize and devalue conservatives. So you will of course agree that the state must ensure that you are punished for saying such things.

You're falsely comparing a criminal act with an act of free speech that you'd like to see criminalized, rolik. I'm sure if you think about it, you'll see why child porn doesn't fall under the protection of free speech.

Excellent post Kate! Great posts by commentators too.

I would venture to say that poverty played a major role in the success of the Nazis in Germany and the Communists in Russia and China. After WWI the world had lost a whole generation of young men (the cream of the crop) and major parts of Europe were demolished. The former Austro-Hungarian Empire was defeated and the war reparations and the loss of life and property made life a grinding wheel of poverty for the citizens on the German side of WWI. Russia was reduced to a burning mass of rubble after a blood bath in WWI that wiped out most of their best young men, a humiliating treaty with Germany wiped out most of their food and production areas and the Bolsheviks plundered and murdered the rest of the Russian spirit.

When people cannot afford to eat they will follow the first leader that offers them a way out - they are thinking of their own self worth and food on the table not ideas. Many German and Russian people knew that the Nazi/Communist ideology were trademarks for slavery; their resentment of others blinded then to the notion that it was not slavery for some that was on the books - it was slavery for ALL. By the time everyone had a full stomach at the expense of targeted scapegoats, it was too late!

'There, but for the grace of God, go I' something I always try to keep in mind when I am studying history.

Just like the Liberals never committed the sponsorship program. It was the government apparatus that did it. If not for the Departmental officials, bureaucrats and ad companies, the Liberals never could have committed such acts, and therefore we must absolve the Liberal Party of any responsibility...

See the folly in your stupid argument now?

john - I fear you misread my comment or you are confusing WWI with WWII (a common mistake among recent graduates - most teachers don't point out or don't know themselves that there has been TWO world wars and they were two distint events). WWI involved no Nazis. One of my old history books, written before 1950, called WWI The Great War (Great meaning 'big', not 'wonderful').

For your information, I do believe that Ad scam involved the public service AND the msm; with the Puffins pulling the strings. What do you think?

if we can't critize and offend to expose agendas and extremism through the force of reason and argument the we have only one other option.

Hmmm...I see that Small Dead Animals has morphed into Stormfront.

Is that you, Lucy?

Haha, you know it's not, Kate. BTW, how's it feel to be known as "Catherine the She-Wolf of Saskatchewan?"

Outstanding column Kate. Keep up the good fight against kinsella, warman and the other censorship goons.

Well Kate-o

"Today's objective criticism might be tomorrow's hate crime" ...but calling black people n*****rs as several of your posters like to do is never gonna be mistaken for "objective criticism".

Guys, it's easy. Stop calling people of other races bad names - which is a practise meant to be destructive, dehumanizing, hateful, and inciteful of violence - much like child pornography - and you'll be fine.

Is that so hard to understand? Come on, leave your redneck ways behind. You'll get invited to better parties. (or maybe *some* parties).

It's 2008, folks! Come on in - the water's fine! :)

"Jason — It’s probably wrong to read too much into Kate’s statements. Whether by accident or design she usually leaves her posts sufficiently ambiguous (or contradictory) that people can read into them whatever they want to. I think that’s part of the reason for her “success.”"

Can't post on Cheniak's site because he censors it so I'll respond here.

The line should continue on this way

"I think that’s part of the reason for her “success and the reason she has 8,190,186 hits whereas Jason has oh-ummm-gee-maybe 2000.”

Horny Toad

Here is an example of what atheistic Q seperatist would say is 'no free will' cuz heck these kids were just exercising those Dawinistic morals that they are learning.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/2008/03/22/school-alert-after-village-hall-orgy-86908-20358779/

Your argument that the allied forces were fighting impersonal institutions like "state machinery" in WW2 and not a hateful, racist, ideology, and the xenophobic, genocidal gang that expounded it is absolutely insane.

You think we were fighting against "government" in the abstract, in WW2?

Are you that nuts?

Brain-dead Kate said: John - the theft committed under the sponsorship program was possible because the rules were altered to undermine the checks and balances in place.

Wow. I see, the Nazis kept all checks and balances in place, right? Time to stop writing and start reading, Kate. It's never too late for that.

[In the absence of a God] My killing of another human being is of no more moral consequence than plucking a leaf from a tree and tearing it to shreds. If this bothers you, it is because you have, common with other human beings, a persistent, deeply ingrained moral sense. Christians have a coherent and reasonable explanation for this moral sense. Atheists do not.
-Richard Ball

Brilliant!

Oh, Eric

You must be new around these parts.

Kate don't need no steenking facts!

What is the point of referencing the Enabling Act of 1933 as a gotcha? Doesn't this act represent the willing surrender of the German government to Hitler's agenda - the extension of Nazi authority to all arms of (the) bureaucracy by the apparatus of the state?
I am still trying to work out how referencing it excuses Kinsella's behaviour during Adscam while Executive Assistant to Dingwall. Enlighten me.

Kinsella who?

"Guys, it's easy. Stop calling people of other races bad names - which is a practise meant to be destructive, dehumanizing, hateful, and inciteful of violence - much like child pornography - and you'll be fine."

I quite agree that calling various people bad names is unwise. However, were one to suggest a ban on immigration for Jamaican males under say forty or people from nations in which terrorism is preached from the pulpits, there is the real danger that a public policy debate can be hijacked into a human rights show trial.

I am a huge fan of civility but I am also a realist. It is, perhaps, realistic to note that Jamaican males are a bad risk as to gun crime. Or that the epicenters of real anti-semitism in Canada happen to be in mosques. Would you censor such speech?

I've no time for people who want to use racist language to grab other's attention; but I am entirely uninterested in pretending that we are all just one big, happy, family. That is not true and the truth is important.

Far more important than being "nice".

(And, just to make the point - child porn is about a rape, free speech is about a right - there is a diffence.)

"If this bothers you, it is because you have, common with other human beings, a persistent, deeply ingrained moral sense. Christians have a coherent and reasonable explanation for this moral sense. Atheists do not." - Richard Ball

A sense of morality is IN NO WAY dependent on the existence of any imaginary "god", it is simply a consequence of being able to place one's self in another's shoes, and realizing that, because you wouldn't want certain things done to you, you have no right to do those things to others. The Christian "explanation" (or, for that matter, any OTHER religion's "explanation") for this is simply "Trust me; an invisible magic man in the sky that I can't even prove EXISTS is responsible for this, so don't worry your little head about it." You wouldn't accept this sort of "argument" from anyone else on any other issue, yet you swallow it wholesale when it comes to this.

"an invisible magic man in the sky"
===============================
Why is it that lefties have such a childish conception of what God is, or for that matter, what Christianity teaches?

Because they're idiots, Louise. That's the level their mentality operates at.

They like simple ideas. You know, "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine too." They -love- that one.

That's why when you say things like "The Nazis would have been -nothing- without the machinery of the German state" they give you an argument.

"Why is it that lefties have such a childish conception of what God is, or for that matter, what Christianity teaches?"

I'm hardly a "lefty", Louise, but that childish conception is exactly what religions dole out; if a serious question is posed, religion's natural response is "Don't worry, our god is in control, and whatever happens is part of his master plan" (ie. "Don't worry your little head about it"). This is the same sort of "big brother is in control, and you just need to follow orders" mentality that true lefties thrive on.

Gee Phantom

It's already been shown here that the Nazis eliminated the checks and balances of the German state, so that when you say the Nazis would have been nothing without the state you, like Kate has done, are making a false analogy.

Not that being corrected on factual matters has any effect on you, or Kate's, twisted attempts to justify your racism by pulling the Nazis out of the mothballs.

oh, I get it. You mean that the government in Germany gave absolute power to the Nazis, so whatever happened thereafter was NOT their fault, because by doing so, they immediately dissolved the office of every single functionary at every level of government. The bureaucrats thus displaced went home for the duration of the Third Reich and their brown-shirt, jackboot-heel-clicking, armband-wearing replacements immediately took over, ran the country and did the whole invade Europe, build the death camps, kill the Jews thing. All dyed-in-the -wool Nazi party members, every one.
That's why the gotcha! Wiki reference. Nothing to do with the Wiessenthal of the Washrooms.

rolik, or perhaps I should say "volik", before being lawfully elected to the Chancellorship, Adolph Hitler and his boys were a bunch of dorks in comic opera uniforms. After that of course we had all the fun times of Hitler consolidating his rule, installing oafs like Herman Goering as head of the airforce, etc. etc. etc.

You think Goering knew how to run an airforce? The Luftwaffe ran in spite of 'ol Herman my friend. Guys who knew what they were doing went around him to make it go, he mostly filled up the fancy outfit, drank beer and got in the way.

Look up the name Adolph Galland sometime. During the Battle of Britain when the Luftwaffe was getting their ass handed to them by the under-equipped, badly led Brits, good ol' Herman asked Galland if there was anything he could do for them to speed the war along. Galland answered "Give us Spitfires, sir."

Herman Goering was nothing without the likes of Adolph Galland to kick him in the right direction every morning. Adolph Galland was German military, not Nazi Party.

The Nazi Party would have been nothing without the German state.

Likewise, Richard Warman would be nothing but a rather annoying pencil necked twerp without the apparatus of the state to ruin people's lives with.

There's always an Adolph Hitler or a Joseph Stalin waiting to jump into the driver's seat and floor the gas on the Big Machine of State. Mass graves are historically the inevitable outcome. The variations between Nazi and Communist are in rhetoric and who they chose to fill the graves with. The graves are a constant.

The difference between Conservative and Liberal is that the Conservatives are trying to slowly and carefully BREAK THE MACHINE. The Liberals are making it bigger as fast as they possibly can, having learned nothing from the hundreds of millions who died at the hands of their own governments in the 20th century.

But please, feel free to tell me how all this makes me a racist. I still haven't figured that one out yet.

It seems that "Devil's apprentices" 'brain camp' (Kinsella, Cherniak et al) would not pass yet another tough, rigor academic analysis of:

'Group of people'/political group
vs.
"State"
vs.
Genocide/crimes against humanity/war crimes .

Namely, Marko Attila Hoare of Kingston University (previously of Faculty of History, University of Cambridge) in his 9th March 2007 paper

"The International Court of Justice and the Decriminalisation of Genocide"

was powerfully harsh against the ICJ's travesty of justice

(possibly 'contaminated', among other, by above "Devil's apprentices" of world power grab (neo)Lib 'elite')

when it let the "State of Serbia" incomprehensibly off the hook, in its Feb 26 2007 historic ruling on 'Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia/Montenegro'.

Full text can be found at many places, here is just one link:

http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/stories.asp?pageid=49&id=318#

Some quotes:

"...
A Court that achieves this level of hair-splitting in its efforts to avoid calling a spade a spade is one that has abandoned objectivity and
ceased to pursue justice.

It has been pointed out that the ICJ set its standard of proof too high, but this is the least of the problems with its judgement.

The ICJ has, in fact, made the definition of genocide so restrictive that the phenomenon of genocide effectively disappears altogether.

If genocide ceases to be genocide provided the deliberate destruction of a group in whole or in part can be excused through reference to a ‘higher’ aim, such as ‘rendering an area ethnically homogenous’, then even large parts of the Nazi Holocaust cease to be genocide.

On the basis of the ICJ’s logic, the Nazi perpetrators of the Holocaust could have pleaded that they did not intend to destroy
the Jews as such, merely ‘to render the Reich racially homogenous’.

The Nazis initially tried to create a Jew-free Reich through pressurising the Jews to emigrate, and this policy overlapped with the policy
of extermination. Jewish emigration from the Reich was not prohibited until late October 1941, by which time the mass extermination of the
Jews was already very much in progress. Even the minutes of the Wannsee meeting of January 1942, the closest thing that exists to a
blueprint for the Holocaust, uses the word ‘evacuation’ as a euphemism for ‘extermination’.

And the Nazis could have come up with a whole string of other ‘excuses’ to satisfy the ICJ’s new exemption clause:

on the basis of the ICJ’s logic,

they could have argued that their massacres of Jews were intended merely as reprisals for partisan activities among the occupied populations of Eastern Europe;

as a means of lessening the burden on food supplies;

or as a means of containing epidemics in the ghettoes.

They could have argued that the working to death of Jewish slaves at Auschwitz was motivated by the desire to provide munitions for the German armed forces.

They could even have argued that their extermination of Jews in the death camps was motivated by the desire to acquire the raw materials to produce lamp-shades, bars of soap, dolls’ hair and other consumer goods for the German civilian population.

The ICJ’s decision has opened up whole new vistas for the acquittal of states and individuals for genocide.

..."