Direct Link to Latest News


The Hypocrisy of Canada's "Tolerance"

February 15, 2006

LevantThe current rhubarb about the caricatures of the prophet Mohammed exposes the hypocrisy of Canada's claim to espouse "tolerance."

When Ernst Zundel questions the character and dimension of the Jewish holocaust, he is thrown into jail, tried and deported. That's "hate speech."

It offends Canada's 300,000 Jews.

But when a Jew, Ezra Levant, publishes cartoons that incense Canada's 600,000 Muslims, and touch off demonstrations, well that's "free speech."

Newly minted Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Wednesday that while he regrets the cartoons' publication, he defends the right of free speech.

Obviously "tolerance" and "free speech" are whatever the New World Order or Zionists determine them to be. Blasphemy is free speech if they say so.

Right now the NWO is setting the stage for the third world war between the "Zionists" and Islam predicted in 1871 by their prophet Masonic Grand Commander Albert Pike.

(Pike accurately predicted World Wars One and Two. See my "Countdown to World War Three")

And right on schedule you have Zionists like Levant in Canada and Fleming Rose in Denmark fanning the flames of global annihilation.

Levant is an old political ally of Harper's who gave up his safe seat in 2002 so the fledgling leader could enter parliament.

He is now publisher of Canada's only staunchly conservative magazine, The Western Standard. But his intolerant actions reveal he is a Zionist stooge. A true conservative would have respect for venerated figures like Jesus or Mohammed and for religious sensibilities.

Levant illustrates how the Zionist movement (a.k.a. Neo Conservatives) co-opts conservatives by paying lip service to their social issues while roping them into the NWO's geopolitical agenda.

I don't agree with Ernst Zundel either. I believe Jewish extermination was a deliberate Nazi policy. Zundel should be answered with evidence not imprisonment.

There is nothing wrong with tolerance and free speech so long they are not used selectively to promote one agenda, in this case the New World Order.

Scruples - the game of moral dillemas

Comments for "The Hypocrisy of Canada's "Tolerance""

Alexander said (February 17, 2006):

Never mind the holocaust! A brick layer by the name of Brad Love was jailed for eighteen months for complaining to his member of parliament about immigration. While not everyone agrees with immigration the fact that someone can be jailed for complaining to the authorities about something is quite remarkable. Brad may not be the most articulate guy around and he may have written a lot of letters but writing letters to a member of parliament is not a crime. Indeed, the police department is out of step for interfering with the democratic process. If "I was only obeying orders" was not acceptable as an excuse for the conscripted participants for the holocaust neither is it an excuse for the police or the prison guards that confined Brad Love for exercising his democratic right to write to an elected official.

Alex said (February 16, 2006):

Yes, free speech only comes into being when it doesn't involve jews. No one can say anything even remotely about them but it's okay to say anything and everything about anyone else, especially about people the Zionists don't like. Smearing muslims is free speech, criticizing jews is hate speech. As for the holocaust. I have always wondered what a nazi gas chamber looked like. Strange isn't it that no picture of one has ever been seen. What is equally strange is that allied planes that flew over the camps reported everything on the ground. They reported how many barrels of oil, how many cords of wood etc. In none of the allied reports however was there any mention of coke. According to one expert, to burn one million bodies let alone 4 million would require a mountain of coke the size of Everest

Jean from Hungary said (February 16, 2006):

It seems that the caricatures of the prophet Mohammed were intended to prove that „free speech” -and thus democracy- is incompatible with the Islam. Indeed, we can see that many muslims are not ready to see their religion mocked but the muslim world has returned the question to their authors in defying the zionists to accept, in the name of the „free speech”, the criticism of what is sacred for them: the Holocaust.

Now, an „anti-semitic” cartoons contest is organised in Israel ( as a way to demonstrate that zionism and/or Judaism is, contrary to Islam, so to say „free speech friendly”. To be convincing, such a demonstration requires that the „anti-semitic” Israeli cartoons will not be only some graphical traditional jewish jokes but the mockery of what is as sacred for many jews as is the Islam for the muslims. Will these jewish „anti-semitic” cartoons mock the Holocaust or the „divine right” of the jewish people for the palestinian territories? If not, the zionist free speech demonstration will fail. If yes, how will the zionists continue to justify those „anti-hate” laws which throw in jail anyone daring to question (not even to mock) the Holocaust or the „divine” territory rights of a „chosen” people?

As for the „free speech” as a supposed absolute condition for democracy, we can also ask ourselves what is more important in a self-pretended civilized society: the right to mock publicly in the name of the „free speech” anything which can be sacred for many people (the religion or the Holocaust, for example) or the consensual restriction of such mockeries in the name of the respect we must have for each other if we pretend to be civilized. Manifestly, the authors of the anti-muslim caricatures have chosen and this choice does not honor them.

Daniel said (February 16, 2006):

Well Henry, what can you do.

I am sure there are millions of people, or more correctly sheeple, who would like to voice their opinion, on the holocaust and other events, but are just to fearful. The is no free speech in Canada, or the US. There is controlled speech.
I could say more, but you get the drift.

Elizabeth said (February 15, 2006):

Thanks for posting your commentary. I was not aware of the offense to either the Jewish or Muslim followers until I read your article. I hope that people will use the examples of these two situations to exercise their critical thinking skills and view the issues from various sides. That is what I enjoy the most from your postings; I can read what you and others have to say and come to my own conclusions. Keep up the good work.

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at