Jewish group aims to prevent anti-Semitic comedian from entering Canada

Dieudonné Jew Hater

Dieudonné Jew Hater

B’nai Brith in Montreal is trying to block the entry into Canada of French comedian Dieudonne, who has multiple convictions and fines for making anti-Semitic statements against Jews in France and Belgium.

  • ontario john

    I hear he got rave reviews in the united church observer.

  • This guy is a rabid anti-Semite, truly rabid.

    • Clausewitz

      I’d still fight for his right to free speech even if he is an asshole. It’s just that I would also work to try to make sure no one goes to his show, or at least take video’s of his supporters so we know who the enemy is.

      • He has no right to free speech, being a foreign agent of the jihad come to spread hatred and recruit more soldiers for world conquest.

        • FactsWillOut

          Please cite evidence that he’s a jihadists, in that he says “kill the infidel!”.
          Jew-hatred does not mean Islamist. I don’t hate Jews, but I don’t really like them much, either.
          The same could be said of me and the Scotts, I don’t really like them much, either, but I harbor no hatred of them, but, like the Jews, I see no reason to shower them with adulation.

          • FWO – I have been following this guy’s career for years, literally. I know French. I know what he believes and says.

  • Alain

    He clearly is a vile anti-Semite, but being a supporter of free speech I do not go along with this trying to ban people with whom you disagree from entering the country. I also have to ask just where B’nai Brith has been concerning the mass importation of those who go far beyond speech and put their anti-Semitism into action

    • See my answering comment just now.

    • dance…dancetotheradio

      I think we let him in so we can see the cucarachas who will attend.

  • John

    I have mixed thoughts about this. That he IS France’s foremost anti-Semite, there can be no doubt.

    However, were he to give some shows in Montréal, he’d attract just about every budding jihadist in the city and province as he has an enormous Arab following. He could be used as a lure to flush out the fundies and to bring them into the public eye. So allowing him to perform could have some very useful and positive repercussions.

    B’nai Brith’s approach leaves me somewhat puzzled. They generally support the current wave of immigrants from the mid-East, many of whom are rabid anti-Semites and murderously so, and yet object to Dieudonné because of his anti-Semitic antics like the quenelle salut. They don’t seem to understand that huge numbers of the immigrant constituency they champion hold views pretty much identical to those of Dieudonné.

    • Alain

      It seems to me that one either supports free speech or one does not. There should never be the cafeteria style free speech we see today. Otherwise we cannot criticise the neo-marxists for demanding that Spencer, Geller, Coulter and others be banned from entering the country. I find Dieudonnè a vile and detestable piece of shit and without any actual talent, but as long as he refrains from inciting violence and killing (which is already a criminal without any bogus “hate crime”) I have to let him be. Otherwise I would be the same as the neo-marxists.

      • No, you would not be the same.

        • FactsWillOut

          Yes, you would be just another asshole pointing guns at folk for saying stuff you don’t like.

          • You have it wrong there. Do I read personal hostility?

          • FactsWillOut

            Hostility against those who threaten freedom of speech, freedom through individual use of force, and other WASP traditions, yes.

          • Wasp traditions? Moron, you know nothing of history.

      • John

        The old adage: ‘Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer’ might apply here.

        It would be interesting to see just who would attend Dieudonné’s shows, wouldn’t it? You’d go to one of his performances, not to listen to his bile, but rather to see which faces are in the audience. A series of Dieudonné performances would act as great bait attracting the silent jihadists among us.

  • Gary

    What’s very telling about the New Canada is that there are people that will support this POS because it’s Trendy on campus and in the Public sector Unions.

    • Alain

      You are right. What is even more sickening in my view is they support fan club style jihadist murderers like Omar.

  • politicallynaive

    Let it go, freedom of speech rules here.

    • It is naive to allow the enemy into your walls.

      • Clausewitz

        Then make it known that he is the enemy. Right with you on that one. There are ways around the MSM these days. Protest long, loud, and hard.

        • politicallynaive

          why make it known, I shouldn’t have too. If you believe in free speech than it is not necessary to make it known that he is the enemy, for free speech trumps everything….

          • Clausewitz

            Some horses still have to be lead to water.

      • politicallynaive

        denying speech is a double edge sword. Look what is happening on college campuses, institutions where one should be able to air all views. instead conservatives are not allowed to air their views…
        Thais is not to the way to combat anti-semitism. Their will always be idiots that want to listen, you can’t stop that…

        • See my answer to those arguments in the longer post below.

          • politicallynaive

            I agree what you stated to FWO, only when taking into account what is happening currently in Europe, which he totally overlooks. But his point in a vacuum is well taken.
            But I find freedom speech should not be played with. Just look at what has happened since this PC culture took effect about 20years. This creeping movement of denying certain words, certain speech , certain discussions is incrementally moving forwards not knowing where will this will all end, has brought negative consequences on college campuses and political movements.
            Now, you want to further add to this garbage of denying speech, to these idiots, does not help the situation. Do you really think that denying speech is the way to fight this onslaught of what is happening,which I’m not happy with either, would solve the problem…come on. Their are many weapons in the arsenal to fight this scourge but denying freedom of speech ain’t one of them… Look at what Milo from Breitbart is doing on campuses to fight this garbage, employing speech, not denial of it. Look at Trump is doing against the PC…he is employing speech, look at Cruz, ditto.
            It is Trump’s mouth that has brought all kinds of new voters out of the woodwork that otherwise were afraid to say something due the PC culture.
            I think you shouldn’t be messing with denying speech for this has become a slippery slope

          • PN – I fully agree with your first paragraph. The PC culture has been disastrous. But I do not think you have read my comment further down here. This guy is a foreigner, member of a cult devoted to destroying our civilization. Do you think that Canadians or Americans or Brits would have, during Nazi days or Cold War Soviet days, allowed a foreign agent to come and lecture, even under the disguise of comedy, to local populations susceptible to being enrolled? Do you think they would have regarded that as against free speech? Of course not! It is simple logic to defend yourself against enemy propaganda. It does not affect free speech. The fact of the matter is that the Muslims are using the free speech laws to speak out their hatred freely, while fighting to prevent others from speaking their minds about them. In other words, they win both ways. We should be doing the same in the opposite direction, not dogmatically giving them free speech.

          • politicallynaive

            That is the problem with DEMOCRACY, for example the Muslims won’t even allow Christian churches,etc.. There is no freedom of speech in muslim countries. It is all true ,I agree. But looking at the bigger picture..have you noticed that countries without freedom of speech are 3rd world cultures,, dictatorial, authoritarian, lack of respect for women, animals,etc…Have you even checked to see how many books are translated in Saudi Arabia in to arab language…there are so few, somehow it has to be related to Islam. The UN has the figures..it is rather sad. In sum, there is a cost to denying speech, thought,etc as you look at 3rd world cultures.
            Look, it all comes down to strong political leadership that is not swayed by Left wing politics in the west. I think the left wing has done amazing amount of damage to the western oriented societies. But I also fault the Jews many of whom are so left wing oriented.

          • PN – I agree with what you say. But I still think that we have every right to deny enemies every right. They have no right of entry, no right to stay once entered, no right of speech – they should go back where they belong. If we do not have the guts to firmly say NO to these political rapists, they will indeed rape us. They are not impressed by examples of civilized behavior.

          • politicallynaive
          • Yes, truly terrible, what is going on in Universities now. And by the way, Israel is the first victim of this fascism, and then all conservatives.

            I hope you do not think that I advocate such behavior. My point is that this is not the same thing. Why?

            Because Islam is actually a mortal danger to Western countries, and not just in the imagination of some putative Islamophobes. That’s what makes the difference – the mortal danger. That’s why people like Diabledonné should be given no consideration whatsoever. It’s a war for survival and they are enemy soldiers.

      • FactsWillOut

        He ain’t my enemy, he’s your enemy. We WASP’s have a tradition of letting assholes jump on a soap box and spew their idiocy, in fact, we like it, it’s entertaining.
        I’ve decided that my enemies are those who attack my people’s traditions. This guy is no more of a menace to me than a Kalahari Bushman spouting vitriol against Zulus. Deal with your own problems, pal, don’t try to make it “societies” issue, that’s a collectivist game, something that we WASPs have and will no doubt continue to die in our millions to resist.

        • bargogx1

          You ARE a collectivist. Your comments reek of collectivism.

        • You are naive. See my longer comment further on.

        • FWO – the mark of intelligence is the ability to make fine distinctions between different things. Furthermore, your anger and use of insulting language are revealing regarding the lowliness of your intellectual and moral level. This said in passing,

          You pretend that you are defending Wasps. Apparently you do not care about any other European or non-European race or creed, such as Catholics, French, and the many other non-Muslim groups who together make up the mosaic of Canada and other Western countries. Obviously, you are not bright enough to understand that this fight, against Muslim invasion and colonization of the West, concerns everyone. Wasps are as much in danger of annihilation or enslavement or forced conversion as any other group.

          You say do not care about Muslim anti-Semitism any more than Zulu-Bushman conflicts. Clearly, to repeat, you do not understand that this is equally bad for non-Jews, including Wasps. But of course, it is evident you do not speak with the welfare of Wasps in mind, most of whom are far more sensible and kind than you are – but you are just looking for an excuse to spew your hatred of Jews, a hatred you share with this guy Diabledonné. That’s the long and the short of it.

          • FactsWillOut

            I have no hatred for Jews, but neither do I have any love for them.
            In your books, not to admire jews is hatred.

          • FWO – your manner of expressing yourself on this very page suggest deep emotional dislike of Jews. I think we have clashed on this matter before, though my memory is not sufficiently strong to remember when and what was said.

            I have never said or implied that non-admiration of Jews is hatred. I only worry about hatred of Jews, certainly not about love of them.

            You claim to be a Wasp, yet your behavior does not reflect my positive experience of Wasps throughout my life in many countries and contexts. Maybe times have changed, but I doubt you represent the norm even today. You should really make an effort to refine your soul.

            Here’s a link to Jewish history for you: http://www.hebrewhistory.info/factpapers.htm

      • John

        Agreed, but would you not be a bit curious just to see who attends his shows? He’s the flame. Just who are the moths?

        That smiling Muslim cab driver? The cheery Muslim baker you often see? That charming hijabed cashier at your local market?

        Separating grain from chaff.

  • When Hitler was alive, I would be against his coming to Canada or any other country to spread his message of hate. Similarly this guy, though a small wannabe Hitler, should not be allowed in other countries to spread his message of hate. Likewise, all Muslims should be forbidden to spread their message of hate throughout the West.

    This does not mean that Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders, etc. should be forbidden entry in countries other than their own – for the simple reason that they do not spread a message of hate, but rather warn people about Muslim hatred. Free speech is about rational speech. It is erroneous to equate the two sets of people.

    As for B’nai Brith, I agree with other commentators here that they are really quite silly people in effectively defending Muslim immigration – knowing full well that Muslims are rabid anti-Semites and a danger to Jews wherever they go. B’nai Brith are acting in a foolish manner, thinking that if they are nice to the incoming Muslims the latter will be nice in turn.

    • FactsWillOut

      Who the fuck elected you as the definer of rational speech?

    • Alain

      The problem with your idea is that contrary to the past when we identified our enemies we insist that we are not at war and that Islam is compatible with our values, culture and traditions. Were our government honest enough to do this, then I would agree about banning entry to this nutter. This is why I do not think one can compare him with Hitler, the real one.

      • See my new comment further on in reply.

  • canminuteman

    Trying to shut down the speech of people you don’t like only empowers them to do the same to you. Better to lwt them spout off whatever they want. At least that way your enemies are in the open and you know who they are.

    • They are doing the same – they, the Muslims, are expert at shutting people up using the medium of “Islamophobia”. There is no moral equivalence between Muslim hatred and anti-Muslim resistance. To allow them to lecture each other is to allow their movement to grow and become ever more militant. It is a formula for disaster. One must be practical, and not get caught up in closed-minded rigidity. There is a practical problem at hand and it needs to be addressed.

      • canminuteman

        The vast majority of people are apolitical. They need to here both sides of the argument before they can come to their own conclusions. The muslims can only bet away with using islamophobia to shut people down because we have ceded ground on the free speech issue. If we hadn’t, we would still be free to criticize them. The way it stands now, they can criticise us, but we can’t back. If we want to fight this fight we should be taking our speech rights back rather than trying to shut theirs down. When we start to try to shut theirs down, the apolitical draw the conclusion that we are as bad as they are.

        I’d like to say more but it’s time to go to work.

  • FactsWillOut

    The Jews are the ones who came up with hate-speech laws in the first place. They have no place deciding WASP policy.
    I don’t want Muzz, jews, Africans or Chinese deciding what WASPs can or cannot do or say. They all have their own countries, leave us the fuck alone, assholes! We like freedom of speech!
    Conservative freedom oriented ideas stand on their own, and as soon as you open the door to stop “hate speech”, well, you see where that gets us, dontcha?

    • bargogx1

      Uh, you are aware this blog is run by a Jewish person, right?

      • FactsWillOut

        He’s free to ban me or delete my posts.

        • bargogx1

          And well he should, but that’s really not the point. This is not the place to vent your anti-semitic views. There are plenty of sites where that sort of thing would be more than welcome, this isn’t one of them.

          • FactsWillOut

            I see. So, being critical of Jews is anti-semitism.
            One group that brooks no criticism at all, is it?

        • Clausewitz

          Funny thing is that he believes in free speech. Try getting away with your diatribes on any Regressive site, mind you they have the same point of view as you do when it comes to Jews so maybe you’d get along.

        • Facts you rally need to tone it down, I know you are able to make a point without resorting to silliness.

          • FactsWillOut

            OK.
            I’ll try to play nice.
            I sort of committed to be intolerant of those who are against individual rights and freedoms, and decided that it’s just as useful to shower them in scorn as it is to try to argue with them, and more fun.

      • I didn’t know. Is that a fact?

    • Alain

      The professional Jews who pushed for hate-speech laws could never have succeeded without the support and agreement of a much larger number of non Jewish leftists. To solely put the blame on the professional Jews is incorrect and wrong. I do not defend them any more than I do the non Jews who brought us “hate” crime laws.

      • FactsWillOut

        It was Jewish lobby groups that started that whole ball rolling, that forced the Lord’s prayer out of public schools, etc.
        The knee-jerk “Jump to the defense of the Jews” thing disgusts me.
        I don’t see any Jews jumping to the defense of the WASPs.

        • Alain

          Then you have not been paying attention, for just off the top of my head I can cite Ezra Levant and Pam Geller who have. Neither are what I call professional Jews. There are others I am sure. If you insist on being bitter and blaming Jews for all this, nothing anyone can say will change it. I do find it rather sad and disappointing, since there are plenty of people, Jews included, who understand the importance of defending freedom including free speech.

        • FWO – I jump to the defense of Wasps and other European people, even Germans and Hungarians (despite their past anti-Semitic records) every day. You are really a silly guy, unconscious of what is going on in the world right now, of the danger of Islam to you and all Wasps and all European peoples. Your anti-Semitism is oozing out unchecked. Try and control yourself and think clearly.

          • FactsWillOut

            To be critical of Jews is not anti-semetism, just like to be critical of Muzz isn’t Islamophobia. The enemy of my enemy is my friend is yet another desert wog principle that is at odds with WASPs.

          • FWO -you know nothing about Wasps. You just imagine that what you believe is Wasp belief. It is not. Or you imagine that posturing as a Wasp makes your words somewhat superior. They don’t, they still seem silly.

          • FactsWillOut

            Advocating against free speech and for hate-speech enforcement is not jumping to the defense of WASP’s, it’s actively hostile to WASP legal traditions.

          • You do not know history. How many history books have you read? I have read dozens. I know you are ignorant.

      • Alain – though I agree with you with what you say here, and very often, I invite you to review your thoughts about hate-speech.

        When Geller and Spencer or Wilders wanted to go and lecture in Britain about Muslim ambitions, they were prevented to do so by the government there (as you no doubt recall), no doubt under pressure from Muslim and leftist groups. These three were accused of hate-speech, so as to justify this, and the MSM lay this accusation on thick.

        But it is erroneous to accept the “Islamophobia” labeling used by the Muslims and their supporters. This is not hate speech, but counter-jihad, i.e. warning the public about the hate-speech, the openly declared and easily documented evil intentions, of the Muslims.

        Similarly, the Jews’ opposition to hate-speech against themselves is a justified act of self-defense, and not a cover for aggressive activities of the sort the Muslims are indulging in. So there is no moral equivalence. It is important to make accurate categorizations, and not fall into false equations.

        To support allowing anti-Jewish hate-speech, on grounds of freedom of speech, is to fall straight into the trap cunningly set by the Muslims and leftists. For this ensures that Muslim hate-speech is protected, and anti-Muslim defense speech is inhibited. You cannot protect free speech by blurring differences, but only by making fine distinctions.

    • You are no conservative. You are obviously ignorant of conservative principles. You are obviously just ranting away, driven by Jew-hatred, oblivious to any rational argument.

      • FactsWillOut

        so not fawning over and adulating Jews is hatred, now?

        • No one is asking you to adulate. Just learn to be polite and respectful to people who treat you with politeness and respect. Don’t come whining here with your personal emotional problems.

          • FactsWillOut

            LOL.
            So far, all I’ve gotten from you are ad-homs and accusations of ignorance.

          • Because your ignorance shines through – I say this with kindness. It would take months and years to educate you and show you how little you know and how badly you think, even assuming you wanted to learn. Learn for a start to be more humble and modest – that is the beginning of wisdom.

          • FactsWillOut

            So far, you have not refuted a single point I made, and now you trot out laziness as an excuse for your failure to do so.
            Allow me to spell it out so that even the dullest can understand:
            Islam are merely the shock troops used by western globalist leaders to water down and eventually destroy WASP societies and their pesky love of Individual rights and freedoms.
            By suggesting that we give these leaders more power to stop freedom of speech or movement is essentially treason against White, Anglo-Saxon tradition, and is playing into the hands of the very folk who are importing the savages.
            What was it Pogo said?

          • Not laziness – exasperation at such bad will.

          • FactsWillOut

            LOL.
            More veiled ad-homs.
            Well done.

          • Facts you are having some real issues being polite here, Chill out OK?

  • bargogx1

    So it appears as though one lone group is trying to stop this guy from entering the country. Now just imagine instead of being known for being anti-semitic, he was known for being anti-Islamic. Something tells me it wouldn’t be just one lone group.

    • FactsWillOut

      So, there are more totalitarians on one side than the other. Big deal.
      Any totalitarian is an enemy of a free people.

      • bargogx1

        Yeah, it is a big deal. If there are more totalitarians on one side than the other, if you’re actually concerned about totalitarianism, you’re going to be more concerned about that side. But then I think you’re more concerned about something else altogether…

        • FactsWillOut

          More “enemy of my enemy is my friend” crap.

  • FactsWillOut

    One side jumps to defend Jews. The other jumps to defend Muzz. No-one jumps to defend WASPs, the only actual endangered group.
    In fact, both the Jews and the Muzz have displayed overt hostility to the WASPs, and our traditions of free speech, right to bear arms, etc.

    • Alain

      Not true. Again I cite Levant, a Candian Jew, and Geller, an American Jew.

      • FactsWillOut

        Jews in the USA consistently vote in favor of gun control, we have avi here voicing that we should restrict hate speech, Jews in Canada worked to get Zundel deported, worked to get the Lords prayer out of public schools both here and in the USA.

      • FactsWillOut

        Who is Ezra’s or Pam’s Rabbi?
        That is the same argument ised to say Muzz are blameless, a good one is trotted out.
        As a voting block, Muzz and Jews are identical in voting patterns, being anti free speech and pro gin control.

    • You’re deluded.

  • Friends, let’s pursue this conversation because it is very important. Let’s go back to basics and reason together.

    First, what is the right of free speech? This right, like all the others (e.g. habeas corpus, self-defense, etc.), was designed to maintain a free and peaceful society. It was made for the citizens of free nations, like the UK or US or Canada, to be able to live freely within their borders and to feel at home without constant fear of repression by government or other groups. The assumption was that there is a certain uniformity in the population, a pool of shared values, namely the values of freedom and peace.

    Second, these freedoms were not applicable unconditionally. For example, if someone killed a fellow citizen, he lost his right to life and might be executed. If someone robbed or committed violence, he lost his right to liberty and might be imprisoned. And so on. This is the rational self-protection of the system of individual rights. The condition for citizenship and benefiting from constitutional rights is to respect and sustain those very rights. Those who do not are not given respect. This is just realism – understanding human nature and dealing with it.

    Thirdly, non-citizens, i.e. visiting foreigners, were not necessarily included in the blessings of freedom, since they were not necessarily equally committed to their maintenance. Thus, dangerous foreigners might well be kept out of the country, or once in it might well be expelled or imprisoned without too much fanfare. This is just realism, again.

    Now, let us consider the case of Muslims. Their avowed goal, inscribed in their Koran and Sharia, and expressed out loud today by countless proponents, is to overturn the rights precious to people in democratic, Western countries, including the right of free speech, to name only this one. By so doing, these people have declared themselves enemies of Western civilization. Being enemies, realistically they should be excluded from all its benefits. This is true equally well for locals (i.e. citizens by birth or by immigration) and ALL THE MORE SO for foreigners.

    It is for us, those who believe in free speech etc., a matter of survival. The paradox of tolerance of the intolerant, as one philosopher has already pointed out, is that when you tolerate the intolerant you give them the means to ultimately destroy tolerance. In other words, by naive application of a righteous principle unconditionally (see above), you make possible the destruction of that very principle. That is the paradox, and the way out of the paradox is simply to reaffirm the condition that the speaker must himself be in favor of tolerance, otherwise he is out of the discussion.

    That brings us to the present case. This man, Diabledonné, is a foreign agent, effectively. He wishes to fire up the local troops in his propaganda work for the ongoing Muslim attempt at world domination. During the Nazi or Communist period, if a foreign agent wanted to come to Canada or any Western country to excite the Germans or Russians or anyone else against the local constitution, he would certainly be kept out or imprisoned. That is simply rational self-defense. There is no dogmatic adherence to free speech when the very existence of the country is at stake.

    We, the West, are de facto at war with Islam. The Muslims have declared it and are actively pursuing this course. It is, to be sure, a war that our side’s authorities refuse to name because they are afraid to have to deal with the enormity of the problem this war poses. Notably, the need to prevent all further Muslim immigration, and the need to deport all Muslims. They prefer to temporize and compromise, hoping that the problem will somehow go away by itself. It won’t. Such passivity and timidity is suicidal. Do not be fooled by naive formulations of freedom and thereby defend the enemy’s freedoms.

    • FactsWillOut

      I haven’t heard him say anything pro-Muslum.

      • John

        Dieudonné has an enormous Arabo/Muslim fanbase. He’s the Lenny Bruce of the Jihadist movement.

        • FactsWillOut

          Has he targeted all infidels? Or just Jews?

          Hitler is pretty popular with Arabs, doesn’t make him a jihadist.
          Hitler, on the other hand, was guilty of incitement to murder, which this clown is not.
          People should be allowed to express hatred of jews, blacks, gays, white folk, whatever, so long as their vitriol doesn’t include instructions to “go forth and kill”, which is where the line of free speech/incitement to murder gets crossed.

    • John

      It is, to be sure, a war that our side’s authorities refuse to name
      because they are afraid to have to deal with the enormity of the problem
      this war poses.

      Just as strategy, do you not think allowing the guy to perform ( his fan base is almost totally Muslim) would help bring that war into sharper focus?

    • FactsWillOut

      The answer is more free speech, and more guns in the hands of citizens.
      Letting this jerk come in and spew his crap is a non-issue, letting hundreds of thousands of folk from Africa and the ME is.
      Denying this man entry sets a very bad precedent, and, indeed, voicing hatred should not be a crime, or a reason to exercise state power, no matter who the hatred is against.