Evan Balgord, A supporter from Ontario, Helmut-Harry Loewen, Maureen Hurley, "Uncooperative Palindrome", Yellow Vests Canada EXPOSED, "No Name", "The ARC of the Moral Universe",
Eric Weiss
The reason for this decision, in the minds of the members and promoted by the proprietors of Free Dominion, is starting to become a tired, old refrain:
Well it's that time of year when Doug Christie hosts yet another misnamed George Orwell Free Speech Award Dinner (misnamed not in the sense that Orwell opposed freedom of speech, but in that as a committed socialist opposed to totalitarianism in all it's forms, he would likely be disgusted that his name was being used to honour people who share the same ideology he risked his life opposing during the Spanish Civil War). Past, ehem... winners of this, uhm.... prestigious award include Marc Lemire, Ernst Zundel, Paul Fromm, Doug Collins, James Keegstra, Malcolm Ross and, our good friends and faithful readers, the Fourniers, among others.
Because misery loves company, Collins and co. awarded the prize to another worthy recipeient:
Hey! Ogopogo! We have a Free Dominion mention in this just for you.
Have at 'er!
Paul Fromm attending a neo-Nazi meet hosted
by Blood & Honour in the United States
Another day, another mass grave found in Libya which has been attributed to the Gaddafi regime recently driven from power. While we know that there are a lot of views from our readers about whether or not we or any member of NATO should be involved in the Libyan civil war, but regardless of our differences we're willing bet that there are very, very few people who have any love for Muammar Gaddafi. To find support for him, you can however turn to the far right in Canada, specifically Paulie and former Ian Macdonald (and, of course, those remaining members of the now defunct Heritage Front not currently pushing up daisies):
Last night, in the state of Texas and the state of Georgia, two executions took place. In the first execution, white supremacist Lawrence Brewer was executed for his part in the brutal murder of James Byrd Jr., an African-American man who was dragged behind a pickup truck by a chain by Brewer and two accomplices.
The Brewer execution occurred before the execution of Troy Davis, an African-American man who was convicted of murdering an off-duty police officer in 1989. Our friend Dr. Dawg has written extensively about the Davis case and we suggest our readers view his take on what he (in our opinion accurately) describes as the American death cult in his latest update on the case.
Suffice it to say that a third judge has ruled in Richard Warman's favor and has stated that Mark and Connie Fournier must provide the ips of those named in Warman's defamation suit. It also awarded Warman costs, though that number has yet to be determined.
And now, we await the inevitable Greek Choir's lament and gnashing of teeth to occur on the Free Dominion boards.
Before we get to the main story, we thought we would share a comment left on the blog. This individual had left an earlier comment that we didn't publish and is now complaining about how we refuse to publish it because we don't want our readers to know how truly intelligent boneheads really are.
We swear that we haven't changed the quote in any way.
god damn is this site full of Pansy wont even post my comment after i make a good point, Are you afraid to make anyone who doesn't agree with you look even relatively smart like hell " herp derp lets just post the comments that make them look dumb BUT if a smart one comes along lets not post it herp derp. "
Yep, you've cracked the case. You are so intellectually superior that we are far too intimidated to allow your comments to be published on this blog for fear that you'll sway our readers to agree with your obviously well reasoned and logical conclusions.
Now that is out of the way....
While many of our readers, and most of the members of the Collective (except Sparky who is still gloating) are disappointed by the outcome of the election on Monday, our favourite fat neo-Nazi is rejoicing in the victory of Mr. Harper's Conservative Party:
We sometimes find it remarkable how much attention the folks at Free Dominion pay towards our little home on the Internet (and now that we mentioned their name, FD user Ogopogo will no doubt dutifully report that we are writing about them now). Objectively, we shouldn't matter to Free Dominion. On a good day we may get a little over 400 hits on our blog in a 24 hour period (we usually average in the 200 to 300 range, with a record of around 800 hits back in March 2009), but we suspect that the Free Dominion forums likely receive closer to 400 an hour. We're realistic enough about ourselves to admit that compared to Free Dominion, or even our friends and fellow bloggers BCL and Dr. Dawg, we're pretty small potatoes.
And yet, they have devoted entire discussion about ARC, often involving elaborate conspiracy theories, nefarious plots, sinister criminal exploits, and government honeypot programs, none of which bare anything close to an objective reality. Mark Fournier even claimed here that ARC, though we believe he actually meant the ARA which they conflate with ARC, was responsible for most of the political violence in Canada during the past 20 years (considering our oldest writer was about 12 at the beginning of this time frame and living on a farm in Balgonie, Saskatchewan which isn't exactly a hotbed of political intrigue, this claim may seem a bit far fetched). We appear to have become a Dr. Moriarty or Keyser Söze caricature to them, a shadowing figure who's tentacle's reach into almost every aspect of the underworld.
Suffice it to say we find it all a bit funny, though their leaps of logic still often leave us scratching our heads.
We have most recently been mentioned in a thread that dealt with the EDL/JDL meet and greet that took place in Toronto last week, however we're a little more interested in the beginning of the thread than where we were specifically mentioned by name:
BCL posted on this earlier in the day, though we first noticed it in the early hours of the morning.
We haven't really written about the denizens of Free Dominion for some time (except for the occasional allusion to the website), mainly because we decided that they didn't merit a comment most of the time. Still, we've continued to be interested in the Richard Warman defamation suit filed against the couple who operate Free Dominion, the website itself and a number of anonymous members collectively referred to as the Does appear to have been identified.
All of the John Does, as well Mr. and Mrs. Fournier, have been adamant that they would fight to the bitter end, claiming that this if a free speech issue and that Warman was simply trying to silence his critics.
For one of those John Does, it looks like the struggle ended yesterday:
We can only speculate as to the change of heart. Perhaps "Droid1963" worked out some sort of deal with Mr. Warman? Maybe his lawyer told him that the case would ultimately be lost and this is Droid1963's attempt at a mea culpa to try and stem the damage. Or, just maybe, Droid1963 looked at his posts, decided that he had wronged Mr. Warman, and independently posted a genuine apology.
Who knows.
Suffice it to say we were very interested to see what the reaction would be, however when we clicked on the link later, we found this:
Looks like the page was blanked. We found it ironic that the Fourniers would censor one of the John Does given their defence of the John Does' right to free speech.
To their credit, the Fourniers did eventually allow the post, however they locked it so that there would be no comments:
Remember how Lemire, Fromm, Levant, JayCurrie, Levant, Steyn, the Fourniers and, of course, "Macleans" magazine have alleged that the Canadian Human Rights Commission, "hacked" a private citizen's wifi to access and post messages on hate sites? Well, it looks like "Macleans" has had second thoughts:
The fatal shooting of a 48-year-old man by Nanaimo police outside a Selby Street apartment on Friday morning came as little surprise to some neighbourhood residents.
The 6 a.m. RCMP response to a noise complaint at the property was not an unusual occurrence according to neighbours, some of whom reported hearing multiple gunshots. Drug-related problems are common in the area, they said.
Nanaimo RCMP officials turned over the shooting investigation to the Vancouver Island Integrated Major Crime Unit and said they have previously visited the building from disturbance and noise complaints. In June, RCMP investigated a complaint of two men shooting at each other in the area.
Friday's incident began when officers called to 531 Selby St. encountered a 48-year-old man. Police called in the emergency response team and a police dog, "given the nature of the subject's response to police." Officials would not elaborate.
Police said multiple shots were fired after the man came outside the residence and confronted officers, who were waiting for the arrival of the specialized teams. Witnesses report hearing as many as 10 gunshots. Several residents who looked outside saw several officers crouched with guns drawn and heard police yell "drop your weapon."
RCMP officials will not say if the man was armed, how many shots were fired or if more than one officer shot at the man.
The victim died outside, where his body was blocked from view by sheets strung along property fences. It was removed about nine hours later. His identity was withheld pending notification of next of kin. No one else was injured.
"If our officers used lethal force, they're faced with death or grievous bodily harm," said RCMP E-Division spokesman Sgt. Rob Vermeulen late Friday. "The RCMP regrets this tragic loss of life and is co-operating fully in this investigation."
Police continue to gather and confirm details and have not determined who shot the man. They would not say if other use of force options, such as a Taser, were used.
Vermeulen said the event was "very traumatic" for officers involved, who are being offered counselling and other support.
The area is often plagued with a transient population and police said it is not uncommon to respond to drug or prostitution-related problems or disturbances.
Andrea Roy, who recently moved to the area, was not surprised.
It's the reality of the area, said Roy, whose backyard overlooked the fatal scene.
One woman who lives in the building told media the shooting "reminds me of the old days" and was unsettled by the violence. She reported she heard door-slamming and swearing in the hours before the shooting.
John Bosch, who has managed a nearby building for nearly a decade, said he was not shocked that shots were fired only metres away from his downtown home.
Several residents brought up the subject of gang warfare in the Lower Mainland and said they were not surprised violence has spilled over.
"These days it happens quite often," said Bosch.
Sisters Tanya and Cyndi Touchie have lived in the area their entire lives and neither was surprised by the shooting.
"It's where all the action is," said Tanya.
Earlier this year, Nanaimo RCMP responded to the same building after reports that two men where shooting each other. Police said at the time that the gunfire was believed to be linked to the drug trade. No one was injured in that incident.
"It's really sad that nobody is surprised," said neighbour William Overnes, 41, who recently moved into the neighbourhood. "You look at the desperation of people around drugs. A lot of people don't realize what happens in the underworld."
Victoria Police investigators with VIIMCU will lead the investigation, which will be monitored by a senior officer, in the interest of impartiality, said officials. An independent observer with The Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP will also be involved.
It is the third police-involved shooting on Vancouver Island this year.
Last month, a 40-year-old Chemainus man was injured after he was shot by police after a traffic stop.
In March, a 39-year-old Duncan man was shot and killed in his trailer home after police said other efforts to subdue him failed.
The last time police in Nanaimo shot and killed a person was in 1996, involving a man armed with a knife near the Departure Bay B.C. Ferries terminal.
We're still waiting on reports to confirm that it was Hughes who was shot and the circumstances behind the incident. Reports of Hughes' death came to light when Harold Covington, announced on his blog that it was Hughes who was involved in the incident. Covington himself is a well-known American neo-Nazi.
Related to the article we published a few days ago:
Conservative Website Hosts Mark and Connie Fournier Win 2009 George Orwell Free Speech Award
VICTORIA, October 10. While many Canadians travelled to see friends and relatives for the Thanksgiving weekend, over 125 free speechers from as far away as Hawaii jammed a hall for food, fellowship and the 24th Annual George Orwell Free Speech Awards.
This year's recipients were Mark and Connie Fournier, the former owners of [Free Dominion], a conservative website in existance [sic] since 2001. They have the unique distinction of being the victims of no fewer than three defamation suits at the hands of the ultra litigious Richard Warman, the chronic Canadian human rights complaints filer. For the past three years, the Fourniers and many of their posters have fought a staunch battle for free speech and found themselves being spied on by blind Canadian human rights investigator (don't ask how -- we don't know and he won't tell), even before a complaint was filed against their site.
One of their libel suits in currently stalled as the Fournier's are appealing a court decision forcing them to divulge the names of eight John Doe's, or anonymous posters of their website, to Richard Warman. The Fournier's are standing four square for privacy of people on their site. Their lawyer Barbara Kulaszka, calling from Ontario, warned: "This appeal is very important for freedom of speech and people posting anonymously on the Internet." She also praised Marc Lemire for "his tremendous stamina and sacrifice over the past six years to overturn Sec. 13. It always falls to individuals to carry the heavy burden," she said.
Hosted by Douglas Christie and his Canadian Free Speech League, the Orwell dinner featured webmaster Marc Lemire. Marc gave a powerful power point presentation of the struggle against Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and his recent victory, when Member Athanasios Hadjis ruled the Internet cewnsorship section unconstitutional. The CHRC is appealing (seeking judicial review) of this decision. Marc revealed further CHRC dirty tricks, including a cozy relationship with Canada Post which resulted in the closing of at least one person's post office box on nothing more than the allegation that he'd run afoul of Sec. 13.
Mr. Christie warned: "The fight for free speech is not the fight of a generation or even a lifetime."
Also present was webmaster Arthur Topham of Quesnel who is being victimized by Harry Abrams, a Victoria B'nai Brith operative, and B'nai Brith in a Sec. 143 complaint about his criticism of Zionism and Israel. Both the CFSL and CAFE have "interested party" or intervenor status in this upcoming battle,. scheduled to open in Victoria, December 14.
Representing the Canadian Association for Free Expression, Paul Fromm, the 1994 George Orwell Award winner, explained the travails of math lecturer Terry Tremaine, another Warman victim, who faces a preliminary hearing in Regina, October 19 on Warman-instigation Sec. 319 "hate law" charges about postings Mr. Tremaine made about Jews and national socialism. He was prosecuted under Sec. 13 on another Warman complaint and fined $4,000 and gagged for life (a "cease and desist" order) in 2006. Warman's complaints led to his losing his job at the University of Saskatchewan. CAFE has been raising money for Mr. Tremaine's defence.
Certain readers -- our biggest fans given the attention paid to us by them -- have claimed we engage in, "guilt by association" attacks. Of course, that hasn't stopped them from engaging in the very tactics they decry. Case in point the pro-Palestinian protests that were crashed by some members of the neo-Nazi Aryan Guard:
Heartwarming, isn't it? The Aryan Guard and Anti-Racist Action, putting aside their differences to show their outrage at Israel.
You know what, idiots? I will shake anyone's hand that I damn well please...but, unlike you guys, you will NEVER find me attending any rallies against Israel.
If you want to find anti-Semites, perhaps you should start by looking in your own freaky little organization.
That the presence of the Aryan Guard at the protest was unwelcome and the members told to leave matters little to Mrs. Fournier. That, and as we've mentioned a few times, we aren't the ARA.
Well Mr. and Mrs. Fournier recently appear to have attended Doug Christie's annual George Orwell Free Speech Award dinner in Victoria (UPDATE: Attendance of Mr. and Mr. Fournier at the dinner is now confirmed by Paulie). Among the participant in the event was none other than Paul Fromm.
Paulie has a few more events taking place in British Columbia. For example, on Friday he'll be the speaker (again) at Volksfront Canada's 15th Anniversary celebration:
And what are some of the things that Volksfront Canada stands for?
We wonder if Mr. and Mrs. Fournier had an opportunity to talk to Fromm about his association with Volksfront or, for that matter, with the Aryan Guard with whom he marched with on March 21, 2009, and of whom he paid such lovely compliments to:
Maybe these staunch supporters of Israel had the chance to discuss their concern with his views on the following subjects:
To be clear, the ARC Collective don't believe Mr. and Mrs. Fournier are antisemetic. We just think they're hypocrites. Somehow, we think they'll manage to overcome our criticism though.
It seems that the Fourniers aren't content with merely counting Marc Lemire as an ally in the "speech wars." Now they've taken it upon themselves to rehabilitate Mr. Lemire himself:
Okay, so they say Mr. Lemire isn't a Nazi. What else?
Investigated for year. Not one shred of evidence that Mr. Lemire is a Nazi or a racist. Demands proof. Any more?
Mr. Lemire posted messages on Stormfront, a known hate website, because they allowed Mr. Lemire (a non-racist) a forum to express his free speech views. And if Connie knew that Mr. Lemire was a racist, she would not defend his honour though she would still defend his right to free speech. Gotcha. Shall we continue?
An innocent victim of circumstance. A free speech martyr. Hell, at this point even we'd be willing to chip in to help Marc in his legal defence, except we know otherwise. This is starting to get good.
Well of course Kennedy would chime in. Can't be a FreeDom thread without Mr. Kennedy talking about "lieberals." We think he needs some new material.
Ah, we were waiting for this. It's the "Heritage Front was a wholly government created fraud intended to trap teens like Lemire and good, law-abiding adults like Wolfgang Droege" meme. And if he was a member of the Heritage Front, he was just 15 years old! A mere babe in the woods. Can't hold that against him.
Hell, not only was the Heritage Front a government created organization, for all intents and purposes it never even existed. All an illusion created by the government and now Warren Kinsella (the "Catsmeat" reference.... if we can agree that is a racist comment, then we'll have something to share later).
Complete, total government control. No way our mere babe in the woods, Marc Lemire, could wrest control from the all powerful federal government.... though if he did control the organization for a time, this fact would put to bed the idea that CSIS founded and controlled every aspect of the Heritage Front, instead of inflitrating the existing organization as has been stated in the msm. And wait. A person could only be a racist if they violate section 13?
And now Mark chimes in. More of the "CSIS created and controlled the Heritage Front" meme. More of the "Marc Lemire and the others who joined were victimized by the ruthless government" meme.
Are you, our dear readers, begining to feel as if you've entered a Dan Brown novel, only with better writing and a plot that doesn't lead the reader on by the nose?
Marc Lemire an employee of Zundel? Bah! Where's the proof? You know, besides that which is found on Mr. Lemire's own website and which he doesn't refute?
You know, come to think of it, Lemire wasn't even a member of the Heritage Front when he was a teen and CERTAINLY NOT a past president of the organization. Lies! All lies!
But wait? Do we hear the voices of disagreement? We think that we do.
Our hero Mark will have none of this though!
And in that, lies the challenge. Prove to Mark, Connie and the rest of the true believers that Mark Lemire is everything that he's been accused of. And, if that is accomplished, Mark will admit that he was wrong.
We'll bite.
Over the next week or two, we here at ARC will lay out the evidence that Marc Lemire is:
1. A bigot. 2. A former member of the Heritage Front 3. A former leader of the Heritage Front 4. A close associate and employee of Ernst Zundel
And we will do all of this by examining Mr. Lemire's own online record, comments and interaction with those close to him and who know him best, besides himself.
Do we think the true believers will admit they were wrong? No, but then this exercise really isn't going to be strictly for their benefit. That said, we will make an initial concession to the FreeDom folks.
We don't believe that the person pictured beside Zundel is Marc Lemire. Never have in fact and we've warned others about claiming so and using the picture as well. The age (Marc was born February 1975), facial structure, and body type bears little resemblance to Mr. Lemire. We aren't sure exactly when claim was made that the person in the photo was Lemire, but our readers will note that, although this photograph has been floating around the Internet for a few years now, we've never used it. As well, we've cautioned others against using it as well.
So, if we were to engage in the conspiracy theories the folks of FreeDom engage in, we might try to say that Mr. Lemire put this picture into the public domain with the object of discrediting people who might ultimately use it to make a connection between Lemire and Zundel. We could do that, but won't, because such a claim is patantly foolish (much like those conspiracy theories, stated as fact, by the Fourniers concerning the Heritage Front as a government controlled and created organization). In reality, stating that Lemire is pictured in the photo is more likely laziness and really bad intel.
So, ladies and gentlement of FreeDom, you have a point. One.
We'll leave our readers with this. It is the portion of Justice Blais decision regarding the Zundel security ticket. The only evidence that Marc was a former leader of the Heritage Front is a claim made by Matt Lauder, Mr Fournier? Well, here's another piece of official documentation to bolster that claim (already posted on FreeDom by someone else trying to make the case to the FreeDom folks but posted here now for our readers). You may not accept it, but it's hard to totally discount:
[26] Mr. Zündel has always supported the ideology of the White Supremacist Movement, one which is based on the fundamental belief that the white race is an endangered species in need of protection as a result of non-Whites and Jews seeking to attack the foundation of western civilization. Blacks in particular are seen as intellectually inferior, while Jews are viewed as conspiring to gain control of the world through manipulation of financial markets, the spread of communism, pornography and general moral degeneracy. The government is viewed with suspicion as it is seen to be controlled by a Jewish conspiracy referred to as zionist occupation government (ZOG). These fundamental beliefs lead to antisemitic, racist, anti-immigration, anti-democratic, anti-human rights and anti-homosexual attitudes.
[27] The Nazi Party under Adolf Hitler in Germany in the 1930s and 1940s is notoriously well known; what is less known, is the Canadian version which was developed over the 1940s and the 1950s under Adrien Arcand, who promoted Hitler as a saviour of Christianity and formed the Parti national social chrétien in the 1930s. That party then merged with the Canadian Nationalist Party from the West to form the National Unity Party. Later in the 1960s, the Canadian Nazi Party became the National Socialist Party and Mr. Zündel explained how he was influenced by Mr. Arcand himself whom he met when he arrived in Canada in the 1950s. At the conclusion of World War II, the enthusiasm of those Nazi parties around the world was greatly reduced; nevertheless, there still remained some desire to support this neo-Nazi approach. Mr. Zündel is among the few people that worked hard to maintain that support and who went to great lengths to try and establish some credibility to the neo-Nazi movement. He also tried by all means possible to develop and maintain a global network of all groups that have an interest in the same right wing extremist neo-Nazi mind-set.
[34] Mr. Zündel maintained a close association with Wolfgang Droege and even admitted that he believed Mr. Droege was involved in terrorist activities in the United States, including attempting to invade the small Republic of Dominica to establish a White Supremacist Government. Mr. Zündel's house on Carlton Street in Toronto was akin to a revolving door for Mr. Droege, as well as every other member of the White Supremacist Movement in Canada or from abroad. These members were always welcome at his house, which had transformed from a residence, into a command centre for people and organizations worldwide involved in the White Supremacist Movement.
[35] Furthermore, Wolfgang Droege and Marc Lemire, two successive presidents of the Heritage Front, spent a lot of time in Mr. Zündel's house. Mr. Lemire, the last known president of the Heritage Front, was working for Mr. Zündel part-time, and then full-time for many years until Mr. Zündel left for the United States.
[36] Mr. Zündel also maintained a close association with Terry Long and the Aryan Nations. Mr. Long was a very zealous activist in Canada, and was depicted as one of the most extreme of the leaders of the Aryan Nations, an organization founded by Richard Butler in 1974 that has among its goals, the elimination of Jews and all minorities, as well as the creation of a White homeland in the North Western United States. [37] It is troubling to hear Mr. Zündel proclaim that he is defending freedom of expression and advocating the use of non-violence, while at the same time, spending most of his time working in close quarters with the most extreme individuals and organizations in the White Supremacist Movement.
[38] If, as Mr. Zündel claims, he is not on side with extremists, is not on side with people claiming that the Jews should be eliminated and is not on side with Canadian members of the Heritage Front that wanted to create a list of members of the Jewish Movement for future retaliation, then how can he agree to participate in a meeting of the Heritage Front as a guest speaker, surrounded and supported by members of extremist White Supremacist groups in Canada?
[39] If, as Mr. Zündel said, the Heritage Front, a group described as the most powerful racist gang to hit Canada since the real Nazis back in the Dirty Thirties, was not a good idea, then why would he hire the president of that organization, Mr. Lemire, as a part-time and then full-time employee in his own personal residence?[40] If, as Mr. Zündel stated, Mr. Droege is a terrorist and was totally ill-advised with everything he has done, be it in the United States or as leader of the Heritage Front, then how can he allow him to enter his house on a daily basis?
[41] If, as Mr. Zündel claims, it is not a good idea to use websites to disseminate messages of racial hatred and incite violence in the pursuit of White Supremacist objectives and that it is not a good idea to post on the Internet a practical guide to Aryan revolution which included chapters on assassinations, terror bombings, sabotage and racial wars, then why would he qualify Bernard Klatt, the man responsible for posting this guide, as a gentle person, and maintain contact with Mr. Klatt over the years?
[49] I also have reservations concerning the scope of Mr. Zündel's knowledge of Mr. Lemire and his involvement in the Heritage Front. I believe that Mr. Zündel was well aware of Mr. Lemire's presidency and particularly of the efforts of Mr. Lemire, a computer expert, to develop websites to disseminate messages of racial hatred and to incite violence. Based on reliable evidence provided to me in camera, I believe that Mr. Zündel was in close association with Mr. Lemire, who was working full-time in Mr. Zündel's house until his departure for the United States in 2000. Furthermore, I also believe that Mr. Lemire had access to Mr. Zündel's website. Mr. Christie testified that Mr. Lemire was constantly admonished by Mr. Zündel about his behaviour; should I therefore believe Mr. Zündel's testimony that he never discussed Heritage Front business in his house with Mr. Lemire? In my view, Mr. Zündel and Mr. Lemire did in fact discuss Heritage Front matters in his house but most probably in Mr. Christie's absence.
On Thursday, October 1, 2009, the Canadian Human Rights Commission applied for Judicial Review of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's decision in the Warman v. Lemire case before the Federal Court.
The Commission applied for Judicial Review so that technical but important legal issues raised by the decision can be clarified. These issues go beyond this particular case and could have an impact on other administrative tribunals. As a result, the uncertainty created by the decision is not in the public interest and merits a binding decision by a higher court.
The application is based on two grounds. It is the Commission’s view that:
The Tribunal erred in law when it found that the manner by which the applicant exercises its statutory mandate could render section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act unconstitutional; and
The Tribunal’s findings of unconstitutionality also resulted from the adoption of subsections 54(1)(c) and (1.1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, subsequent to the Supreme Court of Canada’ s decision in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892. The Tribunal erred in law when it refused to apply section 13 of the Act because a refusal to apply subsections 54(1)(c) and (1.1) would have provided a sufficient remedy in respect of this ground.
The Commission endorses the Tribunal's narrow interpretation of section 13, which is consistent with the Supreme Court and Tribunal's jurisprudence as well as with the Commission's 2009 Special Report to Parliament. The Commission accepts the Tribunal's finding that the penalty clause is unconstitutional. In fact, the Commission itself has recommended that this provision be repealed in its Special Report to Parliament.
The Commission is a servant of Parliament and considers that Parliament's statutes must be applied unless they are found to be unconstitutional. In this case, it is the Commission’s view that the Tribunal went too far in refusing to apply section 13 in its entirety when the constitutional concern could be remedied by refusing to apply the penalty clause in 54(1)(c).
Given that the original decision was a bad decision based on a poor understanding and application of the law, we couldn't imagine that the decision wouldn't be appealed. On way or another, at least we'll be closer to some clarification.
We make a point of not visiting Free Dominion too often. Frankly, it gives us all headaches. But we did take a gander a few days ago. It appears that resident crazy uncle Edward Kennedy had (another) visit from the RCMP around September 17:
Isn't life exciting? I was contacted by, and agreed to a meeting with the RCMP earlier this evening in regards to a complaint from the inhuman rights commission. Poor babies, it seems they want to be immune from any criticism of their persecution of victims and imposition of their politically correct bs.
The constable was reasonable and pleasant to talk to during the investigation, and I gave him a lengthy statement over the issue.
I will post a review of what transpired and what was said, tomorrow and am sending the same message now to these clowns that I sent back in my statement. I am NOT going to stop exercising my freedom of expression and I am not nor will I be intimidated by the fat asses sitting on their heated thrones, thinking they can rule the wortld of thought.
More tomorrow, I am tired, and need to sleep. Working for a living does that to you, but then the arses at the hrc would not know about that. Half a day's work would kill these pompous pampered pathetic peons of pitiful political correctness.
Ed later provides more detail about the encounter:
...and now for the sequence of events.
The general public is and has been aware of my total contempt and disdain for hrc's far and wide, openly voiced here and in real life. One cannot love freedom, democracy and justice without hating the alter, and in my observations of their bullying and totalitarian tactics, my disgust and anger was, is and WILL be apparent.
The RCMP called me late afternoon yesterday and asked if they could visit me, to which I agreed immediately. However, I thought this visit had to do with an investigation over a recent filed complaint I made with the Police Services Commission over violation of oath and code, abuse of system, and duplicity/partiality of several Renfrew OPP officers.
It was interesting when I started the conversation, leading off on that note, when I realized the issue was a complaint by the crybabies at the hrc who did not like me to be so critical of their attacks on justice, democracy and freedom.
The officer made it clear this was an official investigation and read me my rights, which I summarily dismissed and invited him to bring out a tape recorder if he had one in his pack, which he did, and turn it on.
When he did I made a statement about my right to freedom of expression and I made it clear that I would not desist in any way in exercising this freedom fought for in the last Great Wars, also mentioning that I had relatives who had shot better people than hrc tyrrants.
The officer indicated this was about comments made on the "Lemire" case but I corrected this by stating every case I have observed in the jungle of hrc defecation to be similar and an attack on freedom, justice and democracy so my comments and criticisms applied to everything they had touched and defiled. He asked if I used any other computer and I stated the truth that I used only the one in my study. The initial session lasted about twenty minutes after which we had conversations off the record about the fascism of the "Places to Grow Act" wherein the lieberals had written into the act that no compensation would be allowed for landowners and that redress before the courts was made illegal. When a provincial government takes away the basic right to a man's day in court the best word for that is FASCISM and FASCISTS.
Anyway, this material will be taken to his supervisor and then to Ottawa where an official will make a decision. I think that this issue falls under "Section 59" that prohibits intimidation/threats of the hrc's, right after the part where they are given entitlement to special soft toilet paper and mandatory "bidets" in their sheltered existences. Seems that they have yet to learn that as public figures, they are subject to criticism and ridicule. Respect must be earned, and what these self important pitiful excuses for people see to not have learned is nobody, myself included, can be mandated by decree to bow down at their feet and worship their pathetic personages. I think they are a waste of human air and skin.
The issue is strictly one of interpretation and these inquisitors had better learn quickly that what I say and what their paranoid minds read into it are generally two different things. NOBODY has the right to tell me what I mean by what I say and to impose on my words their own fairy tale interpretations.
I asked the Constable to take a message to them, that they can have their fat asses transported to the local OPP station a few miles from here and under the security of the whole detachment, replete with armaments, I will entertain their questions BUT I reserve the right to ask my own. It will be I will answer one of their every time they answer one of mine.
Now how is that for a deal? We will see what they say in return. To be sure, though, I will offer no respect for a bunch of overpaid fat assed politically correct underworked busybodies who think they can impose their warped and tainted ideologies on others, least of all me.
Stay tuned, I could get lucky, they might tyake me up on my offer of the meeting. Hope though they do not mind me wearing my sawdust covered workclothes, I only dress up for suitable occasions. _________________ Please let me know if I said something that offended you. I may want to offend you again sometime.
Kennedy is a fan favourite over on the FreeDom boards so not surprisingly the denizens of the forum jump to his defense. Then again, as we've written earlier, Kennedy isn't exactly a stranger when it comes to over the top language which may be viewed as threatening and an act of intimidation:
Well here is the deal Red. There is always a comeback and retribution to those who impose injustice, and it is always more than that given. I have good people around me, today I addressed a public meeting with Randy Hillier as guest speaker, Jack MacLaren, president of the OLA, and Scott Reid who was also scheduled but could not come due to the early return to parliament.
I spoke an hour and mc'ed the meeting, my theme was "Justice Democracy and Freedom". I addressed many issues as well as the hrc fascists. Randy mentioned the hrc problem. I had told a key OLA member about the hrc thing and was called and asked about it by top OLA brass without telling anyone else. Randy Hillier called me and asked about it before the meeting today where we both spoke.
Needless to say, the boys are not pleased. This is an intimidation tactic that is not intimidating anyone, but will have the opposite effect, and when I am told who is the whiner, the shite will hit the fan.
59. No person shall threaten, intimidate or discriminate against an individual because that individual has made a complaint or given evidence or assisted in any way in respect of the initiation or prosecution of a complaint or other proceeding under this Part, or because that individual proposes to do so.
Possible punishment if found guilty is:
Offence
60. (1) Every person is guilty of an offence who
...
(c) contravenes subsection 11(6) or 43(3) or section 59.
Punishment
(2) A person who is guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $50,000.
In other FreeDom news, we heard from a friend of a friend who knows a guy that one of the John Does have filed his defense in the Warman libel suit against the John Does, the Fourniers, and FreeDom. And while we aren't aware of the particulars of the defense, we're sure it will be as successful as the last libel suit Mr. Warman was involved in.
So looks like our useless, inconsequential blog that no one reads has caught the attention of Connie and the Free Dominion folks. Again.
And they continue to claim that ARC (fyi, they now refer to as the, "ARC Collective" which makes us sound far cooler that we are and also as if we should have a secret lair in a volcano and a Weather Dominator; we're SOOOO going to start referring the the blog as the ARC Collective now) is synonymous with the ARA despite absolutely no proof to back that claim up, not to mention their claims that we are violent. And of course we've said ourselves that we have no affiliation with the ARA. But, we'll move on for now since there isn't a hell of a lot we can do to convince them otherwise (that and we don't really care much what they've chosen to believe about us). Ms. Fournier did make a request that we thought that we could provide an answer to regarding why Mr. Abrams joined her forum back in 2007. So we decided to try something novel.
We contacted Mr. Abrams and asked a few questions.
Yes, we did a bit of a search online and found his email address. And, kindly, Mr. Abrams responded:
This Connie person is completely hysterical. Anyway, it would be a good idea to get some proper info out there before it gets wildly out of hand with another game of broken telephone across even more blogs...
Connie's big hate on for me stems from when I suggested on the Westernstandard shotgun blog quite some time ago that she wasn't in a good position with Warman and would be well advised to make amends. I think I reminded her that she had repeated Fromm statements found by a judge to be libelous and this exposed herto the same liability. Of course she didn't heed that one and her blog has been pumping out malice and threats against Warman ever since and she's been drowning in legal problems and fundraising . I think I used "Brian Esker" to register at FD when the Warman matter was just getting underway, to express a similar warning, but Connie banned my IP after only a couple of postings if memory serves.
I wouldn't be surprised if Connie wakes up in the middle of the night wondering if "beating up on Warman" was maybe not such a good idea. I suppose that will be one of the questions in her cross examination in a court room one day. Connie's reference to my penis stems (pun intended) from a humourous posting to a yahoo group I did some years ago joking about a nude bicycle riding event. This should be most frightening for her, because it shows I have a sense of humour too....
Another misconception that I would like to eventually see corrected in the public eye is the accusation that we tried to change the complaint after we had filed it. In this thread:
Topham's trusty PR hack fourhorses regurgitates Topham's bizarre assertion that somehow Daniel Poulin had changed the complaint to include "Jews and non-whites" rather than "Jews and citizens of Israel." I believe that Topham misinterpreted this notion from part of the text of one of Daniel's emails as we were corresponding back and forth.
Meanwhile he [Topham] made motions over this twice in attempts to stall or dismiss the complaint. That and his quest for us to supply him with a copy of the Protocols which he has had posted on his own site all along anyway.
Unravelling this is obviously too complicated or subtle a concept for your average FD participant (like Ed Kennedy?) and both were shot down in our most recent interim Tribunal decision so I think we'd best leave it for now....
So there you have it Connie. Hope this helps explain things a bit better for you.
Oh, and further fyi, Daniel Poulin is the counsel for the CHRC while Nancy Lafontant is the registrar for the CHRT. Topham, obviously not a fan of theirs, decides to take a swipe at them as French Canadians:
....we can imagine Kurz saying to his bud Dan in the commissar’s basement, why not just drop it and replace it with “and non-whites”? That oughta fool them, eh? What the hell it’s suppose to mean is irrelevant because both you and I know that our Zionist controlled media isn’t going to give this wacko neo-Nazi shit-disturbing, truth-telling Topham any coverage anyway so we’ll just get rid of any incriminating evidence that could possibly jeopardize our chances of a big conviction and a big bucks, maximum fine. Whatcha think Dan my man?
Dan, being a good and dedicated and highly paid commissar lackey and an unwitting sycophant of Jewish lobbyists such as B’nai Brith and the CJC who control the Harper government and his own tenure, likely considered this option for a few brief moments and then responded to Kurz, “Yes, I tink dat just might work. ‘E’ll spot it for sure but so what. Besides us, ‘eem and da Tribunal, oou we already know wee’ll rubber stamp whatever we do, it wee’ll make our chances of a quick, silent and bloodless lynching virtually 100% assured. So for sure, let’s do dat Marvin. I’ll type eet up right away. What was dat again? “non-white?”
“Yes,” Marvin replies, all the while thinking to himself, “Hopefully he’ll remember it and get the spelling correct.”...
Even as stereotypical represenations of French Canadians go, this one seems a bit overly hamfisted.
Mr. Abrams also pointed out his believe that Free Dominion poster, “fourhorses” is a Topham megaphone who posts whatever Topham sends his way and has some issues with Free Dominion being referred to as a “pro-Israel/Jewish” website: “fourhorses would be happy to have us argue about the Protocols and whether the Holocaust happened for weeks or months…” Mr. Abrams also believes that it's pretty ironic that fourhorses thinks that perhaps Free Dominion has been missing something in thier coverage considering Mr. Abrams belief that fourhorses has been posting most, if not all, of Topham's statements without sorting the reality from the fantasy.
By the way, that reminds us. We also want to address this part of Ms. Fournier's comment:
Ha ha! It really stings that we are calling Old Harry on his Brian Esker-pades. Harry was too clueless to understand the PR implications of announcing that he tried to entrap someone with a fake id. After all of the flak that Warman and the CHRC losers have taken for that, it should have been obvious.
Uhm, where did Mr. Abrams try to entrap Mr. Topham? If one actually reads the content of the exchange between Abrams and Topham, Mr. Abrams was warning Topham that some of his writting was a violation of Canadian laws and suggested that they be removed:
February 12, 2007
Dear Mr. Topham,
I am writing to notify you of unacceptably racist material posted on your website at radicalpress.com
"...Jewish supremacists are poisoning, subverting, perverting, and murdering people of all races. The world is enslaved by their control and their ideologies , with the aid of treasonous gentiles...."
I am quite sure that maligning Jews in this fashion offends section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Code, which may be seen here:
13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
Interpretation
(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.
Could you kindly delete this at your nearest convenience, and advise me when this has been effected so that I can point out more articles of a similar nature also for removal.
Failure to do so may result in legal action being taken against you. Thank you for your attention,
Mr. Topham refused the request, so Mr. Abrams and the B'nai Brith initiated proceedings. That, and Abrams was upfront with the CHRC that he had used a pseudonym to contact Topham. So, where is the entrapment exactly?
