Showing posts sorted by relevance for query warman free dominion. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query warman free dominion. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, February 25, 2008

Richard Warman Does Not Sleep, Richard Warman Waits

...and then Richard Warman strikes.

And so the other shoe finally drops on Ezra Levant, with Warman threatening a lawsuit against him. Meanwhile, Ezra's still standing behind his Nazi re those racists posts on Senator Cools, betting that the attribution of the posts to Warman by Ezra will not make it into the final lawsuit, although they figure prominently in this letter to Ezra written by Warman's lawyer..

Not that I would want to help Ezra out, but this point deserves comment:

I started poking around a little bit about those disparaging comments about Sen. Anne Cools, because they’re obviously a source of embarrassment to Warman – he seems to have complained to the National Post when they attributed those words to him. The Post decided to cut bait and move on – they’ve been Canada’s best champions of free speech, so they deserve a little slack for not digging in. But, unless I’ve missed it, in at least two other legal actions – his defamation suit against Free Dominion, and his human rights complaint against Marc Lemire – Warman has conspicuously omitted any reference to their claims that he made the Anne Cools remarks.

In the case of Free Dominion, Warman's first complaint was filed on September 20th of 2007, well before the Anne Coosl material surfaced on that forum. I am not a legal expert, but have been informed that it would simply be a matter of broadening the suit to add this particular allegation to the original list of defamatory material. We may see this happen within the next few days or weeks.

In any case, an important development. It will now come to be revealed how much of the Speechynista case against Human Rights Tribunals has been founded upon the word of Nazis.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Free D In Dutch Again!!!

Connie at Free Dominion writes:

Tonight we answered a knock on our door and we were served with papers from Richard Warman (famous human rights complaint filer).

She's right. Insofar as one can become "famous" in Canada for launching civil rights complaints, Richard Warman is:

Warman is best known for initiating complaints against members of the white supremacist and neo-Nazi movements for violations of the Canadian Human Rights Act, regarding Internet postings and website content of those individuals or organizations. As a result of his work, in June of 2007 Warman received the Saul Hayes Human Rights Award from the Canadian Jewish Congress for "distinguished service to the cause of human rights".[1]

He is/was also active in the Federal/Ontario Green Party, where he has run as a candidate several times in various ridings around the province.

Warman charges that, during the whole episode involving Marie Gentes and her CHRC complaint:

...you have spoken words and/or written words and/or published words that are defamatory and libelous to me appearing on the website http://www.freedominion.ca/.

You can read his whole list of charges at Free-D (through the first link). I should say that I think most of the stuff that Free-D posters have accused him of is pretty mild, but I am not an expert in libel law. It is also unclear to me that Mr. Warman understands that the "you" he is referring to above includes not just Connie and Mark, but their hundreds(?) of regular posters (although I suppose one could argue that they indeed "published" the comments by hosting the forum).

In any case, as his wiki entry indicates, Mr. Warman seems far more bloody-minded about this sort of thing than Ms. Gentes, so his case is much more likely to be seen through to its conclusion.

Also, I don't think Connie has done herself much good in enlisting Neo-Nazi Marc Lemire to help "research" the comments that sparked the complaint. Although her response to this particular point is interesting:

I couldn't disagree more with the white nationalist point of view, but I am also disgusted by people who would use the government and the courts to try to shut down everyone they disagree with.

Marc Lemire has been fighting Richard Warman's complaint with the CHRC and he has been winning because Warman has been caught doing things like posting on white nationalist sites under fake ids. (Thus the links to the white nationalist sites in my post).

The information that Marc Lemire has provided us is verified court evidence that shows what Warman has done in the past. I am not going to refuse to take it because it was given to me by Marc Lemire.

Oh well, time to get out the pop-corn again. I will update as things change.

And, oh yeah, h/t to Buckets.

Friday, November 09, 2007

Stormin' Warman Strikes Again, Or Free-D Part III

The pattern has continued for two months now. Someone at Free Dominion says something stupid about rights activist Richard Warman, and Richard Warman delivers Free-D owners Connie and Mark legal papers claiming libel. Connie and Mark post the contents of the papers, and more stupid stuff follows. Here's the latest episode, and the responses thus far include a vagueish hint by one poster as to what might happen if he gets Warman alone:

Like I said before crybaby, it is VERY easy to ascertain my name and address, and in fact, just give me a call and you can make an appointment to meet me at my place. It is semi isolated and we could interact free of interruption. And as you wish, the Ottawa police would be a loooong way away and I guarantee you our meeting would be betwen just the two of us.

Your move clown!


Last days of Free-D? I wonder.

As for Warman, the guy's got an interesting hobby. Unfortunately, actions he has taken against this anti-warman site have resulted in the disappearance his fascinating presentation (a .pdf file) to the ARA re his "Maximum disruption" strategy. He claimed copyright infringement, that the document in question was posted without his permission, but if anyone wants to fight Nazis in their part time, the paper contains all sorts of good advise. Here's hoping it appears elsewhere soon.

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

How Times Change

This is a picture of the National Post's Jonathon Kay.  I know its hard to look at, but bear with me.  Note the cup he's holding.  It's demonstrates solidarity with the "Canuck 6" a collection of far-right bloggers that Richard Warman sued several years back (and is suing still, because that's how slowly the wheels turn) for defamation, in part because they reproduced a column Kay wrote, and then pulled down, and which the Post quickly issued a grovelling apology over.   Note the two folks bottom right: they are Mark and Connie Fournier of Free Dominion.  Troll over there this morning and you see the headline: National Post teams up w/ Warman, sues Free Dominion.  And there's this:

The case itself is interesting.  Free Dominion reproduced Kay's column, but during his action(s) against the NP, Warman got hold of the copyright and demanded Mark and Connie pull it down.  Connie and Mark responded by re-cutting and summarizing the original so they could use it via an appeal to  "fair dealing" , and a federal court accepted their  reworked version.  Geist's take on that decision, which is being appealed in the legal documents linked to above, can be found here.  The result will have some import on on-line behavior going forward, as it will help determine how much of a column, for example, can be quoted before copyright is infringed.

I usually cheer for Richard in these cases, though here I cannot even pretend enough knowledge of the law in question to offer a guess as to how things will turn out.  But BOY!! what about that National Post and their commitment to Free Speech, to the bloggers that got sued for referencing their publication?  When the going got tough, the NP got going...fleeing that is, hiding in the grass, grovelling and begging, abasing themselves mightily,  promising to raise their children as good Muslims, follow sharia law and take up the veil!  (Note: I'm just kidding about that last bit, but I bet they would have if Warman had demanded it!)

Never rely on what a newspaper tells you.  Never believe them when they say they're prepared to go to the wall with you and for you.  In the end, you will always be on your own.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Warman Vs. Free Dominion: A Few Threads Tied Up

As part of his on-going legal action against the on-line forum Free Dominion, Ottawa human rights lawyer Richard Warman has been trying to get IP addresses and other information from the site owners in order to determine the identities of the remaining anonymous posters that he has accused of defaming him. The first time this particular motion went before a judge Mr. Warman was victorious. A second judge, however, ruled that the first had not adequately addressed the free speech/privacy issues involved, and asked that Mr. Warman show a prima facie case for defamation before ordering the site owners Mark and Connie Fournier to turn over the relevant documentation. Well, a third judge has spoken, and guess what? Your right to post anonymously is not absolute:
And since these postings were prima facie defamatory:
I'm not going to publish the entire decision, as it contains the defamatory statements at issue.  I've read it through, though, and there's nothing particular surprising in the reasoning as far as I can tell.  If you anonymously libel someone on-line, don't expect to make privacy and free speech your defence.

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Free-D Update: Here Come The Nazis!

In recent episodes, rights activist Richard Warman threatened Connie Wilkins-Fournier and Mark Fournier of Free Dominion with libel (something about calling Warmen a "devious character"), and in reply Connie and Mark talked tough about free speech etc.

Well, Connie and Mark have attracted a new champion! Prominent Canadian Neo-Nazi Paul Fromm has written in support of Free-D from his lair at Stormfront, lashing out at Warman in an open letter to all "Free Speech Supporters". Congratulations Connie and Mark. Your White Knight has arrived!

But wait! Warman's not taking this missive lying down! He's peeved, and is threatening a CHRA complaint against Paul Fromm if the offending letter isn't removed from Stormfront by the end of today!

What shall our brave Nazi do? Stay tuned!

PS, I notice that Paul Fromm's lawyer is Doug Christie, Canada's semi-official legal champion of the Right Wing fringe. He and Warman have crossed swords on a number of occasions and I wonder if, when these things settle, they don't go out and have beers together.

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Free-D Update: Did Free-D Lawyer Bust Santa?

It's odd enough that the Free Dominion crowd should have hired lawyers at all to defend them in their libel case against rights activist Richard Warman. Previously, their preferred method of dealing with his accusations has been to hurl even more abuse. But it is even stranger that they should have hired Ottawa lawyer Kenneth Bickley, for Mr. Bickley appears to have been a one time storm trooper in the war against Christmas!

In fact, it looks like Mr. Bickley has gone after Santa himself. Witness this secret document from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners:

Accounting frauds are fair game; corporate swindles and scandals too are fair game. But the reality is that for decades there is a more basic fraud, which has gone unnoticed, unprotested and undetected--Just in time for the festive season, the Ottawa Chapter of the Certified Fraud Examiners is pleased to be the venue where the fraud of Santa Claus will be exposed. Using tried and true techniques of a certified fraud examiner, our speaker will take you through the mechanics of the fraud and leave you puzzling over how the CFE can assist in preventing similar frauds in the future.

Speaker: Kenneth Bickley


Barnes Sammon

Our speaker, Kenneth Bickley (aka Klown Counsel), will hopefully be assisted by a mysterious visitor--the culprit in person--who will be caught red handed in thecontinued perpetuation of the fraud.

Note the ambiguity of the phrase "the culprit in person", which suggests the possibility that we are dealing not with Santa himself, but one of his army of android lookalikes. Note also that I hate Santa as much as anyone, in fact I probably hate Santa far, far more than most people, so I am inclined to cheer Mr. Bickley on whatever the particulars of the matter. But there must have been some hardcore eating of crow amongst the ranks of Free-Ders when they hired this guy.

And Oh My GAWD LOOK!! Mr. Bickley's firm, Barnes Sammon, provides service in Chinese, and lists "Canadian Immigration" as one of their services. Free Dominion is being defended by a bunch of immigration lawyers! Such irony! The "principled Conservatives" over there must be in convulsions.

But I guess committed far Right legal talent is difficult to come by, far too difficult to require ideological purity from your counsel. Doug Christie can't be everywhere, after all!

Monday, September 24, 2007

Free Dominion Update: Bits And Bites

Not much to report on Richard Warman's libel suit against Free Dominion. Connie is contemplating some new security measures (screening software) to keep the people too wingy even for Free-D from posting material that will get the Board into trouble in the future. Seems white nationalists have been popping up left right and center since this whole thing started.

One interesting note. Several years ago Warman took on the Neo-Nazi organization known as Storm Front. At the time he "infiltrated" the groups forum and posted on numerous occasions using the name "Pogue Mahone" (Irish for "Kiss My Ass"). So...not entirely without a sense of humour.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Blast From Past: The Dawn Of The Speechy Wars

It's ancient history now, but nevertheless an interesting addition to our knowledge of the early days of the Canadian Speechy Conflict...

Connie and Marc Fournier--owners of the oft sued FreeDominion BBS for "Principled Conservatives"-- have recently received a large if largely redacted set of files from the CHRC (Canadian Human Rights Commission). They have created a .pdf of this material, which pertains to the first hate-speech complaint raised against them by one Marie-Lynne Gentes in 2007.

And, reading through the documents, it looks as though Connie and Marc got screwed. Not by Richard Warman or the CHRC or Marie-Lynne Gentes, but by anti-gay activist Bill Whatcott, who they have defended fiercely as an ally over the years.

(As an aside: criticizing Bill was what got me booted from FreeD. I told Connie and Marc: This guy is bad news. You need more enemies like me around to keep you out of the trouble your friends get you into. But they didn't listen. Later, they tried to have me fired. Whatever).

Reading through the .pdf, it becomes clear that Whatcott's anti-gay pamphlets, which he was distributing door-to-door (in Edmonton, I believe), bore FreeD's URL; in other words, from Whatcott's pamphlet's you would reasonably conclude that Free-Dominion was his website, a fact the Fourniers had no knowledge of (and something Whatcott did not see fit to tell them). So when the CHRC decided to proceed against Whatcott's on-line activities, they naturally turned on FreeD.

Interestingly enough, the gang at Free Dominion are still blaming the usual suspects for their troubles. Given their ideological commitments, I'm not sure they will ever be able to correctly perceive Whatcott's treachery.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Free Speech Throwdown: Warman Vs. Des Rosiers

I attended the Freedom of Speech and Hate Speech in Canada debate held by CIJA last night, pitting Richard Warman against Nathalie Des Rosiers of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.  I intended to live-blog the event with my new, incredibly sexxxy Acer Iconia, but the place didn't have wifi, so these remarks are just off the cuff.

And I won't say much about the debate itself, because frankly I'd heard most of it before.  RW was thorough and logical in his responses, and most of his jokes worked.  Des Rosiers was passionate, but I found her vague in places.  Her objection to S13 being that someone's right to free speech somewhere might get chilled somewhat some day...though she couldn't point to concrete instances of this actually having happened.  My impression is that the majority of the room was in Warman's corner.

I chatted briefly with Meir Weinstein, who is a civil enough fellow in person.  If I were to summarize his current views, it is that the white supremacist movement has been entirely supplanted by radical Islamists as a threat to the Canadian Jewish community (mostly by being a threat to Israel), and that really the latter group are the only ones worth pursuing these days.  I think he's dead wrong, or at least that it isn't an either/or (but not both!) proposition.  And I don't see why he would want to see S13 discarded as one of the tools in the tool-kit for fighting hate, whatever the source of that hate.

As a side note, Meir and the gang (including possibly a small contingent from the Canadian Hindu Advocacy) will be driving up to Quebec later this month (the 26th, I think) to protest Huntingdon Mayor Stephane Gendron's recent remarks on the Israel/Palestine conflict.  These are the latest in a series of inflammatory statements by the fellow, and a few have clearly strayed over the line into Anti-Semitism.  More power to Meir and Co., then, but be careful--don't get yourselves lynched out there in the back-country!

Gary Harding, the only Canadian to be convicted of hate-mongering under the criminal code, was also in attendance.  And, minus the beard, he looks astoundingly like Dr. Dawg.  And that's not a joke or an attempt to insult the Dawg; Harding even had the same style of hat.  I almost went up and said hello, but noticed a mad gleam in his eye (Dawg also has a gleam in his eye from years of NDP indoctrination, but its a slightly different gleam.  That's how I could tell the difference).  I didn't catch much of what Harding said to the people around him; however, a couple of them looked as though they wanted to change seats but were too polite.

It doesn't seem like anyone from Free Dominion showed up, through apparently several of them watched via webcast.  That's a pity, because  there was a FreeD guy sitting next to me at the Lemire hearing whose name, and a DNA sample, I wanted to collect this time out for inclusion on my personal enemies list. 

Went out for drinks later with Bernie Farber and other notables from the old CJC.  Almost all of our discussion was ruled officially "off the record", and will remain so, because I don't want to get sued nine ways from sideways.  However, the general sense seemed to be that this was all window dressing and, no matter where CIJA eventually comes down on the issue of section 13 (they're currently fence-sitting), its gone which--given how hard it is to get the police to act on a hate speech complaint via the criminal code--means Canada will have no viable legal means of combating hate speech.  There have been hints dropped that, as a replacement, the Tories will move to make the criminal code provisions easier to use, but nothing concrete so far.  In any case, we shall see.  There will be a fight in the HOC over Storseth's bill to repeal the measure; so far nobody from the NDP or Liberals has come out in support.  And surprises can happen, even in a majority parliament.

Finally, Ron Bannerjee of the Canadian Hindu Advocacy was apparently in attendance, but I did not meet him.  Which is also a pity: one of my readers recently commented that the guy was an honest to goodness porn star, which remark I deleted as possibly defamatory.  Maybe Ron could clear this up, though.  If its true, my hat is off.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

FreeD Vs. Warman: The Obvious Occurs

Free Dominion is ordered to turn over IP addresses for the "anonymous eight", an octet of true Conservatives so committed to the principles of Free Speech that they are willing to hide behind pseudonyms in order to slander Richard Warman.

The most important bit of the ruling is here. Warman gets access to

Now, Connie claims that:
For well over a year, the IP address information on every post has recorded the same number: 127.0.0.1

...and I'm not sure if year old IPs will help much in establishing the anonys' identity (though a few cases this can be figured out from strictly on-line sources). It occurs to me, however, that a number of these people claim to have contributed to the FreeD defense fund, and if the Fourniers are required to turn over billing details of these transactions, then that should seal the deal.

Another nice bit:

In the case before the court, we are dealing with an anti-hate speech advocate and Defendants whose website is so controversial that it is blocked to employees of the Ontario Public Service.

Apparently, FreeD can make you go blind.

Finally, none of this should have come as a surprise to anyone that's been paying attenion. As Judge Kershman wrote:


The fact that they're all sitting there stunned at FreeD speaks to a wilful ignorance of Canadian law and, since Connie and Mark are receiving paid/professional legal advice, speaks I think to the fact that they are playing forum members for saps.

PS. The Fourniers got dinged $5,000 by the judge for forcing this whole silly motion and hearing in the first place.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Free-D Update: Something About Being Called An "Ambulance Chaser" Obviously Went Down The Wrong Way

Richard Warman has followed up his original libel complaint against Connie Wilkins-Fournier and Mark Fournier of the ultra-Conservative e-bulletin board Free-Dominion with a second complaint based on the flurry of insults inspired by his first, of which "ambulance chaser" is among the least obscene. The whole list can be found here. "Unwashed hippy" and "devoted crypto-jew" are among my favorites.

And here is a link to an Anti-Warman site, where I found this speech to the ARA in which Warman outlines his techniques and modus operandi.

Thursday, January 23, 2014

The Price Of Free Speechiness?

The Richard Warman Vs. Free Dominion defamation case has been winding down for awhile now.  The Fourniers lost.  Had their asses handed to them, in fact.  In addition to $43,000 in damages, we find today that  they've been hit with $85,000 in costs:


Meanwhile their latest funder stalled out after raising  $23.67.  Connie's been talking about selling her pancreas. Mark was trying to sell his liver, but it was deemed hazardous materials.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Free Dominion Loses For Good And All

 Some background here.

Ottawa human rights lawyer Richard Warman had already won on this issue, but the Fourniers requested leave to make yet another appeal, which was turned down yesterday.  The upshot is that they will have to cough up IP addresses and other information on the anonymous posters who, Warman alleges, defamed him on the Free D Forum.  And of course the defamation lawsuit against them and other FreeD participants will now go forward, presumably. 

More generally, the four-part legal test noted above seems to have become the strandard in Canadian law for determining where the balance between protecting on-line privacy and applying defamation laws lies in particular instances.

Finally, the Fourniers will need to cough up costs, probably in the low five digits. 

Monday, August 10, 2009

Date Set

...for an appeal of the ruling in the FreeD vs. Richard Warman case wherein Free Dominion owners Connie and Mark Fournier were ordered to turn over the IP addresses of eight FreeD members who allegedly posted defamatory comments re Mr. Warman.

And that date is April 6, 2010.

At the time of the initial ruling (back in March) Toronto employment lawyer and progblogger Garry Wise wrote:

An order for disclosure may have been justifiable if the statements made by the anonymous posters were, on their face, apparently actionable.

The Court's disinclination, however, to engage in any factual analysis of the alleged defamation or the necessary balancing of competing interests has created a dangerous precedent that should not be allowed to stand.

Interestingly enough, Gary was at yesterday's ProgBlogs BBQ and we fell to talking about this issue. If I am remembering his remarks correctly, his instinct was that the original decision would be upheld, but the missing "factual analysis" would hopefully be filled in by the appeals judge.