Posting to the Freedomsite.Org website message board
What was posted by Warman
Is Richard Warman a racist bigot, or was he "just following orders" issued by his masters at the Canadian Human Rights Commission when he posted the headlined message above on a Freedomsite forum on September 5, 2003? Whatever the answer, the same CHRC that has ruled Bible verses to be hate speech doesn't seem to consider these words to be a problem.
But they are a big problem, for both Richard Warman and the CHRC, and the rest of what he wrote only makes matters worse.
“Not only is Canadian Senator Anne Cools is a Negro, she is also an immigrant!It may be mere coincidence that Richard Warman is in fact an Anglo-German, but it is not likely a coincidence at all that the owner of the website where Richard Warman posted this racist screed against Sen. Anne Cools came under attack by the CHRC shortly after Richard Warman began his complaint-less investigation there.
Complaint-less investigations by the CHRC have been in the news lately because information has surfaced concerning CHRC operative Dean Steacy and his official exploits as 'Jadewarr'. But compared to his colleague Richard Warman, Dean Steacy is a piker. Richard Warman enters a forum swinging as '90sAREover'.
In testimony beginning January 29, 2007 Richard Warman admitted under oath in Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearing (Case T1073/5405) that he was, in fact, the poster named 'lucy' who had registered on the Freedomsite (and other) forums. What he neglected to add was that 'lucy' was not his first Freedomsite screen name. He failed to mention that his complaint-less investigation of Freedomsite actually began two months before 'lucy' hit the scene, it began when he registered on the Freedomsite under the screen name '90sAREover'.
Another miscalculation by Richard Warman was the technical expertise of the target of this particular setup operation. Marc Lemire is a techie, a networking nerd, so it was not much of a problem for him to find information on both 'lucy' and '90sAREover' in the Freedomsite database.
The table reproduced below shows information found in the Freedomsite database comparing Richard Warman's admitted 'lucy' identity (left column) to information about '90sAREover' (right column). This table infomation was gathered by expert technology witness Bernard Klatt and submitted as evidence to a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on February 8, 2007.
Mr. Klatt concludes in Paragraph 71 of his affidavit:
"Based on the information provided in this affidavit, in my expert opinion, I concluded that the Freedomsite message board user accounts "90sAREover" and "lucy" are those of Richard Warman and that Richard Warman was the poster of the message headed "Cools don't belong in our Senate" posted September 5, 2003."
There is also no doubt that the CHRC was aware of this internet posting by 90sAREover because it was a part of the original complaint filed by Richard Warman, when referred to tribunal. But this posting is no longer a part of the CHRC complaint against Lemire, the CHRC dropped it from the complaint the day after Mr. Lemire won a decision to subpoena Rogers' internet records.
This posting by 90sAREover would be a slam dunk in a real court of law, so why did the CHRC drop it from the complaint?
This story is far from over because the attacks on Marc Lemire by the CHRC are ongoing and with no end in sight, as are the attacks on many other Canadians by this government agency. This story is also far from being completely told. More ugly twists and turns will be revealed as those at the center of it all give us leave to report the details.
Slowly but surely the truth is coming out.
And it isn't pretty.
reveal too much
Richard Warman’s strategy of maximum disruption of the lives of those who hold political opinions unapproved by Richard Warman included many tactics. He associated with violent brownshirts like those from the ARA, with painfully obvious obliqueness he counselled physical assault on his targets, he tried to frame his victims by planting evidence against them on their websites and then dragging them into a CHRT kangaroo court for summary convictions. Suing individuals in civil court was also one of his tactics, as can be seen with his attempt to silence Free Dominion via his lawsuit against Mark and Connie Fournier.
Warman’s suit against Free Dominion was likely motivated by the fact that some posters at FD had begun posting hints about the operations of Richard Warman. He understood better than any of us how much he had to hide. In the end, it was this civil suit that initiated his downfall. Instead of succumbing to fear we began to look even deeper into Richard Warman’s activities.
Richard Warman lived in his own little world where he was surrounded by pro-censorship organizations like the CHRC and the CJC. In this tight little club he received awards and accolades for selling off the liberty of all Canadians. But now the country knows what he was really doing and we are learning very much about the agencies and political philosophies that were supporting his operations. And the more we learn, the dirtier they all become.
Free Dominion published transcript evidence that Richard Warman was indeed Lucy and that Lucy and "90sAREover" (of the Anne Cools/n*gger c*nt post) were using the same computer and the same IP address. Now more IP evidence has arisen as a result of Warman’s libel complaint against Paul Fromm.
In Warman v. Fromm, Volume 1 of the Book of Documents – Tab 4 Richard Warman submits as evidence a document written by Paul Fromm titled, “Jewish Lobby being re-organized”. Richard Warman copied this document on October 15, 2003 from the URL http://www.freedomsite.org/pipermail/fs_announce/2003/001248.html.
A check of the freedomsite log files for the event in question produced this result:
What this shows is that Richard Warman printed out the document:
In 2003, Mr. Lemire was running TWO servers. One of them ran the message board (a Windows-based computer), and a totally separate Linux box was running the website. The above log entry is from the SECOND server, and is, thus, a secondary source to confirm exactly what Warman was doing.
SAME IP ADDRESS WARMAN USED ON THE MESSAGE BOARD
The second server that Lemire was running logged the visitors by either hostname or IP address. As you can see above it was the HOSTNAME that was logged.
The hostname is: wc09.mtnk.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com
That hostname matches exactly the IP address used by Warman on the message board when he registered as Lucy…which is also the IP address used in the notorious Cools post.
126.96.36.199 = [ wc09.mtnk.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com ]
You can verify this yourself on your own computer by doing this:
Click on Start button.
Click on RUN
In the box type: cmd (then click OK)
(a black DOS window will open)
Then type this exactly as I have it: nslookup wc09.mtnk.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com
You should see this:
*** Can't find server name for address 192.168.1.1: Non-existent domain
*** Default servers are not available
So here is the new timeline:
September 5, 2003: Richard Warman had the IP address of: 188.8.131.52 (Expert witness Bernard Klatt testified on this) and posted the message against Senator Anne Cools.
October 15, 2003: Richard Warman had the IP address of: 184.108.40.206. Printed material to be used in the Paul Fromm Libel case. (Book of documents – Volume 1 – Tab 3 and 4)
November 11, 15 and 23rd, 2003: Richard Warman had the IP address of: 220.127.116.11 (Warman testified he visited the Freedomsite on these dates – see page 1 of the complaint form filed by Warman against Lemire)
Click Here to see the evidence that is being submitted to the tribunal.
Jonathan Kay on Richard Warman and Canada's phony-racism industry
Posted: February 18, 2008, 1:14 P M by Jonathan Kay
Jonathan Kay | National Post
Canadians now know the precise moment when radical anti-racism became a more powerful sociological toxin than racism itself: 7:55pm EST on Sept. 5, 2003.
That is the date-stamp on a particularly vile posting, left by an anonymous user on the message board of the right-wing web site freedomsite.org, attacking Canada ’s first black senator. It read as follows: “Not only is Canadian Senator Anne Cools is a Negro, she is also an immigrant! And she is also one helluva preachy c*nt. She does NOT belong in my Canada . M y Anglo-Germanic people were here before there was a Canada and her kind have jumped in, polluted our race, and forced their bullshit down our throats. Time to go back to when the women *** imports knew their place … And that place was NOT in public!”
Horrible, shocking stuff. But even more shocking is the identity of the fellow whose electronic fingerprints were all over the message: famed Canadian human-rights lawyer Richard Warman.
Warman is a legend in anti-racism circles. A former member of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, he’s launched countless complaints against right-wing extremists, and won almost all of them. But during proceedings surrounding one of Warman’s 2003-era complaints against freedomsite, the respondents turned the tables. A computer expert named Bernard Klatt did some digging under freedomsite’s back office, and determined that the Cools posting had been made from a computer bearing the IP address 18.104.22.168, the very same address from which Warman had admitted to visiting freedomsite using a different alias.
Other technical details – such as the operating system and Web browser being used – also provided an exact match to Warman. Based on this evidence, Klatt concluded in a recently publicized affidavit, “Richard Warman was the poster of the message headed ‘Cools don’t belong in our Senate.’ ”
Does this mean Warman is a closet bigot? I doubt it. What seems more likely is that – like other anti-racism activists – Warman simply found himself running out of Aryan Nation types to chase around the Internet. And so, under this theory, he decided to just start typing the stuff up on his own computer – and then added these self-authored “racist” postings to his blunderbuss brief against freedomsite. (As Klatt notes, Warman has been accused of perpetrating the same sort of stunts on other right-wing Web sites.) When you’ve got profitable hate-speech cases to prosecute, why wait for some unemployed conspiracy theorist to start raving against immigrants when you can just manufacture the evidence yourself?
Bizarre as this episode may be, it is of a piece with a larger trend – symbolized, south of the border, by the shamefully trumped up case against the Duke University lacrosse team. The anti-racism industry, running out of legitimate hatemongers to go after, has gone rogue in its search for attention and relevance.
It also raises the question: How many other faux-racist frauds are out there? Thanks to Warman, it's a question I now think about every time a Canadian hate-speech activist or blogger publicizes an email he gets from some firstname.lastname@example.org or other. These poisonous messages are held up as dramatic proof that there are still plenty of Nazi types out there – and that without hate-speech laws to shut them up, the country’s gays, Jews, Black and Arabs will remain at risk of verbal assault, or worse. But if the picking are so slim that anti-racists have slid into second careers as fiction writers, what does that say about the scale of the problem? How many of the other examples of “hate” that you see out there are similarly bogus?
The anti-racism industry has become an industry like any other: As the actual need for what its peddling has diminished in this extraordinarily tolerant nation, the industry’s various profiteers and carnival barkers have created myths and exaggerated fears to prop themselves up.
As I’ve written before, this would not be so much a problem if their various speech codes were used merely to prosecute men such as David Ahenakew, Ernst Zundel, Jim Keegstra and the like. But in the post-9/11 era, radical anti-racists are also agitating to shut up sensible people saying sensible things about the war against militant Islam, the defining global struggle of our era. They’re also giving comfort to Islamists who seek to carve out sectarian taboos from our hallowed tradition of free speech.
All of this would be destructive enough on its own. When the censors start churning out the hate speech themselves – that makes them as much a farce as a menace.
Sunday, January 20, 2008"Yeah, I'm a fascist, but for the Left..."
-- Woody Allen in Manhattan (1977)
This post must be read to be believed.
Looks like Richard Warman, the ex-Human Rights Commission employee who uses the Commission as his own personal s&m dungeon/ casino, has been well and truly toasted.
FreeDominion says Richard Warman wrote something disturbing at another website that I won't print here because The Shotgun isn't my blog (but FreeDominion claims to have the ISP addresses to prove it).
Be sure to read the whole thing, and, please tell your MP what you think of this use of your tax dollars -- funding employees and ex-employees of the HRC in dubious "undercover" activities.
January 21, 2008 |Not content with having the Canadian Human Rights Commission act as his own, private, shakedown agency, the easily offended Richard Warman has, apparently, taken to posting vile, racist, remarks under a now traced phony name. I am not going republish this filth on my blog but go over to Free Dominion for the details.
Three observations: first, this is profoundly corrupt. Fake posts written by a serial complainant who then complains about the fake post should be enough to prompt a full scale, judicial, inquiry into the CHRC. How many other bigot-bots has Richard Warman fired into forums and comment sections and then complained about. At a minimum every one of Richard Warman’s complaints to the CHRC - and he has won all of them - should be re-investigated for fraud.
Part of that judicial inquiry should focus on how complicit the CHRC or its staff have been in this Richard Warman fraud and any others which may have occurred.
Second, Richard Warman is a lawyer. As such he is not supposed to be defrauding quasi-judicial bodies such as the CHRC. As this story gains traction it will be interesting to see if, for example, the proprietors of Free Dominion, ask the Benchers of the Law Society of Upper Canada to investigate.
Third, the losing parties in Richard Warman CHRC complaints would be well advised to seek legal advice as to the possibility of re-opening their complaint and/or looking to real courts for damages against Richard Warman and the CHRC.
Frankly, what little credibility the CHRC had has just been shredded. If the Tories had any stones they would shut the Commission down pending the outcome of a really hardcore, judicial, investigation of Richard Warman’s fraud.