I have read at a few spots that the Blogging Tories will drop Small Dead Animals from the blog roll. Have you heard this?
Posted at 2008-04-11 04:47:08 [PermaLink]Mark,
Thanks for the link. I've posted a further link to a fascinating if lengthy discussion of the technical evidence regarding the infamous "Anne Cools" post, the one alleged to be by Warman. The commentator appears to know what he's talking about, and there's some solid reading here for those interested.
"...but he does recognize the consequences for bloggers and commentators on his side of the aisle if Warman gets his way."
I, meanwhile, would note from the Ontario HRC: "I think one needs to be very careful when one speaks in generalities, that in fact one is speaking factually about all the people in a particular group."
So, you know how when you say that "X is more ... than Y" or even "X has a higher ... rate than Y", you need to explicitly add that "Of course, this doesn't mean that every X is more ... than every Y" or some idiot is going to chime in with "So you're saying that EVERY SINGLE X is more ... than EVERY SINGLE Y? HUH? HUUUHHH?!?!?"
Well, that's now enforceable by law in Canada.
"The commentator appears to know what he's talking about, and there's some solid reading here for those interested."
I don't know enough of the details of how Nelly Hechme was tied to that IP (particularly what timespan was checked) to know whether his analysis (which spans months) is relevant. But it's worth noting that the evidence was good enough for Bell Canada and the OHRC to publicly single her out. If they're really that reckless with assigning identities to alleged violators of the law, there's a problem here that goes way, way beyond whether one of Warman's staffers planted this particular piece of evidence, and how.
Otter:
Some facts.
1) It was the CHRC, not the OHRC, and the information should not have left the hearing. It did, courtesy of Marc Lemire.
2) The nub of Buckets' argument, as I understand it, is that the IP address in question is that of a regional proxy server open to hundreds of thousands of subscribers. That should alter the technical discussion somewhat, which up to now has been in the hands of one neo-Nazi "techie" and a veritable army of the credulous and the righteous.
Your attempt to shift the goalposts is duly noted. Just watch the IP arguments by the Lemire team vanish into thin air at the libel trial. That dog is dead.
"The nub of Buckets' argument, as I understand it, is that the IP address in question is that of a regional proxy server open to hundreds of thousands of subscribers."
Doesn't that imply that Nelly Hechme (or someone very near by) was using the same identity on a hate site as the CHRC? The simpler explanation is that someone from the CHRC used her open WiFi. The interesting question is how they would have accessed it given their offices are two blocks away.
Bruce:
The technical discussion is way past my level of competence. But if Buckets is right, and the IP address is that of a regional proxy, then a large number of people would be using the same address simultaneously--it's not their personal address, but that of a server.
Perhaps you should take up your arguments with Buckets, though.
From the OHRC:
"Islamophobia is a form of racism that includes stereotypes, bias or acts of hostility towards Muslims and the viewing of Muslims as a greater security threat on an institutional, systemic and societal level."
Islam a race? What a bunch of fuckwits. Apparently the HRC's find the following trash perfectly acceptable - no doubt because it was published by that race called Muslims. There's lots more where this came from in case anyone cares to read it. This material came from an Ontario publication - enjoy your new neighbours.
I wonder if Dawg finds this acceptable?
"Most white people lie with impunity
and deceive others without remorse
and shame. Dishonesty and deceit
are favorite pursuits of many
Western white people. They feel
proud and smart to outdo someone
with lies and deceit. In every walk of
life, prominent genetic character-trait
of dishonesty and deceit prevail in
the white population, even to this
day.
History records that the white people
of the West are the greatest robbers,
thieves, dishonourable thugs and
pirates of the world."
"In other words,
most Western white women are cruel
and immoral, shameless and
remorseless, unpleasant and
obnoxious, unlovable and
undependable. Not only are they
totally out of tune with the needs of
the child and the family, but they are
also counterproductive and
damaging to the interests of their
children the families. Such women
can not breed, groom, and raise
mentally sound children and law
abiding citizens."
"Even mothering is at
stake due to unreliable and
irresponsible, unpredictable and
unaccountable, intolerant and
impatient, rigid and resistant,
inflexible and unreasonable,
ungrateful and unfaithful, selfish and
self-centered, greedy and powerhungry,
ungiving and unobliging,
controlling and castrating, materialistic and sadistic, insensitive
and abusive, intrusive and
disruptive, abrasive and repulsive,
competitive and coercive,
manipulative and aggressive,
punitive and vindictive, oppressive
and repressive, vicious and
malicious, emancipated and defiant,
deprived and depraved, unfeminine
feminist females."
As soon as I followed the links to the Klatt "evidence" (including such nonsensical comparisons as "logged onto message board only twice" and "very short usage time" [14 min. vs 120 min.!]), I realized that this guy was blowing smoke out his ass. I don't claim to be an expert but, having worked for a small ISP (which buys bandwidth from Bell), it was clear this "techie" either knew almost nothing about the assignment of addresses (not to mention the huge issue of proxies that Buckets lays out so well) or was being disingenuous. Probably a combination of both.
In short, much as I cringe at "human rights" tribunals, this case is largely about defamation and the more reputable bloggers involved should have known not to get into bed with neo-Nazis (something even Charles Johnson at LGF has been very careful about).
Bruce: "The interesting question is how they would have accessed it given their offices are two blocks away."
They could have been sitting in a Second Cup within the building sipping a latte or parked outside.
1) Obviously I understand that "The nub of Buckets' argument...is that the IP address in question is that of a regional proxy server." That point needs to be taken in the context of other technical details of Bell Canada's findings, of which I know nothing either way.
2) It's hardly shifting the goalposts to wonder if Bell Canada and the government would have had a better grasp of the technical details if this were a homicide case instead of a blogosquabble that's been elevated to a libel case. It would certainly suck if a defendant needed help from a random blogger to avoid conviction on evidence like this.
3) That said, given that this is the Internet and it's considered bad form to abandon a flamefest to think about something important, let's return to the libel case. If this was an acceptable level of technical acumen for Bell Canada and whichever HRC is in question, isn't it peculiar for bloggers to be held to a higher level of accuracy for what their commenters link to or repeat?
Otter:
Not sure exactly what you're claiming. The original "Cools Post" comment was on Lemire's site. This, as I understand it, was followed up (e.g. on Freedominion) by the bloggers themselves. That would make it no longer an uninvited comment but a conscious statement by the blogger(s). They own their words.
That OHRC statement is astounding and really does give me a chill. I'm wondering whether it is actionable itself. Tribunals and public servants are protected from defamation actions by a qualified privelege provided they are acting within the scope of their authority, no matter how incompetently, but they can lose it when they step clearly outside. For the Commission to decline jurisdiction but then pronounce without a hearing that they are guilty of violating human rights and causing widespread damage is outrageous. MacLean's might be able to prove hefty actual damages.
MacLean's vs The OHRC would be a lot more fun and educative to follow than Warman vs. Kay, et. al.
"They could have been sitting in a Second Cup within the building sipping a latte or parked outside."
That would seem the most likely reason, but Dawg earlier posted to BigCityLib Strikes Back who claims the connection to StormFront lasted 24 hours, which is a long time to spend in a coffee shop or parked in a car. Granted, I don't know whether BCL's assertion is correct, or not.
It might be interesting to find out if anyone associated with the CHRC is a close neighbor of Ms. Hechme.
On the OHRC, take a look at this.
[External Link]
Does anyone know anything about these obviously very brave folks?
Peter: "Does anyone know anything about these obviously very brave folks?"
I only know about their founder and former director Tarek Fatah. Fatah has been a long time opponent of radical Islam and the political correctness helping the radicals (or fundamentalists if you wish) gain a foothold.
He resigned his directorship of the MCC after death threats including having his car windows smashed. He resigned over concerns for his family. Regarding the Ontario HRC discussed here - Fateh's money quote in today's Post:
"Fatah stated that for the Commission "to refer to Maclean's magazine and journalists as contributing to racism is bullshit, if you can use that word"
More background here:
[External Link]
Dawg & Otter:
The two of you seem to be mixing two different posts together. As I understand the situation:
Post #1: This was made using the Rogers ISP in 2003, under the name of "90sAREover". The allegations about who posted it are investigated by Buckets at the link at Dawg's site. This post contained nasty slurs about Senator Anne Cools.
Post #2: This one was made using the Bell ISP in 2006, under the name of "jadewarr". The IP address was traced to a woman with an unsecured WiFi router who lives near the CHRC offices in Ottawa. I don't know what the content of this post was.
It occurred to me that I didn't reference the obnoxious quotes above. Here are the newsletters, the excerpts are towards the back.
[External Link]
[External Link]
"Islamophobia is a form of racism that includes ... the viewing of Muslims as a greater security threat on an institutional, systemic and societal level."
I don't know about you, but I shake in my shoes when I see a bunch of Methodists get on a plane. And Buddhists? Don't get me started on those guys!!