There ought to be a webserver dedicated solely to cases of repression of Islam-critical free speech on the internet. The site would need an enormous amount of hard drive capacity, plus special protection against DDOS attacks, given the current trends.
The list of targeted dissidents gets longer and longer. Some have already had their day in court — Dahn Pettersson, Tomashot, Gregorius Nekschot, Jussi Halla-aho, Susanne Winter, and others: all have now paid the jizyah and feel themselves subdued.
Some, too few, have won their cases: Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant come to mind. Geert Wilders has not yet won, but his case recently ran into some well-timed speed bumps and will be postponed for months.
Others have yet to have their day in court: Pamela Geller faces a $10 million lawsuit here in the USA, and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff will be tried in an Austrian court next month for “hate speech”.
And now Blazing Cat Fur, a well-known Canadian anti-jihad blog. The story of the absurd lawsuit that was recently brought against him is below. Scroll to the bottom for information on donating to his defense fund, or visit his blog.
I realize that everyone must be feeling tapped-out by now, but this onslaught against us will not abate; it can only intensify:
Richard Warman Sues Blazingcatfur For Linking To “Far Right” Mark Steyn
About 18 months ago everybody’s favourite Ex-Canadian Human Rights Commission employee Richard Warman launched one of his many, as in very many, SLAPP suits against yours truly for, among other dastardly deeds, linking to the “far-right web site http://www.steynonline.com/”. Sheesh everybody knows Mark Steyn is controversial.
It gets better. I’m also being sued for linking to a web site while specifically referring to “the allegations” against Richard Warman. But what else would you expect from Warman, a man so tone deaf he actually believed he could win the support of both the CJC and B’nai Brith in a hate crime complaint against the JDL, who dared offend him by showing the Geert Wilders film “Fitna”.
Warman is also suing for comments made by multiple readers. In one instance for the heinous crime of calling him a “Bully”. We all know what this SLAPP suit is really all about. Warman is using every lawfare tactic he can to prevent a discussion in the public interest of Section 13 (1) and the CHRC. A discussion in which he must feature prominently.
Warman is suing me for $500,000.00 Dollars. A ridiculous amount for an equally ridiculous lawsuit. Nonetheless even nuisance suits such as this must be defended against. To date legal fees have run me about 10K. I’ve covered that from my own pocket. I am now asking for your help. I know times are hard for many of us but if every reader who visited daily were to contribute 5 or 10 dollars then that would go a long way to helping all of us out.
This is your fight too, well except for the lawyer stuff anyway;)
If you like this blog, if you like my efforts then please, if you can, make a small donation via Paypal by hitting the “Feed the Kitty” icon on the sidebar. If you don’t “do” the Paypal thing you can do an e-mail internet banking transfer sent to blazingcatfur@gmail.com.
Or… you may send a cheque by mail made payable to:
“Christopher Ashby in Trust”
Attn: Blazingcatfur defence fund
Suite 1013
8 King Street East
Toronto ON M5C 1B5
28 comments:
Cool! If Mark Steyn is far right, I am far right next to him!!
Haven't read the article yet, but the Warman guy makes me embarrassed to be Canadian. What a kook! He should be banned from suing like the guy in Kentucky prison was.
I find nothing about Mark Steyn that is far right.
He is no fascist.
He is no threat to democracy at all. If anything, he's doing his very best to protect it.
This suit must be laughed out of court.
Ehm, what exactly does 'Far right' mean..?
Are we talking persons like Ron Paul, who wish to get rid of most of the state and leave things up to private enterprise? Surely, that could be a crime, in the eyes of the State, to link to him...
Fascism is basically a leftist ideology. That can be ruled out from even being relevant.
Without a clear definition of what he's accused of, this case can only be laughed out of court.
I cannot understand for the life of a stranger why dissidents dont universally dissent ANONYMOUSLY, or under a nom de guerre.
Why stick your neck out. There are MILLIONS of porn sites on the web and in but few examples it is virtually impossible to identify the real name and address of the people who operate them.
I know....because I am one of those site operators and my name and address is on no records anywhere associated with it.
You cannot do ANYTHING against someone who cannot be identified.
Why stick your neck out.
Because it encourages many others to do the same. There is protection in numbers.
al-ttt:
I've always signed my real name to posts since when all we had was Usenet (and we had to hand-crank our computers and wore rocks for shoes AND WE LIKED IT!) because I've always felt it was cowardly to hide behind anonymity.
I also think that if I am standing up in support of someone who is being threatened, or for some issue I feel strongly about, my opinion carries more weight if I'm an identifiable person instead of just a screen name.
Then again... I'm purely small fry, so my opinion don't mean much in any case. :)
Henrik,do you really think seeing people on trial or sued senseless is an encouragement to anyone?
...more to the point,theres nothing stopping you calling yourself something totally ordinary and to all intents and purposes that IS your "real" name...in that context. But doesnt lead back to your home address and family.
I am one of a growing community of dissenters who all call ourselves "Tom Dixon". The idea is its like "John Bull", you can Google it and it gets you nowhere, there are MILLIONS of Tom Dixons. But unlike "John Smith" it is not obviously phoney and it immediately identifies your standpoint.
and BTW...why not use anonymous IP adresses (obtained by buying "dongles" for a few dollars in cash fromany cellphone retailer).
I do.
You can log my IP, the network can locate my phone cell, but that includes thousands of peopleat hundreds of addresses. In effect, means nothing. It would take someheavy SIGINT to narrow it down and then I can just switch to another dongle.
al-ttt, I'm not using my real name in order to stand trial or have other kinds of unpleasent trouble.
I use my real name to show that I'm a plain, ordinary citizen not afraid of speaking the truth.
And I believe the danger of using a screen name is larger anyway. For there is prestige in finding the person behind it and creating trouble for him. If you just create trouble for an ordinary citizen, there's no doubt who's the scumbag :]
al-ttt, I maintain anonymity on my own blog and elsewhere as 1389 or 1389AD.
When I deal with other people face-to-face, I say the same things I say on my blog, but I don't go around telling people about my online persona.
All that having been said, I am fully aware that anybody who is sufficiently determined can figure out who I am and come after me. All anonymity does is slow the miscreants down somewhat. Do not be deluded that your online persona is impenetrable.
Oh, and by the way, not all cyberstalkers go through the legal system once they figure out who you are; some resort to violence. If you live in the US, I suggest you consider the Second Amendment to be your next line of defense. An alarm system and a dog might not be a bad idea either.
This post has been mirrored HERE.
I don't have a huge server all to myself, but I do have a server account and my own domain name, so I do what I can.
Thanks again for all your work on behalf of the Counterjihad. Your efforts are appreciated more than you will ever know.
The left has moved so far to the left and been so good at redefining the words that the middle is now called far right. Common sense, good reasoning is considered extreme and dangerous, be a traditionalist is considered extreme and yet what could be considered more staid? That is how radical the left really is, think about it and we let them make it all up about us. I don't know about anyone else but I feel like they have won and continue to master that game, but maybe that is because they are liars without principle or conscience in regard to such things. Conservative tend to be reserved until pushed, we don't like making big deals about things, or running in the street complaining about everything.
If it comes to extremes we'll be there and show up but when it is but a trifle expect only a leftist to make a mountain out of an ant hill and use that ot their great advantage.
I will feed the kitty. For some reason the situation in Canada strikes me as more tyrannical than the situation in Europe. There is a good Christian organization I know of called ECP, which stands for Equipping Christians for the Public Square. Their motto is no apologies and they have been doing some great work there. You can visit their website at
the link
Another link to the ECP Centre in Canada is
My Title
Henrik,Id say murdering Van Gogh or Fortuyn ought make it pretty clear who's the scumbag...but the fact is the murderers in these cases are regarded by our media as lesser scumbags than their victims. Look at the Fort Hood murderer. Hes fast becoming some kind of saint. Theres even a demonstrationin in his honour about to take place.
You would have a pretty hard job singling out the "real" Tom Dixon, as there are so many of us.
I write from urban UK. Here, the stark reality is that the entire apparatus of the state is bearing down four square on any criticism of Islam. Look at what happens to people who publicly support the EDL, beaten, limbs broken, imprisoned without charge, their homes ransacked and employers harrassed and lately theyve even been shot at by police.
Let me clarify, Im not in the least worried about Muslim assassins, I would welcome any attempt they might make. Bring it on. We saw what happenned at Glasgow airport when they are confronted by someone willing to stand their ground. They cave like a house of cards.
No, what Im concerned to avoid is the attention of the dhimmi state apparatchiks of the EUSSR and Al Britannia. P;us that of law-mongers such as the nutter Warman whose suing everybody. Remember, the process of "justice" can destroy your life without a guilty verdict ever being necessary. I know, Ive experienced the British legal system.
I think anonymity is sometimes useful. If you just want to put your ideas out there and give people something to think about but don't want your real life bothered by lawsuits, fatwas and axe wielding lunatics who didn't like your cartoon then anonymity makes good sense. You can have an effect without needless hassles. There's certainly a place for that.
Blazing Cat Fur himself remained anonymous, for a while. He didn't go public voluntarily, he was outed. As 1389 said " All anonymity does is slow the miscreants down somewhat".
But, there comes a point when the problems in your country become very serious. Then good people have to begin pushing back publicly, in courts, in newspapers, in front of microphones and on the street. If we want to hold on to our values in the West then not everyone can hide in the weeds.
We need lots of people like Mark Steyn, Blazing Cat Fur and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff who take the fight public.
What's needed are judgements against these bringers of frivolous lawsuits requiring them to pay legal and court costs and/or counter suits that require them to pony up and pay out for attorney's fees, aggravation, lost wages, etc. And the sooner the better! Of course, that's easy for me to say.
All that aside, if I used my "real" name (and its debatable what that means), everyone Googling it would come up with tons of pretty strong stuff that Ive said over the years online and my business would losepretty much all its clients in an instant. Even the ones whose managers agree (probably most) but would not want others to know they agree.
Manesteiner....my father helped defeat Hitler, as maybe did yours, who knows their names?
Indeed, aside from King Jan Sobieski, who among those who defeated Islam at the Gates of Vienna can you name?
Identities dont matter. Numbers do.
Watchful said "What's needed are judgements against these bringers of frivolous lawsuits requiring them to pay legal and court costs and/or counter suits that require them to pony up and pay out for attorney's fees, aggravation, lost wages, etc. And the sooner the better! Of course, that's easy for me to say."
Agreed and quickly. What about some rick conservative folk who really believe and start using their money in more practical ways than donating to political parties, like setting up a professional protesting organization like the left has, including salaries for the most outspoken who will suffer and sacrifice for the cause. To me that is what is needed now. Leftists had that, Muslims now have that but Copnservative traditionalists do not and that is whny we are in the back. We need people who will suffer loss and even risk their lives but who will be helped in every way by a powerful helper. Many people would do more if they could afford to but they can't and in addition anythng that one person or only a few do will only result in them suffering alone without any larger benefit to make it worthwhile.
al-ttt, I didn't get to read your post at 7:58pm until after I posted mine. I didn't know you were from the UK but I do know that your government is waging a much tougher war on its citizens than mine is in the US.
"Remember, the process of "justice" can destroy your life without a guilty verdict ever being necessary. I know, Ive experienced the British legal system."
That's true. Mark Steyn finally prevailed against the Human Rights Commissions in Canada, but it cost him about 100k in legal fees. Not everyone can take that on. I certainly can't.
So, I won't fault anyone who chooses to remain anonymous. They can still make a big difference. At the same time I respect those who go public. We need those people and I'll do what I can to support them.
A donation has been made. It sounds, however, like this man has no leg to stand on. I should love to see him laughed out of court (and in any saner time, he would be. Alas, such is our time).
I should add,I survived my brush with British injustice. But it nearly wrecked me as a person.
Of course,I do have great respect for those who can speak out as public figures. But circumstances vary. Some journalists can do it because their publishers support them. Like Steyn. Others cannot...as we saw last week.
Those who are household names are the generals of our resitence, the bloggers the captains and the commenters (like me, mostly ) the lowly footsoldiers.
Of course, Steyn is The Churchill...or as we English say "The Daddy".
Al-ttt, I don't understand how you can be so confident about your anonimity.
If you have a blog or a website (and probably even if you just comment on other people's sites), you're just a court order away from your identity being found out, right ?
And if you run a business, how can you not submit you real identity at some point ?
if I used my "real" name (and its debatable what that means), everyone Googling it would come up with tons of pretty strong stuff that Ive said over the years online and my business would losepretty much all its clients in an instant.
That's a distinct and sensible reason to use a screen name.
I just found out that both my comments and Blazing Cat Fur's comments are being blocked by the Akismet anti-spam service - throughout the entire blogosphere!
Akismet is an anti-spam service that is invoked via a WordPress plugin, and via other plugins that interface with various other content management software.
That means that EVERY blog that uses Akismet automatically blocks every comment by me, and every comment by Blazing Cat Fur, as spam.
Methinks that somebody has been maliciously flagging our comments as spam, for political reasons.
That is why there needs to be levels.
Steyn, Wilders, Melanie Philips, Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes.
Then 2nd tier bloggers.
Then the EDL and people like me.
The EDL are the folks with little to lose and a willingness to take the fight to the streets, but they need support with legal help, etc.
Michael Servatus is right on point with his comments about conservatives and leftwingers. What we need are radical conservatives to counter the drive by any means necessary of the radical Left (and Islam). We should adopt Alinsky Rules for Radicals, also the tactic of taking over institutions via political promoting and hiring, once inside these organizations.
We need Lawfare organizations, and Legal Defense Funds, we need conservative "activist judges" appointed to the courts.
The Left has been waging war against us, and we have been reacting as if it is a rational debate that is going on between patriots, a simple difference of opionion on how best to defeat the enemies liberty and our US constitution, and our culture, and religion, Christianity.
Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.
Post a Comment