Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman believes that numerous postings in which he was called a professional complainer and a censorship champion are libelous. Is that so? What would you call a man who spends most of his free time silencing people he doesn't agree with? Especially if his efforts are only directed against white supremacists; never against radical muslims or racist groups run by visible minorities. (At least the wikipedia article doesn't list any of them among the groups Warman fought against.)
So, the man whose hobby can no longer be mentioned under a threat of being sued for libel, took his time to read the Free Dominion threads and dig out all the harsh language used to describe his judicial activism.
Connie writes: I just scoured that thread and it appears that all of the comments in the complaint, except one, were quotes from other sites posted by klinkxx (who we have banned). Strangely, Warman doesn't mention klinkxx in his complaint, only EdS (who wrote one comment).The latter refers to Warman as "the proxy by which the B'nai Brith, CJC, CHRC works through". Warman claims EdS is accusing him of being controlled by someone else or by some other group. I don't think that "proxy" and "being controlled by" are synonyms. But I am sure that a system of self-imposed one-sided censorship known as political correctness couldn't function without self-hating activists like Warman helping to enforce it.(Source)
No comments:
Post a Comment