Wednesday, June 11, 2008

You Daily Nazi: The Shorter Buckets

Buckets begins to make his case. The For Dummies Version:

1) StormFront Moderator PatrickOdin claims that CHRC investigator Dean Steacy posted to StormFront on Sept. 15th, 2006 from IP address 70.48.181.203.

2) In March 2007, Freedomsite owner Marc Lemire, who has brought a criminal complaint against the CHRC for hacking Nelly Hechme's wifi, asked Stormfront founder, Don Black, for IPs related to the activities on Stormfront of one Jadewarr, Dean Steacy's Stormfront Pseudonym. Black provided Lemire with the IP address 70.48.181.203. Lemire then subpoenaed Bell Canada for information about this address.

3) However, because Bell uses dynamic IP addressing, by December 2006 the address 70.48.181.203 had been assigned to Ottawa resident Nelly Hechme, who lived about a quarter a mile away from the CHRC HQ. And when Bell technicians revealed this fact, Lemire hatched the "CRHC employees hacked her wifi" conspiracy theory.

4) Except: what are the odds that Dean Steacy hacked a wifi account that, by sheer coincidence, bore the same IP in December as the IP borne by his own account about three months earlier? I would suggest they are rather low--"infinitesimal", as Buckets says.

Where does the story go from here? Read more in the upcoming few days, but here's a couple of hints.

Hint One: Most likely nobody visited Stormfront from 70.48.181.203 on December 8, 2006. Not Steacy, not Hechme--nobody. Lemire's criminal complaint, which refs that IP number, will therefore come to nought.

Hint Two: Given the search tools employed by Stormfront, a thorough search of IPs related to Jadewarr should have returned more than a single address. And the address used by CHRC staff in December, 2006 is almost certainly sitting undiscovered in Stormfront records.

Update: Buckets unspools more of the mystery here.

47 comments:

Ti-Guy said...

No other comments? Hmph.

When sufficient evidence comes to light to build a particularly strong case, that's when I really enjoy the contributions of fantasists and obscurantists like Paul S. and Jermo Sapiens and all the other speechies/wingnuts. Why do they disappear at the point when their lies...er, speculations... would be most entertaining?

Pikers.

bigcitylib said...

I mentioned this to Ezra, as he reiterated the charge today, and...comment appears to have been killed.

Jermo Sapiens said...

alright Ti-Guy I'll bite. You're gonna play nice? I dont care either way but if you start hurling insults, dont go crying after when I respond in kind.

Anyways, here's what I dont get, and perhaps you could clarify. Im pretty sure the Bell guy who testified on March 25 at the CHRC (the day where Nelly was named) knows that Bell addresses are assigned dynamically. That he would testify and name the IP owner in December based on a September posting is completely ludicrous, and a further testament to the staggering incompetence of the HRT "judge". If that is in fact what happened I will have to revise my opinion of the HRC from totally irredeemably and sickeningly corrupt and fascist, to just totally corrupt and fascist but incompetent beyond belief.

Do you guys know where to find the transcript of that march 25 hearing?

I mean, you cant get a Bell guy to testify to an IP owner's address without first establishing the relevance of his testimony (I know, this is assuming that the HRT is somehow competent and judicial but this was Lemire's witness, not the HRC's)

Are you suggesting Lemire fabricated evidence which fooled not only the HRT but the bell guy as well, into believing that the IP in question was used to post on stormfront under jadewarr?

If he did, well that was extremely gutsy (and stupid), but that he succeeded would be quite impressive.

In any event, I wish you both luck in this little battle of yours for the HRC's reputation. How relieved will I be when I find out that the fascist state censors post racists shit online, but at least they do it from their own computer.

bigcitylib said...

Tune in tomorrow, Jermo. Or think it through. Bucket's blog has links to the transcript.

Reality Bites said...

Jermo, for someone to impress you merely requires them having an IQ higher than 50.

Jermo Sapiens said...

yeah bcl, I will. but frankly, it just dawned on me, you guys are obviously missing a piece of the puzzle: you have a bell guy allowed to testify, a privacy commissioner investigation and an rcmp investigation, and mr. obvious comes out and says "but IPs are assigned dynamically" - no shit mr. obvious. the presumption that the bell guy, the rcmp, and the privacy commissioner somehow missed the widely known and obvious fact that ips are assigned dynamically and that it somehow validates the CHRC is laughable.

let's go with your "likely" scenario and examine where it takes us: nobody posted at stormfront from the IP in december. okay, so Lemire flatly lied to the HRT (that's obviously a possibility): he took an IP used by jadewarr in september and subpoeaned the bell guy to find out who had it in December for another alleged post (which, under the current hypothesis, never happened). Why would Lemire do that? What result was he hoping for? Im not sure. I dont think even Lemire expected it to turn up to the address of someone living two blocks away and separated by an open field to the HRC offices. I mean what are the odds of a random IP turning up two blocks away from the HRC. That is one fucking hell of a coincidence. And Lemire had no way to know about that. So according to your likely scenario, Lemire plucked an IP out of thin air, and it turned out to come from two blocks away from the HRC. That's pretty good karma for a despicable piece of shit like lemire.

Jermo Sapiens said...

Jermo, for someone to impress you merely requires them having an IQ higher than 50.

that's true, yet I still think you're a fucking retard. I suspect you're hovering in the mid 20's. But keep going with those hooked-on-phonics buddy, they do pay off.

bigcitylib said...

Jermo,

1) Previously, Klatts testimony re the Cools post was rebutted by Vigna on the grounds that Clatt failed to mention that Rogers assigned IPs dynamically. You'd think they would learn, wouldn't you? But maybe not.

2) NOBODY posted to Stormfront in Dec. That is accepted by all sides. Steacy VISITED Stormfront on Dec 8. That much is accepted. The question is: what IP did he visit from? It was almost certainly not the one Lemire gave to Bell.

3) Lemire got the IP from Black. The IP was one IP Steacy POSTED from in September. However, Stormfront runs on Vbulletin and if you look at the search capabilities of Vbulletin,at least ONE other IP should have been come up (the one Steacy registered with in 2005, which is different still). We know this because OdinPatrick dug it up when he did his searches. How many IPS Black gave to Lemire, and why Lemire used the one he did, is unknown. Although it probably has something to do with the fact that Steacy had in fact used it previously.

Jermo Sapiens said...

Hey BCL: thanks for discussing this like a normal person. I see your henchmen RB hasnt taken his pills today, but that's okay I can handle him.

I accept the facts as you state them until I find a reason to do otherwise, but even then, there is a certain element of luck involved for lemire - you should at least admit that. Let's say he just took the IP from a september post by Steacy - and it turns out that at the relevant period the IP was assigned to someone living blocks away from the HRC - isnt that a bizarre coincidence in lemire's favor?

If he knowingly took an IP which was not used to visit or post at stormfront, how lucky did he get that the IP was assigned to someone in such proximity to the HRC? Would Lemire have any reason to believe that this IP would yield something that useful, if it was all a lie? That's the missing piece here.

And besides, this is like putting Hitler on trial for rape. We know he's a genocidal dictator, but is he also a rapist? Just like we know that the CHRC is a corrupt institution which posts racist message online and stifles speech, but do they also steal internet connections?

bigcitylib said...

"...and it turns out that at the relevant period the IP was assigned to someone living blocks away from the HRC - isnt that a bizarre coincidence in lemire's favor?"

If you were to stand in front of the CHRC building in Ottawa and pace out about 1,000 feet in any direction, I bet you would find hundreds upon hundreds of Internet subscribers.

And again, I suspect Lemire figured the IP address would be assigned to the same account in Sept and Dec of 06.

Finally, all of your arguments that the CHRC is corrupt rest upon allegations like Lemire's--in fact, most of these allegations can be traced directly back to Freedomsite. And all of Lemires allegations turn to crap when examined closely.

Jermo Sapiens said...


If you were to stand in front of the CHRC building in Ottawa and pace out about 1,000 feet in any direction, I bet you would find hundreds upon hundreds of Internet subscribers.


well, as you've said yourself previously, this is mostly office buildings. most of the internet connections there are not from wifis, although there are a few residential buildings on Laurier where that woman lived. Still, let's say that a couple of hundred IPs isnt that much. I would be interested to know whether Bell, when assigning IPs dynamically assigns them based on geography, or is it completely random - in other words, can an IP used in yellowknife one day, be used in Halifax the next? I dont know.


And again, I suspect Lemire figured the IP address would be assigned to the same account in Sept and Dec of 06.


fair enough. let me make it clear though: i would like to find out that the HRC was engaged in some illegal action, but that's just a means to an end. if you turn out to be correct on this particular point, I will give you credit, but ultimately that is not my beef with the HRC. My beef is their fascist, speech-censoring ways.


Finally, all of your arguments that the CHRC is corrupt rest upon allegations like Lemire's--in fact, most of these allegations can be traced directly back to Freedomsite. And all of Lemires allegations turn to crap when examined closely.


no not quite. do you dispute that Warman, ex-employee of the HRC has used it as his personal star-chamber and inquisition and not only that, he used it to make money? Those are not allegations stemming from Lemire, they are widely known and accepted facts and come from Warman's own testimony under oath. That is enough to consider the HRC corrupt.

But its not all - do you also dispute that HRC "investigators" post racist shit online? That is not from Lemire, but from Steacy's own testimony under oath as well as Warman's. That alone is also enough to consider the HRC corrupt.

But there's more - do you also dispute that the HRC is actively stifling speech and not allowing truth as a defense? That alone is also enough to consider the HRC corrupt.

Trust me BCL, even if you win this battle on the very minor point of whether some HRC employee hacked that woman's wifi connection, you still have tons of work to do to rehabilitate the HRC's reputation.

bigcitylib said...

I've linked to a new post by Buckets. More of the mystery comes out there.

Jermo Sapiens said...

i just read the new buckets post. basically, the question remains - we dont know whether the IP in question was used on stormfront on Dec. 8.

Did Lemire lie about it and got lucky by landing an IP 2 blocks away from the HRC building, or was the IP actually used at stormfront on that day. Im very willing to consider that you are correct and that Lemire flat-out lied, but I still dont understand what Lemire could hope to gain by making that up and how he got so lucky - unless, as I suggested earlier, he had some knowledge which suggested that the IP, although dynamic, was confined to a geographical area around the HRC building.

bigcitylib said...

Jermo,

If the same IP was used on Dec. 8than that would be an amazing coincidence. Steacy has the IP in September, and hacks into an account which has been assigned the same IP in Dec. How amazing a coincidence depends on how many IP addresses Bell has. Their literature and their techy's testimony says you get a different one EACH TIME you connect, so that argues for alot.

Note that Buckets is not arguing that Lemire is lying. His instructions to Black may have been vague. In fact, he never mentions that he wants the IP for a certain DATE returned. He may have thought he got the IP for Dec 08. From the reaction on his blog around the time of the hearing, it is pretty clear he thought it would match up with a CHRC account.

Jermo Sapiens said...

If the same IP was used on Dec. 8than that would be an amazing coincidence.

agreed.

From the reaction on his blog around the time of the hearing, it is pretty clear he thought it would match up with a CHRC account.

sure - you should at least acknowledge though, that unless as I suggested earlier IPs are confined to a geographical area, that Lemire got lucky. How lucky? Well, that's what Im trying to find out. According to your scenario, Lemire asks Black for an IP related to the jadewarr account and gets the now infamous IP that Steacy used in September. He subpoenas the bell guy and suggests that the IP was used in December and gets an address 2 blocks away from HRC offices. So, if the IP is confined to let's say an area like downtown ottawa, between elgin and bay, or something, Lemire got very lucky. Had it turned up in Toronto, he would have looked like an idiot. It turns out he managed to get some sort of result out of it. That's what's bizarre here.

note: that the bell guy was allowed to testify to the id of the IP owner in December, with apparently no evidence that it was used on stormfront in December, means one of 2 things:
-the chair of the HRT is grossly incompetent in allowing such testimony, guilty of professional misconduct, and I would suggest also liable to Nelly Hechme for compensation.
-there is in fact evidence to suggest a post in December from that IP, coincidence notwithstanding.

Fact is, there is yet to be an explanation that does not require some kind of coincidence. We both seem to prefer the coincidence which fits our biases, and that's not very surprising.

In my opinion, the one scenario which does not require a coincidence is the following: Lemire knows the IP was used by Jadewarr - he also knows (this is a guess, I dont know this to be true) that the IP may move around, but not too far away, maybe a couple of blocks, just close enough to allow him to allege hacking into a wifi, so he lies to HRT and gets the bell guy to testify and the rest is history.

But you know what, even this fails. Because, as you said, the area is quite dense and probably has thousands of IP addresses within a few blocks - its all high rises there (Im a few blocks away from there right now), the overwhelming majority of these are not wifi connections, but desktops connected to a LAN. So Lemire's story and his rationale for getting the Bell guy to testify could have been exposed as lying to the tribunal, unless he managed to land an IP that was somehow accessible to a HRC employee. He actually managed that. It's a terrible bet: bad odds, low payout, extremely bad outcome if you lose, he took it and won. That piece is still missing from your analysis.

Jermo Sapiens said...

correction:
So, if the IP is not confined to let's say an area like downtown ottawa, between elgin and bay, or something, Lemire got very lucky.

Ti-Guy said...

That he would testify and name the IP owner in December based on a September posting is completely ludicrous, and a further testament to the staggering incompetence of the HRT "judge"

I didn't get past this.

This is obnoxious. There is something called the principle of charity...you assume the least malign motivation for a particular action absent any evidence to the contrary...such as a history of neo-nazi activism and hate-spewing bigotry, for example.

Anway, carry on. I'm not even following the details of this anymore because I don't believe the neo-nazis are even telling the truth. Why would they start now, for God's sakes?

Ti-Guy said...

...and another thing:

What I meant by obscurantism is all the baseless speculation without any attempt to look for evidence, such as "Do you guys know where to find the transcript of that march 25 hearing?" and "I accept the facts as you state them until I find a reason to do otherwise, but even then..." followed by more obscurantist speculation.

All of that seems like the modus operandi of the speechie and might be just a function of how their brains work, but I'm always suspicious of the amount of time they devote to it.

It's almost like they're worried for some reason...

Jermo Sapiens said...

This is obnoxious. There is something called the principle of charity...you assume the least malign motivation for a particular action absent any evidence to the contrary...such as a history of neo-nazi activism and hate-spewing bigotry, for example.

what does that mean ti-guy? I understand you havent been commenting much because this whole discussion is way over your head, as it involves issues which are more complex than the old "conservatives are stupid". but are you saying im too charitable towards lemire? i have consistently stated that he is likely lying.

Anway, carry on. I'm not even following the details of this anymore because I don't believe the neo-nazis are even telling the truth.

translation: "I dont understand so I'll just make unsubstantiated attacks at anyone who dares question the BCL". That's okay ti-guy, just make sure your tinfoil hat is on tight because otherwise Harper is going to get inside your head.

What I meant by obscurantism is all the baseless speculation without any attempt to look for evidence, such as "Do you guys know where to find the transcript of that march 25 hearing?" and "I accept the facts as you state them until I find a reason to do otherwise, but even then..." followed by more obscurantist speculation.

Right, so I agree to discuss the issue based on the facts as BCL has stated them, and the discussion is going on quite well and in a civil manner, but that wont do for you - you see that as an evidence of bad faith? How thick are you buddy. BCL's argument has holes in it, Im not suggesting BCL's lying or is doing this in bad faith, quite the contrary, Im just discussing it.

hey ti-guy, this discussion is for people with a modicum of intelligence. come back later when BCL posts about so-cons and then you can spew your anti-christian bigotry and hatred all you want.

Ti-Guy said...

Right, so I agree to discuss the issue based on the facts as BCL has stated them, and the discussion is going on quite well and in a civil manner...

Civil? You've vilified and defamed Richard Warman and the HRC workers in this very thread and you're expressing it as if it's indisputable fact. It's astonshishing.

I don't care what you believe; it's what you end up saying. You speechies don't seem to give a damn about the distinctions among evidence, speculation, vilification and defamation.

You should all be grateful that you have access to any justice at all; as it stands, you're all unfit for civil society.

hey ti-guy, this discussion is for people with a modicum of intelligence. come back later when BCL posts about so-cons and then you can spew your anti-christian bigotry and hatred all you want.

See? More vilification and defamation...it's like they can't stop themselves.

I no longer seen any difference between the speechies and the neo-nazis. None whatsoever.

Jermo Sapiens said...

Anway, carry on. I'm not even following the details of this anymore because I don't believe the neo-nazis are even telling the truth. Why would they start now, for God's sakes?

just so you know, I am laughing my ass off at your stupidity. do you italicize words randomly to make it appear like you know something? and do you just string together big words hoping the result is a coherent sentence? I thought you had a masters degree or something, must be arts or some sort of social science, otherwise there is no way in hell you would have passed. Oh, well maybe you went to Lakehead or something.

Holly Stick said...

jermo, there are rules for italicizing words. A word or phrase may be italicized for emphasis or because the word or phrase is from a different language. Clearly you did not study English.

You should try to carry on a civil discussion without employing obnoxious language and personal attacks which simply make you appear petty and ignorant.

Jermo Sapiens said...

no not quite. do you dispute that Warman, ex-employee of the HRC has used it as his personal star-chamber and inquisition and not only that, he used it to make money? Those are not allegations stemming from Lemire, they are widely known and accepted facts and come from Warman's own testimony under oath. That is enough to consider the HRC corrupt.

Ti-guy, this is all i said about warman. What in the above do you disagree with? So is this vilification - that he filed a whole bunch of complaints with his ex-employer? Do you dispute that? Geez, how do you explain all the complaints, available online, involving Warman as the complainant. Now there's a mystery for Buckets to solve. Hint: dynamic IPs!!!!!!!

Also, my discussion is with BCL - to whom I've been very civil. The only venom comes from you and RB, and from me, in response to you and RB.


See? More vilification and defamation...it's like they can't stop themselves.


Hey you fucking retarded inbred, I told you, you call me out (see first post), I say okay, play nice or i'll respond in kind. I have a good civil discussion with BCL, and you come out with your retarded bullshit with nothing to say that's remotely relevant except insulting anybody who is not in perfect agreement with BCL, so I lived up to my promise and responded in kind. If you want to dish it out, you little pussy, you're going to have to learn to take some in reply.


I no longer seen any difference between the speechies and the neo-nazis. None whatsoever.


big fucking deal you whining pussy, you dont see the difference between a vagina and a hole in a blow up doll, so why would anybody give a shit?

Jermo Sapiens said...

jermo, there are rules for italicizing words. A word or phrase may be italicized for emphasis or because the word or phrase is from a different language. Clearly you did not study English.

holly stick: just try and read the comments before if you dont understand. my random italicization of words is for making fun of ti-guy.

also note the civil tone of my discussion with bcl, and how quickly everything turns to shit as soon as ti-guy appears from his hole.

Ti-Guy said...

Oh, Jermo. Angry, anti-social screechy speechy Jermo.

I began setting up networks in 1997 (when it was considerably harder to do than now) and I know how IP addresses are assigned. What I don't know because I don't have access to any verifiable records and what I don't care to speculate baselessly about is what has occurred in this particular instance until better evidence comes to light.

What I do find fascinating is the speechy need to indict people based on nothing more than their ability to vilify and defame them...and nothing more.

It's hideously corrupt. Which makes me think you're nothing but a neo-nazi yourself. Sure sound like one.

Maybe a "white nationalist?"

big fucking deal you whining pussy, you dont see the difference between a vagina and a hole in a blow up doll, so why would anybody give a shit?

Ah, the fascist standard has been almost achieved. When Jermo gets to accusations of NAMBLA associations, my work here shall be complete.

Doubting Thomas said...

I was enjoying this back and forth discussion until this ti-guy character decided to bring it back down to a mud-slinging session. Take partial quotes here and there to prove a point...well, right back at you, to provide "evidence" of your level of comprehension:

On Ti-Guy's experience in the 4th grade:
"I didn't get past this"
On Ti-Guy's knowledge of the case being discussed:
"I'm not even following the details"

Anyhow, I'm being a hypocrite with this post, but it disgusts me when spirited right/left left/right debates (i.e. BCL and Jerome) get thrown off by obtuse windbags.

anyhow, to Jermo's question on how dynamic IP addresses are assigned, if it's geographically random, from Wikipedia:
"On the public Internet, as opposed to private internets or intranets, IP addresses are managed and created by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). The IANA generally allocates super-blocks to Regional Internet Registries, who in turn allocate smaller blocks to Internet service providers and enterprises."
So it's possible that IP addresses remain within a certain geographic boundaries, if I'm interpreting that correctly.

Holly Stick said...

jermo, I was explaining to you why ti-guy's use of italicization for "obscurantism" and "modus operandi" was correct, so that when you complained about it you merely displayed your own ignorance. Your own random use of italicization is merely boring.

Ti-Guy said...

they are widely known and accepted facts and come from Warman's own testimony under oath.

Really? Richard Warman testified that he uses the HRC's a his own personal star chamber and inquisition and to make money?

This is libel.

bigcitylib said...

Jermo,

Lemire's "luck" is more an example of making lemonade out of lemons than anything else. He wanted (I believe) to peg the IP to a CHRC computer, and got another computer in the same city. Where he has got lucky is in the incredulity of the media on this issue, combined with the fact that a bureacracy like the CHRC lets its lawyers defend them behind closed doors.

Incidentally, the argument here does not at all require admitting that he found an IP address accessible to a CHRC employee. In addition to what Buckets is saying, there is also the argument it is still pretty much impossible for a computer at CHRC HQ to have hacked (since it turns out it was not secure) Hechme's computer.

Jermo Sapiens said...

What I do find fascinating is the speechy need to indict people based on nothing more than their ability to vilify and defame them...and nothing more.

It's hideously corrupt. Which makes me think you're nothing but a neo-nazi yourself. Sure sound like one.


hey dip shit, read those two paragraphs together. in one you chastise people for indicting people based on no evidence, and then you accuse me of being a nazi on no evidence. very "ti-guy" of you.

i hate nazis, lemire is a lying douchebag, and my whole argumentation accepts this fact, if you had taken the time to read and had the intelligence to understand it.

anyways, seems like BCL left as soon as it became clear that a couple of things in his theory couldnt be explained away and sent in ti-guy to create a distraction.

too bad.

Jermo Sapiens said...

Really? Richard Warman testified that he uses the HRC's a his own personal star chamber and inquisition and to make money?

This is libel.


I'll eagerly await his libel notice then. It's called fair comment ti-guy. by calling me a nazi, however you have libeled me for real.

do you dispute that warman filed a ton of complaints? do you dispute that he made money of it?

Jermo Sapiens said...

Incidentally, the argument here does not at all require admitting that he found an IP address accessible to a CHRC employee.

i dont know BCL, had the bell guy testified that the IP was in fact in Iqaluit, Lemire would have some explaining to do to the HRT.

Jermo Sapiens said...

, there is also the argument it is still pretty much impossible for a computer at CHRC HQ to have hacked (since it turns out it was not secure) Hechme's computer.

impossible is too strong a word here. hechme first said it wasnt secure than that it was secure. i dont think she knows much about wifi connections.

bigcitylib said...

None of this came up at the actual hearing. It really took about a day after the hearing for Lemire and the folks at FreeD to settle on the conspiracy theory they were going to push. At the hearing itself (read Kady on this) nobody really knew what to make of it. Same with the blogs at the time.

In any case, now I DO have to leave for several hours.

Ti-Guy said...

I was enjoying this back and forth discussion until this ti-guy character decided to bring it back down to a mud-slinging session.

It's not the first time Jermo has infested this place, you know.

I'm sorry to ruin your fun, but t I can't fucking stand these speechies anymore...a bunch of hate-filled, antisocial, raging, lying crapsacks who should no longer have any expectation of being treated civilly. In fact, I find it galling that I would have to defend them in the very real event that they were subject to an abuse by the State. Frankly, I almost think that it's suicidal at this point for a liberal and a true democrat to think that lying fascists should be protected at all.

by calling me a nazi, however you have libeled me for real.

Except, I didn't call you a nazi. I didn't even call you a neo-nazi. If you speechies learned how declarative language works, you've save yourself a lot of trouble.

In any case, I wonder how they calculate the damages with regard to the reputations of pseudonymous online personae?

Jermo Sapiens said...

Except, I didn't call you a nazi. I didn't even call you a neo-nazi. If you speechies learned how declarative language works, you've save yourself a lot of trouble.

you did, quite unequivocally, but dont worry, i have better things than to sue impecunious losers like you.

Frankly, I almost think that it's suicidal at this point for a liberal and a true democrat to think that lying fascists should be protected at all

are you suggesting that only people of the "correct" political persuasion should have rights of due process? wow, that is the most fascist thing you've ever said, and that is quite an accomplishment.

Jermo Sapiens said...

In any case, now I DO have to leave for several hours.

alright BCL - I thought we had an interesting discussion for a while. I dont believe Lemire's version, but buckets' case is no slam dunk either. that's basically my point in a nutshell.

the whole thing smells, cause it seems it should be simple to verify whether the stormfront logs show any activity from the infamous ip in december.

Ti-Guy said...

are you suggesting that only people of the "correct" political persuasion should have rights of due process?

No, I'm suggesting it's suicidal for liberals and true democrats to think fascists should have the right to due process. Remember, their political agenda rests on the notion that other people's rights should be restricted.

...I'm sure if the Weimar liberals had known what was coming, they'd have rounded up the nazis and interned them.

Food for thought, asshole.

Doubting Thomas said...

Ti-guy,

don't you think you're being a bit alarmist with those comments? I mean, maybe I'm being naive, but are fascists/neo-nazis/nazis really that big of a threat in Canada? The liberal establishment in Canada is very much entrenched and to talk as though fringe groups like this stormfront pose a real danger to our society and therefore they shouldn't be allowed due process is, well, anti-liberal. DOn't get me wrong, i think they are kooks and what they preach is vile, but to suggest stomping them out is not righteous.
Anyhow, I'm curious, do you have the same attitude towards muslim extremists? They hate our society, and live in our cities while promoting a different kind of hatred, but is still hatred.

Jermo Sapiens said...

No, I'm suggesting it's suicidal for liberals and true democrats to think fascists should have the right to due process. Remember, their political agenda rests on the notion that other people's rights should be restricted.

indeed, like your political agenda rests on the notion that mark steyn's right to free speech should be restricted. yeah, like doubting thomas is saying, much of the douchebags at guantanamo bay wouldnt let you have any rights if they could, but typically liberals, or at least the ones who are consistent, dont think guantanamo bay is so swell. interesting that you believe differently. i never thought you were a neocon. oh well. on second thought, considering your thinking is not based on any principle, its not surprising that you manage to espouse fascism, socialism, and neoconservatism all at the same time.

Paul S said...

It appears ti-guy has gone off the deep end today. And it's only Wednesday.

"You speechies don't seem to give a damn about the distinctions among evidence, speculation, vilification and defamation."

You're serious in that statement? Have you missed the whole broader argument concerning HRCs? Where have you been?

"You should all be grateful that you have access to any justice at all; as it stands, you're all unfit for civil society."

There you have it folks. The ti-guy has spoken.

"I can't fucking stand these speechies anymore...a bunch of hate-filled, antisocial, raging, lying crapsacks who should no longer have any expectation of being treated civilly."

LOL. And Lefties who pathologically see racism in every nook and cranny and want to criminalize speech that offends are the "civil" ones. Right.

buckets said...

Jermo. I dont believe Lemire's version, but buckets' case is no slam dunk either. that's basically my point in a nutshell.

I'm not quite finished making my case, Jermo, so I hope you'll bear with me. One point that I'd like to emphasize is that as far as I can see, no one in a position to know has actually ever said that jadewarr had that IP on Dec. 8, not even Lemire's motion to get the Bell technician to testify about that IP on that date. (I've posted a copy of his motion here.

Ti-Guy said...

Doubting Thomas:

The liberal establishment in Canada is very much entrenched and to talk as though fringe groups like this stormfront pose a real danger to our society and therefore they shouldn't be allowed due process is, well, anti-liberal.

I know. Y'see, that's what happens in a free society. When people don't take responsibility for their actions, someone else will make sure they do.

During the last seven years, "conservatives" have enjoyed the hateful, racist and bigoted spew coming from their cohort and they're lying through their teeth when they attempt to claim it's been simply an issue of Muslim extremism, terrorism and material threats to the safety and security of our country (which are issues handled through our security and intelligence services anyway). Time and time again, various groups become their targets; one day it's gays and lesbians, next day it's aboriginal people, next day it's blacks, next day it's a conglomeration of non-whites, next day it's all immigrants, etc. etc. These sentiments have been accepted uncritically by "conservatives." Even met with hearty approval.

Three things:

I view "conservatives" as a very real threat to the safety and security of myself and other Canadians and to the right of people in this country to live in peace and mutual respect. I have no obligation to believe that the bigoted sentiments that they either passively or actively support are simply issues of free speech; if they can so easily believe that every extreme pronouncement by some angry Imam in Sweden means all Muslim Canadians constitute some real danger, I am almost obliged to believe that the cacophony of racism, bigotry hate and lies rising up from "conservatives" right here in my country must be a danger that is even more immediate. If some people don't like that, that's just too bad.

"Conservatives" are a minority in this country, but their voices are amplified by the sheer vulgarity they manage to spew in a culture that has been characterised traditionally by a high degree of temperance. It's time they turned down the volume. If they can't do it themselves, rest assured other Canadians will do that for them. Again, if they don't like that, that's too bad.

Finally, why have the speechies expended hundreds and hundreds of hours and millions of words complaining about their freedom of expression being restricted, particularly in venues where they are not welcome?

The party's over for the speechies. They either tone it down and articulate their arguments better (although I suspect white supremacy is the only argument they have) or, rest assured, they will be obliged to.

If none of this is satisfactory to them, they can pack up their white sheets and hoods and move to Alabama.

Paul S said...

"The party's over for the speechies. They either tone it down and articulate their arguments better (although I suspect white supremacy is the only argument they have) or, rest assured, they will be obliged to."

ti-guy, it is simply that your multicultural sensibilities have been offended and nothing more.

The best argument I have ever heard offered is that someone was offended. Sorry, that is insufficient grounds for legal proceedings to occur.

The criminal code is capable of handling hate speech and will do so when necessary in the future.

The only people who will be "obliged" to do anything will be HRCs and their spurious complainants, who will back off their unfounded harassment of speech and words merely because they have been offended.

Countdown to ti-buy going ballistic now: 10-9-8-7 . . .

Jermo Sapiens said...

The party's over for the speechies. They either tone it down and articulate their arguments better (although I suspect white supremacy is the only argument they have) or, rest assured, they will be obliged to.

okay, geez now i have to clean coffee from my keyboard as it came out my nose when I read that. im still having a hard time catching my breath from the hilarity.

ti-guy's putting on a "WAR ON SPEECH" - you are either with us or against us. the fascist leanings are now morphing into openly declared totalitarianism.

great ti-guy, looking forward to it. according to the latest polls, there's still at least 30-35 % of the population who is not mentally retarded, and presumably more if you count the soft liberals, and who will fight any attempts by petty little fascists like you to curtail our rights.

what's your plan?

PS: commenting on BCL's site probably wont help you achieve the ultimate power you seek, you might want to do more with your life than just that.

Ti-Guy said...

and who will fight any attempts by petty little fascists like you to curtail our rights.

Yeah, I'm sure that'll work. You people can't even argue yourselves out of wet paper bag. Who's going to take you seriously the minute you start shrieking "Star Chambers! Czarina Hall!! Kangaroo Courts!!! Thought crimes!!...MY FIRST AMENDMENT WRITEZ!!1!"

Additional articulate and compelling arguments from the speechies here.

*snort*

Madman said...

Good for you Ti-guy.

Make sure that you try to curtail speech from anyone who may not agree with you.

There are way to many of those nasty conservatives in this country. Have your Mom iron your cape, so you can continue with your conservative silencing crusade.