Warren Kinsella Whimpers And It Sounds Like A Wet Fart
Written by Richard Evans
Wednesday, 23 July 2008
In what seems to be a child-like tantrum, Warren Kinsella writes the following :
A SUGGESTION
Wednesday, July 23, 2008, 07:13 AM
I
have a novel suggestion for the Islamaphobic rightist lunatic fringe -
you know, the ones continually wheedling and whining for your money to pay for lawsuits brought against them
by private citizens (not the Stalinist iron heel of the State), and for
whioh donors are provided (a) no receipt (b) no undertaking that taxes are being paid on what is clearly income and (c) no idea how the money is being used, and never will.
On the above quote, I'm of three speculative minds;
Warren is completely baffeled by the fact that Ezra, Kate, Kathy and the others aren't backing down in the face of his pal Richard's "Maximum disruption" technique. He's extremely annoyed by the fact that the defendants are continuing to recieve donations to aid their fight and even more annoyed that his arch-nemisis Kate, from small town Saskatchewan, has recently announced that she, for the time being, doesn't need any more donations. And, now, he's throwing a tantrum, or,
Warren knows that he and his buddies are going to lose if their SLAPP suits make it to court and he's trying to quage the odds of that happening by getting a look at the funds that the defendants have available. In order to get that look he's attempting to sow the seeds of distrust amongst the donors, and the Canada Revenue Agency, in an effort to have them call for a public accounting of the donations collected, or,
All of the above.
I'm leaning toward the 3rd option.
Before I go any further I want to make a quick comment to Warren regarding this statement:
(b) no undertaking that taxes are being paid on what is clearly income
Warren, you aparent retard, small 'donations' are considered 'gifts' and 'gifts' aren't taxable. Not as income. Not in Canada. I think you're a pinhead.
On to the next point; Warren's demand that the defendants 'get a job'. The last time I checked, all of the defendants are gainfully employed; Kate, of 'smalldeadanimals.com', is a sucessfull dog breader and commercial artist. Kathy, of fivefeetoffury.com, is an author. Ezra, of ezralevant.com, is a lawyer who, but for all of the SLAPP suits being thrown towards him, would have a lot more time for his practice. I can't speak to the Forniers but I have to assume that they have some sort of income. Jonathan Kay, with the National Post, seems to be employed, because, well, he's with the National Post. It's all common knowledge. I don't understand where Warren gets the idea that these folks aren't gainfully employed. Is Warren Kinsella maybe mental?
Now that we have that cleared up, Warren's tantrum gets even better in his comments thread ;
Warren, in my view the person who is liable for costs (in the event of
loss) is the person bringing the case. Perhaps the complainants should
reimburse the Human Rights Commissions their costs, in order to avoid
the appearance of the State bringing the case?
This is why the HRCs, being neither properly civil or criminal, are
such an odd beast for onlookers to figure out, and why the complaints
of the people you refer to as the lunatic fringe have traction.
Mark Dowling |
Homepage |
07.23.08 - 8:55 am | #
Interesting viewpoint. Let me propose an alternative viewpoint: both of
the "Islamaphobic rightist lunatic fringe" folks that I'm sure you're
alluding to (namely, Steyn and Levant) did have jobs. In fact, it was
through the normal conduct of their jobs that they incurred the wrath
of the kangaroo tribunal. These were not two guys sitting in a dark
basement, posting hate literature on a blog while painting swastika
flags. They were both gainfully employed in a profession (journalism)
that is frequently characterized by controversial opinions. And for
that, they were dragged before the tribunal. It is of more than passing
interest that, for every "rightist lunatic fringer" in Canada, there is
at least one (and probably more like ten) "leftist lunatic fringer",
letting loose all sorts of venom against those they perceive as evil.
Many of them work in journalism, just like Levant and Steyn. And yet
rarely do the lunatic lefties get hauled before a tribunal. That, more
than anything else, should tell you which complainants have far too
much time on their hands and need to "get a job".
Steve |
07.23.08 - 9:33 am | #
Would you hire Ezra Levant? The guy is unemployable.
Anon |
07.23.08 - 9:41 am | #
Hey Mark, imagine for a second that Warren had said anything about the HRC in this post.
Let it sink in.
Go on.
Then imagine how cool your comment would have been.
Take a minute.
Got it locked in there in your imagination?
Good.
Because in your imagination is the only place where this post was about
the HRCs and the only place where your comment was cool or even on
topic.
Cameron |
07.23.08 - 9:52 am | #
So many lawsuits for such petty reasoning like hurt feelings because someone called you a name, like in a school yard.
One thing for sure, the lawyers always get paid no matter what side they are on, it's an industry unto itself.
I feel for the Judges who are left to decide these types of conflict as lawyers bill the hours like clockwork.
Mark-Alan Whittle |
Homepage |
07.23.08 - 9:55 am | #
Steve: no one is talking about the bloody HRCs. No one. (And I opposed both the Levant and Steyn complaints, by the by.)
We are talking about Shaidle, Levant et al. taking the money of others,
with no accountability and no reporting mechanism whatsoever, and
spending it on whatever they want.
Not even your despised HRCs do that.
Warren K |
Homepage |
07.23.08 - 10:00 am | #
If it continues to cost complainants zero dollars to bring an action in
a Human Rights Tribunal, then it is anyone's right to seek funds in
order to fight their accusers.
What is there to stop someone with a grudge from filing complaint after
complaint after complaint against an individual or organization?
A good step might be to turn HRTs into a loser-pays model. This would certainly cut down on the more spurious complaints.
The best bet would be to do away with HRTs, or limit them to serving
their original purpose, to fight against discriminating landlords or
employers.
LePolitico |
07.23.08 - 10:05 am | #
Mark et al., please pay attention: THIS IS NOT ABOUT HRCs.
It is about these people (a) spewing bile at other people (b) getting
in trouble for it (c) dishonestly suggesting that they need money to
fight HRCs when in fact HRCs have dick-all to do with it.
Geddit?
Warren K |
Homepage |
07.23.08 - 10:30 am | #
I was wondering if those donations are gifts or a source of income for the purposes of the ITA... can't figure it out.
Tony |
07.23.08 - 11:18 am | #
(emphasis mine)
Poor Warren seems ticked that the SLAPP suits instituted by he and his pals are being confused with the HRC persecutions instituted by his other pals. Here's some clarity: Not once, to my knowledge, have any of the
defendants alluded that Richard Warman's SLAPP suit was an act by the
CHRC. Warren Kinsella didn't provide any sort of link or back-up to indicate that they have. He's just accused others of being dishonest without providing any sort of proof. That, in and of itself is defamatory, no? Here's the rub; Richard Warman, Warren's SLAPP suit pal, used to work for the CHRC and is responsible for filing the vast majority of section 13 complaints under the Canadian Human Rights Act. Richard Warman could easily be the CHRC poster boy! Fairly recently, he's taken his efforts to quell dissenting opinion out of the public sector and moved them to the private sector. Hence his lawsuit against the defendants. Knowing that, it's easy to see where the confusion, on the part of the general public, comes from. When you're dealing with the same players in different venues, it's easy to get things muddled. It's just a guess but I'm thinking that it's the connection that's being made, between the players, and their fascist 'currently preferred' vehicles, that really has Warren steamed. He doesn't seem to want folks to know that the people now instigating the SLAPP suits are the exact same people who worked with, and used, the HRC's to silence dissenting opinion in the past. That they used to be the cogs in the gears that are currently using the power of the state to silence free expression. The lines are blurred, yes, but it's only because Warren and his SLAPP suit pals put themselves in a position where they could be blurred.
A final note; Warren are you reading this? Of course you are. You just go ahead and file those papers but before you do, think for a minute about how angry your wife will be that I'm moving my furnature into what used to be your cottage, after all is said and done. Your apparent arrogance may not allow you to understand this but the best thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging.
Warrens head is exploding because he knows he couldn't raise more than 35 cents from his "fans". I understand that parking cars for the CJC doesn't pay much - even with the tips.
... written by Donater,
July 23, 2008
Here's a foreign concept for Warren to contemplate: it's called trust. I don't need Kate, or Kathy, or Ezra to provide me an accounting of what they have done with my small donation. I trust that it will be used for the purpose intended, which I have decided is an important purpose. Now, I can understand why trust is such a foreign concept to the likes of your nemesis, unless in the context of trusting that the envelope is stuffed with enough cash.
I met CC last weekend and I gave him a blowie. He said that was almost as good as the one he wants to give Kinsella.
KEvron
... written by Richard Evans,
July 23, 2008
KEvron, please do the folks a favor and keep your homoerotic stories to yourself. No one wants to read about your gay conquests.
(In other news, KEvron once again learns not to mess with the people who have the power to change his words. He should also be learning that no matter how many times he changes his ip addy and his user name, his comments will be pulled and/or altered. He's not welcome to post here. He knows it.)
Note To Kevron: Your comments, every single one of them are sitting in my DB unaltered and yet unpublished. Why do you think that is you mental midget?
I have a novel suggestion for the Islamaphobic rightist lunatic fringe - you know, the ones continually wheedling and whining for your money to pay for lawsuits brought against them by private citizens
Private citizens in concert all part of a HRC cabal, In fact the suits by vagina and warman and kinsella were probably all drawn up and planned in the same coffee shop.
At least 2 of them use the same lawyer.
Private citizens my ass,
As for the money gosh that seems to have him riled he wants to cause personal pain. In fact Warman and Vagna both have vested interests in doing that. How much did Guacamole cost when he walked away from the proceedings? Since Thor's Hammer is upset at cost. That cost was to taxpayers not from volunteered gifts. Like the ones from people who view him and his ilk as a threat to free speech and democracy.
I don't understand where Warren gets the idea that these folks aren't gainfully employed.
If you aren't blowing funds from the taxpayers with drunken abandon it's not real work is it? At least not to the guy who got Chuck Guite hired.
Warrens head is exploding because he knows he couldn't raise more than 35 cents from his "fans".
You don't raise it from fans you do it from taxpayers it's the Chretienite way.
... written by curious,
July 24, 2008
Can someone tell me please when the last time was that Ezra Levant actually practiced law and represented someone-anyone in court at trial? They do call it "practicing law" for a reason? no?
I should also add "Kicked Arse" seems real upset that gifts are spent without being taxed or traced so he says!
But when Warman uses government based extortion to take 50k from people who are at least a step up from commies, he isn't accountable.
5 carbon credits for anyone to find a post where Kinsella complains about Warman is spending that money with out knowing if it's going to psychiatric help to assuage his hurt feeling for calling Anne Cools a negro, or something about it needing to be taxed.
... written by curious,
July 25, 2008
I ask the same question yet again to be fair-does anyone know the last time Ezra Levant practiced law by defending someone in an actual court room.? This is why they call it law practice.
... written by Richard Evans,
July 25, 2008
I ask the same question yet again to be fair-does anyone know the last time Ezra Levant practiced law by defending someone in an actual court room.? This is why they call it law practice.
Merle? Is that you? Yup, your ip say's it is. I think your premise that every lawyer spends an ample time before a Judge in a court is just a teensey-weensey bit flawed. They don't. Can you please explain to the folks how Levant's "practicing" status is somehow relevant to Warren Kinsella's temper tantrum? It's not. Further, I clearly indicated that, but for the SLAPP suits, Levant would actually have time for his practice.
Merle, Ezra is suing you because of what you sent to a POS leftie rag, based on your own personal grudge, which they in turn eagerly published without doing any fact checking. You had a chance to settle but you started to listen to Kinsella's whispers and decided to fight. My respect for you dropped. I hate to say it but you're nothing more than one of Kinsellas useful idiots at this point. He's using you as a proxy in his fight against Levant.
I've seen the comments you've left at Red Tory's and Kinsella's places. You're welcome to jump into bed with whoever you want but if you try to gain sympathy here, it won't fly.
... written by Bill K,
July 28, 2008
Curious,
Here's one for ya, and just as irrelevant. Can you establish beyond any doubt that Kinsella ran the War Room during the Chretien years?
Or how'bout an actual instance where he "kicked ass".
Warren, in my view the person who is liable for costs (in the event of
loss) is the person bringing the case. Perhaps the complainants should
reimburse the Human Rights Commissions their costs, in order to avoid
the appearance of the State bringing the case?
Interesting viewpoint. Let me propose an alternative viewpoint: both of
the "Islamaphobic rightist lunatic fringe" folks that I'm sure you're
alluding to (namely, Steyn and Levant) did have jobs. In fact, it was
through the normal conduct of their jobs that they incurred the wrath
of the kangaroo tribunal. These were not two guys sitting in a dark
basement, posting hate literature on a blog while painting swastika
flags. They were both gainfully employed in a profession (journalism)
that is frequently characterized by controversial opinions. And for
that, they were dragged before the tribunal. It is of more than passing
interest that, for every "rightist lunatic fringer" in Canada, there is
at least one (and probably more like ten) "leftist lunatic fringer",
letting loose all sorts of venom against those they perceive as evil.
Many of them work in journalism, just like Levant and Steyn. And yet
rarely do the lunatic lefties get hauled before a tribunal. That, more
than anything else, should tell you which complainants have far too
much time on their hands and need to "get a job".
Would you hire Ezra Levant? The guy is unemployable.
Hey Mark, imagine for a second that Warren had said anything about the HRC in this post. 
So many lawsuits for such petty reasoning like hurt feelings because someone called you a name, like in a school yard.
Steve: no one is talking about the bloody HRCs. No one. (And I opposed both the Levant and Steyn complaints, by the by.)
If it continues to cost complainants zero dollars to bring an action in
a Human Rights Tribunal, then it is anyone's right to seek funds in
order to fight their accusers.
I was wondering if those donations are gifts or a source of income for the purposes of the ITA... can't figure it out.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
RG