So looks like our useless, inconsequential blog that no one reads has caught the attention of Connie and the Free Dominion folks. Again.

[Image]And they continue to claim that ARC (fyi, they now refer to as the, "ARC Collective" which makes us sound far cooler that we are and also as if we should have a secret lair in a volcano and a Weather Dominator; we're SOOOO going to start referring the the blog as the ARC Collective now) is synonymous with the ARA despite absolutely no proof to back that claim up, not to mention their claims that we are violent. And of course we've said ourselves that we have no affiliation with the ARA. But, we'll move on for now since there isn't a hell of a lot we can do to convince them otherwise (that and we don't really care much what they've chosen to believe about us). Ms. Fournier did make a request that we thought that we could provide an answer to regarding why Mr. Abrams joined her forum back in 2007. So we decided to try something novel.

We contacted Mr. Abrams and asked a few questions.

Yes, we did a bit of a search online and found his email address. And, kindly, Mr. Abrams responded:

This Connie person is completely hysterical. Anyway, it would be a good idea to get some proper info out there before it gets wildly out of hand with another game of broken telephone across even more blogs...

Connie's big hate on for me stems from when I suggested on the Westernstandard shotgun blog quite some time ago that she wasn't in a good position with Warman and would be well advised to make amends. I think I reminded her that she had repeated Fromm statements found by a judge to be libelous and this exposed her to the same liability. Of course she didn't heed that one and her blog has been pumping out malice and threats against Warman ever since and she's been drowning in legal problems and fundraising . I think I used "Brian Esker" to register at FD when the Warman matter was just getting underway, to express a similar warning, but Connie banned my IP after only a couple of postings if memory serves.
I wouldn't be surprised if Connie wakes up in the middle of the night wondering if "beating up on Warman" was maybe not such a good idea. I suppose that will be one of the questions in her cross examination in a court room one day. Connie's reference to my penis stems (pun intended) from a humourous posting to a yahoo group I did some years ago joking about a nude bicycle riding event. This should be most frightening for her, because it shows I have a sense of humour too.... Another misconception that I would like to eventually see corrected in the public eye is the accusation that we tried to change the complaint after we had filed it. In this thread:
http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=117666
Topham's trusty PR hack fourhorses regurgitates Topham's bizarre assertion that somehow Daniel Poulin had changed the complaint to include "Jews and non-whites" rather than "Jews and citizens of Israel." I believe that Topham misinterpreted this notion from part of the text of one of Daniel's emails as we were corresponding back and forth.

Meanwhile he [Topham] made motions over this twice in attempts to stall or dismiss the complaint. That and his quest for us to supply him with a copy of the Protocols which he has had posted on his own site all along anyway.

Unravelling this is obviously too complicated or subtle a concept for your average FD participant (like Ed Kennedy?) and both were shot down in our most recent interim Tribunal decision so I think we'd best leave it for now....
So there you have it Connie. Hope this helps explain things a bit better for you.
Oh, and further fyi, Daniel Poulin is the counsel for the CHRC while Nancy Lafontant is the registrar for the CHRT. Topham, obviously not a fan of theirs, decides to take a swipe at them as French Canadians:
....we can imagine Kurz saying to his bud Dan in the commissar’s basement, why not just drop it and replace it with “and non-whites”? That oughta fool them, eh? What the hell it’s suppose to mean is irrelevant because both you and I know that our Zionist controlled media isn’t going to give this wacko neo-Nazi shit-disturbing, truth-telling Topham any coverage anyway so we’ll just get rid of any incriminating evidence that could possibly jeopardize our chances of a big conviction and a big bucks, maximum fine. Whatcha think Dan my man? Dan, being a good and dedicated and highly paid commissar lackey and an unwitting sycophant of Jewish lobbyists such as B’nai Brith and the CJC who control the Harper government and his own tenure, likely considered this option for a few brief moments and then responded to Kurz, “Yes, I tink dat just might work. ‘E’ll spot it for sure but so what. Besides us, ‘eem and da Tribunal, oou we already know wee’ll rubber stamp whatever we do, it wee’ll make our chances of a quick, silent and bloodless lynching virtually 100% assured. So for sure, let’s do dat Marvin. I’ll type eet up right away. What was dat again? “non-white?” “Yes,” Marvin replies, all the while thinking to himself, “Hopefully he’ll remember it and get the spelling correct.”...Even as stereotypical represenations of French Canadians go, this one seems a bit overly hamfisted.
Mr. Abrams also pointed out his believe that Free Dominion poster, “fourhorses” is a Topham megaphone who posts whatever Topham sends his way and has some issues with Free Dominion being referred to as a “pro-Israel/Jewish” website: “fourhorses would be happy to have us argue about the Protocols and whether the Holocaust happened for weeks or months…” Mr. Abrams also believes that it's pretty ironic that fourhorses thinks that perhaps Free Dominion has been missing something in thier coverage considering Mr. Abrams belief that fourhorses has been posting most, if not all, of Topham's statements without sorting the reality from the fantasy.
However, there is light praise for one Free Dominion poster who seems to concur with Mr. Abrams that the use of a pseudonym might not be such a bad idea at times.
By the way, that reminds us. We also want to address this part of Ms. Fournier's comment:
Ha ha! It really stings that we are calling Old Harry on his Brian Esker-pades. Harry was too clueless to understand the PR implications of announcing that he tried to entrap someone with a fake id. After all of the flak that Warman and the CHRC losers have taken for that, it should have been obvious.

Uhm, where did Mr. Abrams try to entrap Mr. Topham? If one actually reads the content of the exchange between Abrams and Topham, Mr. Abrams was warning Topham that some of his writting was a violation of Canadian laws and suggested that they be removed:
February 12, 2007

Dear Mr. Topham,

I am writing to notify you of unacceptably racist material posted on your website at radicalpress.com

One such article is titled: Trapping Wiesel's and Other Rodents, posted at http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=380#more-380

Here is an excerpt:

"...Jewish supremacists are poisoning, subverting, perverting, and murdering people of all races. The world is enslaved by their control and their ideologies , with the aid of treasonous gentiles...."

I am quite sure that maligning Jews in this fashion offends section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Code, which may be seen here:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ShowFullDoc/cs/H-6///en Hate messages 13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. Interpretation (2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.

Could you kindly delete this at your nearest convenience, and advise me when this has been effected so that I can point out more articles of a similar nature also for removal.

Failure to do so may result in legal action being taken against you.

Thank you for your attention, Mr. Topham refused the request, so Mr. Abrams and the B'nai Brith initiated proceedings. That, and Abrams was upfront with the CHRC that he had used a pseudonym to contact Topham. So, where is the entrapment exactly?
ARC Collective, signing off.