Deadline Looms To Implement Anti-SLAPP Laws Across Europe

To start the new year off on a positive note, let’s look at what’s happening in the European Union. Directive (EU) 2024/1069 of the EU Parliament is approaching the 2 year anniversary, which is the deadline. Denmark has already opted out, but the other EU countries have until May 7th, 2026.

It’s encouraging sign to see more efforts to free speech from civil lawsuits. If Brussels can get this passed, can Ottawa as well?

What Are The Important Parts In The Directive?

Article 2
Scope
This Directive shall apply to matters of a civil or commercial nature with cross-border implications brought in civil proceedings, including procedures for interim and precautionary measures and counteractions, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. It shall not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters or the liability of the state for acts and omissions in the exercise of state authority (acta iure imperii). This Directive shall not apply to criminal matters or arbitration and shall be without prejudice to criminal procedural law.

Article 3
Minimum requirements
1. Member States may introduce or maintain provisions that are more favourable to protect persons engaged in public participation against manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings against public participation in civil matters, including national provisions that establish more effective procedural safeguards relating to the right to freedom of expression and information.
.
2. The implementation of this Directive shall in no circumstances constitute grounds for a reduction in the level of safeguards already afforded by Member States in the matters covered by this Directive.

Article 4
Definitions
For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions apply:
(2) ‘matter of public interest’ means any matter which affects the public to such an extent that the public may legitimately take an interest in it, in areas such as:
(a) fundamental rights, public health, safety, the environment or the climate;
(b) activities of a natural or legal person that is a public figure in the public or private sector;
(c) matters under consideration by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other official proceedings;
(d) allegations of corruption, fraud, or of any other criminal offence, or of administrative offences in relation to such matters;
(e) activities aimed at protecting the values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, including the protection of democratic processes against undue interference, in particular by fighting disinformation;

Article 10
Security
Member States shall ensure that in court proceedings brought against natural or legal persons on account of their engagement in public participation, the court or tribunal seised may require, without prejudice to the right of access to justice, that the claimant provide security for the estimated costs of the proceedings, which may include the costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant, and, if provided for in national law, damages.

Article 12
Burden of proof and substantiation of claims
1. The burden of proving that the claim is well founded rests on the claimant who brings the action.
2. Member States shall ensure that where a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it shall be for the claimant to substantiate the claim in order to enable the court to assess whether it is not manifestly unfounded.

Article 13
Appeal
Member States shall ensure that a decision granting early dismissal pursuant to Article 11 is subject to an appeal.

Article 14
Award of costs
1. Member States shall ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation can be ordered to bear all types of costs of the proceedings that can be awarded under national law, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive.
2. Where national law does not guarantee the award in full of the costs of legal representation beyond what is set out in statutory fee tables, Member States shall ensure that such costs are fully covered, unless they are excessive, by other means available under national law.

Article 15
Penalties or other equally effective appropriate measures
Member States shall ensure that courts or tribunals seized of abusive court proceedings against public participation may impose effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties or other equally effective appropriate measures, including the payment of compensation for damage or the publication of the court decision, where provided for in national law, on the party who brought those proceedings.

Some key takeaways from this include:

  • “Matter of public interest” is defined very broadly
  • Presumptive full indemnity (100% of costs) to Defendants
  • Damages can be awarded to Defendants
  • Plaintiff has the burden in showing why the case should continue
  • Plaintiff can be ordered to put up a security deposit in order to continue
  • Rulings can be appealed
  • Applies to civil cases, not criminal
  • Countries can implement stronger protections if they want

Keep in mind, this is just the framework. Individual countries will come up with their own versions. At least some of this should be familiar, given the cases covered here.

Sign Of Things To Come Locally?

So, why should Canadians care? Because there’s the possibility to build on existing laws here. A national framework could be implemented here, or at least some could implement their own versions.

  • Quebec — Provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure (2009)
  • Ontario — Section 137.1 in the Courts of Justice Act (2015)
  • British Columbia — Protection of Public Participation Act (2019)

Interestingly, the more “communist” provinces of Quebec and British Columbia have anti-SLAPP laws, while the more “conservative” provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan do not. Whatever the country ends up as, or if any provinces leave, these protections are still important.

The EU Directive, much like the Canadian laws, is extremely broad in what “matters of public interest” can include. Otherwise, what would be the point? And there’s always the possibility of including topics not previously considered.

Anti-SLAPP exists in most, though not all, of the U.S. as well.

The Supreme Court of Canada has already weighed in several times in anti-SLAPP appeals, so it’s unlikely that including new provinces will contribute much in terms of precedent. Still, perhaps a visit to the local M.P. might be helpful.

(1) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1069/oj

“They Downplayed My Contributions, So I Had To Engage In Litigation”

The Hate Network” is a Canadian documentary that is currently being screened for select audiences, presumably before being made more public. It’s effectively HateGate 2.0.

In honour of that, let’s take a look back at its predecessor, HateGate 1.0.

September 2023, the “HateGate Affair” was published by Caryma Sa’d and Elisa Hategan, who still goes by her old name. While the paper was disjointed and rambling, it tried to promote a narrative. Specifically, it attempted to convince people that the Emergencies Act (EA) was invoked in February 2022 largely over a meme and shoddy police work. It cited a 1,082 page FOIPOP release “proving” it.

So, why was the EA invoked? A shorter FOIPOP from around the same time suggests, although it does not conclude, that blockades along the Canada-U.S. border were shutting down international travel and shipments. While not definitive, it’s far more plausible than HateGate.

Going back through the 85 page paper, it’s obvious that most supporters never read the HateGate Affair, let alone the FOIPOP package, or this page. They probably just relied on this 4 1/2 minute video to tell them what to think.

The FOIPOP doesn’t prove — at all — that law enforcement relied on CAHN, the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. If anything, police found little to substantiate their claims. The authors just cherrypicked quotes to suit a narrative. And most of the HateGate Affair has nothing to do with the invocation anyway.

Keep in mind, Hategan and Sa’d didn’t request a FOIPOP from the police for all information and conversations related to the invocation. That would have been tens of thousands of pages, at least. Instead, they asked for information about the group Diagolon, and simply reported that they had proof of this narrative. Nice pivot.

Hategan got her “fame” as a teenager in the 1990s, helping infiltrate and eventually take down the neo-nazi group Heritage Front. It turned out to be an operation, and its leader, Grant Bristow, a CSIS agent. However, she’s nearly 50 now, and nowhere near as relevant. But if people minimize her role in this, she’s quite willing to file a lawsuit against them.

Let’s look at some forgotten gems in this “paper”.

Grant Bristow And Bernie Farber Were Actually Friends

These are from pages 48 and 50 of HateGate Affair. Even though Grant Bristow was “supposedly” the head of the largest neo-nazi group in Canada, he and Farber remained friends. The only logical conclusion is not just that it was a CSIS operation (which it was), but that Farber knew all along that it was.

Farber must have deduced (if he wasn’t directly informed) that Diagolon was also an operation. After all, it was the O.P.P. informant, Hategan, writing this paper.

And why does Hategan have I.P. tracking software on her website?

Ferryman-Cohen Sued Bernie Farber For Clout

Ms. Hategan has invaded Ms. Moore’s privacy

[138] Ms. Moore submits that Ms. Hategan’s actions amount to the tort of public disclosure of embarrassing private facts. The information about Ms. Moore’s former extra-marital affair was conveyed to Ms. Hategan under strict promises of confidentiality. By publishing statements about these sexual relations, and falsely claiming that this was done to advance Ms. Moore’s career, Ms. Hategan has clearly given publicity to a matter concerning the private life of Ms. Moore. Ms. Moore submits that this publication is (i) highly offensive to a reasonable person; and (ii) is not of legitimate concern to the public. Ontario courts have particularly noted the private nature of sexual relations and family quarrels, among others.

[139] Ms. Moore further submits that Ms. Hategan’s actions amount to the tort of breach of confidence. The information about Ms. Moore’s extra-marital affair was confidential, in that it was conveyed to Ms. Hategan under strict promises of confidentiality, and Ms. Hategan’s publication of that information was unauthorized and was to Ms. Moore’s detriment. This confidential and highly intimate information was used to denigrate Ms. Moore’s personal and professional reputation, imputing that Ms. Moore received professional benefits from this and other sexual relationships. Damages, sufficient to mark the wrong that has been done, are warranted.

[140] I agree that this tort has been made out. The information about Ms. Moore’s extra‑marital affair was conveyed to Ms. Hategan in confidentiality. I agree that this information is highly offensive to a reasonable person and is not a legitimate concern to the public.

Ms. Hategan appropriated Ms. Moore’s personality and likeness

[141] Ms. Moore submits that Ms. Hategan appropriated Ms. Moore’s likeness by registering multiple websites and social media handles (the “domains”) in Ms. Moore’s name. Ms. Hategan inked many of the domains directly to her own website, so that when a person searched for Ms. Moore, they were redirected to Ms. Hategan’s information. In doing so, Ms. Hategan took advantage of the name, reputation and likeness of Ms. Moore’s personality. Ms. Hategan did this for commercial purposes and to boost her own professional reputation. As a direct result, Ms. Moore cannot register many of the domains that would naturally be used for her business – including variations of her name. Instead of using her own name, Ms. Moore has to use a fictional phrase – “one moore liz” – to promote herself online.

[142] I agree with the defendant that these actions constitute an appropriation of Ms. Moore’s personality and likeness.

Interference with Ms. Moore’s economic relations

[143] On at least two separate occasions, Ms. Hategan threatened to sue Ms. Moore’s professional colleagues in an attempt to interfere with Ms. Moore’s economic relations. Ms. Moore alleges that this amounts to the tort of intimidation, and is an actionable wrong committed against a third party. In at least one instance, as admitted by Ms. Hategan, these threats led to a speaking engagement being cancelled. As a result of these actions, Ms. Moore has suffered economic harm and loss. Ms. Moore does not know how many other opportunities she may have lost out on, because Ms. Hategan has refused to produce relevant communications with third parties. Ms. Moore submits that an adverse inference should be drawn.

[144] Again, I agree with these submissions. Ms. Hategan has caused interference with Ms. Moore’s economic relation.

Page 51 of HateGate Affair, Ferryman-Cohen complains that she’s been silenced from speaking out. This came after she filed a frivolous lawsuit against Farber for not giving her the credit she thought she deserved. She was also found to be harassing, threatening, stalking and defaming her “rival”, Elizabeth Moore-Frederiksen.

Caryma Sa’d went after CAHN in Federal Court, but it was struck for having no Cause of Action.

Ferryman-Cohen Sued TV Ontario For Clout

48. Bernie Farber made the false representation that both the Plaintiff and Moore were critical in the dissolution of the Heritage Front. At no point did Moore correct Farber that she had not been involved in the “shut down” of the Heritage Front. Without permission, Farber also uses the Plaintiff’s name and courageous actions as an 18-year old teenager and conflates them with Elizabeth Moore, who was a privileged, upper-middle class adult woman who did nothing to shut down the HF, was not a “hero”, and was not involved in any way whatsoever in shutting down the Heritage Front:

“By the way, [Elizabeth] was one of a couple of women that were involved in the Heritage Front, both of them actually, Elizabeth and another woman by the name of Elisa Hategan. Both of them ended up being heroes in terms of how they were able to take themselves out, how they were able to work with the system, to basically shut down the Heritage Front. And so in this particular case, it’s kind of interesting that the women were the heroes in shutting this down. There were others involved as well, the Bristow Affair, he was the mole. All of this came together as a result of the women who full timely took a stand and said, we’re not going to deal with this anymore.”

Back in 2019, Ferryman-Cohen sued TVO because it didn’t give her enough of a glowing review. She and Elizabeth Moore-Frederiksen both were credited with helping to topple Heritage Front. But sharing credit wasn’t good enough, and she filed a $150,000 lawsuit. It was settled out of Court.

Ferryman-Cohen Sued For Defamation By Paul ApSimon

Ferryman-Cohen is being sued for defamation by Paul ApSimon, a former fencing instructor. She posted ancient allegations on her website that essentially accused him of sexual abuse and pedophilia. Now, unless this turns out to be provably true, then he’s 100% justified in filing this one. As of the time of writing this, there is an anti-SLAPP Motion pending.

Bit of advice for Diagolon supporters: maybe someone who gets sued for making these kinds of accusations isn’t the best person to write for you.

Ferryman-Cohen Sues Caryma Sa’d And Toronto Police

Ferryman-Cohen has finally gone after Caryma Sa’d, her co-author, filing a $2.53 million lawsuit. There are some interesting revelations here.

She is suing the Toronto Police twice in Small Claims Court. One was on December 8th, and the other on the 16th.

There’s also one against Mitch Hancock in Small Claims for $35,000. She simply cannot allow people to forget that she’s the one who took down Heritage Front.

50. Sa’d further lied to police, claiming that she did not owe Ms. Hategan any money (despite having had extensive text and verbal discussions about splitting credit, donations, and other compensations for Ms. Hategan). Sa’d has earned thousands of dollars from work performed at least in part by Ms. Hategan, and as a result of her journalistic mentorship. Sa’d and Hategan’s co-authored article The Hategate Affair was also uploaded to a website solely under Sa’d’s control. The website (found at https://dove-herring-wfpt.squarespace.com/ and linked to the domain “hategate.ca”) was operational from September 12, 2023 until fall/winter 2024, and featured “Donation” and “Make a Donation” buttons from its inception until around January 2024. Ms. Hategan does not know the total amount of money collected by Sa’d through the website, through Sa’d’s GoFundMe journalism-related pages, or via direct e-transfers to Sa’d’s bank account and PayPal account, but strongly believes the figure is in the thousands of dollars.

77. It took Elisa many years to overcome her police phobia. Graduating Magna cum Laude from the University of Ottawa with a double major in criminology and psychology, she served as a consultant with the London, UK-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), and has assisted law enforcement such as the Ontario Provincial Police with advice and training on preventing radicalization and extremism in youth. As a keynote speaker for the Probation Officers Association of Ontario (POAO), she presented workshops alongside OPP and RCMP officers. Her wrongful arrests and the high volume of false police reports Sa’d filed about her, which are still registered in CPIC, have destroyed her reputation in the law enforcement community.

96. As a result of Sa’d’s false reports, Ms. Hategan was locked out of her X account and remains suspended to the present day, unable to access her account. Ms. Hategan has never been suspended from any social media platform before. Sa’d lied to X Support by falsely claiming that the photo was a “private” image, even though Sa’d is a notorious public figure who regularly seeks media attention, stives to be famous and become an “influencer”, and has her own Wikipedia Page. As a result of Sa’d’s malicious and false reports, Ms. Hategan has lost her primary source of income – most of her public speaking and consulting requests, as well as crowdfunding donations, come from her X account.

113.(g)(ii). Her duty and loyalty to another client, Jeremy Mackenzie. Ms. Hategan believes that Mackenzie paid Sa’d for work on The HateGate Affair, the September 12, 2023 85-page longform article co-authored and written in majority by Ms. Hategan. Elisa is entitled to receive half of all earnings as per her agreement with Sa’d, but received nothing.

Ferryman-Cohen didn’t “leave behind” her life working with law enforcement. She apparently still does it, and works/worked as a consultant for the ISD? They’re arguably worse than CAHN.

Now we’re getting to the heart of the matter. Ferryman-Cohen believes that MacKenzie paid Sa’d to create HateGate Affair, and she wants a cut of it. She also wants compensation for whatever donations came in. There’s no objection that the document is misleading, just that she wasn’t paid.

This also explains why the paper was so shoddy, at least in part. No one will donate unless there’s a juicy story, such as the EA being invoked over a meme. This was supposed to be a cash cow.

Ferryman-Cohen apparently doesn’t work a regular job, and largely relies on pubic speaking and online donations. Gee, where have we heard that before?

There are many more allegations against Sa’d and her boyfriend that are not relevant here.

Ferryman-Cohen Works For Institute For Strategic Dialogue

According to her LinkedIn page, (see archive), Elisa Hategan is the Regional Coordinator for Central Canada and United States at Against Violent Extremism. They coordinate with the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, or ISD.

Not familiar with the ISD? They were covered here and here previously, but quite simply, they can be considered the “global” version of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. Their work includes:

  • Documenting activities of the far right
  • Education and digital citizenship
  • Outreach
  • Deradicalization efforts

Among the ISD’s donors is the ADL, or Anti-Defamation League. As many know, it was created in 1913 to “protect” the reputation of Leo Frank, convicted rapist and murderer of a 13 year old girl.

Ferryman-Cohen rails against CAHN and Bernie Farber, while participating in an organization that does essentially the same thing. Both CAHN and ISD get taxpayer subsidies. Did no one ask any questions about that? That takes some real mental gymnastics.

She’s also an Advisory Board Member and Social Media Manager for OVED for Human Rights, a Holocaust Survivors Non-Profit. That’s interesting, considering that HateGate was written to “exonerate” people who adamantly deny the Holocaust even happened.

Guys, They’re Totally Not Feds!

The CBC outed and doxed many nationalists at a recent meetup in B.C., while deliberately shielding a member from Second Sons Canada. Very interesting choice, considering the recent protests in Ottawa and Regina.

Heritage Front was a CSIS operation, and Ferryman-Cohen helped destroy it. She points that out every day. It’s hard to believe that she’s bright enough to do that, but too clueless to see the obvious parallels. Sa’d doesn’t mention it either.

Filing lawsuits for being called a “fed” isn’t a good look, especially when the allegation was confessed to under oath. The POEC transcripts are freely available.

It’s kind of surreal to think about. An admitted police informant (Hategan) is promised money to write a paper concluding that another admitted police informant (MacKenzie) was framed by the cops? And none of this seems abnormal?

Prospective members of Second Sons Canada are required to undergo a criminal record check, amongst other things, before being admitted. And who is it that conducts record checks? That would be the RCMP…. who apparently tried to frame MacKenzie. Applicants will be paying to hand over their details to law enforcement.

For the reasons outlined above, the HateGate Affair cannot be taken at face value. There are far too many questions that need to be answered. No amount of gaslighting will change that reality. It would be nice to know how MacKenzie got ahold of those RCMP messages (see 1:00 mark).

What will “The Hate Network” look like? The 2023 release seems designed to “legitimize” an intelligence operation, by dressing it up as state persecution against free speech. Now, this is just a prediction, but maybe the 2025 version will do much the same, but by “shoe-horning” it in with legitimate cases.

(1) Hategan LinkedIn Profile
(2) https://search.open.canada.ca/grants/record/ps-sp%2C214-2020-2021-Q3-0023%2Ccurrent
(3) Elisa Hategan Toronto Police Lawsuit
(4) Hategan v Toronto Police 456 Pages Redacted
(5) Elisa Hategan Caryma Sad lawsuit Info Redacted
(6) Elisa Hategan Hancock Lawsuit
(7) Public Safety A-2022-00112 – Release Package Diagolon

(1) Hategan v. Farber, 2021 ONSC 874 (CanLII)
(2) Hategan v. Frederiksen, 2022 ONCA 217 (CanLII)
(3) Hategan v. Frederiksen, 2022 ONCA 715 (CanLII)
(4) Hategan v. Frederiksen, 2023 ONCA 57 (CanLII)
(5) Sa’d v. Yew, 2023 FC 1286 (CanLII)

HATEGATE AFFAIR:
(1) HateGate Affair Original Filing
(2) HateGate Archived Version (Without Highlighting)
(3) HateGate Archive (With Highlighting)

HATEGATE FOIPOP PACKAGE (FULL RELEASE):
(0.1) Previously Published Documents
(0.2) A-2022-06987 Release Section Of 2nd Package
(1) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 1
(2) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 2
(3) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 3
(4) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 4
(5) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 5
(6) A-2022-06987 Release package Part 6
(7) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 7
(8) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 8
(9) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 9
(10) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 10
(11) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 11
(12) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 12
(13) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 13
(14) A-2022-06987 Release package Part 14
(15) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 15
(16) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 16
(17) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 17
(18) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 18
(19) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 19
(20) A-2022-06987 Release Package Part 20
(21) A-2022-06987 Release package Part 21

MacDonald Gets 10 Years For Production Of Atomwaffen Videos

An Ontario man, Patrick Gordon MacDonald, received a 10 year jail sentence for a series of terrorism offences. Specifically, he was convicted for creating 3 videos encouraging people to join the group Atomwaffen. While he posted other content online, it’s these videos which caused the most trouble.

One might think that there’s little else to do in the way of solving crime in Canada. Police spent a lot of time and money going after him.

It’s true that the creation of the videos predates Atomwaffen’s designation by Ottawa as a terrorist organization. However, it didn’t seem to matter much. The videos MacDonald made were called:

  1. Grey Zone
  2. Fission
  3. Feuernacht

The ruling doesn’t go into great detail about the contents of the videos, but these remarks are made.

[35] The videos had two purposes: a) to recruit new members; and b) to propagate AWD terrorist ideology by encouraging viewers to start the revolution and purge the weak. The Fission video invites viewers to join AWD in their efforts to “vanquish the modern world”; the narrator continues stating “we call forward all who are willing to descend, like a howling wolf, on the frail fold and rend limb from limb those without the stomach to fight”, “from the ashes of the kike system, our new order shall emerge” and concludes by saying “join us or perish with the rest”, which is a statement that expressly incites fear in members of the public.

[36] In the Feuernacht video, the narrator exhorts viewers to “burn it all, purge the weak, join the division”. The Grey Zone video concludes by telling viewers to “get the program”, “create your own cell”, and “start the revolution”. It describes the terror that will be unleashed on “fat, treacherous bureaucrats” and “Jewish snakes”, “we will storm your mansions, creating caskets from your dining tables and tombstones of your bedposts”. All three videos end with the same email address: awdrecruiting@tutonota.com.

Apparently, there was nothing in any of them to indicate it was trolling or satire.

“Grey Zone” was filmed at an abandoned cement plant in Belleville, Ontario. The police spent some time comparing the graffiti and marks on the cement wall. They also pulled MacDonald’s phone records (including location data), to confirm he was in Belleville. (Paragraph 38)

“Fission” was filmed at a former school in St. Ferdinand, Québec in July 2019. The police pulled MacDonald’s bank records to show that he had made purchases in the area. Oddly, phone records show that his cell wasn’t in the area, and the Judge simply concluded it might have been loaned out at that time. (Paragraph 38 f/g)

The Judge doesn’t say where Feuernacht was created, but ruled that it was shot by the same camera which created the other 2 videos.

On some level, it’s quite something the effort that was spent to find out where, when and by whom these videos were made. That said, it’s telling that there are many other serious crimes that go on in Ontario that receive little to no investigation.

Side note: another honeypot has decided to call out Atomwaffen. It’s amusing when they turn against each other.

MacDonald’s Counsel Does Lackluster Job

To be blunt, it’s not really clear what the strategy was supposed to be. There were several things that implicated MacDonald, and there seemed to be no effort to attempt any mitigation.

[17] The Defence did not attack any of Dr. Perry’s evidence about the history of AWD, the formation of AWD, or dispute her opinion evidence that AWD’s core ideological views were based on neo-Nazi accelerationism or that it encouraged its members to engage in acts of violence against the state, Jewish people, minorities, and others with the intent to create a race war to establish a white ethno-state.

[20] I accept Dr. Perry’s expert evidence about the history and the ideological beliefs of the AWD group, including her opinion that AWD was a terrorist group within the definition of section 83.01(1) of the Criminal Code in the 2018-2019 time period, because AWD encouraged its members to commit violent acts against the state, Jewish people, minorities, and others to create a race war to establish a white ethno-state. I also accept Dr. Perry’s opinion evidence that one of AWD’s purposes was the facilitation of carrying out a terrorist activity and as such, it was a terrorist entity in 2018-2019. Her opinion was not contested on this point.

[27] The Accused posted the recruitment videos and violent Nazi images online under the online pseudonym “Dark Foreigner” for AWD on several media platforms using the hashtag “atomwaffen division”. The login information and password for these accounts were found above the ceiling tiles in the Accused’s residence during the search of his premises. The fact that the Accused hid the login information and passwords for these accounts above the ceiling tiles indicates his knowledge that AWD was a terrorist group. The post by “Dark Foreigner” on Tumblr on April 16, 2018, included an image showing the trefoil symbol, a person wearing a balaclava skull mask, a military camouflage jacket, an assault jacket, and carrying a weapon with the words “Nazi” and “Atomwaffen” inscribed at the bottom.

[29] Finally, the pamphlet of “the AWD program” written in Russian was also found hidden above the ceiling tiles in the Accused’s room in the basement. While the recruitment pamphlets of AWD were written in Russian, the fact that the Accused hid the pamphlets above the ceiling tiles indicates that he knew about the ideology of AWD and tried to conceal the pamphlet to avoid detection of the fact that he was a participant in the activities of AWD and that it was a terrorist group.

[30] The metadata contained in the Grey Zone video, namely in the JPEG files, confirms that these images were filmed using the Accused’s Fuji camera and lenses that had the identical serial number as the Fuji camera and lenses that were found in the Accused’s residence during the search of his premises. This is strong evidence that the Accused was involved in taking images with his Fuji camera and lenses that were included and found in the Grey Zone video. It is also strong evidence that the Accused was aware of AWD’s ideology and that it was a terrorist group.

[34] The Defence did not argue that contributing to or participating in the production of the recruitment videos would not amount to participating or contributing to a terrorist activity. The issue is whether the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused is the person that participated in the production of the recruitment videos and posted the violent Nazi images online.

While the decision convicting MacDonald is long, here are a few highlights. The Defence apparently never tried to argue that creating these videos didn’t amount to terrorism. Instead, his lawyers tried arguing that it wasn’t him.

However, a few things really hamstrung MacDonald: (a) metadata from his camera; (b) cellphone activity; (c) AWD pamphlet and login information for his social media accounts hidden in the ceiling; and (d) clothing that appeared to match those seen in the videos.

[3] The Defence raises two arguments against the conviction:

a. Firstly, the Crown’s evidence does not identify the Accused as the person who participated in or contributed to the production of the three recruitment videos and posted AWD propaganda images online beyond a reasonable doubt; and

b. Secondly, the Defence submits that the expert evidence of Dr. Perry, to the effect that AWD was a terrorist group in the 2018-2019 period that promoted the use of violence in Defence of the white race, was not sufficiently reliable to constitute proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

According to the Judge however, the Defence never really challenged the testimony from Barbara Perry about Atomwaffen’s core ideological beliefs.

Timeline Of Major Events In Case

2019: MacDonald creates 3 promotional videos for Atomwaffen. It’s noteworthy that all of this happened prior to the group being designated as a terrorist organization in 2021.

February 3rd, 2021: Atomwaffen is officially classified as a terrorist group.

November 18th to December 3rd, 2024: MacDonald formally goes on Trial.

April 2nd, 2025: Justice Smith convicts MacDonald on 3 counts of participation in activity of terrorist group. He remains out on bail.

August 7th, 2025: Justice Smith agreed to let Matthew Kriner give opinion evidence during the sentencing hearing of MacDonald.

September 8th, 2025: MacDonald is sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Is An Appeal Likely To Succeed?

10 years is a long time for a first arrest. MacDonald had no prior record, so that should count for a lot. He also remained on bail for 2 years without incident.

On the other hand, Judges are given a large amount of deference when handing down sentences, and Appellate Courts may be reluctant to interfere. This last ruling is not yet available on CanLII, but should be interesting to read.

But if he does appeal, perhaps he should get a better lawyer.

(1) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc1939/2025onsc1939.html
(2) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc4582/2025onsc4582.html
(3) https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/regu/sor-2002-284/latest/sor-2002-284.html
(4) https://sppc.gc.ca/eng/nws-nvs/2025/08_09_25.html
(5) https://x.com/JeremyMacKenzi/status/1965106679634112626/
(6) https://jeremymackenzie.substack.com/p/talk-shit-get-ten-years

“Atomwaffen Applicant” To Be Sentenced For Participation In Terrorist Group

Last month, Seth Bertrand was found guilty of participation in activity of a terrorist group. The organization is the Atomwaffen Division, or AWD, also known as the National Socialist Order, or NSO. He is expected to be sentenced in October, and faces up to 10 years in prison.

It’s a fair question to ask whether this was explicitly set up by the authorities (as Grant Bristow did with Heritage Front), or if it has simply been heavily infiltrated. In either situation, Bertrand is in serious trouble.

He has effectively screwed up his life over graffiti, a broken window, and some slashed tires. Moreover, he ran his mouth to undercover police, explicitly stating that he wanted to join a “domestic terrorist organization”.

During that time, Bertrand apparently also reached out to: (a) Injekt Division; (b) National Partisans; and (c) The Minutemen. Similarly, one has to ask if any of these are ‘legitimate’ organizations, or merely fronts created by the police.

The way Bertrand describes things, he was angry and frustrated in early 2021 from various lockdown measures and the apparent helplessness in his life. This likely is true.

In, 2023, he pleaded guilty to inciting hate, and to 3 counts of mischief. However, he fought the terrorism charge, which was by far the most serious.

Diagolon Engages In “Fed-Jacketing” Against Atomwaffen

As an aside, law enforcement operations aren’t safe from being critcised by each other. Even Alex Vriend (a.k.a. “The Ferryman’s Toll”) commented recently that Atomwaffen was obviously a trap. The irony seems lost.

This site previously covered the gun grab of Gary Schill here and here. Detective Constable Ernest Carmichael testified that police regularly infiltrated the in-person meets, and that the Telegrams chats were monitored.

Consider that Jeremy MacKenzie testified in 2022 that he was willing to have a “continuous relationship with law enforcement”. He also detailed some of his previous cooperation. By Vriend’s own logic, anyone currently promoting Diagolon is either a retard or a fed.

Identities Of Witnesses, Undercover Officers Shielded From Public

These rulings also come with an Order attached under s.486.5 and s.486.31 of the Criminal Code. They prohibit any information that could identify the witnesses from being disclosed. Furthermore, the identities of “Undercover Officer Alex” and “Undercover Officer Eric” are also to be shielded.

Perhaps “Undercover Officer Jeremy” would have been too obvious.

One has to wonder what other cases these 2 have testified in, and if there are any more coming up. A likely explanation is that the operation is ongoing. It’s hard to “confront one’s accusers” in Court when Defendants don’t even know who they are.

Questions From Bertrand’s AWD/NSO Application

Why do you want to join NSO? What stands out to you, from other groups?

your professionalism and your propaganda quality everything about the NSO just stands out to me.

Why should we bother to recruit you?

I have wanted to be apart of something big ever since I was redpilled the NSO/AWD has been the biggest when i was running my division i strived to be as good as you guys plus i have already proven myself worthy of another divisions trust a stunt of mine made it in local news.

Question: Anything else?

If I do get accepted I promise all my loyalty to you i want nothing more then to be apart of a group that’s actually doing things to help save/protect the white race “if he wish not to fight in a world where struggle is the way of life then he does not have the right to exist”-adolf hitler.

Timeline Of Major Events In Case

February 3rd, 2021: Atomwaffen is designated as a terrorist organization by the Federal Government.

February 15th and 20th, 2021: Bertrand wrote graffiti on private property.

February 21st, 2021: Bertrand emails the National Socialist Order, requesting to join. The NSO is another name which AtomWaffen is known by.

February 21st, 2021: Bertrand throws a brake rotor through the front window of the WETrans Centre.

February 26th, 2021: Bertrand uploads a voice post which said, “look on the bright side, if I do end up going to jail, um, I can recruit people from inside the prison”.

March 6th, 2021: Bertrand sends an email to Folkish Aryan Resistance, asking to join. He adds that he’s good with vehicles and weapons.

March 2021: On 2 separate occasions, Bertrand punctured the tires of a vehicle parked outside. He was caught on surveillance camera doing so.

May 20th, 2021: Bertrand left a note outside the home of a gay couple, which included swastikas, and the words, “The AtomWaffen knows who you are!” and “hail Hitler”.

January 30th, 2022: Bertrand meets with “Undercover Officer Eric”, whom he believes to be the leader of a group looking to employ him. He admitted to the above graffiti and vandalism. For some reason, Bertrand took it upon himself to explain what AtomWaffen in, describing it as a “domestic terrorist organization”. He would later claim that he was entrapped and manipulated.

May 5th, 2022: Bertrand is arrested, and he explains to the police that there were people out to get whites. He described Atomwaffen Division as “a paramilitary terrorist organization”, which he “wanted to jump on that”. He later tried to justify the application since they weren’t listed as a terrorist organization. Or at least, that’s what he believed.

August, 2023: Bertrand pleads guilty to mischief and inciting hate, receiving a 5 month conditional sentence.

September 3rd, 2024: More hearings take place, and they continue into the Fall and Winter.

December 30th, 2024: Justice Carroccia dismissed an attempt to have Bertrand’s statements to police blocked from consideration at Trial. His rights weren’t violated in obtaining them. He claimed that he didn’t really understand he was under arrest, and had merely been detained for his participation in the national convoy.

February 27th, 2022: Justice Carroccia dismisses a Motion brought by the Defence to throw out the case for lack of evidence. She believed it was strong enough to send to Trial

April 9th, 2025: Bertrand stands Trial. Part of the Crown’s case came from Garth Davies, and Associate Professor at Simon Fraser University.

[23] The Crown also relies on the evidence of Dr. Garth Davies who was qualified as an expert to give opinion evidence on the identification of, and explanation of, specific ideologically motivated violent extremist (IMVE) groups including Atomwaffen Division, National Socialist Order, National Partisan Movement, Injekt Division, and Folkish Resistance Movement.

August 6th, 2025: Bertrand is convicted of participating in terrorist activity.

He’ll be sentenced in a matter of weeks, but it’s hard to predict the exact outcome. Patrick Gordon MacDonald recently received 10 years in prison for his convictions for making 3 videos promoting recruitment for Atomwaffen. Considering Bertrand already has a criminal record, jail time for him seems likely, although not inevitable.

In the big picture, one has to ask how many of these people really are terrorists, and how many are useful idiots that are easy to set up.

(1) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc1303/2025onsc1303.html
(2) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc4591/2025onsc4591.html
(3) https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/regu/sor-2002-284/latest/sor-2002-284.html
(4) https://www.sfu.ca/iccrc/members/memberprofiles/garth-davies.html
(5) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc1939/2025onsc1939.html
(6) https://x.com/ferryman4747/status/1953636876642136402
(7) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/windsor-terrorism-seth-bertrand-far-right-1.7420091
(8) https://www.ctvnews.ca/windsor/article/it-was-kind-of-like-a-job-interview-accused-windsorite-admits-to-communications-with-terrorist-organization/

Anti-SLAPP Ruling Upheld: When “Recycling” Your Defamation Cases Goes Horribly Wrong

A long awaited Court of Appeal decision has finally been handed down. Justices Zarnett, Young and Favreau have upheld a December 2023 ruling from Justice Chalmers of the Ontario Superior Court. That initial verdict saw a $1.1 million defamation case against CSASPP thrown out under anti-SLAPP laws, with $132,000 in costs awarded. Another $10,000 in costs was ordered in this subsequent ruling.

CSASPP is of course the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy. In January 2021, it began a Proposed Class Action against Bonnie Henry and the Government of British Columbia. This has been covered elsewhere on this site.

See here, here and here for background information.

That said, a hilarious detail seems to have been overlooked. The case against CSASPP was almost entirely borrowed from an earlier defamation case…. against this website. To clarify, there were 2 separate actions, with overlapping allegations.

[1] This website was sued in September 2021 for detailed criticism of various anti-lockdown cases.

[2] CSASPP and its staff were sued in June 2022 over much, MUCH more mild criticism, and to silence a fomer donor from complaining to the Law Society of Ontario.

Given that this there were 2 different lawsuits, with very different circumstances, one would expect that 2 very different cases would have been prepared. Instead, it seems that the documentation for the first case was simply repackaged and reused for the second case. From the ruling:

[86] …. Finally, because of evidence in the appellant’s own materials of other extremely vitriolic and sustained criticisms of him by others, including the publication “Canuck Law”, he found that if there was damage to the appellant’s reputation, it was not shown to have been caused by the respondents, as opposed to other sources.

[91] The difficulty with the appellant’s submission is the motion judge’s causation finding. The motion judge referred to the evidence from the appellant of a concerted campaign against him by a group known as “Canuck Law” who was not a party to his action. The motion judge stated: “the [appellant] references the group extensively in the material filed on this motion. In articles posted on the Canuck website, the [appellant] was the subject of disparaging and racist comments”. Referring to that and some judicial criticism, he concluded that there was no evidence that any damage to the appellant’s reputation was caused by the respondents, as opposed to other sources.

As an aside, the “racist comments” referred to in the CSASPP case actually came from a site called Overdue Revolutions. It was just misrepresented that they originated here.

Not only are anti-lockdown cases being recycled, but defamation ones are as well. By filing evidence that someone else may have engaged in character assassination, it completely undermines the claims that CSASPP had been responsible.

Whatever happened to taking pride in one’s work?

CSASPP/RG DOCUMENTS (June 2022)
(1) CSASPP RG Statement Of Claim
(2) CSASPP RG Moving Party Motion Record Volume 1
(3) CSASPP RG Moving Party Motion Record Volume 2
(4) CSASPP RG Moving Party Motion Record Volume 3
(5) CSASPP RG Responding Motion Record Volume 1
(6) CSASPP RG Responding Motion Record Volume 2
(7) CSASPP RG Responding Motion Record Volume 3
(8) CSASPP RG Moving Party Supplemental Motion Record
(9) CSASPP RG Moving Party Record Motion To Strike
(10) CSASPP RG Plaintiffs Responding Record Motion To Strike
(11) CSASPP RG Transcript Brief
(12) CSASPP RG Moving Party Factum (Arguments)
(13) CSASPP RG Responding Plaintiff Factum
(14) CSASPP RG Moving Parties Reply Factum
(15) CSASPP RG Reasons For Judgement
(16) CanLII Posting Of Decision

CSASPP/RG APPEAL DOCUMENTS (2024)
(1) CSASPP Defamation Appellant Factum
(2) CSASPP Defamation Respondent Factum
(3) https://www.covidconstitutionalchallengebc.ca/status-updates
(4) https://www.scribd.com/document/768627727/2024-09-12-Notice-of-Merit-Hearing-13-January-2025
(5) https://www.scribd.com/document/758138683/2024-08-06-Defendant-Respondents-Motion-Record-to-Dismiss-for-Delay

1ST LAW SOCIETY OF ONTARIO CLAIM (July 2022)
(1) Law Society Of Ontario Statement Of Claim
(2) Law Society Of Ontario Intent To Defend
(3) Law Society Of Ontario Amended Statement Of Claim
(4) Law Society Of Ontario Requisition For Amended Claim
(5) Law Society Of Ontario Motion Record, To Strike
(6) Law Society Of Ontario Moving Party Factum To Strike
(7) Law Society Of Ontario Plaintiff Responding Factum

2ND LAW SOCIETY OF ONTARIO CLAIM (July 2023)
(1) Law Society Of Ontario Second Statement Of Claim

“Frozen Bank Accounts” Lawsuit Dropped Without A Fight

A much hyped case challenging Ottawa’s decision to freeze bank accounts of peaceful protestors has come to an end. Lawyers have discontinued the claim, before a single Statement of Defence had been filed.

Clients and donors contributed at least $150,000 to a case that never even finished the pleadings.

It was all a giant nothing-burger.

While lawyers could simply have challenged the freezing of bank accounts, and probably advanced the case, they had to turn it into a giant conspiracy. They pleaded that Government officials had relied on the postings of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network (CAHN), doing no research whatsoever. This is the infamous #HateGate scandal. Ironically, they made the same mistake they accuse law enforcement of: not bothering to get their facts straight ahead of time.

Against CAHN, and Bernie Farber, the Plaintiffs essentially made defamation allegations, but without spelling out what they were. However, because of Ontario’s anti-SLAPP laws, Defendants filed a Motion to dismiss. It was granted, along with nearly $50,000 in costs being awarded. What’s interesting is that once the Motion is initiated, Plaintiffs are prohibited from amending their claim to prevent this.

And the Plaintiffs’ lawyers billed almost $100,000, over a pleading they bungled.

Granted, the anti-SLAPP decision only got Farber and CAHN off the hook. Theoretically, the case could still proceed against the others. However, the Statement of Claim was so poorly drafted it would have faced a Motion to Strike. Most likely, clients would have to pay tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars in more costs. Instead, the suit was dropped.

This is pretty shoddy work for a major commercial litigation firm.

The Notice doesn’t specify the terms, but it’s entirely possible that the Defendants agreed not to seek any costs in return for discontinuing.

Interestingly, at least one group is still asking for money. Shouldn’t donations be returned, if Plaintiffs aren’t going ahead with their case?

LAWYER DETAILS:
(1) https://lobergector.com/
(2) https://lobergector.com/emergencies-act
(3) https://lobergector.com/contact-us

COURT DOCUMENTS:
(1) Cornell Notice Of Action
(2) Cornell Statement Of Claim
(3) Cornell Farber CAHN Notice Of Motion Anti-SLAPP
(4) Cornell Farber CAHN Motion Record Anti-SLAPP
(5) Cornell Richard Warman Affidavit Anti-SLAPP
(7) Cornell Vincent Gircys Affidavit Anti-SLAPP
(8) Cornell Factum Of Farber CAHN Anti-SLAPP
(9) Cornell Defendant Cost Submissions Anti-SLAPP
(10) Cornell Plaintiff Cost Submissions Anti-SLAPP
(11) Cornell Notice Of Intent To Defend Ottawa Police Services
(12) Cornell Notice Of Intent To Defend Assiniboine Credit Union
(13) Cornell Notice Of Intent To Defend Canadian Tire Bank
(14) Cornell Notice Of Intent To Defend Meridian Credit Union
(15) Cornell Notice Of Intent To Defend Fraser Stride Credit Union
(16) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2024/2024onsc5343/2024onsc5343.html
(17) https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2025/2025onsc543/2025onsc543.html
(18) Cornell Notice Of Discontinuance

(1) https://takeactioncanada.ca/justice/