In the Network: Media Co-op Dominion   Locals: HalifaxMontrealTorontoVancouver

Support the VMC, donate today!

This post has not been reviewed by the Vancouver Media Co-op editorial committee.

Greg Renouf: Dangerous Reactionary

Blog posts are the work of individual contributors, reflecting their thoughts, opinions and research.
Greg Renouf
Greg Renouf

Blogger Greg Renouf has been a terrible annoyance and worse to revolutionaries and activists across Turtle Island since at least December 2011 when he was called out publicly for harassing an activist about Occupy Vancouver even though that particular activist was hardly ever at the encampment. He has since moved to Toronto where he has engaged in a more long-term campaign of slander, harassment, and conspiracy theories about the “tides funded” “treason” of what he sees as the left.

This is a callout for awareness, in the hopes that someone can shut him down in whatever capacity possible on the internet or wherever. It should also not be taken lightly that he is fairly tech-savvy.

I realize that there are more important things in the world to be writing about, and that some may even find his accusations and conjecture rather amusing (I know I have at times), but he actually represents a very real danger to many peoples lives. From reading his blog, it would appear that an anarchist comrade in Toronto has already been arrested and charged with an apparent assault, as a result of his cape-fear-esque obsession with individuals involved in radical social movements in so-called “Canada”.

The man is a dangerous right-wing reactionary and his accusations often have racist overtones. One very telling example came last March when No One Is Illegal held a march against racism on Commercial Drive in East Vancouver. The march is held yearly against individual and systemic racism, and was being held on Commercial Drive that year because of a string of racist attacks in the area by members of a group named Blood and Honour. Renouf’s response was to attack an organizer from the group for their stance on Diversity of Tactics and charge them with reverse racism because they pointed out the racist implications of authoritarians and pacifists telling people what they could do or not do when they fight against capitalist society with its myriad of oppressions such as racism.

Another good example was when he backed up We Are Change Victoria a right-wing “libertarian” group for a demonstration they organized that had Doug Christie as a speaker. He does not in any way voice opposition to Doug Christie who as a lawyer has a long history of defending fascists, Nazis, and various holocaust deniers. Instead he goes into a redscare-like “beware the bolshivek menace” type rant about an organizer of the counter demonstration.

It is also quite telling his obsession with what he perceives as the left and similarities to the white power movement with its “rock against communism” as a response to “rock against racism” concerts.

Below I’ll let him speak for himself (in one of his latest postings) to show his absurd theories of a unified left, and his disgusting legalistic authoritarian arguments intended to whip up fear and hysteria against everyone from anarchists in a black bloc, to random university students

Most amusing of all perhaps is his assertion that the "anti-olympic movement" suddenly fell off a cliffs edge as a result of the Heart Attack demonstration on Feb 13th 2010. He clearly had no involvement in the movement and apperantly has no idea of the reason that there were thousands of people on the streets for the oppening of the Olympics and no time later. Because it was the only mass demonstration organized during the convergence! Masses of people don't just fall out of the sky and fly back into outer space because of some public image they like or don't like, it takes organizing! The capability of anticapitalist movements to mobilize people, and the autonomy that certain sections of the movement show is clearly something that threatens Renouf, and this is becoming dangerous for many people in these movements :

“It’s no secret now that Canadian activist movements have a problem with violence. Every major activist event in the past few years has been stained by violent acts- the 2010 Olympics, G20, the student fees protests in Quebec. Yet, despite the fact such violence very few activists have dared to speak-out. People who have, like peace activist Derrick O’Keefe, have ended-up being publically slaughtered. I can attest to that fact, having been on the receiving end of the abuse after standing-up against violence in the Occupy movement.

There are many leaders in activist communities who have been actively promoting the use of violent tactics. Some of the more prominent pro-violence activists I’ve written about include Harsha Walia (who O’Keefe and I were harshly attacked by), Alex Hundert, Julian Ichim, and Franklin Lopez. Pro-violence activists preach a gospel that it’s not only acceptable, but necessary to achieve societal change.

It’s hard to guess these people’s intentions, that should be left to the courts. But we can look at the results of previous activist violence and quickly realize it’s only had negative results. We can also ask the question of what would motivate people to promote such unproductive behaviour- are they simply unable to comprehend reality, or are some people intentionally leading activists down a path of self-destruction?

Let’s first look at the reality of the ineffectiveness of violent protest in Canada. One of the best examples is the 2010 Olympics where there were two major type of protesters- the ‘usual suspects’ of the anti-everything activist community, and then there was a large crowd of average middle-class folk who were unhappy having to carry the burden of the Olympic debt. The moment the violent faction began smashing-up the (American owned) Hudson Bay Company (in the name of anti-colonialism) the 100′s of average folk made a beeline back to the suburbs.

It was widely thought the protesters could have effectively shut-down the Olympics until that point…

Outside of scaring-away potential allies, and helping justify the building of a police state, there’s a more important reason to reject the use of violence. After reading through the Canadian Criminal Code (things one does when locked-in the house on a snow day) it appears that violence is the best possible tactic to kill an activist movement.

Have a look at section 2(a) of article 46 the Criminal Code:

(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,

(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

So, basically, anyone who uses violence while calling for a revolution is technically committing treason! When Julian Ichim chants it’s ‘time to pick up a gun’, or when Harsha Walia said that Black Bloc is “about breaking windows, but not about breaking windows” what they are doing is counselling people to commit treason. Treason is a serious crime- get charged with that, and you’re unlikely to be marching in next year’s May Day march.

Now have a look at section’s 2(c) & 2(d):

(c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);

(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; 

One doesn’t have to commit an act of violence to be charged with treason. All it takes is to be caught conspiring to be violent. The law is very clear on this- if your activism is focussed on using violence to overthrow the capitalist system, and you get caught, there’s a possibility you will be put away behind bars for a very long time.

Outside of using violence, there’s only one other scenario where it’s illegal to try and overthrow the government- when a person decides to work with a foreign government to achieve that task. This must be particularly troubling for people like PressTV’s Joshua Blakeney, who’s been broadcasting anti-government propaganda on behalf of the Iranian government. This is covered in section 1:

(c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

Beyond the use of violence, and collaborating with a foreign enemy, there don’t appear to be any other sections in the Criminal Code that deem it illegal to try and overthrow the government. It’s perfectly legal to (peacefully) gather people to protest and demand change. It’s legal to run for government and make change yourself. It’s also legal to lobby and communicate with political leaders (and fellow citizens) in an effort to overthrow the government. You’re just not allowed to use violence to achieve your goal.

So, regardless of their intentions- activist leaders who promote the use of violence are leading people down the one path that justifies the government to use force against their movements. If one had the intention to destroy the activist community, I couldn’t think of a better way to accomplish it.

The government knows this too- why else do you think the Quebec provincial police risked getting caught when they send provocateurs during the Montebello summit? They did it because they they knew it was the fastest path they could have to justifying a crack-down on the protesters.

As I’ve said, it’s impossible to know what’s going-on in the minds of the people promoting the use of violence- but, does it really matter what their intention is? The result is, and will continue to be, that each time violence is used, social & environmental justice movements end-up taking a step backwards. Then there are the individuals whose lives are destroyed- and more often than not, it’s the rank & file who end up in jail, not the leaders.

Violence is the one single issue that has the potential to kill people’s hope of achieving social change- isn’t it time that people grow-up and realize how misguided this is? And, isn’t it time to start treating people who promote violence as the real enemies of the movement?”

Catch the news as it breaks: follow the VMC on Twitter.
Join the Vancouver Media Co-op today. Click here to learn about the benefits of membership.


again your the idiot!

slan·der  (slndr)

1. Law Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
2. A false and malicious statement or report about someone.

THIS IS ALL YOU HAVE WRITTEN its everything you have said to the tee you twit!


I'm the idiot? kk watch this...



Defamatory Libel



Definition of “newspaper”

297. In sections 303, 304 and 308, “newspaper” means any paper, magazine or periodical containing public news, intelligence or reports of events, or any remarks or observations thereon, printed for sale and published periodically or in parts or numbers, at intervals not exceeding thirty-one days between the publication of any two such papers, parts or numbers, and any paper, magazine or periodical printed in order to be dispersed and made public, weekly or more often, or at intervals not exceeding thirty-one days, that contains advertisements, exclusively or principally.

  • R.S., c. C-34, s. 261.

Marginal note:Definition

  • 298. (1) A defamatory libel is matter published, without lawful justification or excuse, that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published.

  • Marginal note:Mode of expression

    (2) A defamatory libel may be expressed directly or by insinuation or irony

    • (a) in words legibly marked on any substance; or

    • (b) by any object signifying a defamatory libel otherwise than by words.

  • R.S., c. C-34, s. 262.

Marginal note:Publishing

299. A person publishes a libel when he

  • (a) exhibits it in public;

  • (b) causes it to be read or seen; or

  • (c) shows or delivers it, or causes it to be shown or delivered, with intent that it should be read or seen by the person whom it defames or by any other person.

  • R.S., c. C-34, s. 263.

Marginal note:Punishment of libel known to be false

300. Every one who publishes a defamatory libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.'re bad at this game.... slander?  I've never said a word to you...  But go ahead...try to get me on libel.  I fuckin dare you.  Can't wait the court laughs in your face.  


King Dipp Shit of Turd Island

all your posts are irrelevant you simply ignore reality making up your own argument anyone that reads the post can see you are a dumb fuck

Renouf = White Nationalist Sympathizer?

It's interesting you mention Renouf's racism here... I've tried to call him out on this before, but he simply doesn't publish critical comments on his blog because, according to him, he's pushing a "narrative" (which the author does a good job of pointing out is essentially just bashing social movements and their participants) and things that don't match his "narrative" are simply not published. He's not interested in debate or discussion.

Anyway, wrt racism, Renouf recently tweeted a link to a video produced by a site run by an admitted white nationalist. On Jan 25, he tweeted a link to a video on Youtube that was produced by, a site run in support of and by Marc Lemire, a known "white nationalist" and former president of the Heritage Front. The video alleges that Anti-Racist Action is a B'nai Brith front group, an allegation that boneheads and white supremacists have been pushing for years, with no evidence, because it suits their openly anti-Semitic ends. Renouf has been told several times that is run by Lemire and that it is linked with white nationalism, but the tweet remains up. The first frame of the video is a link to freedomsite. It's easy to sort out the credibility of this source (5 minutes or less would do it) and it certainly seems odd for an avowed "centrist" to push such hard right sources to further his arguments. The guy cannot claim ignorance; he was told several times. He supports white supremacism, either as a political end itself or as a means to further push his own "narrative", attacking radicals. Either one is repugnant and shows he needs to be stopped.

Also, i have screenshots in case he tries to delete the tweet. Here's a link:

Additionally, Renouf has links to the so-called "men's rights" movement, dating from a hit piece he wrote on participants at a direct action at U of T. They were using Renouf's "work" to help track down and harass people, primarily women, who took part in disrupting an appearance by rape-apologist Warren Farrell. He wrote for noted misogynist site, which has advocated stalking and harassment of feminist activists.

The point being, between his support for white supremacist and anti-feminist websites, Renouf has been making friends with people on the hard fringe right. Not the Conservative Party or even the church, but serious, organized far-right fringe elements. He presents himself as attacking the excesses of the radical left (and anarchists!) from a neutral, centrist "ethical" perspective, but, politically, he makes overtures to groups even more outside the mainstream on the opposite side of the spectrum. It's creepy and we should, as a community, be aware of it: he's not just a crank blogger anymore, but a legitimate asset to the most reactionary and dangerous fringe of the radical right (men's rights, white supremacy) by making their politics slightly more palpable because, hey, he's just a guy who cares about non-violence and locking up criminals, right? He needs to be confronted and exposed. As the blog about him reminds us, this man is, indeed, dangerous and is growing moreso.


Hold on while I consult the great dictionary of who's videos and comments to post and not post because the cult of occutards says without much proof (and even if they did who the hell do they think they are telling people not to post a vid because it was made by xxx person that is a white nationalist?).

The way I see it, the previous poster should focus on the people that do the unsavory acts, posting a video is not even close! How retarded. No wonder the public hates the whole lot of you low brow meddlers.


Greg says he's a journalist, researcher and writer; you, i assume, are not. Any writer, especially one focusing on politics, who would tweet a link to a site he's never investigated in any capacity (30 seconds on Google is all it took me) is a poor researcher and a fool. But he's been made aware of the content of that site and he doesn't care. Why? Because he cares more about talking shit about anarchists than he does, say, offering white nationalists a platform for their propaganda. Because he represents himself openly as a so-called "centrist" and "ethicist", I think many of his readers and supporters, to say nothing of his detractors, might be surprised by that. He's either an irredeemably terrible writer who does not follow even the most basic standards of verification, a liar and an opportunist who doesn't give a fuck about the truth but just wants to slander radicals or a white supremacist. I can't think of many other real possibilities, given the facts. But, as a Renouf fan, i'm sure the facts aren't that important to you.

As for proof, see the below response. All the proof is right there, available at your convenience. Maybe when you actually start caring about the truth you can take a look at them.

Well anybody worth their salt

Well anybody worth their salt wouldn't judge a book by a cover either.  That means if he sends out a single link it does not mean an endorsement for an entire site.  This childish argument will get you nowhere, if I posted an alex jones link, it does not mean that I subscribe to his entire agenda.  Just like if someone posts an occupy link -- which I have done before as I am sure many other people have done without really endorsing the occupy movement.


Got any other irrational ideas?  Any more logical fallacies to present?

I outlined three

I outlined three possibilities based on Renouf's tweet:

1.) He's a terrible writer and researcher because he didn't do his due dilligence.

2.) He doesn't care where his information came from because it fits his worldview. If so, he's crass and deceptive.

3.) He agrees with the information, which makes him at least a sympathizer.

All three possibilities are based on the assumption that someone who calls themselves a centrist would not knowingly provide a forum for white supremacists, which Greg did and which he was made aware of, with no retraction or explanation following. What other conclusion, based on the evidence, is available? I'm genuinely curious.

As to your book/cover comment... the nature of social media is that we only see what we are presented with. I don't know Greg personally, but i do follow his writing online. Given what he has written and said, I drew a conclusion based on the available evidence. A writer is only as good as their words and their words are only as good as their sources. He presented this source to his readership as bolstering a point he wanted to make, namely that Toronto police do not arrest anarchists for property damage, something demonstrably untrue, but leave that aside for a moment. Why did he use that video? Why didn't he investigate the link before posting it? Or did he? For someone who doesn't know the man and only knows what he writes, i think these are all legitimate questions. Nobody's making the logical equivocation that *because* he posted this, he's a white supremacist; that would be a fallacy. He could be, he could not be. But to those of us who only know what he's spewed out online, who assume that he is, as he says, deeply opposed to any form of racism and politically of the center, it seems really incongruous to tweet a link to a video produced by white supremacists. As his readers, i feel we are owed a clarification.

I presented the evidence, the (rather modest) assumptions i employed and derived a conclusion (that Renouf has been making links with fringe elements of the online right). Perhaps my analysis is incorrect (perhaps). You give Renouf the benefit of the doubt because you know him and have a history with him. Most of us, thankfully, do not. To say we ought to agree with you based on evidence we have no access to (you know the "book" and not its "cover") just shows you've got nothing to contribute and don't even really understand the point i'm making. So, y'know, good luck with that friend.

With the information on the

With the information on the page he tweeted, perhaps he does agree.

With the whole site? Nope, that is how subversive asshats try to frame people, nobody that has four brain cells to rub together would fall for such logical fallacy.

So we should just take your

So we should just take your word for it? Why? Because you know the guy and say so? Wouldn't that be a fallacy too? And Greg has stood up for Marc Lemire and Doug Christie... perhaps standing up for one of them might be excusable as a mistake. But two of the most prominent white supremacists in the country? It's certainly odd and raises questions that a man who continually hurls accusations of racism would pick up for two of the most important racists around.

And that's the extent of what's being said. Fallacious reasoning, which you like to keep invoking carelessly, would say that BECAUSE he tweeted that link, he agrees with it, whereas all i am arguing is that he did tweet said link and there is a legitimate question as to how he feels about it, given his previous political statements and his writings. You seem to be having a hard time grasping the difference between "might be" and "is.  And you tell us not to commit a logical fallacy, heavens no, but to merely agree with some random guy on the internet (i.e.: you) who tells us to accept his argument from authority. Huh. Right.

Also, "subversive asshat"? Seriously? Are you a 14 year old time-travelling from 2005? Or are you just running out of ideas?

By all means make up your own

By all means make up your own minds, you already have and we know that I am bang on in terms of logic, your deduction skills leave much to be desired. Your deduction methods jam words and whole agendas into people's mouths and you use the flimsiest of evidence.

Deductive reasoning is pretty simple, endorsement of a single statement or speech based on it's own merit has nothing to do with the entire agenda of the person issuing the speech, and no it is not people's responsibility to read the entire biography of a person giving speech or presenting an article, or else face the consequences of being flimsily attached to irrelevant things that had absolutely nothing to do with the thought processes that went behind that which you would have framed as an evil act through subversive manipulations of perspective and language.

Thank you very much but I don't expect you to take my word for it but I expect the rational ones out there to take notice of how much of a manipulative bird brain you are.

All these guys are racist idiots

Thing is, stealthc (Ryan Elson) - you can't prove you're not racist, or that Doug Christie isn't racist. Especially if you keep saying and doing things that reasonable people consider racist. I have every right to say you are racist (and a jerk and an idiot to boot).

The court found it was fair comment to call Doug Christie a "perverted monster." It will also find that it's fair comment to call you "racist." Why? Because it's protected speech. And we have every right to name Greg Renouf as a racist, sexist, liar. The lying part is provable - the racist, sexist part is fair comment and free speech. You should talk to a lawyer sometime.

What a dumbass comment, in

What a dumbass comment, in this country it is innocent until proven guilty.

That's where the sparks are misfiring in your head buddy!

well, there's innocent until proven guilty

and then there's the proof you've plastered all over the internet...lolz.  you need help ryan.  you're ill.

Innocent until proven guilty

Right  And when you accuse someone of LIBEL, as you have, that person is INNOCENT until you prove otherwise. Which you can't. But I can prove you ARE racist with your own words and actions. And truth is an absolute defense against libel.

Criticism is not racism so

Criticism is not racism so try rubbing those brain cells together a little better. Also, be prepared to be asked for the rest of threads, your videos that you recorded, and other materials because I happen to know how people like you try to prove things like racism. Either way best of luck with proving "white supremacist" comment, or "harassment" or "stalking". Last time I checked "stalking", "harassment" and "racism" are all illegal criminal acts, so if you couldn't prove any of them before well enough to have cops at my door I doubt you'll prove much of anything in court. Also I think you'll enjoy the revisions to my papers I've added a bunch of things, such as retalitory action on a human rights commission complaint, which I have a kit for. You do know what sort of penalties were behind including reference to it in your blog right? I have a file number and I can most definitely say that your antics have interfered with it.

As for your response I never laughed so hard in my life! What exactly does point 10 of your version of the facts have to do with the price of tea in china?

Also, I hope you include the source for your professional iphone photographs in your evidence cuz if not I'll be asking for them. Lol! I know a lot more than you might think about those and I am ready to prove a few things as lies on your form.

It's funny how you claim to have always been on the side walk 150 meters away, because there are photos and legislature videos which shows you were actually on legislature grounds. The sidewalk is that part next to the road, not the path that is on their property. I will be obtaining security footage from the legislature to prove it even further. Also there are noise by-laws by the legislature for a reason, we had to get special permission for our amplified device and regardless if the cop was willing to enforce the law or not you were violating that law.

I also happen to know that you were part of the coho ferry blockade, so tell me is that the activity of a law abiding citizen or a criminal (because last time I checked it is criminal). Furthermore, citations do not always have to be directly below a photograph as I am sure any judge will take a whole article into context -- I think I was pretty clear where those shitty photographs came from which are filled with some suspicious looking compression artifacts for "professional" (or even amateur) quality.

I have my evidence all ready to go, so if you are so certain you have yours, serve me it, I'll serve mine a day or so after, and we'll fast track things to "question period". I'd like very much to begin to ask you questions that you have to answer, this way I can put to perspective how the judge will view someone whom persistently lies who also has a criminal record. Feel free to check mine, perp.

oh sorry...did you say fallacy?

falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus


well, he had a blog...seems it keeps disappearing from the interwebz...something to do with lawbreaking...


Yes, it's got something to do with libel and lousy fact checking.  I understand his new blog site is up for review too... You'd think someone so very 'tech-savvy' would find a way to deal with that....  But, meh, perhaps he's adding that to his persecution complex.


More fiction. If the only way you can get your points across is by making his up then whats the point just ban him and you can talk on his behalf.

pure comedy the way you just make shit up seems like you tore a page from Harpers play book


Fiction? Seriously? Wow.

Fiction? There's a link right there. Click it. There's a video. Watch the video. The video has several links to Go to it. It's a site to support Marc Lemire. Wikipedia Marc Lemire. He's the ex-head of the Heritage Front, the largest white nationalist group in Canada for many years. Freedomsite is a site whose sole purpose is to support Lemire. I mean, to call these simple, inarguable facts fiction really demonstrates that you've got nothing to say and that you're just anrgy at the truth. 

Renouf fancies himself a journalist, researcher and writer. Any one who is even one of those three things would know to check your sources before publishing. He didn't (and doesn't). He was informed about the content of what he was presenting, in case it was just laziness and opportunism that led him to post said link. He deleted the comment and kept the post up. I mean, it's right there.

As for his association with AVFM, Look at what he wrote and the comments below it. Men who cyberstalk and bully young female activists are positively thrilled with the groundwork he laid for their subsequent efforts.

As Greg has said numerous times, we are known by the company we keep. And look who Greg's been hanging out with. No fiction necessary; he's fucked up enough as is.


If Greg is such a white supremist why did he support Boris a part inuit boy with autism and yes I have the proof and will post the proof if need be The lefties did nothing to help my boy I have nothing but contemp for them Greg got the vicious witch who dissed him reassigned .How dare peopel say greg used me and my boy I am not a stupid woman I have degree from the University of Toronto and my activism comes from the heart not the pocketbook

Calling police on activists

Both Greg Renouf and his buddy Ryan Elson (commenting above as "stealthc") like to call the cops on activists to report them for made-up "crimes." Ryan supposedly tried to get the cops to arrest me a dozen times for calling him a racist white-supremacist jerk. But the Victoria PD won't even take a report from him because they know he's full of shit.

Both Renouf and Elson admire Doug Christie, the white supremacist lawyer. Wannabe fascists - and not even very good at it. Thanks for the article!

you have the police report

you have the police report numbers to prove this dozen times thing?

Last time I checked I reported you 2-3 times.  Saved and put in the evidence pile, I am sure you can prove this remark in court can't you?

Made up crimes?  We shall see about that in court now won't we!


I also have a FOIA request which I put in on the 22nd, so it should be completed in 10 days.  For all of the reports.  They will be included in my docket.  The reports were made as events occured to establish a reliable chain of evidence.  Not to mention I recall having had the cops called on me first, I guess they must think those that filed that report are full of shit too eh?  You're sad you can't even make up lies that would maintain past court, as they will be exposed for what they are at our debate table as you have chosen to define it.

Please, continue...

Please Jason, continue to tell us how Occupy was controlled by the NWO.  Talk to us about the 'tyrrany of Colectivism" and by all means continue to tell us what a wonderful person Greg Renouf is...

(goes and gets some popcorn)

again making up your own arguments

here we go again making shit up go on tell me what else I said that I never said so you can win the debate with your self

Ryan Elson has nothing better to do

I have no idea how many times you've called the cops. You've certainly said you would do it a dozen times. But the cops and everyone else know you're delusional.  Do you have a lawyer yet? Oh wait, you have no income and you live by mooching off your boyfriend. That's why you have nothing better to do than rant online. Sad. But funny too.

you just said a dozen times

you just said a dozen times to slander me, now you are back peddling and saying that you have no idea.


Also adam and I are a family unit, we can do whatever the fuck we want for working arrangements and they are really no business of yours.


Do I have a lawyer?  None of your business though I'd rather deal with this case myself, perhaps I do have a lawyer who is giving me advice, perhaps not.  Why would I tell you anything you wanna know?  I play my cards how I see fit.


If I said I would do it a dozen times I suggest you post the screen shot of that remark if you have it (which you don't).  Who do you think you are fooling with your spin and misrepresentation of facts?

These dumbasses have nothing better to do

Neither Ryan Elson nor Greg Renouf have anything better to do than rant and flail online. It's amusing! Why did you get kicked out of We Are Change Victoria, Ryan? For stealing money? Why are you asking the taxpayers to pay your court bill? Why do you owe Revenue Canada $12,000? I think as a public figure you owe us an explanation, at least.

Oh that one I'll gladly

Oh that one I'll gladly explain, though I thought it was closer to 25k.
You are part of occupy so I'd assume that you agree with the stance of the red squares.

Well I owe that for 1 month of education when the government of ontario test ran their rubber stamp of approval beginning of 2000-2001, where any joe schmuck got the stamp and could defraud students for their loans and not even worry about OSAP doing their jobs. Over that affair I had marie bountrogianni write everybody in parliament on my behalf noting the hypocritical law I was getting hung with. Ever since then I've refused to pay, as I never got my day in court with the system to deal with their negligence and they even failed to serve me for what I noticed during my search of cso online recently. You say it's 12,000 which is funny because they wouldn't even send me a settlement offer for the principal when I had an opportunity to put it behind me. I had a fairly huge file at my mp's office, paddy torsney whom I even voted for and worked a polling station during the elections. She appaerently called everyone because she was destroying files after she'd lost the election; which is a lie because I never received any such call.

You know what is funny with how occupy positions itself on student loan issues, I don't think it would look good on y'all if you even bother going there (which I think is a more than fair warning, since I really could be keeping my mouth shut and letting you blunder into it)

You know what's funny?

This rugged individualist "libertarian" dude mooching off the system and his boyfriend. This brave "free speech advocate" calling social justice advocates "racist" - and then trying to silence others who point out he's the racist white supremacist nutter. Funny how both he and Renouf pretend to be heroes, then pretend to be victims, and fail dramatically in both types of fiction. Carry on dude! Let's see if you can top yourself.

And how do you get your

And how do you get your money? By mooching off of donors, and probably either welfare or disability?

If my boyfriend thought I was mooching he would have said something about it, so speak for yourself lady, I paid the bills when he had his ordeal with a former employer.

I see you pointed out that you don't have much money and you have to beg for it on gofundme, looks like you've got a case of deadbeat-itus and sounds like you are jealous that I actually have someone in my corner backing me up in such an unconditional way.

How did I try to silence you? You were the dumbass issuing bogus dmca complaints first, I wasn't going to complain about the photo you snarfed from my youtube vid, until YOU decided to try that silencing gig. All I did was post a rebuttal on your make belief lies to silence the critics, which is what you are doing here once again proclaiming that I tried to silence you. Lol. Boy can't I wait till there is a rational judge that won't care what you have to say when presented with a cohesive and thoroughly documented timeline, because I have it all ready to roll complete with dvd's of saved evidence.

Renouf and Elson are cowards

They put on the "big man" act online and if they think they have backup from their pathetic loser buddies. Some of us don't put up with it.

Get used to it, buddies. This is the new normal for you.


I'm sure they're just acting children are wont to do...

Pity Greg Renouf

I don't think people really understand Greg Renouf. 10 years ago he was a high flying IT manager with a good salary, an exciting career and lots of prospects and hopes of being an executive in his own business. Fast forward to the present  when Greg should be pulling down 6 figures and enjoying the height of his career in both earning potential and professional satisfactiona and waht do you have? A near bankrupt who has two failed businesses and a failed business partnership in his rear view mirror, a failed personal relationship, a middle aged man living in a shared house, trying to make ends meet by living off of welfare, his dwindling savings, and anything he can mooch off of his brother. No career prospects. No profession. Burned bridges where he should have professional relationships and contacts. So where else to turn for respect than a motley group of losers, cranks and conspiracy theorists? He can't do real journalism, couldn't get an article published for pay if his life depended on it so instead he fulfills his journalistic pretensions by running a blog that "investigates" (read makes things up about) anarchists and socialists of all people. You may look at Greg and see an anti-social, misogynistic, pathological liar, stalker, harasser and obsessive but I look at him and see a failed human being, flailing around on the dock of life like a beached squid, trying desperately to squeeze out some bit of self-respect from the empty toothpaste tube of life before he finally falls to pieces. 

Thank you

That is pure poetry!

This coming from a journalism

This coming from a journalism dropout whom has the empathy of a lizard?

love letters


such hate could almost be seen as admiration.

I think Greg means well and even where we dont agree I know he at least will not resort to the low brow, criminal and juvenile tatics these idiots here and with Occupy I think they must be handing out a paperback Occupy for Dummies.

Seems you have a low opinion of him based more on his salary, career and professional standings.....  FUCK YOU! typical Occupy asshole cut a man down because he could have been one of the scum bag professionals sporting some big paychecks and friends with all the right assholes.

If Greg is all these things and a loser as you insist than what would one say you are for taking time to bash him? I mean her you are post after post bashing him and stocking every word he says jumping in on every Greg hate blog?

If Greg is such a low life and under achiever then why does he command so much of your time? is it really love.


Well then wettstein

Renouf must love anarchists and activists since he's displayed so much irrational hatred and venom on his blog. 

"Seems you have a low opinion of him based more on his salary, career and professional standings"

Um, what salary? What career? What professional standing? Those things are long gone my friend and they're not coming back. All that's left are anger and tears and a desire to lash out and blame everyone but himself for his failures. 

"If Greg is such a low life and under achiever then why does he command so much of your time? is it really love."

Writing my post took about 2 minutes. How many hours does Greg spend every day on his obsessions? If you're Greg Renouf I'd say your post is one huge case of projection, my friend. 

Well then fake name

I go after banks and bankers to me they are the real criminals if you really think Greg is just a loser why bother let him bash the anarchists and Harsha just saying the hate seems a little over played like Captin Kirk Hate.

I side with the underdog more then anything/one I see no harm in what any one says more in actions. 

I like Greg bottom line I think he is justified in going after Harsha but hey I am not current on what Gregs up to you sure are this to me makes you more of a fan. You guys sure did up his traffic probably even made him some money in Ad-words LOL

Its funny with all the real criminals and elitist ruiing scum you would right amonst the lowest franking "empty toothe paste tube" its just what the ruling class want division amongst us so we will right each other and never effect anything real. 


"Its funny with all the real criminals and elitist ruiing scum you would right amonst the lowest franking "empty toothe paste tube" its just what the ruling class want division amongst us so we will right each other and never effect anything real. "

Isn't Greg trying to create division by attacking activists rather than the ruling class? Whose purpose is he serving, wettstein? Why doesn't he go after the corporations and the powerful instead of spending all his time going after activists? And look at his allies, look at all the people on the right and far right who love what he's doing. But yeah, you have an ax to grind against one or two activists so Greg's your man despite the fact that the only interests he actually helps are the ones you claim to oppose. 

if you don't know what he's up to

then why are you defending him or his actions?  And you support his misogynist attacks on Harsha? wow...  can't take you seriously at all...

This is pretty much perfect.

This is pretty much perfect.



Really "wittstein" are you going to poke fun of my name LOL my real name I might add at least not pretending to have conviction that I will stand behind. 

No Greg is not creating Division maybe you are using something he has said advance your own division. You are responsible for you not Greg how are you going to change Greg if you become him and emulate all the things you say you hate about him?

I have no allegiance to Greg for any other reason then I believe despite is poor judgment the people he is up against are much worse. Maybe if Harsha and the Gang of Occupy ad been a little more inclusive Greg would have been an ally. I was at OV day 1 and it was not leaderless it was racist, sexist and it was stinking of agendas completely over run by special interest groups. There was one night where white males were denied a voice actually told that they would have to allow 3 minorities speak for every white male I can list off many that will collaborate. 

What activists is he going after because I am out of the loop here Harsha? I hope he hassles her until she drops a molotov cocktail on her head. 

But who else what innocent poor Activists is he hurting, slandering and ????

I just see a bunch of wannabe activists loving the attention any real activist would not wast their time on anything but the real fight in my opinion. 

Communists, Feminists, Anarchist, Activists Dam just so many labels so many divisional sides to get behind and hate by design and it seems were all falling for it at every turn.


Or maybe if they didn't side with his ex when she complained that he was stalking and harassing her he wouldn't have gone after them. Do you really think Renouf would have gone to Occupy at all if it wasn't to follow the woman who dumped him?

And if I wanted to make fun of your name I would have called you genuinewittystein. Wittstein was a typo. 

e and i

e is no where close to i on the keyboard but yeah sure based on everything else you have said you have a load of credability here with me 

then again with the lame personal attacks I mean why the fuck do you know this shit you are like tha National Enquire of Greg I just cant think that you hate this guy it really seems more like a love affair some strange obsessive fanatic stocker 


gregs the fuckin stalker ffs.


I've had a beer or two with Greg over the years. Unfortunately, it's pretty obvious to anyone who knows him, talks to him and hasn't drunken his Kool-Aid that the poor guy's gone off the rails and is desperately in need of professional help. At the very least he needs to start taking his meds. He needs to walk away from his ridiculous delusion that he's an "investigative reporter" and put some effort into getting his life back together but unfortunately his Scooby gang of fanboys and girls is just enabling him and feeding into his self-important delusion that he's on some sort of mission. 


I trained my dog to piss and shit out side with love and affection and the odd treat

a guy I know beat his dog 

both dogs piss and shit out side but I think the guys an asshole


the scooby gang

I had an old cat once named scooby doo and he was the most loyal and devoted cat and had the highest integrity he was also a feral from the streets To me a scooby is a high compliment cause thats the kind of loyalty and committment alot of us in the autism community have towards our people We are tenacious in our defense when our people are attacked like they were in Barrie

Kids being herded and abused with blockers by OPSEU staff and being publically vilified in the press and public rallies by union leaders dresses as storm troopers weilding these blockers.At the end of the day the union leader who called my son a monster and led these attacks was reassigned because of her behavior.Gregs blogging led to this persons removal and helped shed light on a gross violation of human rights Nobody else would stand up for us except for him and one mpp who brought in Bill 102 The NDP was pro blocker and only after an international backlash started to ease up Greg stood up for a helpless boy and his classmates while cowards took cover He was there at Queens park for the second reading as I was too sick to go 

I will not see him abused and slandered by the same old crowd of progressives who have little regard for the rights and well being of small people They are only out for themselves and to burn out the next genertion of well intentioned youth I am a scooby and I guess Greg is one too Its a term of honor and you guys who hate are neighbors.By  the way neighbor is a term of derision coined by 12 year old autistic boy .It means the non autistic ,the dullards,the banal .Aftr a horrible murder the cops ask the neighbors about the suspect and they always hear he was so normal so quiet .Because neighbors question nothing only look to the surfaces and thats why its a term of derision for us .Greg examines complicated issues and writes as he finds It may not be pretty but its not fairy tales 

Creative Commons license icon Creative Commons license icon

User login