This Canadian, In Reply To Susan G. Cole

She doesn't speak for me either.

Ms. Cole is absolutely right, though, about the impact of the lack of a Canadian free speech 1st amendment, as it were. The 1st Amendment is what empowers citizens of the United States. Canadians are denied this empowerment, and the lack thereof has shaped the Canadian version of "free speech," which events demonstrate is more accurately termed politically-correct speech.

This is why U of O can support and ensure smooth operation of Israeli Apartheid Week but discourage and tacitly approve the disruption of Ms. Coulter's appearance on campus.

That should have been 'encourage... the disruption.' Apologies.

I would like to thank the U of O for providing Ms Coulter with millions of dollars worth of free network advertising. It will boost her book sales and her message. Anne has more brains than that the entire population of Ottawa.

Every time I see this sort of student protest at a university, I am reminded how vapid and mislead are those students. If it weren't for mindless government jobs, those people would have no hope of making a living in the private sector.

The first amendment is nothing without the right to bear arms, and all the impotent pissing and moaning in the universe is not going to change that fact.

I have no Idea what a Susan Cole is but it certantly does not speak for me.
This is a good reason why the west should get as far away as possible from Canada

I would like to get Susan G Cole's thoughts on why you can't talk about the "Muslim Rape Problem in Sweden" without being silenced by the Swedish human rights commission.

BTW, its an interesting google search term to key in.

Any leftwing counterpart to Coulter would be welcome on a Canadian cam-puss. Typical leftist double standards.

> not-showing-up-to-riot is a failed conservative policy

Is that genuine or some sort of satire?

> The first amendment is nothing without the right to bear arms

Canadians have a right to bear arms.
It was inherited from Magna Carta thru British North America Act, but bullied out of existence by cowards in the govt.

We have a right, some (majority?) are just to coward to exercise it.

Unitl I saw O'Reilly's show last evening, I had never heard of either Susan G. Cole or "Now" magazine. Now I know why.

I really resent it when someone presumes to speak for me (We here in Canada...) This notion that certain types of speech are not suitable for students (places of learning should not be disturbed...etc. etc.) So we don't ever want them to THINK? As if students are hothouse plants that must be pruned and directed the "right" way and a Coulter could interrupt that process? There's so much wrong with the way Susan Cole thinks, that I don't know where to begin.

Unitl I saw O'Reilly's show last evening, I had never heard of either Susan G. Cole or "Now" magazine. Now I know why.

Obvious Susan Cole is from the GTA. She is a big part of the problem we call Canadian culture. As with most Liberals, free speach as long as you agree with me. I'm sure what I have just typed is hate speach, but amen.

I would love to see Susan debate with Anne...

I can dream, can't I?

Ugh.

Jeebus Cripsy, do you ever get the feeling that we're nothing but a country of GTA feminist bitches porked up on government grants?

Sweet Mother of Pearl. The merest possibility that people like Susan Cole could feel entitled to deign for even a nanosecond to feel privileged to decide what thoughts I'm allowed to hear is just....

Ugh.

Smite. Them. Now.

Or, variously,

Smite. Them. Now.

Take your pick, but you have to pick just one.

COAB.

Oh, man....

"we are trying to create an environment to think and learn"

So explain Israel Apartheid Week on university campuses?

Progressivism is a sever mental disorder.

I agree with Susan Cole that Anne Coulter is not an appropriate choice to be speaking in Canada. If we are to respect as Canadians the viewpoints of all people, it's inevitable that particular groups of people who hold certain opinions will be shortchanged. That's a small price to pay to ensure a safe environment for all Canadians.

My words exactly when I saw her on tv. I said to my husband that if people don't start speaking out, womyn like her WILL be speaking for me. Please, do not read/buy her crappy magazine. If possible, boycot any companies that advertise in it.

Universities are the place where all speech should be welcome and debated. "Higher" learning, I don't think so.

Meanwhile some profs at the U of R are against the 'hero' scholarships given to the children of service members lost in Canada's service. Glorifies war, should be for poor kids and the usual unimaginative BS.

Ann Coulter doesn't speak for me either, but she has the right to speak anywhere in this coddled socialist Country,without fear of violence or intimidation.

The double standard is so apparent,even progressives MUST be able to see it, unless it really IS a mental disorder.

Wow. Now magazine, the bastion of balance. The tower of truth. For those who don't live in Toronto and plan to visit, you can always find a copy of Now in the nearest trash bin—I believe Now is the reason why the city had to increase the sizes of the recycling units on the streets.
Now, and Ms Cole do not speak for me.

"WE"? she does NOT speak for me. Now I know how Pretzels were conceived. The two ends of her logic did not connect and she sounded like Rae and Dossanjh

The arrogance and ignorance of Susan Cole is quite astonishing. She dares to assert that she speaks for Canadians - she speaks only for herself and ought to have the courage and humility to say that.

Her ignorance about the criminal code of Canada's hate law (section 319), which requires that actual violence against people be advocated in the speech - i.e, opinions against beliefs are not hate speech, which allows truth as a defense, and also, allows public discussion of issues as a defense - is astonishing. She's so ignorant that she considers the obnoxious human rights subjective speech code as this criminal law!

The university must be the site for open debate. It is where students ought to be exposed to all beliefs, where they must debate, question, critically examine such beliefs. Instead, Ms Cole's idea of a university sounds like a summer camp where everyone is expected to join in and sing along.

Her anti-Americanism is evident, with her sneer at the 'religion of free speech' in America, which she claims Canada does not have. How dare she reject our free speech, which is, despite that HRC, defined as a 'fundamental right'.

She is a perfect example of the shallowness and ignorance of the left, and that image of Canada is what is being spread across the US and the world right now - that we are a shallow, ignorant and superficial people who reject thought, analysis, debate and instead, insist that every single sentence a Canadian utters must be uncritical, unquestioning, without reasoned dissent.

The Canadian identity as set up by Ms Cole is of a people incapable of thought.

So if Canada does not have a first amendment, what gives the protesters the right to speak? doesn't that mean that any speech is "hate speech" that is public and volatile?

What struck me about the utterances of Susan G. Cole, was the multiple use of the word "I", when referencing her objections to the presence of Ann Coulter. While I don't object to her having an opinion on the subject, she certainly doesn't speak for me, and I find it incomprehensible that not only does she feel she knows better than I do, what is permissible in this country and what isn't, but seems more than happy to impose that opinion on me.

Now I know I'm only a 62 year old Canadian citizen, but I believe I have at least as good a sense of what our "traditions" are as she, and I certainly don't need her, or a lawyer, or a politician telling me what those might be. I had a glance at the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and found the following....

FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

I'm not a lawyer, but I thought (b) was just peachy, particularly as it is described as a "Fundamental Freedom", you know, like foundational and the basis of all the other ones.
So, thanks very much, Susan, but when I need your advice on matters regarding what is permissible or not regarding my rights in this country, I'll ask you. In the meantime, I'll keep my own counsel.

I'll leave you with a little tidbit from Noam Chomsky...

"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."

Ta.

In Cole's Canada 'free speech' requires a permit.

I watched and listened to Ms Cole and I was reminded of George Carlins line--"think of how stupid the average person is and then realize half of them are stupider than that"

How is it that a supposed “journalist” has a say what is acceptable or not in Canada. The “journalist” moves in close circle of socialistas/fascistas and apparently does not get out that much, thinks the population of this country is thinking only along the lines that the “journalist” thinks.
Moron comes to mind for some reason.

susanc@nowtoronto.com

I encourage everybody to e-mail this dangerous woman. I couldn't resist, myself:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ms. Cole, you do not speak for me. So, when interviewed on American television, please do not reference "we here in Canada."

Free speech is a foundational principle in any advanced democracy, and to limit it in any fashion as you would suggest is reprehensible. The answer to speech you do not like is not to shut it down, but to expose it to the light of day. Period, and full stop.

My tax dollars help subsidize U of O's operations, and Ann Coulter should have been welcomed on campus to give her speech. Whether you like it or not.

You, madam, and your beliefs, are bad for this country, and for freedom in general. It is people like you who enable tyrants to lead nations down the path to despotism, all in the name of the "common good."

You should be ashamed of yourself.

P.S. I don't know who you are, or how you presume to speak on behalf of Canadians. Up until yesterday, I had never heard of you or your pathetic little rag.

*Great* comment, paddyk.

I was amazed at the number of times Cole fit in the term free speech absolutist with the accompanying sneer of anti-Americanism. I assume she is a supporter of free speech balancing, a ridiculous PC terms that is merely the transitional bridge to absolutely no free speech.

Dr. Libby Raoul @11:00 - I do not pretend to "respect... the viewpoints of all people" - there are a great many viewpoints I don't respect at all, to say the least. I do, however, want each and every "particular group... of people" to have it's say; actually, scratch that; I want every particular person to have his or her say, regardless of whether I respect that "say" or not.

Free speech is not a "small price to pay" for your notion of a "safe environment for all Canadians".

What you say actually makes so little sense that I suspect you might be a genuine academic.

"it's inevitable that particular groups of people who hold certain opinions will be shortchanged"

Are you volunteering your group to be shortchanged, raoul, or just others?

"If we are to respect as Canadians the viewpoints of all people, it's inevitable that particular groups of people who hold certain opinions will be shortchanged."
~Dr. Libby Raoul

Does your head hurt when the cognitive dissonance is so strong?

"It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed."
~Vladimir Lenin

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."
~Benjamin Franklin

The socialist guide to creating "safe places".First you shut them up. Then you lock them up.
Then you cover them up with dirt.

I agree with Susan Cole that Anne Coulter is not an appropriate choice to be speaking in Canada. If we are to respect as Canadians the viewpoints of all people, it's inevitable that particular groups of people who hold certain opinions will be shortchanged. That's a small price to pay to ensure a safe environment for all Canadians.
Posted by: Dr. Libby Raoul at March 25, 2010 11:00 AM

Ms. Raoul (you do not deserve the respect of the title 'doctor') -- your statement is inherently contradictory. Limiting speech of "particular groups of people" is NOT respecting "viewpoints of all people".

The two aims are mutually exclusive, and cannot exist at the same time. So, Ms. Raoul, while this Orwellian belief may help you sleep at night, I am here to tell you that you must pick your poison. One, or the other. Which will it be?

First CBC speaks for Canadians and now this Ms Cole I've never heard of before is supposed to be speaking for us?
Neither one speaks for me, but how do they get the message?

Also the other babe with the big mouth who seemed to be the rabble leader, could she not (and should she not) lose her government job?

Who cares what Dustin Hoffman thinks?

I saw this guy on O'Rielly yesterday and his argument is completely hypocritical. On one hand he says that it's hate speach, and on the other hand she says it's okay for her to speak, just not on campus. It's either illegal speach or it's not, regardless of where Anne speaks.

Dr. Libby Raoul:

What a bunch of BS. If you're expecting particular groups of people who hold certain opinions to be shortchanged, then you're not respecting their viewpoints are you?

Susan Cole make some very salient and trenchant points. Incidentally, in our local school this very topic is being debated today, and there seems to be a resounding support for the U of O's actions. Obviously Susan Cole does speak for many people.

Barbara @11:01 - "Please, do not read/buy her crappy magazine."

No worries there, mate (as the Aussies say).

Please ignore the troll.

T
and what school is it that you are referring to?? What does "resounding support" mean? is it one person? couple? or is it 2 thousand like the media claimed at the UofO?

Drive by sniping like this without providing the facts is nothing more than dribble.

As we all 'cluck, cluck, cluck' about how ignorant this 'Cole' woman is, this faction of our society continues to succeed. They exist in academia and in the MSM and make a living doing so. Many posters mentioned Bill O'Rielly who the leftards succeeded in effectively banning from Canada. The CBC continues on a daily basis to propagandize their political agenda at taxpayer expense. What to do?

In Ezra's most recent post he wrote:

"This is the sham of political correctness. It's not about civility. It's not about protecting groups from hate, or even violence. It's about politics and power."

Consider Susan Cole, speaking on behalf of Canada, as Exhibit A:

"We still have very vibrant and vital dialogue, and actually don't need Anne Coulter to contribute to that - and we even have our own homegrown Canadian Conservatives to do that work for us...."

She's essentially saying that "we've" got enough of that crap already from conservatives..."

Smite them.

T - "...in our local school this very topic is being debated today, and there seems to be a resounding support for the U of O's actions."

You mean the local brainwashed grade-school pupils are brainwashed, T? And are you monitoring them - as, say, a parent? Or do you attend yourself, kiddo? Are you (oh, hideously plausible!) a teacher there?

Or are just sort of hanging around the schoolyard?

Actually, none of the above. I simply don't believe a word you say.

Lamest troll ever.

colin from BC - I figured that the comment by Libby Raoul had to be a joke, since it was so internally contradictory.

Oh, and NOW is a free tabloid in Toronto.

Good heavens, so T is a high school student! Heh. Poor brainwashed kid.

That should read:
"this "COMMIE" bitch does not speak for me"

Only a degenerate commie would bold face lie and say Charter section 2 is not the equivalent of the second amendment. It is in both pith and substance and it came from a common source.

How about this from the Canadian Bill of Rights:

"1. It is hereby recognized and declared that in Canada there have existed and shall continue to exist without discrimination by reason of race, national origin, colour, religion or sex, the following human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely,
(a) the right of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person and enjoyment of property, and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law;
(b) the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law;
(c) freedom of religion;
(d) freedom of speech;
(e) freedom of assembly and association; and
(f) freedom of the press. "

She must have missed that little tidbit of Canadian law in her revisionism class at Commie Martyrs U in Havana.

Another thing I noticed is that the particularly unattractive lefty females say the vilest things about Coulter. Envy?

The school I am referring to is our local K-12 school, which my daughter attends. A general debate for grades 9 to 12 was held yesterday afternoon and again this morning as part of a current events project that the principal thought a good idea. By resounding I mean, about 90% of students and staff had no objections to what occurred at the U of O after hearing a presentation of the drivel that emanates from Ann Coulter mouth.

The school I am referring to is our local K-12 school, which my daughter attends. A general debate for grades 9 to 12 was held yesterday afternoon and again this morning as part of a current events project that the principal thought a good idea. By resounding I mean, about 90% of students and staff had no objections to what occurred at the U of O after hearing a presentation of the drivel that emanates from Ann Coulter's mouth.

ET - I thought the same myself, at first. But, I'm not so sure. Listen to Cole herself -- contradictory positions seem to be routinely held by the liberal-left.

The usual socialist/fascist poster going by a single letter would like to insist that certain “journalist” speaks for many.
This works well for that particular segment of totalitarians, you don’t have to define many.
Reading one of William Buckley’s columns some time ago, Buckley mentioned with a heh, when the socialist speaker, “journalist” or other such, says people don’t want that, he said pointedly that it only takes two to make it plural.