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.

Smite them.
~EBD

A pox on Mz. Cole and the braying group of Komsomol* Kiddies in the video who showed up to deny free speech to Ann Coulter and the people who invited her.

"Free speech for me but not for thee" Leftists say.

*
http://tinyurl.com/2jnb2n

She and her ilk think they have the right to redefine what it means to be Canadian.

“inappropriate”

“unacceptable”

“the extremist free speech absolutionists who are supporting her here in Canada”

“the absolutist free speech peoples’ goal is to change things, that’s true”

“Those are the things that drive our political culture: not freedoms, not rugged individualism, not free speech. It’s different and, for us, it works.”

She doesn't speak for me, either.

Wow, the Left does love to brag about the Trudeau Charter of Rights and Freedoms, never mind it makes some more equal than others.

Susan G. Cole mouthing off, what an embarrassment to add to an embarrassing situation.

Fascism is alive and well in Canadian Universities.

Dr. Libby Raoul: "I agree with Susan Cole that Anne Coulter is not an appropriate choice to be speaking in Canada."

So now it isn't just that Ann Coulter shouldn't be expressing her thoughts in the hallowed halls of open thought, debate and criticism. Now she shouldn't even be speaking IN CANADA!

Let me guess, Libby: you're a member of a social science department at one of our universities -- Women's Studies? Labour Studies? Sociology? Political "Science"? ...

And what, please, does "appropriate" have to do with it? I've heard several people using the same word who object to Ann Coulter. Who decides what is "appropriate"? In my experience, people use this word, as well as "inappropriate," when their arguments have no logical or defensible basis. It simply means "I don't like what she's saying; it makes me uncomfortable and might hurt someone's feelings. Can't somebody stop her?"

And who gets to make the "choice" about who speaks in Canada and who doesn't?

If Ann Coulter breaks the law -- which she hasn't, and won't -- let her be charged. Otherwise, suck it up.

Oh great, the kids are being taught in school that shutting down speech is a GOOD thing to do. Just great. I can just picture the presentation in the auditorium. Cherry picked quote to show how EVIL she is, then how noble the protesters were, and now lets celebrate this shutting down of hate speech.

School kids think ANY protest is cool. So yeah, they liked the fact that protesters shut something down.

It's not like they're being taught about the value of free speech in the classrooms.

I watched this particular interview the other night. Ms Cole came across as not having a particularly good grasp of either the law or unbiased journalism. Her idea of free speech dovetailed nicely with the goons who were at the event to disrupt it. Same bunch as protested at the O games I suppose.

I like Cole's logic and will apply it to Democrat victims of vandalism. They are getting what they deserve!

good heavens, T, of course young children 'approve' of what they are being told by their principal and teachers. Do you seriously consider that young teens have the background in both breadth and depth of knowledge and above all, critical thinking skills, to stand up to the authority figures in their school?

They haven't been taught the logical rules of critical thinking, they haven't been exposed to fallacies of argumentation, they haven't been required to substantiate their conclusions with evidence.

You are a perfect example of such a failed education system; you yourself never substantiate your conclusions; all you do is...express them. Over and over again.

Now, how about justifying your opinion that Because, to SOME people, Coulter 'speaks drivel', THEN she should not be allowed to speak to those people who want to hear her.

Please justify your view. Don't just repeat your opinion. Justify it.

Also, children can't distinguish between what is actually "hate speech" and what is "mean speech".

Can't for this next batch of kids to enter Univeristy. Next years Israel Apartheid week is going to be even bigger!

When this Susan Cole dude mentioned that we have hate speech laws what the hell is he talking about. I cannot find any mention about hate speech in our constitution. If he is referring to section 13:1 wasn't a moratorium placed on that pseudo law? It really ticks me off when men like Susan Cole start spewing these lies. He needs his ass kicked.

Hahaha, Warren Z!! And I was wondering why Fox chose to interview that Susan Cole fella instead of Ezra Levant!

"Mr. O’Reilly, in the name of fairness and balance, can you please express my embarrassment for the events at the University of Ottawa on Tuesday and please know that SUSAN COLE DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME! In fact, Susan Cole speaks for nobody but HERSELF."

I'm recommending an email blitz to Bill O'Reilly from everyone here at SDA. Please do something to preserve our dignity. Who’s with me?

He needs his ass kicked.
~Warren Z

That's what I thought when "he" was introduced before I heard him speak.
I thought, "That's a Man, baby."
(just a boy named Sue)

In re "T"

If 90% of the students at your daughter's school had "no objections" what happened to Ann Coulter than I feel the deepest pity for your child. This would seem to confirm that Canadians are increasingly comfortable with the soft facism of political correctness (such an inadequate term) and official restrictions on speech that is insufficiently "nice." Apparantly you agree with Ms. Cole (and are happy your daughter is being similarly indoctrinated) that true freedom of speech is a disposable relic of a bygone age and incompatible with Canadian values. You might want to remind your daughter of Benjamin Franklin's observation that "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." Hoever to do that might expose you to prosecution as a hate-speech criminal.

O'Reilly chewed her up and spit her out last night.

Dr. Libby Raoul @ 11:00 AM:
"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."

On the contrary, there is a massive price to pay that far overwhelms the vacant promise of safety.

What you are proposing is the end of intellectual freedom. Diversity in all things but opinion, eh Doc? State censorship of opinion/ideas/thinking which offends or challenges the conventional dogmas of the political class. That is a uniquely fascist concept that is the antithesis of the liberal arts and the historic university culture. The price to be paid for politically cleansed intellectual freedom is despotism.

No sale here on that red herring Doc.

Here we go again "free speech" unless of course you have a somewhat Conservative view point, oh and extra knuckle-draggin' points if you are an attractive woman with a point of view. I had heard of Ann Coulter, but had not the pleasure of hearing her speak till now. Oh and bonus points for exploding the "entitled-to-be-offended" little heads.
It is just amazing to listen to the coddled little leftys screeching about everyone "feeling safe" as they used brown-shirt-bully tactics to silence Ann Coulter. Do they really think they have the right to define who is "allowed" to speak.? Do they really think Susan G. Cole gets to decide for all of Canada what is acceptable, who gets to speak? I will state Susan G. Cole does not speak for me!
All this on a day when "16 University Professors"
have signed an "open Letter" criticizing "Project Hero" which provides for financial aid for children of Canadian Forces Personnel who die while on active service.
They called it a "glorification of Canadian Imperialism in Afghanistan".
I guess these "Learned Professors" are O.K. with the be-headings, genital mutilation, burkas etc. that go with the terrorist cabal known as the Taliban.
Note to "Learned Professors" the only reason you sleep safely at night is far better people than you stand ready to both keep the Peace and extend the hand of freedom to those being oppressed by criminals masquerading as "freedom fighters" but never mind. Just put on your "Che'" t-shirt wrap your spotty table cloth around your scrawny necks and go bully someone that does not sing from your Hymn book.
Kinda strange that yall' did not object to Israel Apartheid week. Did you write a letter condemning that? If I was a Jew or a Conservative on Campus I would not feel very safe or welcome.

ET: Justify? Ok. Coulter says Jews should be "Christianized" and also Muslims should be "Christianized" (those who she doesn't wish to bomb into oblivion...also her comments). This is pure unadulterated drivel. Clearly she has not read any material regarding the history of the two religions, let alone Christianity. Telling a Muslim woman to "ride a camel" is not only offensive but completely stupid. As is her contention that all Muslims should be banned from air travel. More drivel and insensitive remarks. Not going to happen. Those that think it might are living in a fantasy land. Further, I would hope that grade 11 and 12 students can formulate some degree of independent thought. I know they can. You are not giving them very much credit.

Although I can't speak for Dr. Libby Raoul, I believe what the good doctor is saying is that viewpoints are like ingredients in a comforting bowl of hot soup on a cold Canadian day.

If we take just one ingredient (viewpoint), salt, and add everyones preference ... none, a pinch, two pinches, etc. the soup will be to salty for anyone to enjoy. For the sake of the children, we shouldn't make the soup too salty.

Colin: "Please ignore the troll."

Please listen to Colin.

Kate: "O'Reilly chewed her up and spit her out last night."

I thought so too. But he did it politely.

Susan Cole is not an appropriate choice to be speaking in Canada.

I just watched the video and man did Barbie chew up the frumpy old hag!!! It's real sad when you try to make a statement and get blown away by the interviewer. HAHA!

In order to formulate independent thought the students would have to be able to hear all sides of the debate, not one filtered and manipulated by teachers. Otherwise, its similar to attempting to do a math problem or experiment with only half of the variables to work with. You may come up with a solution but it is likely to be an incorrect one.

Sure, she has, can, and will say lots of offensive things. Just because you and the delicate little ears of children can't handle hearing it, doesn't mean it CAN'T be said. Should it be said? That's a totally different question, and one that is being confused with if it can.

You and the children are saying that she can't speak and more importantly that *I* can't listen to her if I so choose. That I'm incapable of drawing my own conclusions or that I'm going to be swayed by her enticing thrall to go out and do X? So yeah, children have childish thoughts, it's not a virtue.

order to formulate independent thought the students would have to be able to hear all sides of the debate, not one filtered and manipulated by teachers. Otherwise, its similar to attempting to do a math problem or experiment with only half of the variables to work with. You may come up with a solution but it is likely to be an incorrect one.

Basically just like the AGW debate that the leftys love sooo much!

For heavens sake Coulter isnt even THAT radical, and the left gets thier panties in a knot.
Are we doomed?

T:

I feel sorry for your daughter and 90% of her classmates.

And what about the remaining 10%? Should they be shouted down and prevented from speaking?

Even if it was 99.9%, it doesn't mean its right. Freedom for all or none, there is no in between.

You don't have to respect what someone says but you better as hell respect their right to say it. If you don't respect their right to say it, you are truly a disgusting and hateful person.

She doesn't speak for me either but let her talk. She has no idea when to "stop digging".

HERE IS THE ANN COULTER ARTICLE FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T READ IT YET. Oh, Canada!
Since arriving in Canada I’ve been accused of thought crimes, threatened with criminal prosecution for speeches I hadn’t yet given and denounced on the floor of the Parliament (which was nice because that one was on my “bucket list”).

Posters advertising my speech have been officially banned, while posters denouncing me are plastered all over the University of Ottawa campus. Elected officials have been prohibited from attending my speeches. Also, the local clothing stores are fresh out of brown shirts.

Welcome to Canada!

The provost of the University of Ottawa, average student IQ: 0, wrote to me—widely disseminating his letter to at least a half-dozen intermediaries before it reached me—in advance of my visit in order to recommend that I familiarize myself with Canada’s criminal laws regarding hate speech.

This marks the first time I’ve ever gotten hate mail for something I might do in the future.

Apparently Canadian law forbids “promoting hatred against any identifiable group,” which the provost, Francois A. Houle advised me, “would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges.”

I was given no specific examples of what words and phrases I couldn’t use, but I take it I’m not supposed to say, “F——you, Francois.”

While it was a relief to know that it is still permissible in Canada to promote hatred against unidentifiable groups, upon reading Francois’ letter, I suddenly realized that I had just been the victim of a hate crime! And it was committed by Francois A. Houle (French for “Frank A. Hole”).

What other speakers get a warning not to promote hatred? Did Francois A. Houle send a similarly worded letter to Israel-hater Omar Barghouti before he spoke last year at U of Ottawa? (“Ottawa”: Indian for “Land of the Bed-Wetters.”)

How about Angela Davis, Communist Party member and former Black Panther who spoke at the University of Zero just last month?

Or do only conservatives get letters admonishing them to be civil? Or—my suspicion—is it only conservative women who fuel Francois’ rage?

How about sending a letter to all Muslim speakers advising them to please bathe once a week while in Canada? Would that constitute a hate crime?

I’m sure Canada’s Human Rights Commission will get to the bottom of Francois’ strange warning to me, inasmuch as I will be filing a complaint with that august body, so I expect they will be reviewing every letter the university has sent to other speakers prior to their speeches to see if any of them were threatened with criminal prosecution.

Both writer Mark Steyn and editor Ezra Levant have been investigated by the Human Rights Commission for promoting hatred toward Muslims.

Levant’s alleged crime was to reprint the cartoons of Mohammed originally published in a Danish newspaper, leading practitioners of the Religion of Peace to engage in murderous violence across the globe. Steyn’s alleged crime was to publish an excerpt of his book, America Alone in Maclean’s magazine, in which he jauntily described Muslims as “hot for jihad.”

Both of them also flew jet airliners full of passengers into skyscrapers in lower Manhattan, resulting in thousands of deaths. No, wait—that was somebody else.

Curiously, however, there was no evidence that either the cartoons or the column did, in fact, incite hatred toward Muslims—nor was there the remotest possibility that they would.

By contrast, conservative speakers are regularly subjected to violent attacks on college campuses. Bill Kristol, Pat Buchanan, David Horowitz and I have all been the targets of infamous campus attacks.

That’s why the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute (a sponsor of my Canada speeches) and the Young America’s Foundation (a sponsor of many of my college speeches) don’t send conservatives to college campuses without a bodyguard.

You’d have to be a real A-Houle not to anticipate that accusing a conservative of “promoting hatred” prior to her arrival on a college campus would in actuality—not in liberal fantasies of terrified Muslims cowering in terror of Mark Steyn readers—incite real-world violence toward the conservative.

The university itself acknowledged that Francois’ letter was likely to provoke violence against me by demanding—long after my speech was scheduled, but immediately after Francois disseminated his letter—that my sponsors pony up more than $1,200 for extra security.

Also following Francois’ letter, the Ottawa University Student Federation met for 7 1/2 hours to hammer out a series of resolutions denouncing me. The resolutions included:

“Whereas Ann Coulter is a hateful woman;
“Whereas she has made hateful comments against GLBTQ, Muslims, Jews and women;
“Whereas she violates an unwritten code of ‘positive-space’;
“Be it resolved that the SFUO express its disapproval of having Ann Coulter speak at the University of Ottawa.”

At least the students didn’t waste 7 1/2 hours on something silly, like their studies.

At the risk of violating anyone’s positive space, what happened to Canada? How did the country that gave us Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Martin Short, Dan Aykroyd and Catherine O’Hara suddenly become a bunch of whining crybabies?

After Tuesday night, the hatred incited by Francois’ letter is no longer theoretical. The police called off my speech when the auditorium was surrounded by thousands of rioting liberals—screaming, blocking the entrance, throwing tables, demanding that my books be burned, and finally setting off the fire alarm.

Sadly, I missed the book-burning because I never made it to the building.

But, reportedly, a Canadian crowd hasn’t been this excited since they opened a new Tim Hortons. Local reporters couldn’t make out what the crowd was chanting, but it was something about “Molson” and a “sled dog.”

I’ve given more than 100 college speeches, and not once has one of my speeches been shut down at any point. Even the pie-throwing incident at the University of Arizona didn’t break up the event. I said, “Get them!” and the college Republicans got them, and then I continued with my rambling, hate-filled diatribe—I mean, my speech.

So we’ve run this experiment more than 100 times.

Only one college speech was ever met with so much mob violence that the police were forced to cancel it: The one that was preceded by a letter from the university provost accusing me of hate speech.

(To add insult to injury, Francois didn’t even plan to attend my speech because Tuesday is his bikini wax night.)

If a university official’s letter accusing a speaker of having a proclivity to commit speech crimes before she’s given the speech—which then leads to Facebook postings demanding that Ann Coulter be hurt, a massive riot and a police-ordered cancellation of the speech—is not hate speech, then there is no such thing as hate speech.

Either Francois goes to jail or the Human Rights Commission is a hoax and a fraud.

T-- "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."

Geez T, I'm bothered somewhat by elements in your report. Did the staff actually voice a position in the 'general debate' or did they stand back and let the children sort out their own position.
I wonder if you want your child to be taught to think or taught to think like you..

At our home we've been saying Canada needs a Fox News Channel. O'Reilly and Kelly's interviews of Cole have proven that to be correct! The "she doesn't speak for me" outcry against Cole is huge! Coulters presence in Canada has held up a mirror and we see Cole being held up as Canada's reflection and we are shocked. Cole is being excoriated in Now Magazine under her own column.

I'm disgusted with Cole's comments and yet I'm happy to see we are capable of having the free speech debate in Canada after all. Thanks FOX. (And of course to Kate, Ezra, Mark et al who keep the free speech happening)

It is wrong for that woman to say that Canada does not have freedom of speech laws.

In Canada we are free to say what we want unless it has been specifically prohibited by a government that has taken that right away. The government limits our freedom by direct legislation (hate speech laws and criminal code prohbitions) and court decisions.

We do not have a first ammendment, but until now we have not needed one.

Nice Lyle Lovett hair-butch, Mzzzzzz Cole.

The sooner we secede from GreTAstan, the better.

T-- "The school I am referring to is our local K-12 school, which my daughter attends.

Don't believe for a minute that T has progeny; it's a chromosomal thing that happens when you cross a jackass with a horse's ass.

Which ever way you look at it.... University of Ottawa is looking very bad.

I suspect Libby Raoul and the Susan G. Cole are in shock because they have discovered they really do not speak for Canadians but only for themselves.
However, the two mentioned must secretly be thanking Ann Coulter for a few minutes of access to American FOX Network, because in Canada nobody outside of Toronto has ever heard of them.
You speak for yourselves ladies, not for us especially here at SDA.
So please, ladies, do not speak for me on FOX or anywhere else for that matter!

yes, sealclubber, liberals assume they are "we" and a liberal consensus becomes the ultimate judge of both social and scientific soundness. At the point "we" get the desired result, the debate ends and can never again be revisted or altered - ever. An odd stance from those preaching change and progress.

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

So Dr Raoul, you feel that Fascism is a "safe environment" for all Canadians? I wonder how you will react when a small minded, unelected and unaccountable thug like Francois Houle, Vice-President Academic and Provost, University of Ottawa, should decide he objects to your thoughts or actions and sends his brownshirts after you?

Of course, by that point anyone capable or interested in YOUR freedoms will be long gone....

No, T - you haven't answered my question. I asked:

"How about justifying your opinion that Because, to SOME people, Coulter 'speaks drivel', THEN she should not be allowed to speak to those people who want to hear her. "

Please respond to this question.

The fact that the Fox Anchor was beautiful and attractive was icing on the cake.

At the end of the day, one of the things that the liberal left never understands is that conservatives know how to have a good laugh about the madness of the world.

I was discussing the whole Coulter Thing with an American friend. He couldn't get his head around the behavior at U of O until I pointed out that Ontario is where Canada "mainstreams" the retards who wouldn't fit in Quebec. Then it made sense to him.

The absolute most intolerant people in the world look just like Susan Cole. If there's one thing any free thinking person in Canada should do is read our constitution (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/1.html). You will be amazed at how deceitfully people like Susan Cole abrogate the meaning and context of our Constitution and Charter counting on people like you not to check if what she says is true. This country respectfully allows Susan to actively spread her beliefs about homosexuality and yet she seeks to dissuade speech by anyone she doesn't agree with (Ann Coulter for example). I find it funny that North Korea and Iran would probably throw her in jail for her views and yet she yearns for her kind to control speech and thought here in Canada. All dictators are the same at heart.

Canada has freedom of expression, it's the same damn thing.
Ms.Cole does not speak for me and Ann though gruff at times and always blunt speaks mostly the truth, even if your too sensitive to hear it.
Ann sees the world as it is not how we would like it to be.

The troll has never gotten so much attention. What's wrong with you people?

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

Posted by: ET at March 25, 2010 11:07 AM "

And unfortunately,we prove that identity every time we vote,and every we time we do not stand up to people like AHoule,Cole etc.

And Kate....I agree,but it should read "the fascist bitch butch doesn't speak for me",although I hate using bitch as it denigrates all female dogs.

I remeber a lawyer citing the example of the radio station in Rawanda that actually told its listeners to go and kill the "Tutsis or Hutus". Ms Coulter actually says things that are true without the "candy-coating" we Canadians have gotten so used to AND she actually tells the truth (Most Canadians seem to be very afraid of that--especially if it doesn't jive with the propaganda they've been led to believe).

It seems the "freedom of speech" so many here are fighting for is merely the freedom to let angry insults fly without thinking. How useful is that? And not very conducive to a peacful world. As Susan says - it's a "provocation".

Taking the time to contemplate our words so we don't insult one another is a quality that Canadians can be proud of striving for. Unfortunate that we need laws enforcing that, but I guess we're not grown up enough yet.

I am proud that hate speech is illegal in Canada.

The same brainwashing that's going on in Ontario public schools is also happening here in Alberta. My daughter who is in grade 11 came home yesterday and announced that they would be discussing Ann Coulter in Social Studies tomorrow (today). Her male Social teacher said "She (Ann Coulter) is a real piece of work" and also advised the students to not do any research about her (Ms. Coulter) as they would discuss it all tomorrow.
My husband and I advised our daughter to do her own research and form her own opinion.
My experience with teachers is that most no longer teach critical thinking. They teach their opinion and do not want healthy, open debate and any student who tries to debate any issue will pay the price. It's no longer about learning it's about indoctrination into a liberal point of view.
Ms. Cole does not speak for this Canadian nor do I want her speaking for my daughter.

Looks like Levant and Coulter have created a catch 22 for the HRC. Will the HRC take the bait?

Can't make it down to Calgary, so I'm going to give my support by buying a book. We're still free to do that, aren't we?

Oh, and check out Michel Coren's interview.

proudcdn -- And not very conducive to a peacful world

It's about balancing peace and freedom; you would probably find the Country to be very peaceful if you could lock up everyone that disagrees with you.

My dad who is on his last legs, will iam sure be glad to know that we in canada Dont value Our freedom & free speech as Cole has stated. Iam sure his brothers who also fought for these Morons will be turning in their graves wondering What exactly did we fight for!.

T:

Any school which condones intimidating violence as a legitimate form of political expression is conditioning children to accept anarchism and terrorism. Such fanatical political indoctrinating in public educational institutions amounts to child abuse.

J. Cairns (12:58), your daughter's experience with her "Social Studies" teacher is disturbing.

proudcdn,

Hate speech is illegal in Canada -- see the example of the radio station in Rawanda...anything short of that is NOT hate speech.

Here's an example of provocative speech..."welfare is the idea that the government will take the money you earn to feed your family and give yourself a decent life and it will give your money to people who refuse to work and live an indigent lifestyle" but we (the public) get fed "welfare is the government enabling those who are unfortunate to live a life of dignity".

However, "dignity" to me is one's ability to provide for one's family as well as being a great example of responsibility to the next generation by having and keeping a job.

EBD--J. Cairns (12:58), your daughter's experience with her "Social Studies" teacher is disturbing.

Perhaps that teacher would be happy to allow an audio recording of the class discussion.

Get Susan Cole going on Israel/Palestine. She makes Hamas sound like the Likud.

how many of the anti-Coulter people have actually read any of her books or columns? I have met so many people who say they can't stand Ann, but they have never actually read anything she has written - it drives my crazy. All they can do (like T) is parrot "oh she said that Christians are perfected Jews" or "she said we should convert Muslims to Christianity", or "she doesn't believe in evolution". I feel like I'm surrounded by brain dead idiots - another one said to me the other day, "well America now has free health care". I gave him the PJ O'Rourke line, "if you thought health care cost was expensive before, just wait till you see how much it costs when it's free".

Conservatives should promote more speaking engagements on campuses: Ezra, Kathy, and Kate should get on a lecture series tour of Canadian campuses.

You might be half-kidding, glasnost (1:23), but what you suggest is precisely what the doctor ordered, and what's required at this point. Sadly enough.

Occams Thats not child abuse Its a repeat of history of a Failed regime.
Indoctrination of the minds of our youth In order to achieve the Ultimate goal, Power over the people, Socialism/communism call it what you want You do not take total control until all of the pawns are in place. All of the desenters have been silenced no matter how long it takes.

Wonder when Cable Regina will replace CNN with Fox so that we in Saskatchewan can all see the difference on basic cable. More and more are switching to Fox but not enough yet.
Wonder how many of them know anything about Ann Coulter - she says it like it is - the way it should be. Too bad it offends some people. Suck it up you radicals who want us to be like Cuba and similar countries.
It'll never happen because more people are getting to look at you closer.

EBD (1;27), who could possibly object when those that pay for the system ask for some accountability?

Poor kids wasting their lives in public schools while there is the whole beautiful world of rhetorical art on the outside.

In Saskatchewan, we don't discriminate against rightists, or leftists. You're for or against daylight savings time. The rest doesn't matter.

What is so ironic is that it is actually these leftists (for lack of a better label) who spew the most vile hatred and for whom violence is their basic M.O. Once again they used violence to ensure that only their views are heard. To think that this is the country, or rather what it has become, for which so many shed their blood and lives.

Joe Citizen (1:37), that would be the "fastists" vs the "slowists".

Someone earlier suggested we let OReilly in on the fact that Cole "doesn't speak for me". That was my instinct..already did it.

As for John: regarding Cable Regina (John it's been called Access Communications for nearly a decade) that's a great idea but have you let them know that's what you want? It's a co-operative are you member? I wish I could make that request of them but they don't serve my area.

We're all glad real hate speech is illegal in Canada, proudcdn.

As has been pointed out many times before, ss. 318-319 of the Criminal Code already cover quantifiable hate speech and provide exception clauses to protect freedom of conscience and religious belief.

This is all we need. Abolish S13 of the CHRA.

I'm sure after posing "au naturel" for Playboy, Ann Coulter is upset at what the University of Ottawa "thinks." God you people are naive! One thing for sure. The left can't say she isn't "up front!"

From Now Magazine in Toronto. Savage Love
By Dan Savage
Story Tools
Email
Print/Save
Facebook
Twitter
Buzz This
Share
Savage Love
By Dan Savage
I’m a 23-year-old bi dude seeing a guy who is intelligent, sweet, attractive – the works. We’ve been together for six weeks. The problem is, after our first night together, I lost s*xual interest in him. When I do get h*rny – which is rare at the moment due to work pressures – I prefer to beat off alone, because I can fantasize about some sort of transgression or other when I do it, e.g., having s*x where I’m at risk of being discovered, r*pe fantasies, inc*st scenarios. Obviously, at some point I began associating “s*xy” with “dangerous” and maybe “wrong.”

I want a serious relationship, but I’m tired of pretending and failing in bed because I’m just not into the s*x. And, damnit, he’s cute and I should be able to get it up! What do I need to do?

Two Guys, One Er*ction...............This is an example of Toronto culture. From the Toronto Now Magazine. All Taxpayer subsidized. The editor is the same Susan Cole who was on Fox yesterday whining about Coulter. And how Coulter should be censored.

"Taking the time to contemplate our words so we don't insult one another is a quality that Canadians can be proud of striving for. Unfortunate that we need laws enforcing that, but I guess we're not grown up enough yet."

proudcdn:

No, YOU haven't grown up yet. The rest of us here already have.

I don't need you or some useless bureaucrat shielding my ears from speech that I may potentially find offensive. I can analyze and come up with my own conclusions thank you very much. It's not my problem if you or these other lefty twits can't handle it like adults.

Just what is Toronto Now? & who is she?
i guess Bill Murdoch is right again stating Toronto should separate & form their own Prov. As she(cole) dont have a clue about the rest of Canada just that little world known as Toronto. Have you never noticed how liberal/Dippers always state Thats what Canadians want & are speaking for? When all along its what They want! No what we want is for them to shut the hell up & stop making the assumption they are speaking for Canadians..
Speaking of ASSumptions i wonder if the Liberals are going to Stand-Up for Freedoms in QP today? Are they going to question Canadian Prisoner Pensions? Or remain Silent like a Lamb

So some kids think the response to Coulters appearance was appropriate.....well, that isn't exactly surprising.

Kids are naturally pretty stupid and only get their act together when they mature and can think for themselves. Of course some, like T, never get to that point.

Posted by: Joe Citizen at March 25, 2010 1:47 PM

I'm not sure what your point is.

Re: Dr. Libby Raoul
If memory serves -- and I believe Vitruvius first pointed this out -- Raoul is a satiricist and a very good one as evidenced by the earnest rejoinders. Libby, welcome back and congrats on the Doctorate!

Comment: Before logging on today, was chatting with an old friend. I had mentioned this "safe environment" meme the lefty diversity cultists inevitably trot out. And it hit me: this is nursery school stuff. And looking at those students in the clip you can't but feel that they are children; and many of the girls seemed noticeably overweight. Children. Arrested Adolescents. Tragic.

I am so glad that the American people can get, from the sheep's mouth so to speak, a clear statement of how hostile Canadians are to free speech. During the Ezra Levant/ Mark Steyn trials, I could detect little coverage of the proceedings in the US. Like myself a few years ago, most Americans assume the "free world" enjoys "freedom" as we here in America understand that term. It was shocking to learn otherwise. My appreciation for the men who laid the cornerstone of our republic and wrote its constitution has grown immensely in the last few years. Their work was nothing less than a miracle, a gift directly from the hand of God.

We don't have "free speech"??

Actually our freedoms are arguably broader:

thought belief opinion expression

Any form of expression is protected. Speech being subsumed therein.

I believe this woman was parroting what the "progressives" would have our freedoms (or lack of them) be.

glasnost - "you would probably find the Country to be very peaceful if you could lock up everyone that disagrees with you"

Your extreme interpretation of my comment ( I said nothing about disagreeing) is exactly the type of provocation Susan is speaking of. There are ways of listening and voicing an opinion without insulting or provoking anger.
them's fightin' words... we don't need more of that.

I'm still waiting for T to answer my question about why he feels he or someone else has the right to stop a lecture that others want to hear.

proudcdn - truth isn't about 'feel good' conversations. Truth sometimes requires hard questions. Of others and of oneself. It sometimes requires unpleasant answers.

Therefore your insistence that debate and discussion be confined only to interactions that you and other people feel are 'not insulting' to them or their beliefs is a promotion of superficial 'lunchtime babble'. It certainly has nothing to do with the development of knowledge.

What's remarkable is how comfortable she is in parroting lefist nonsense as if it was fact.

That she so glibly erases from history the fact that we actually have a constitution and a Charter, perfectly epitomizes today's "tolerant progressive left".

And don't you love her argument that free speech should be reserved for private gatherings behind closed doors, rather than in....gulp...public places and institutions.

It appears that we need to pay more attention to who is hired by our local school boards to teach our children. Or, the next thing we know we will have a Hugo Chavez wannabe as Prime Minister.

BTW, I emailed Bill O'Reilly that Susan Cole does not speak for me but only for the left that thinks they own the country.

"I agree,but it should read "the fascist bitch butch doesn't speak for me",although I hate using bitch as it denigrates all female dogs."

I believe the politically correct term is:Beeeeeaaaatch!

When you pull the plug on your own event, as Levant and Coulter did you can't claim you were censored, censorship doesn't work that way. No one was arrested, no one was assaulted. Levant couldn't wait to call off his own event and grandstand gleefully for the press.

What's worse then a bigot with a microphone?

A. A bigot with a microphone who thinks they've been victimized.

proudcnd (2:08), it's you who are touting laws "so we don't insult one another" yet you accuse me of being extreme. Why don't you simply admit that you're not interested in the balance that I mentioned and instead that you want to be the one who has the power to decide what's acceptable.

You say it well Indiana.

What's worse then a bigot with a microphone? ~ Scott at 2:25

A criminal who triggers a false fire alarm.

rfb

There is no such thing as a "bi-guy".

Campuses are not places to promote conservatism, rugged individualism, and free speech according to Comrade Susan.

Brainwash them young and you'll always have them. Comrade Susan understands that as well as any other good Communist or Nazi. They had the Nazi Youth. Canada has the University of Ottawa.

glasnost,

A false fire alarm is mischief and a misdemeanor, it's not a criminal act.

False firm alarms are pretty common on campus's, as they are in high schools.

Not condoning it, but it's not unusual.

And clearly the Ayes have it - "That BITCH doesn't speak for me(us)!!!"

Cole made all Canadians look like we are from the other side of Pluto.

Why not drop Kelly (the host of the segment) an email expressing your sentiments - perhaps Fox will invite a Canadian more representative of who we are onto the show - or at least get some emails read on the air:

kelly@foxnews.com

"perhaps Fox will invite a Canadian more representative of who we are onto the show".

Maybe they should see if David Frum is available, he's worn out his welcome just about everywhere else.

Thank you for the enlightenment Scott at 2:35, you've demonstrated two things.

False alarm of fire

437. Every one who wilfully, without reasonable cause, by outcry, ringing bells, using a fire alarm, telephone or telegraph, or in any other manner, makes or circulates or causes to be made or circulated an alarm of fire is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 393; 1972, c. 13, s. 31.

scott - are you purposely 'stuck on stupid'?

Coulter and Levant didn't 'pull the plug on their own event'. They were told by campus security and the police that the police could not guarantee security because of the demonstrators. Got that?

Neither the police nor the administration have the authority to cancel an event arranged by an organizer; only the organizers can do that.
But- when the police tell you that security cannot be provided for speaker and audience - then, you have NO CHOICE but to cancel the event.

So, kindly stop with your incorrect claim that Coulter and Levant, on a whim or for no reason or for 'grandstanding' (of which you have no evidence), cancelled the event. They had no choice. The police warned them that they could not provide security.

Who is to blame? The university. Its provost Francois Houle and the Student Council.

Houle sent Coulter a letter warning her to not to 'incite hatred'. He leaked this letter, thus inciting people to assume that Coulter would actually 'incite hatred'. This provoked demonstrations - including the student council who passed a motion against her, informing everyone that 'Ann Coulter is a hateful woman', and put up posters asking for demonstrators to come and protest.

Both Houle and the student council incited hatred and contempt for Coulter - and that is a violation of the sacred Rule 13 of the Human Rights Act. She's right to file a claim.

proudcdn - feeling insulted is an entirely subjective emotion. There is NO WAY that one can, for example, tell beforehand when discussing let's say a religious or political or societal issue, that someone is not going to 'feel insulted' or offended.

Quite frankly, your insistence that we need laws to ensure that we don't 'insult one another' is insulting to me and makes me quite angry. It privileges subjective emotions which can be irrational and ignorant - and ignores objective and rational truth.

I've been enjoying this thread all morning and it just jumped out at me why FOX dug up this Canadian lefty (Cole) to address the Coulter events. Its not about Canada.....ITS ABOUT THE AMERICANS! and showing THEM what lays ahead for as they tread the path the Democrats are forging. The unexpected outcome is that we Canadians are shocked to see our own reality.

After reading the hateful violent laden posts at CBC and the Gob I've come to the conclusion the political left hate conservative women. Not only do they hate us with a blind form of hatred and bigotry I honestly think they'd harm us if they could get away with it? Does that make me afraid, no because I feel the self same hatred towards the progressive left and their barking mad demented political ideology. What does scare me is how intolerant our Institutions of Higher learning have become towards Conservatives, Jews and females that don't cower before their supremacists' progressive betters. Alot of hate boiling in their veins, no doubt about it the left are the most vile bigoted hateful nasty dangerous bunch I've seen in my lifetime. The left have shown Canada we have nothing to be proud of, whilst they espouse diversity this and that they spread hate towards Jews, Women and Conservatives and they get away with it. Time we stopped gritting our teeth and take on their hatred in public.

Rose...you are right. It is time to push back hard on the left wing bigots. They have gotten a free ride for far too long and they have to be pushed back under their slimy rocks.

And that is why, frankly, Coulter speaks as she does. She dishes it back to the left wing meat puppets and they can't withstand it.

ET,

I've seen no direct quote from the police in Ottawa that recommended the event be cancelled due to security. I've only seen them on record recommend that it be moved to a larger venue to accommodate the crowd.

So Scott are you totally ignoring Glasnost? Is that 'cause truth sucks?

I doubt the police will admit on the record that they couldn't guarantee Coulter's safety. Although they've said that to me and many others _in the moment_ to get us to disperse, they aren't really going to put that in writing after the fact, for reasons I hope are obvious.

Let's clear the air now- what words, phrases and topics are considered improper or even hate speech? Let us define these terms now. I, as an educated adult raised in a good home, want to know what to say or not say by either the government or special interest groups. If not, stick it in your ear.
Miss Coulter leaves Canada with vindication and scads of cash. As much as the noise-makers like to pat themselves on the back, they don't get they are being laughed at.

I've seen no direct quote from the police in Ottawa that recommended the event be cancelled due to security. ~ Scott

You've obviously not seen the Criminal Code either, so I guess that makes your comments here quite irrelevant.

"Glasnost", by the way, is translated literally as "publicity". I have it on authority from a Russian that Gorbachev's lukewarm policy was window dressing at best.
Moving on...

She doesn't speak for me either. In fact, she embarrasses me. Collectivists (notice her use of "we" and "Canadians", instead of "I" - very telling) like her don't believe in freedom - it's their agenda or nothing and they'll proudly tell you "It's the Canadian way".

Well, not to me.

I'm not sure who the blonde is (there's no FOX where I'm at), but OMG she's great. She didn't let up once. Canadian MSM take note, if you care at all.

window dressing? I've been called worse.

She doesn't speak for me either. In fact, she embarrasses me. Collectivists (notice her use of "we" and "Canadians", instead of "I" - very telling) like her don't believe in freedom - it's their agenda or nothing and they'll proudly tell you "It's the Canadian way".

Well, not to me.

I'm not sure who the blonde is (there's no FOX where I'm at), but OMG she's great. She didn't let up once. Canadian MSM take note, if you care at all.

and Osumashi Kinyobe means what?????

AGAIN, repeat after me: The true party of bigotry, hatred, censorship and violence is the liberal party.

Susan Cole called US Freedom of Speech a "religion" since when are consitutional rights a religion.

False fire alarms usually result in a fine, or in extreme cases eviction from the university. Yes if the fire department misses a call on route, or kills someone in an accident it becomes a criminal offense. It's a stupid thing to do, but it hardly indicts all who were waiting for the event.

It still doesn't change the fact that Levant called off his own event.

could be Payback for the Canadian Delegation walking out on Ahmadinejads speach at the UN! The radicals at UofO mad at that.
In fact why dont the UofO invite him to speak.

Scott - I provided the quote froom the NP before, where the police told the organizers that they could not guarantee security. The police themselves cannot organize or cancel an event; their role is security. Are they able to provide it?

Do you expect a public bulletin board from the police? They told the organizers. Not the media. Not the crowd.

Ezra Levant was an organizer; he told the crowd that the police told him they could not guarantee security. That means that the event HAS to be cancelled because, if the police have given such a warning, then if even one of the dissenters OR people who came to listen, were hurt - that's a civil lawsuit.

What more do you want? You seem trapped in some kind of fog of confusion.

No shortage of free expression here.

http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/25/john-baglow-a-different-view-on-the-coulter-file.aspx

Scott, your comment is indictitive that you've been watching too much Law and Order SVU.

That's Megan Kelly, and she's recently had a baby which also blows the myth out of the water that women can't look good after having kids.

Hard work pays off, whether its in the gym or at work.

Conservative women are HOT!!!!

Indiana, I'm a conservative woman, you should see me!
Judged by the company you keep works for me.

glasnost,

You're right, just complete fiction over here.

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Students+cost+UVic+false+alarm+fines/2549716/story.html

There is no such thing as 'Dr Libbi Raoul'.
A handful of blog posts don't qualify him/her a doctor.

Everyone is a SPECOPS super ninja black belt on the Internet. Why not calling self a doctor?!

Scott said "It still doesn't change the fact that Levant called off his own event."

Have a read up on Liability Laws. Especially Vicarious Liability. He had to pull the plug.

In the real world of grown ups there are consequences to actions.

Glasnost wrote: window dressing? I've been called worse.

I wasn't calling you "window dressing". Only assessing the political ramifications of a policy.
Relax.

Nettieonthenet wrote: "and Osumashi Kinyobe means what?????"

That I'm awesome.

Moving on...

Look, Scott and other assorted trolls, prove- with irrefutable evidence- that Ann Coulter's cancelled speech was a stunt and that the protesters (if one wishes to call them that) were peaceful and without malice in their hearts.
I would also like to know what qualifies as hate speech. Spell it out.

Mean time, it is Jason Devine who will lead the rally against Coulter in Calgary. He is the spokesperson for the local Anti-Racist Action. Lucky for him, Communists are free to express their views in Canada . . . and even run for office: http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2006/riding/244/#jasondevine

I always thought you had one of the coolest names round-here along with Mamba and me of course.

Can I launch a human rights complaint against Susan G. Cole for appearing on Fox News?

Osumashi,

I'm not actually a believer in hate speech laws. I don't think they're particularly effective and are by their nature unenforceable.

The only thing I object to in this matter are people making martyr's out of themselves by censoring themselves.

My proof is that no was arrested, no one was assaulted. Yes people were animated, yes they were angry, but no more then at a Leafs, Sens game. The Police only recommended a larger venue to accommodate the crowd. If anything the event was poorly organized and should have been in a larger venue.

If Miss Coulter is a martyr, who made her one?
I've read your posts. Nothing you said in them indicated that this was all one big mess-up but that Miss Coulter was shut down and you were glad for it.

"When you pull the plug on your own event, as Levant and Coulter did you can't claim you were censored, censorship doesn't work that way. No one was arrested, no one was assaulted. Levant couldn't wait to call off his own event and grandstand gleefully for the press.

What's worse then a bigot with a microphone?

A. A bigot with a microphone who thinks they've been victimized.
Posted by: Scott at March 25, 2010 2:25 PM"

Did I misread you?

And you still didn't answer my question: what qualifies as hate speech?

"Susan G. Cole is an author and playwright and has been active in the queer community for over 25 years. As an activist, she was a member of the first lesbian political organization in Toronto, called LOOT (the Lesbian Organization of Toronto), which was founded in 1977 and operated a coffee house and lesbian phone line."

Osumashi,

Ya you did misread me actually. I think it's pretty obvious that I'm against them ie. no sense in making bigots into free speech martyrs.

Where did I advocate limits on free speech? Where have I spoken in favour of hate speech laws?

To answer your question almost anything can be said hatefully, but it's so subjective the government has no business adjudicating it. People should be allowed to speak as freely as they wish insofar as they're not inciting violence.

This should give Western separationists a good boost. This time I'll be with them.

What ET said.
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/013636.html#c484104

But what do you expect from "reporters" like Kady "Is it lunchtime yet?" O'malley or whatever her name is, who is busily "getting to the bottom" of this "story" between trips to Sephora...?

Scott, your own words:

Was anyone arrested?

From the looks of it there was no mob. Levant manufactured this whole thing and pulled the plug on his own event.

If there's one thing conservatives love it is to feel aggrieved and feel that the world is out to get you.

Go on feed your victim complex, it feels good doesn't it?
Posted by: Scott at March 24, 2010 5:28 PM

Osumashi,

So looking angry is a crime? Just because people are in a heated argument doesn't mean they've done anything wrong.

The bottom line is no was arrested, no one was hurt, there was no violence, and there was no threat.

Coulter and Levant pulled the plug on their own event, what a bunch of media whores.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Organizers+university+cancelled+Coulter/2721580/story.html
Posted by: Scott at March 24, 2010 5:56 PM

Ann Coulter is a master of lazy racist comedy, quite simply she’s one of the best.

“take a camel.”= classic comedy.

They don’t make em like Ann anymore I tell ya, Ann Coulter is a throwback to generations past when casual ignorant racism flourished in society.

Without Ann around, how would we truly know how far we’ve come? This lady is doing us all a public service, she’s a walking monument to our bigot forefathers and criminally forgotten foresisters.
Posted by: Scott at March 24, 2010 6:55 PM

Ah yes let us all take our cues from "Horny Toad" on what is and isn't racist.

"God, that black woman in the picture is the UGLIEST troll I have EVER seem.She's got a mouth (pun intended) that could swallow a whole watermelon. Of course I doubt she is a Canadian." = Not racist.

"Take a camel" = not racist.

If only we were enlightened as you.
Posted by: Scott at March 24, 2010 7:12 PM

Reminding someone that our laws are different is not a terrible indictment. For one thing the University Provost has no power to prosecute such a matter.

But that's besides the point, if you want to claim you were muzzled you can't cancel your own event. Levant and Coulter effectively self-censored themselves and then act as if there free speech was denied.

It's not that no one was shot or killed, it's that everyone was peaceful, no one was arrested, or assaulted. Yes the two people in that picture are having a heated argument, how scary, and one of them's black! run!!!

Whoever pulled the fire alarm is a loser, but at worst that's mischief. People pull the fire alarm all the time at University's, all the time, in residence, during exams. It's not unusual.
Posted by: Scott at March 24, 2010 7:41 PM

Am I missing something here?

Osumashi,

Show me where I said Ann Coulter should not be allowed to speak.

Show me where I said there should be limits on free speech.

You can't, because I never wrote that, and it's not what I believe.

Scott - your wilful turning your eyes from reality is quite astonishing to watch.

You totally ignore that the provost sent Coulter a provocative and insulting letter, which he leaked to others, telling her that he assumed she would 'speak with hate' and that 'hate speech' was a criminal act in Canada. Apart from its insult to her, this was also an act of ignorance of criminal hate laws in Canada.

Section 319 is specific; it isn't enough that someone says something hateful or untrue; there has to be evidence of intent to harm; that is, there must be statements advocating breach of the peace. OK? Got that?

Do you know who violated this act? The student council with their posters asking people to come out and demonstrate against Coulter and bring 'things to throw'.

Coulter's talk, for all its hyperbole, doesn't come close to this stricture. Oh, and a further defense is if the topic is one for public discussion. OK?

And for the zillionth time, please take your head out of the sand. There was no 'self-censorship' by Levant or Coulter. The police told them they could not guarantee security. That means - and I'll bet you know zilch about liability law, and, as has been noted, vicarious liability, that the organizers MUST cancel the event.

Your claim that SINCE no-one was arrested, THEN this means that there was no concern about security, is logically and empirically invalid. Why? Because it's backwards. You are claiming that until and unless there's an arrest, there can be no concerns about security. This is obviously invalid.

And no, this was not a sports event; this was an event where a group, organized by the student council, who posted that 'Coulter is a hateful woman' and encouraged people to come out and protest, came to demonstrate.

ET,

I guess it comes down to who you believe. Ezra's account of what he says the police told him.

Or the Police's own account.

They're inconsistent.

If you think Cole is a bit Cukooo Cukooo have a look at some of the comments related to the article at ctv.ca

PM upset, seeks to rectify pension payments to Olson
ctv.ca Mar25/10

There are people that honestly believe Olson deserves a pension.
One comment says "Clifford Olson is like any other Canadian, He is entitled"

Like any other Canadian??? He is Entitled??
My gawd We need a majority Conservative govt to put an end to these Liberal Socialy Correct Laws .
I just Wish Please Please Liberal/NDP bring this to the floor in HoC, You think you had a bad wk with your Almost Abortion issue Let Canadians hear you defend Clifford Olson.
And sorry folks for the Little Off Topic.

Just a thought. I scroll by any comment posted by T AND any comment that replies to it. Responding to trolls is the oxygen they crave. Don't give it to 'em.

Ann Coulter: Canadian free speech hero

"Canadian media to UOttawa--you suck

The reviews of Ann Coulter’s aborted talk at the University of Ottawa are in, and the message from Canada’s editorial and op/ed writers is, “Dear University of Ottawa, you suck.”"

I don't support the Provost's letter, but if he wants to write her a letter informing her of Canadian law that's his right. I don't agree with it, but he wasn't breaking any laws. It's not like this is the first time people have accused her of hate speech.

Like I said, I don't agree with hate speech laws.

As for the Student Council passing a motion against Coulter, well that's democracy and they had the votes. If they want to demonstrate and call on others to demonstrate and protest that's free expression.

If you can show me where the Student Council advocated throwing things at Coulter I'd love to see it.

Show me where the police are on record saying they couldn't guarantee security. I've seen nothing from them to suggest that was the case.

Levant cited security concerns, the police have yet to do so.

Scott, show me where you've agreed that Miss Coulter should speak. You've called her "racist" and never once challenged Houle's infantile warning of criminal proceedings.
You were caught. Deal with it.

Lets assume that Scott is correct and Anne w/ Erza chose to cancel the event. Accepting your premise, the fact that they a) felt intimidated enough by the crowd to cancel, or b) feared criminal prosecution for sharing her views and cancelled; is it not fair to say that her speech was suppressed regardless of who pulled the plug?

Your answer to this should settle this issue.

As I said on the other thread today Scott, I do respect you for defending your views, as backwards as I may thing they are. And yes, I do believe you will see the light much sooner than the big 40:)

Omumashi,

Just because I think someone's a racist, how does it follow that I think they shouldn't be allowed to speak.

That's my opinion. Houle's letter is her opinion. Ann Coulter's speeches are her opinion.

I've been consistent, everyone should be free to speak.

Indiana,

Your second premise is irrelevant because that is not their stated reason for canceling. Levant and Coulter are hardly the kind of people to be cowed into toning down their speeches on account of someone reminding them of the law in Canada.

If they felt intimidated by the crowd that's unfortunate, but that's the reality of a free society where you allow the freedom of association.

The organizers were obviously not expecting to attract that large a crowd. I think it's very easy and lazy to blame students for styling Ann's free speech when they were only expressing their own.

If Levant and Coulter don't feel safe in the face of protest shouldn't it not have been their responsibility to hire enough security to calm their fears.

"If Levant and Coulter don't feel safe in the face of protest shouldn't it not have been their responsibility to hire enough security to calm their fears."

So you're saying you have have the right to free speech so long as you have the means to pay for security?

So... Once again we have a "conservative," Megyn Kelly, who is so smoking hot, and some batshit crazy "I look like a man" liberal. It seems we have a winner. I was disappointed though that Mrs. Kelly did not ask if Mr. Manhater would have allowed Keith Olbermann or Michael Moore or Al Franken on campus. Because you know she would.

scott - as has been noted many times, the police told the organizers they couldn't guarantee security. They didn't tell the press or the public. The organizers then told the public that the police had said that security couldn't be guaranteed; you've been told this many times.

“It’s a public safety issue,” said Sgt. Dan Beauchamp.
"Ottawa police Sgt. Dan Beauchamp told reporters: "It's a public safety issue," according to The Washington Times."

"Levant, the conservative activist scheduled to introduce Coulter, tells Newsmax that a Facebook page had advised protesters to bring things to throw at Coulter, including "vegetables and eggs and things like that."

The Provost did not provide Coulter with a truthful definition of our hate speech laws, for as I've outlined section 319 of the criminal code, her speech could in no way fall within that law. Yet he told her that her type of speech could lead to criminal prosecution. No, it could not.

You may consider that misinforming a speaker about the Canadian law on hate speech is 'not breaking a law' but it is unethical and an act of deliberate misinformation.

The HRC's are not criminal law.

The student council's motion against Coulter is indeed an issue of free speech. So why couldn't they allow Coulter the same right?

Go to Kathy Shaidle's Blog (Five feet of fury) to see the first hand accounts of students texting other students to 'bring rocks, bring sticks, you gotta hurt Ann Coulter tonight, don't let her speak'.

Scott - I have a question for you. Answer honestly. Do you think the Isreal Apartheid Week organizers should have received the same letter that Houle sent to Coulter? Why or Why not?

Indiana,

No I'm saying you have the right to free speech regardless.

Your fears are your own issue.

People are free to protest, people are free to speak, people are free to hire security if they feel they need it.

Osumashi Kinyobe @ 3:52 PM, good one. ROTFLMAO!

For the love of God people, The woman's name is ANN Coulter, not ANNE Coulter.

As of 5:50 pm EDT (3:50 pm MDT) Ann Coulter is apparently a few minutes away from a live interview on CBC News Channel -- they keep mentioning that they have the interview planned but it seems that she is later in arriving than they expected, so they keep filling in with other items. Anyway, the interview could probably begin at any time now to end of the next hour because the same show is on (Power and Politics) in the next hour. So heads up if you want to see the interview.

It's not what Coulter said or didn't say, it's that she is a conservative.
Ann Coulter is a conservative woman and the Canadian media, government and institutions like the U of zero exist to defeat conservative policy and opinion.
Canada is a communist country.
Susan Cole is a communist.
As for my rights, they were given to me by the CREATOR, not some sexually confused marxist bureaucrat in Ottawa.

@ Ex-liberal.
I agree with you whole heartedly .

Paul in calgary

201 comments ... and counting.

Susan G. Cole looks like Bea Arthur after she's ingested 50 pounds of Prozac.

ET,

It certainly was a public safety issue, but that was due to the crowd being three to four times larger then what the venue would hold. That's why the police recommended a larger venue, they didn't recommend cancellation. The event was not shut down due to people threatening violence.

A facebook page is not the same as the Student Union. So indicting the Student Union makes little sense on your part.

No-One,

Ya I honestly think they should have, both are controversial events and if you're being consistent you should send them to both. I don't think it was Houle's place to inform Coulter of the law, but he felt differently and that's his right.

Personally I think limits on free speech are counterproductive, people should be as free to speak as they wish.

I'm starting to think the not-showing-up-to-riot is a failed conservative policy.

Posted by Kate at 9:48 AM| Comments (189)

Hang on to that thought Kate, we are working on it.

On another note; this would have been an excellent venue to bring up the CHRC, born in 1977 to silence any conservative dissent.

On a 2nd note: Kelly held her contempt well.
,

It has been said that one measure of a persons character is how they respond to criticism.

Note ... the leftard response to a critic of their ideology.

Someone said in the comments above that there is no middle ground when it comes to free speech.

I agree .... stake you ground and defend it.

And always know your enemy.

Well, CBC more or less tricked her into saying all the things that most Canadians will find very condescending, annoying and insulting.

She obviously needs better handlers, if she's going to go to all this trouble, she might as well do some good for the cause of free speech.

What she's done so far is mostly to score a bunch of ugly looking own goals (and yes, it is a soccer reference, and yes I know you're not supposed to make them on conservative forums, and yes I don't really give a damn because I am old, wrinkly and should be dead soon enough).

Black Mamba @ 11:18 a.m. re Dr. Libby Raoul:

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

Touché! Brava!

To be blogged as: "Frank A. Hole".
(H/T Ann Coulter)
...-

"Houle should apologize to Coulter, U of O teachers' organization says

University of Ottawa provost François Houle should apologize to American pundit Ann Coulter, says Canada’s main university teachers’ organization.

“We feel you (Houle) owe an apology to Ms. Coulter and, even more importantly, you owe the University of Ottawa community an assurance that the administration of the university strongly supports freedom of expression, academic freedom and views the role of the university as fostering and defending these values,” officials with the Canadian Association of University Teachers said this week in a letter to Houle.

Coulter, an often controversial commentator, cancelled a speaking engagement at the University of Ottawa earlier this week because of a mob of shouting students denouncing her presence. But even before she spoke Houle took it upon himself to write the best-selling author a letter warning her against violating Canada’s hate-speech laws. Coulter is set to speak in Calgary Thursday evening.

Houle’s conduct has been denounced as condescending, a violation of freedom of expression and even intellectual cowardice. CAUT president Penni Stewart and executive director James Turk added to the denunciations in their letter, saying Houle’s action also “raises serious questions about the University of Ottawa’s respect for freedom of expression and academic freedom.”

Since the Coulter cancellation, the University of Ottawa has been widely mocked in the Canadian and U.S. media as a bastion of small minds."

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Houle+should+apologize+Coulter+teachers+organization+says/2726436/story.html

Scott...is this
"A. A bigot with a microphone who thinks they've been victimized.'
a reference to the young lady that attended the London presentation, and possibly is in Canada with her family so that she can get an education, due to the fact that in her home counrty she could be be-headed for being in the same room with men?
Just asking...

Just don't call it Football Peter!

bluetech,

Ya, you're right because it's impossible that a Muslim student is also Canadian.

Let's take your lead and assume all brown people aren't Canadian citizens.

ET
"Ezra Levant was an organizer; he told the crowd that the police told him they could not guarantee security."
Why exactly could they not? Reports mentioned 9 police cruisers on the scene. 3 cops to a car, that's over 2 dozen large,fit, males. The hall is only a few blocks from a major police station, backup could be there in minutes. Firemen were also present. Demonstrators were typical young, loud youths, nothing more hardened.
I think it is a question of did not want to, as per instructions from the Chief and his political masters.These are some of the same forces that cannot clear Ont. highways in labour disputes and extreme political demonstrations.
Was any attempt made to arrest demonstrators, or find the person setting off the alarm? Didn't think so. Really 2 tier, selective policing is already a reality in Ont. and can only get worse.

Anyone have contact information - preferably email or a website for Susan B Cole?

Peter O'Donnell, with all due respect, I disagree with your assessment of Ann Coulter's answers to Evan Solomon's questions. He looked spooked and I loved it.

In essence, Ann Coulter's answers to Solomon's often predictable, condescending, and flippant questions said to him and the CBC -- NOT to Canadians -- "who do you think you are?"

The only Canadians who will find her answers condescending, insulting, and annoying, IMO, will be those Canadians who are looking to be "offended" (a much overused grumble, BTW) -- Canadians like Susan Cole. (THAT interview on Fox was PAINFUL. Susan Cole DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME.)

Solomon and the CBC weren't interested in a genuine Q & A with Coulter. They were, as you say, baiting her, and she punched back.

I enjoyed her taking the mickey out of them. As for "a nice little country"? That's certainly been her experience of Canada up to now: little minds, little freedom of speech or expression, little security, little humour, little multicultural banshees.

"Why exactly could they not?"

The police ARE the "Brown Shirts". They are the ones that will come for us when our views ARE finally criminalized; thus the official support for any and all firearm restrictions.

Everyday individual police officers sell their souls for the security of their union jobs and their pensions. This is one issue conservatives are woefully misinformed about.

Let's try this again:

Ann Coulter was _in her hotel room_ when her bodyguard got a call from the cops saying, "There are 2000 protesters outside the university and we can't guarantee your safety."

That means the event is cancelled. It isn't your choice. The cops are washing their hands of protecting you, unless you have your own private army and can afford millions in liability for a wrecked auditorium.

Scott is long on opinions while lacking facts. I guess facts are just too bothersome. On the other hand it is easy to call someone, Coulter in this case, a racist and a bigot, when you need not provide any proof or evidence. Actually his comments indicate someone with a very small and closed mind.

Martin: "Really 2 tier, selective policing is already a reality in Ont. and can only get worse."

'Very astute and scary observation, Martin. 'Used to be -- and I'm old enough to remember -- when the police upheld law and order. Now that doesn't seem to be the case.

I see police officers in Toronto, young, female, multicultural, looking like they don't know what the heck they're doing. At a major intersection in Toronto a few weeks ago, at an accident site, two police officers, one male, one female, were "directing" traffic, with absolutely no assurance whatsoever. One was directing a car to go one way, and the other was directing the SAME car to go the other way (it was my car), and I simply had to make up my own mind to find a way through the morass. It was a MESS.

I have even less confidence in the police's abilities to secure people's safety when politics is involved. Multiculturalism, political correctness, and cowardice jeopardize our freedoms, security, and safety.

Bummer.

Kathy,

Hearsay is not a particularly strong form of evidence. The police have said nothing to that effect.

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/03/25/did-coulter-silence-herself/

Alain,

What do you dispute of what I've written?

When Coulter advocates taking away a women's right to vote I think it's completely logical to call her a bigot.

Now if you want to argue the latter, please have at it.

Scott...next you want to tell us Coulter advocates killing abortionists, right?

"...Coulter advocates taking away a women's (sic) right to vote..." - Scott

Oh, come on. Please tell us that you're not unaware that it was a joke. She said women shouldn't have the right to vote because they know how to spend money, but they don't know how to make it. Ha ha ha.

Do you honestly believe that she "advocates" the disenfranchisement of women? If you do, I'm starting to see the problem here. If you don't, then you're being deliberately dishonest.

Coulter:

"Look, some things are jokes. Manifestly. Only if you've been through a medical procedure to have irony removed at birth do you not understand when they are jokes...I've been publicly speaking, going on TV, writing columns, giving interviews for more than a decade now. They cull those to rip every joke out of the lush analytical context I've presented it in. (Then they) read it back in earnest and angry tones."

Or sometimes, apparently, they type it out.

Steyn gave a complimentary shout out to both Kate and Kathie on his website where he eloquently sums up the leftist mentality and belief system when it comes to freedom of expression. This exert on the Coulter fiasco from his website will provide John, Scott and the rest of them with a mirror to look in - perhaps, for the first time they might just see themselves clearly.

The others [politicians]are either nakedly Orwellian, carrying placards hailing "Free speech!" even as they threaten violence to silence their opponents, or so pathologically lacking in self-awareness that in the interests of creating "a safe, positive space" they join an ugly mob to crush any dissenters. The University of Ottawa, an institution mired in stultifying conformity and intellectual homogeneity, has just received a $2.5 million grant to study diversity.

But you could point out the ironies forever, and the other side wouldn't care. Because they don't want to win the debate, they want to win, period. And that's a big difference. As I wrote in The National Post eight years ago - August 5th 2002:

The aim of a large swathe of the left is not to win the debate but to get it cancelled before it starts. You can do that in any number of ways -- busting up campus appearances by conservatives, "hate crimes" laws, Canada's ghastly human-rights commissions, the more "enlightened" court judgments, the EU's recent decision to criminalize "xenophobia," or merely, as the Times does, by declaring your side of every issue to be the "moderate" and "nonideological" position...

The quality of your argument is only important if you want to win by persuasion. But it’s irrelevant if you want to win by intimidation.

EBD,

She's said similar things on other occasions. If your personal fantasy is the disenfranchisement of women voters then I think it's fair to call you a bigot.

"If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. It's kind of a pipe dream, it's a personal fantasy of mine, but I don't think it's going to happen"

EBD...more, faster.
Coulter has a way of making logical statements so loaded with sarcasm and irony that the left don't know they've been outed.
Along come the media taking her out of context and voila... Scott and co. call her a bigot.

"hey I was only joking when I said Muslims ride magic carpets and camels...dontcha get it? "

ha-ha-ha!

"It was just a big joke I made when I said Jews need to be perfected into Christians, dontcha get it?"

ho-ho-ho!

"nuke Mecca!"

Hee-hee-hee!

"john Edwards is a fag!"

har-har-har!

"invade their countries, kill their leaders, convert them to Christianity!"

bwa-hah-ha! Such Wildean wit!

More lush analytical context from Coulter for the conservative deep thinkers.

"Anyone have contact information - preferably email or a website for Susan B Cole?"

If you type into google "irony challenged and hair color free" you should get it.

"I'm a conservative woman, you should see me!"

Whether beautiful or not on the outside, you are beautiful on the inside.

The 'rats are squealing.

Fire. Them. All.

(H/T Ezra Levant & Ann Coulter)

...-

"Harper government attacks human rights

Closure of CHRC offices will punish marginalized people

OTTAWA, March 25 /CNW Telbec/ - The Public Service Alliance of Canada condemns the Harper government's decision to close Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) offices in Vancouver, Toronto and Halifax. The union maintains that the closure of the three offices will make it substantially harder for individuals from marginalized groups to launch human rights complaints.

The three offices slated for closure received 70 per cent of all signed complaints to the CHRC in 2008.

The union, which represents CHRC employees, says this latest attack will have a particular impact on racialized people and recent immigrants. In many cases, the closures will make it much more difficult to challenge both systemic abuses and individual instances of discrimination.

For John Gordon, National President of PSAC, the closures are indicative of a strategy by the Conservative government to destabilize human rights organizations and women's groups in Canada.

"When the Conservatives took power in 2006, one of their first moves was to abolish the Court Challenges Program and close Status of Women Canada offices across the country," Gordon said. "Women's groups were denied government funding if they engaged in research or advocacy work, and equality-seeking groups lost the ability to fund Charter of Rights challenges. The government has also cancelled funding to notable NGOs such as KAIROS, and appointed ultra-conservative partisan board members to Rights & Democracy - manufacturing a massive crisis within the organization. The closure of CHRC offices is another example of this outrageous trend."

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/March2010/25/c5241.html

http://www.bluelikeyou.com/2010/03/24/so-was-it-a-whipped-vote-or-not/#comments

Scott - here's the Facebook rhetoric, from Macleans:

"... Facebook page dedicated to disrupting the event: Vanessa Alexandra Peterson wrote "I wonder what the security would be like. I want to throw rotten veggies and eggs at her evil Barbie mask." Saif Latif wrote "somebody needs to throw a pie at her during her speech like they did at the University of Arizona," to which Guillaume Pelegrin replied "I hope someone will get arrested."

"It was the assessment of police, campus security and Coulter's own bodyguard that there was too much physical danger to Coulter and the audience to proceed. As Ottawa Police Sgt. Dan Beauchamp said, "it's a public safety issue."

Where did this abusive student culture come from? What explains the complete lack of tolerance for different opinions? Some of the blame must surely lie at the feet of U of O's administration. Last week, François Houle, the university's vice-president, sent a letter to Coulter saying she should "educate" herself about "what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before (her) planned visit." He warned that her comments could "lead to criminal charges."

The students got the message: Coulter was unwelcome, and the university itself was actively trying to scare her off, or get her to change her speech. And the student union voted that Coulter is a 'hateful woman' and allowed posters to be put up asking for demonstrators to protest her speech.

Remember, Scott, that Houle's letter shows an incredible ignorance of Canadian criminal law, and remember also, the duty of a meeting's organizers who are responsible, legally, for 'vicarious liability'.

Gordon must have inadvertantly dropped a word in his note. It should read, "this STUPID bitch does not speak for me."

Coulter is another reason Toronto should seperate from Canada!

AGREED! susan g cole is a Bitch ! and should get her sorry ass up on the camel and ride her sorry ass outta the country..and if you dis-agree with me !! you to can ALL get up on the camel and exit !! Do Not Speak For Me !

EBD,

Ah sorry for the misunderstanding. I guess one man's bigot is another man's comedian.

I think I'm starting to get this conservative comedy thing figured out though, just insert a crude stereotype and you're done.

"take a camel"=hilarious

Say, have you heard the one about Jews being obsessed with money?

ET,

I agree with the sergeant squeezing 1500-2000 people into a tiny lecture hall is a public safety issue. That's why the police advocated moving to a larger venue, which Levant and the organizers declined. It was their decision to cancel.

Yes I agree, threatening to pie someone in the face is assault with a deadly weapon.

But it was your contention that the Student Union advocated violence as their position. You've produced nothing to support that. Yes a few random people on facebook wanted to pie and throw vegetables at her, hardly unusual. She's been pied before, hundreds of people have been pied before and lived to tell about it.

William Shatner, Chretien, Fred Phelps, Andy Warhol, and Anita Bryant have all been pied.

It's rude, but it's not like this is some new development in society, it's been going on for decades.

Scott - have you heard the one about lefties being prissy, humourless, conformist little power-freak commissars?

Q: How many Liberals does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Racist!!!! I'm filing an HRC complaint!!!

Scott: Fair enough in your mind. Now explain your answer to the crude stereotype.

Jews obsessed with (all the worlds!!) money ....

Radical Muslims blowing up my gay brother, your pregnant high school sister, your aunt who kissed her neighbours husband, your belief in something other than what you are told...

Black Mamba,

Not a fan of the Jewish stereotype jokes are we.

Honestly which stereotypes do you guys think are the funniest?

Progressives clearly suffer from a mental disorder.

The Guardian Angels made a failed attempt a few years ago to set up chapters in various Canadian cities, in order to quell a spate of gang, drug and gun violence.

Guess what. They were denied. Canada just went back to sticking its head in the sand. Now imagine what would have happened if the Guardian Angels prevailed, and offshoots appeared elsewhere, for instance in University campuses.

So there would be a conservative militancy to match that of the leftists which, although much smaller in numbers, would counter this with sleek proficient tactics.

Speakers like Ann Coulter would not only be able to speak, she would also get to sit down with the Provost Francois to mindf@#k as well.

Scott - could you provide proof that Levant and the organizers refused to move the location? Please provide proof. Was there a larger hall available and was it offered to them to use?

Could you provide proof that the size of the hall was the only issue of security concern, and not the rowdiness and actions of demonstrators?

No, I didn't say that the student council advocated violence; they advocated demonstrations and protests against her, defining her as a 'hateful woman'. They didn't leave it up to the individual students to listen to Coulter and make up their own minds.

Their promotion of Coulter as 'hateful' and asking for protests and permitting posters to be put up asking for protests, is a clear incitement to 'act against someone defined as hateful'. Perhaps you think that's the proper role of a student council. I don't.

You may think that it's trivial to throw a pie at someone, and your 'tu quoque' argument of 'oh, everyone does it or had it done to them' and therefore it's OK, is actually a fallacious argument. Basic logic. It remains an act of violence and has been treated as such in court. Why do you accept such treatment of people?

And since when does a violent act have to be 'new' in order for it to be considered unacceptable? Your 'logic' here is yet another false argument ..illogical.

How many times do you have to be told that no-one can cancel an event except the organizers, and when the police told them...not to find a larger room..but that they couldn't guarantee security, then, the organizers have NO LEGAL CHOICE but to cancel.

After all, IF the room had a limited number allowed, and all rooms have such a limit, THEN, there is no reason why the event could not have continued, with such a limit, and apologies to those who were not allowed in. That happens everywhere.

But that's not the reason for the cancellation. As noted, the police said they couldn't guarantee security. Once you are told that, the event MUST legally be cancelled. After such a warning, if anyone sustains even a scratch, you are legally liable.

Correction: My post at 8:07 should have read [protesters] as opposed to [politicians]. Sorry bout that.

Scott you never did answer my question, a deflection is not an answer. Should the Israeli Apartheid organizers received the same letter as Coulter? Rex Murphey thinks they should have.

That hag does not speak for me either. Almost puked listening to that bag of sh!t.....

Scott @9:34 - "Not a fan of Jewish stereotype jokes, are we"

You mean like the one about the Jewish child molester:

"Hey, kid, wanna buy some candy?"

Do you have a problem with the stereotype about Jews being intelligent? And how do you feel about Israel, BTW?

When Mordecai Richler was accused of pandering to anti-Jewish stereotypes (of the self-loathing variety, natch) over The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, he dismissed it: "I don't write for anti-semites".

That's the thing, Scott; public discourse cannot be shut down to a level where nothing interesting may ever be addressed or acknowledged in case it's potentially upsetting to idiots and emotionally disturbed types with violent proclivities, as defined by self-appointed guardians of the public good such as Susan G. Cole.

Stereotypes can be positive or negative, accurate or inaccurate; we need them because they help us make sense of the world. I mean, you keep stereotyping "conservatives", and not very well, I must say. But at least you're trying to make sense of your surroundings, as we all are.

And don't say "we" when you mean "you" unless you want to remind people of that grade-school teacher they really, really couldn't stand.

"Houle should apologize to Coulter, U of O teachers' organization says

Posted by: maz2 at March 25, 2010 6:49 PM

This changes things a lot for me. I really have been bothered that the issue has been what Coulter has said/done that might be considered 'over the top' when the issue should be that if IAW had been hosted, then a similar controversial subject should also be hosted.

It appears Houle may now be the centre of controversy. This could get interesting. Thanks for the link, maz2.

ET,

Your words.

"Do you know who violated this act? The student council with their posters asking people to come out and demonstrate against Coulter and bring 'things to throw'."

What posters advocated bringing "things to throw"?

As for the larger venue, I'm not sure if one was available, that's a good question actually, I have no idea what the largest venue on the campus would be. Nevertheless this is the police's public position.

"I spoke with Ottawa Police Services media relations officer Alain Boucher this morning, and he told me, in no uncertain terms, that it was her security team that made the decision to call off the event. "We gave her options" -- including, he said, to "find a bigger venue" -- but "they opted to cancel ... It's not up to the Ottawa police to make that decision."

Boucher said Ottawa Police were concerned with “security issues,” which he said could be summed up to the sheer number of people for the size of the venue. He said according to police estimates there were 1,500 people in total, both outside and in the entrance to Marion Hall, where the event was being held.

As for the protesters outside the auditorium, Boucher said, “I wouldn’t call them rioters. They were people there to voice their concerns.”
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/03/25/did-coulter-silence-herself/

As for pieing, you asked "Where did this abusive student culture come from?"

And I answered that pieing is not a new phenomenon and is not an indictment of students today. People have been getting pied for a long time. I don't accept pieing per se, but to me it's a reality of being a public figure. It's definitely wrong, but it's hardly the end of the world, usually the pier is arrested, looks stupid and juvenile and ends up turning people against their cause. I don't approach it as some great scourge we need to eliminate at all costs.

Once again, you've never shown me a quote from the police where they said they "couldn't guarantee security". Sure Levant has said that's what the police told him, but that's hearsay, hardly strong evidence.

If the police gave the option of larger venue doesn't that suggest their concerns were motivated by accommodating the crowd, and not by the threat of violence?

If there concerns were motivated due to the threat of violence wouldn't it be irrelevant what size of room everyone was in?

No-One

How is this a deflection? I answered your question directly.

No-One,

"Ya I honestly think they should have, both are controversial events and if you're being consistent you should send them to both. I don't think it was Houle's place to inform Coulter of the law, but he felt differently and that's his right.

Personally I think limits on free speech are counterproductive, people should be as free to speak as they wish."

Why is it that most left wing feminazis all looked like they just had a FAILED sex change operation?

Scott: "that was due to the crowd being three to four times larger then what the venue would hold. .... The event was not shut down due to people threatening violence."

Scott is deliberately obtuse. If the crowd were conservative minded, safety would not be at issue.
It's not the numbers, it's the mind set.

He also knows the student/activist/leftists were being intimidating in order to achieve that very purpose.

And finally, regarding the crack about Jews and money, I'd be willing to bet that Ann loves Jews - she just dislikes liberals who happen to be Jewish. I'm guessing that Ann defends Israel while, Scott does not.

I haven't read all 240 posts so this may have been noted already, but:

An amusing sidelight of the term "kikeroach" is that there is a black feminist named Kike Roach (first name pronounced Kee-KAY I believe, with appropriate accent) in Toronto who is fairly active in leftie causes ...

Just wondering.
Does "T" stand for tit or twat?

Black Mamba,

I'm not in favour of HRC's or limits on free speech, I dare you to find anything I've written to suggest I am.

The point I was trying to get at was what stereotypes are considered funny around here and what aren't. Forcing Muslims to ride camels instead of airplanes seemed to be a real winner. I was just curious, what other crude stereotypes that logic extended to.

Do I have a problem with stereotypes about Jewish intelligence? I've never really thought about that before, I mean I've met many Jews I wouldnt' consider too intelligent. So insofar as my experience I wouldn't consider it all that accurate. I'm sure there are plenty of Jewish kids struggling in school who don't find it particularly helpful to them either.

As for my thoughts on Israel, I really don't see what that has to do with anything. Nevertheless I think it's a pretty remarkable country, modern, western, free press. I have my differences with their foreign policy, as I do with many countries.

Put simply, you can only be offended if you choose to take offence. If they didn't want to hear her message, nobody was forcing them to attend. The very notion that this country has got to the point where people believe that they need a gov HRC to ensure that their feelings will never be hurt again disgusts me to my core. I sometimes wonder if I wasn't wasting my time during my military career; evidently our centers of higher learning believe that Canadian values aren't worth protecting.

"As is her contention that all Muslims should be banned from air travel. More drivel and insensitive remarks. Not going to happen. Those that think it might are living in a fantasy land."

You are absolutely right for once "T"
And the hijab will never be outlawed in France or Quebec either.

No Guff,

I'm not exactly sure Jews love Ann back.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/12/national/main3361954.shtml

Here's that comment from the student again: "I was just worried that things were going to be said about certain groups of people that were going to make them feel very unsafe and very uncomfortable and we promise our students here at the University of Ottawa a safe, positive space."

Doesn't this sound like the politically correct version of the white man's burden?

Student protester: "All you blacks, Asians, gays, women, we'll protect you from big bad mean right-wing Ann Coulter and keep you feeling safe."

Minority: "I'd like to listen to Ann Coulter and judge for myself. Considering I don't suck my thumb or anything."

Student protester: "Shut up and do what we tell you!"

Scott @11:25 - re. anti-semitism: "As for my thoughts on Israel, I really don't see what that has to do with anything"

That's because you're so bright and well educated, Scott. An illiterate moron would instantly perceive the connection, but years of University training have placed you on a higher mental level.

(I think you're a bright guy, Scott, and I appreciate your opposition to the HRCs; but lighten up, and stop playing dumb.)

Susan Cole would have made a great Stalinist. She'd have gotten on famously with Lavrenty Beria.

Black Mamba,

Oh right I forgot that any criticism of Israel would mean I"m anti-semitic. That makes complete sense, what a tired old trope that is.

Scott - I missed your previous post. That being said. I'm having a difficult time with your logic. From what your posts state, it appears you believe the protest and cancellation were a result of having to small of a venue. You also hint that this was all "planned" the pulling down of posters by the university (which BTW they paid the university printing dept. to print), booked a venue several weeks in advance because they just knew there would be a protest that would result in threats to Ann's life on facebook, apparently they also just knew a letter would be written by the provost essentially firing a gun shot over her head. Yes, Scott they planned everything it was all a conspiracy. The reality is that the university screwed up - the protesters actions back fired and the wounded Muslim girl is a bigot and another thing, the take a camel comment was in response to the hecklers, and there was also ten minutes in between the Muslims girls question and that answer, Ann had already begun to give her a very thoughtful answer to something which Ann said ten years ago about Muslims on planes right after 911 - context is everything as is editing to make one look bad. How about I ask you a question and then you give me a thoughful answer, but instead I take a response you gave to someone else and post that as your response which in turn makes you look like a real jerk - that is exactly what that clip with the Muslim girl is - a whole ten minutes edited out b4 the take a camel that was directed at the hecklers.

Scott - Somehow I missed your previous post where you answered my question-glad to hear you think the letter was a bad idea, so do I because it is what caused the protest in the first place.

That being said. I'm having a difficult time with your logic. From what your posts state, it appears you believe the protest and cancellation were a result of having to small of a venue. You also hint that this was all "planned" the pulling down of posters by the university (which BTW they paid the university printing dept. to print), booked a venue several weeks in advance because they just knew there would be a protest that would result in threats to Ann's life on facebook. Apparently they also just knew a letter would be written by the provost essentially firing a gun shot over her head. Yes, Scott they planned everything it was all a conspiracy. The reality is that the university screwed up - the protesters actions back fired and the wounded Muslim girl is a bigot and another thing, the take a camel comment was in response to the hecklers, and there was also ten minutes in between the Muslims girls question and the real answer that Ann had already begun to give her a to comment which Ann made ten years ago about Muslims on planes right after 911 - context is everything as is editing to make one look bad. How about I ask you a question and then you give me a thoughful answer, but instead I take a response you gave to someone else and post that as your response which in turn makes you look like a real jerk - that is exactly what that clip with the Muslim girl is - a whole ten minutes edited out b4 the "take a camel" that was not even directed at her but at the hecklers.

To "set you free."

Re: I'm not sure what your point is?"

I love her body. Her mind is Ok too!

Duuuh helloooo! Do you get it now!! Helloooo!

No-One,

My position is I think it's ridiculous to grandstand as a free speech martyr when you call off your own event. I mean if the Police had shut him down, or the University shut him down then I'd say that's a violation of his free speech rights. He was free to hold his event and he chose not to.

As soon as someone unjustly muzzles Coulter or Levant I'll be the first to spring to their defense. I supported Levant reprinting the Danish cartoons, and admire his absolutist free speech crusade.

The pulling down of posters you refer to was not done by the university but by the Student Union. They tore down posters on the bulletin boards the Student Union controlled. The President of the Union said he'd be happy to reimburse the cost of posters. The union controls their own bulletin boards, they're democratically elected and are allowed to control what's advertised on their property. I don't agree with their position, but they are within their rights to do so.

Ya I certainly agree, advising a Muslim student to "take a camel" is a respectful retort to an honest question. Real classy, if she was really interested in a thoughtful dialogue as you suggest why add an insulting rejoinder?

The hecklers were asking her to "answer the question" and she retorted "take a camel" which was a response to the girl's question. So ya I think it is safe to say it was directed at her.

Scott: "I'm not exactly sure Jews love Ann back."

I note from the CBC article to which Scott directed me: "The National Jewish DEMOCRATIC Council is going even farther, demanding the media stop interviewing the bestselling author because of her statements on the television program."

Exactly as I stated previously. They're Jews to be sure, but they are liberals first and foremost.

That should have been CBS, not CBC. My apology.

Re Uof O students protesting.
Thats not even a protest.

This was simply the "bong"crowd, sticking their fingers in their ears, and lacking spray paint, resorted to speach vandalism.. "nya nya, I'm not listening".

Not sure if they could even spell free speach.

NO Guff,

It's actually a CBS article.

Nevertheless the National Jewish Democratic Council denounced her, as well as the American Jewish Commitee.

And when you have the Anti-Defamation league "strongly condemning" your "anti semitic comments" I think it's safe to say you're not held in very high esteem.

As an agnostic schiksa who always wanted to be Jewish (I think I would have been really good at it; also, I'd probably be even smarter than I am now), I want to point out as others have that this fake outrage over Coulter's remark about Christans being "perfected Jews" is based on a pathetic misunderstanding of one of the most fundamental ideas upon which Christianity is based, i.e. that Jesus Christ was the Jewish Messiah, and that the New Testament is therefore a sequal to and a fulfillment of the Old. That's all she's saying, and she's not demanding anyone agree with her; there's nothing to be offended by.

Here's the clip. The relevant discussion begins @2:40 minutes in; she makes the "perfected Jews" remark @3:18

Well. It was a good thread until some idjits allowed the troll Scott to hi-jack it.Sigh.Some people just love arguing with useful idiots,I guess.

Justthinkin - I don't think Scott's a troll.

Susan Cole's regretable rant proves comprehensive left wing biase corrupts Canada's MSM, and education system. She doesn't and won't speak for me; I'm capable of making up my own mind. Denying Ms. Coulter's freedom of speech is but one more step toward denying our own. Universities are places where feeble-minded professors and bureaucrats indoctrinate ideologies that any student valuing their grade point average will embrace.

Ann called U of O a 'bush league' university; then to prove that Ann was correct the university sent a scrubby shrub to speak for the fools that work/attend classes there: on the most popular talk show in North America!! The scrubby bush just made us the laughing stock of a continent. I do plan to e-mail Mr. O'Rielly about this...he is laughing at us.

I don't think Scott's a troll; he's just 'thick'.

For example, he insists that closing down an event by the organizers because the police told them they couldn't guarantee security is an invalid reason. He thinks that an event can only be closed, 'for due cause' by the university or police.

Scott refuses to accept the facts. Neither one of them can close an event that neither organized and paid for. Only the event organizers can do that.

Scott also thinks that all police concerns must be given to the press and not just to the organizers of the conference. So, if Scott didn't hear or read it in CBS, he insists that the police didn't tell the organizers of their security concerns..or..that the organizers were lying and making up such a tale. Of course, Scott has no proof of this 'lie'.

Scott also trivializes threats, so, his reaction to threats of'pie in the face' is to trivialize it as not a genuine act of violence because it has happened to others. This illogic is akin to saying that because so many people are robbed, then, such an action is hardly a violent act.

This is a common red herring approach to debate, where the content of the argument is denied because the process of making that point is not known or is focused on..rather than the content. So, security concerns are denied because I didn't hear the police say such; suggestions for violence are denied because a 'pie' is sigh, such a common act.

Or where the fact that a student union, a small set of less than a dozen people, asserts an opinion on someone rather than allowing ALL students to hear that person and make up their own mind - is ignored.

So, Scott isn't a troll; he's just a bit set in his ways and won't examine how he comes to conclusions.

One thing that I have definitely learned in my short existence, is that universities in Canada are the farthest thing from free speech we Canadians have. Universities here are a bastion for Leftist ideologues who reside in their ivory towers and throw stones down at all those who question their pious academia and unquestionable knowledge. Unfortunately, there are students who love that crap as well.

I can tell you, unequivocally, that Susan G. Cole does not speak even an ounce for me or my family, and I'm getting increasingly disgusted by people like her saying that they do.

I don't think Scott's a troll; he's just 'thick'

Possibly attending U of O Law School on the Affirmative Action Program.

What ET said. Thick, very thick. Scott's logic, or lack thereof, is that despite threats and a call to her bodyguard from police that they could not insure her safety, Ann was supposed to just go ahead and speak anyway. But because, according to Scott, she cancelled it was grand standing.

Scott says Ann, ignore the call to throw pies in your face, and ignore the rape comments, so what if ppl are asked to bring sticks and vegtables to throw at you, you should have just spoken anyway and you should have changed the venue at the last minute too, and directed a crowd of a thousand ppl to the new venue. I'm surprised you did not suggest she should have had buses ready for transporting the crowd.

ET you are being gracious when you say thick.

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

This seems to be the missing piece that is ignored by several posters. Remember the part that says you can't incite violence/dangerous behavior. Ironicly this part was put forward by the progressive conservitive party of Canada, not the liberals. Go figure...

Though Coulter has been denounced by three different Jewish organizations - the American Jewish Committee, the National Jewish Democratic Council and the ADL, for making an anti-Semitic comment, (yes Black Mamba, saying that the entire Jewish religion is invalid IS anti-Semitic), nonetheless, the rightwing deadend mouth-frothers say she CAN'T be anti-Semitic.

Even though. as the ADL observes:

"Coulter's remarks are outrageous, offensive and a throwback to the centuries-old teaching of contempt for Jews and Judaism. The notion that Jews are religiously inferior or imperfect because they do not accept Christian beliefs was the basis for 2,000 years of church-based anti-Semitism"

But if you criticize Israel's foreign policy in any way, you are an anti-Semite.

Why? Because it's useful (in some shrinking corners) as a poltical cudgel for the right-wing frothers. And that's all it is.

Look to their defense of Coulter's remark to see how they really feel about antiSemitism.

bleetymouth - she never suggsted that "the entire Jewish religion is invalid". Look, aren't you the big Christian here, constantly denouncing "specifically anti-Christian" Objectivists and saying (I prefer the King James): "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me"?

So how are Christians not "perfected Jews"? Explain it to an agnostic.

Look, Muslems believe that Christians and Jews are imperfect because they fail to acknowledge God's Final and Definitive prophet; do you, as a professed Christian, call that beliefhatred? I won't respond unless you say something interesting.

...belif hatred...

belief. Long week.

"perfected Jews" is how many Jewish individuals who convert to Christianity refer to THEMSELVES, for Heavens sakes.

But, don't let that fact get in the way of the liberal left's capacity for enraged taking offense.

They're such babies. They've never grown up. 'Might as well build them a great, big sandbox to play in, because that's about their age level: kids in kindergarten.

Y'all know a new piece of Canadiana was born this week, Eh? "A-Houle" As in: "you're such an A-Houle".

Blackmamba

The point was that the American Jewish Committee, the National Jewish Democratic Council and the ADL all consider Coulter an anti-Semite for making the comment. I think they know enough to tell, don't you?

Every religion considers it own religion as the source of absolute truth. But it doesn't follow that adherents of every religion then go out of their way to denigrate other religions. And it especially doesn't follow that an adherent of a religion would go out of their way to denigrate a specific religion. When a person does that one assumes the person has a particular problem with that religion - especially when it is done with such dismissive contempt.

I only wish I could say I surprised to see the gang here leaping to defend someone who has such a prejudice.

Section 13 Human Rights Act

Hate messages
13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
Exception
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of any matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.
Interpretation
(3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of that matter. [1976-77, c.33, s.13.]

So those who put together the facebook page inciting Hatred against Ann are guilty - Ann is not.

mamba: "American Jewish Committee, the National Jewish Democratic Council and the ADL all consider Coulter an anti-Semite for making the comment. I think they know enough to tell, don't you?"

I think they certainly know enough to tell an issue they can latch on to. These organizations make their business drumming up anti-Semitism wherever they can find it, whether it's existent or not.

No honest Christian could tell you anything other than that Jews are perfected by becoming Christians. That's a simple matter of faith. That it was used to justify anti-semitism in the past is revolting, but the belief in the rightness of Christianity is kind of central.

Sean

So three Jewish organization know nothing about anti-Semitism, huh? Oh, and they're whining liars, as well, right?

It's amazing how you guys can find a way to dismiss any fact that doesn't support your extreme fringe ideology. You scream yourselves hoarse yelling "anti-Semite" at anyone who would suggest Israel be subject to the same criticism as any other country - and yet when Jews actually denote someone an anti-Semite you say "Well, that doesn't count."

Why? Because she voices the same fringe whacko ideology as yourself. And that's the same fringe whacko ideology that says everything Israel does must be mindlessly supported, and uses the term "anti-Semite" to silence anyone with the mildest criticism of Israel (tho it's an attack that only works in the fevered fantasy lives in the rightwing echo chamber).

The defense here of Coulter shows you guys aren't interested in anti-Semitism too much; but that you are interested in your extreme fringe rightwing ideology a great deal.

Sean, I am a Christian, and I certainly believe in the eternal rightness of Christianity. And sure, I think any human is perfected by becoming Christian.

Coulter didn't say "any human" though.
She said Jews. And when Deutsch, her interviewer, asked her if "Judaism should be thrown way" so that we all should become Christians she said "Yes".

It is your prerogative to think that someone saying that the Jewish religion should be thrown away is not anti-Semitic, and to disregard the viewpoints of 3 major Jewish organizations on the matter. But I'll also say that any 'honest Christian' knows that their Saviour tells them that it is not for them to judge others but to work towards their own salvation in the Christian truth - which leaves no time to engage in the anti-Semitism of telling the world that "Judaism should be thrown away" on national television.

Man who lets these sort of people on the air waves. Cole is more repugnant than Coulter ever was or will be .. I can't believe I'm in a free western society when I hear such tripe from such a woman as this Cole. What gives here any credence. She gives journalists a bad name , she sullies the reputation of freedom of speech that Canadians are supposed to enjoy. She gets on the air as though she had anything of any substance to offer the free world. She would strangle anything that doesn't conform to her restrictive views. Who is she to pass any sort of judgment . She's a reporter (and a poor one) and not a smart one .. Her only qualification is she's a bitter liberal woman..with a big mouth . a bad combination.
She doesn't speak for me Coulter has some good ideas... At least she's some one I could respect... not Cole no no no