Anne Coulter comes to Canada

[bush_cheney2004]

Ummmmmmmmmm...no you didnt...but thats understandble...

You just didn't like the answer....tough noogies.

You do now.

No...not before...and not now.

When was the last time you spoke with one?

I've never spoken with you either, but yet there is communication.

[Guest TrueMetis]

He remember the time someone tired some of that freedom of speech thing at a McCain Palin rally and a mob beat them up? What you don't? Because it just happened, nice too see they freedom of speech only when it is their own.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/27/palin-heckled-at-mccain-r_n_515863.html

So BC what was that about free speech in America?

Edited March 27, 2010 by TrueMetis

[bush_cheney2004]

So BC what was that about free speech in America?

It's alive an well....no criminal charges for "hate speech" or "heckling". Looks like Palin got to give her speech, unlike Coulter.

[punked]

It's alive an well....no criminal charges for "hate speech" or "heckling". Looks like Palin got to give her speech, unlike Coulter.

But the protester who tired to exercise his freedom of speech was beaten by an angry mob. So angry mobs on the left BAD, angry mobs on the right GOOD?

[bush_cheney2004]

But the protester who tired to exercise his freedom of speech was beaten by an angry mob. So angry mobs on the left BAD, angry mobs on the right GOOD?

That's called assault and battery. Quite illegal...even in the USA.

[punked]

That's called assault and battery. Quite illegal...even in the USA.

Yet Sarah watches it go on, and says nothing. Hmmmmmm.

[Argus]

He remember the time someone tired some of that freedom of speech thing at a McCain Palin rally and a mob beat them up? What you don't? Because it just happened, nice too see they freedom of speech only when it is their own.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/27/palin-heckled-at-mccain-r_n_515863.html

It really is sad, the appalling ignorance of so many of the posters here from the Left. You guys really don't even understand what the concept of free speech is all about. I mean, you REALLY don't understand what it means. Are you all from some third world country? Were you not brought up here or did you drop out of school in grade five to wash dishes?

Free Speech means that Sarah Palin can rent a hall and give a speech. It does NOT mean any idiot who wants to put his hands together and shout repeatedly at her from the audience is free to do so. He's perfectly free to say whatever he wants outside, or in a manner which doesn't interfere with her speech, but no, he can't heckle and interupt her, and if he does he'll be escorted out. And if he resists he'll be forced out.

You people just don't GET it do you?! It's a horrible condemnation of our educational system if you actually grew up here. I hope you're all immigrants or drop-outs and have been spending your time playing video games or something.

By the way, if you stand up at a movie theatre and start screaming at the movie, or if you start shouting at the opera or at the ballet or at a book reading or a museum lecture on dinosaurs you'll be tossed out too. Free Speech does not mean you can go wherever you want and interupt with your incoherent shouts of anger or denial.

Btw, being escorted does not equal being "beaten". There's no indication he was harmed at all.

Edited March 27, 2010 by Argus

[punked]

It really is sad, the appalling ignorance of so many of the posters here from the Left. You guys really don't even understand what the concept of free speech is all about. I mean, you REALLY don't understand what it means. Are you all from some third world country? Were you not brought up here or did you drop out of school in grade five to wash dishes?

Free Speech means that Sarah Palin can rent a hall and give a speech. It does NOT mean any idiot who wants to put his hands together and shout repeatedly at her from the audience is free to do so. He's perfectly free to say whatever he wants outside, or in a manner which doesn't interfere with her speech, but no, he can't heckle and interupt her, and if he does he'll be escorted out. And if he resists he'll be forced out.

You people just don't GET it do you?! It's a horrible condemnation of our educational system if you actually grew up here. I hope you're all immigrants or drop-outs and have been spending your time playing video games or something.

By the way, if you stand up at a movie theatre and start screaming at the movie, or if you start shouting at the opera or at the ballet or at a book reading or a museum lecture on dinosaurs you'll be tossed out too. Free Speech does not mean you can go wherever you want and interupt with your incoherent shouts of anger or denial.

Btw, being escorted does not equal being "beaten". There's no indication he was harmed at all.

That must be why the Federal government payed our 100,000 dollars in the Rank v. Jenkins case two years ago, after moving protesters away from places where the president was speaking right? Freedom of speech means freedom of speech. They can remove that man in a private place but they can not stop what he is saying, or assault him for saying what he wants too say. A security group removing someone or asking them to leave is a different thing then an angry mob punching someone in the face. Sorry Argus. The law of the United states disagrees with you Argus.

[nicky10013]

It really is sad, the appalling ignorance of so many of the posters here from the Left. You guys really don't even understand what the concept of free speech is all about. I mean, you REALLY don't understand what it means. Are you all from some third world country? Were you not brought up here or did you drop out of school in grade five to wash dishes?

Free Speech means that Sarah Palin can rent a hall and give a speech. It does NOT mean any idiot who wants to put his hands together and shout repeatedly at her from the audience is free to do so. He's perfectly free to say whatever he wants outside, or in a manner which doesn't interfere with her speech, but no, he can't heckle and interupt her, and if he does he'll be escorted out. And if he resists he'll be forced out.

You people just don't GET it do you?! It's a horrible condemnation of our educational system if you actually grew up here. I hope you're all immigrants or drop-outs and have been spending your time playing video games or something.

By the way, if you stand up at a movie theatre and start screaming at the movie, or if you start shouting at the opera or at the ballet or at a book reading or a museum lecture on dinosaurs you'll be tossed out too. Free Speech does not mean you can go wherever you want and interupt with your incoherent shouts of anger or denial.

Btw, being escorted does not equal being "beaten". There's no indication he was harmed at all.

Edumactate all us from the 3rd world. Please, explain how we're specifically being anti-free speech. I've yet to see a coherent argument, just accusations that we love dicators.

Edited March 27, 2010 by nicky10013

[bush_cheney2004]

...They can remove that man in a private place but they can not stop what he is saying, or assault him for saying what he wants too say. A security group removing someone or asking them to leave is a different thing then an angry mob punching someone in the face. Sorry Argus. The law of the United states disagrees with you Argus.

Yes they can....any attempt to resist law enforcement will usually be met with escalating force. He/she are not permitted to incite a riot. Assault by private citizens ia an entirely different matter as are civil lawsuits.

[bush_cheney2004]

Edumactate all us from the 3rd world. Please, explain how we're specifically being anti-free speech. I've yet to see a coherent argument, just accusations that we love dicators.

We've already been over this....how many people get threatening letters or e-mails from all the A-Houles of Canada ? Is it a form letter?

[punked]

Yes they can....any attempt to resist law enforcement will usually be met with escalating force. He/she are not permitted to incite a riot. Assault by private citizens ia an entirely different matter as are civil lawsuits.

Did you watch the video? There was no law enforcement there he shouted one thing started to leave the place and got punched in the face. You are making up a situation. That apparently is how freedom of speech works with the Palin crowd.

[bush_cheney2004]

Did you watch the video? There was no law enforcement there he shouted one thing started to leave the place and got punched in the face. You are making up a situation. That apparently is how freedom of speech works with the Palin crowd.

So what? If he was assaulted then he should file charges with law enforcement and retain the services of a personal injury attorney...what are you missing here?

[nicky10013]

We've already been over this....how many people get threatening letters or e-mails from all the A-Houles of Canada ? Is it a form letter?

And that limited her right to speak in any capacity? Was she barred from speaking at the university? No. Not in the least. She cancelled her own event. Something that we've already been over.

[punked]

So what? If he was assaulted then he should file charges with law enforcement and retain the services of a personal injury attorney...what are you missing here?

I am sure he will. I am saying that when someone does express their rights too free speech and is assaulted the leaders of the right who watch the thing didn't condemn it and really incited the incident. You like free speech then you should support it in all its forms otherwise you are a hypocrite.

[bush_cheney2004]

I am sure he will. I am saying that when someone does express their rights too free speech and is assaulted the leaders of the right who watch the thing didn't condemn it and really incited the incident. You like free speech then you should support it in all its forms otherwise you are a hypocrite.

You are assuming that I or many others approve of the assault....and this is where you went off the rails. It is assault and likely a violation of their constitutional rights, as it would be to physically attack Palin. The actions or inactions of others on scene does not change this.

[punked]

You are assuming that I or many others approve of the assault....and this is where you went off the rails. It is assault and likely a violation of their constitutional rights, as it would be to physically attack Palin. The actions or inactions of others on scene does not change this.

I am not assuming anything I am saying someones first too free speech was stifled and Palin sat back and watched it. I hope those as mad about Coulter, express their rage at Palin as well. I bet they wont though.

[bush_cheney2004]

I am not assuming anything I am saying someones first too free speech was stifled and Palin sat back and watched it. I hope those as mad about Coulter, express their rage at Palin as well. I bet they wont though.

Again....so what? Sarah Palin is not law enforcement, nor did Sarah Palin write an e-mail to affect prior restraint of whatever he had to say. Your attention here is misdirected.

[punked]

Again....so what? Sarah Palin is not law enforcement, nor did Sarah Palin write an e-mail to affect prior restraint of whatever he had to say. Your attention here is misdirected.

I think I might say the same about you.

[bush_cheney2004]

I think I might say the same about you.

Then say it then....sheesh. I can still easily dispatch your argument vis-a-vis Coulter's "official" experience at the UofO.

[punked]

Then say it then....sheesh. I can still easily dispatch your argument vis-a-vis Coulter's "official" experience at the UofO.

I don't see how? Was she prevented from speaking did anyone assault her?

[nicky10013]

Well, that's certainly how such situations are handled at hockey games and movie theatres, and never so far as I'm aware do the police feel compelled to give "suggestions" in those situations.

Well, lets be honest here. Hockey games are far better organized than the event in question.

However, anticipating that a situation might not work out for the best is undeniably part of the job of the police and security people, yes?

-k

There's no suggestion, and indeed, evidence to the contrary, that the situation WASN'T going to work out for the best. Reporters who were there said there 20-50 protestors max who were peaceful. The organizer, the young woman from the Young Conservatives at U of O claimed there were 2,000. Nobody has been able to find the "facebook threats" Ezra Levant said that they funneled to the police of which the police have been distancing themselves of. Not to mention the conversation between the MP and an organizer with the organizer claiming that the event was likely to be cancelled while people were in the early stages of lining up.

So, with all those facts, what's more likely? That this is a gross breach of freedom of speech (to which Im still waiting for an answer on how the university stopped her from speaking) or a publicity stunt to pick up sagging book sales for Coulter and to give Ezra Levant a weapon to use against the HRCs?

As for Francois Houle, not to say what he did wasn't stupid, but did it really honestly limit her right to speak? He didn't bar her from the institution, just made her aware of the hate laws in this country. It may have had less to do with threatening her with legal action than to have his point across that he doesn't agree with what she has to say which is entirely in his right to do in accordance with his ability to speak freely. In the end, I don't think the Houle letter mattered at all. She was clearly so frightened by the letter that she continued to plan to speak until these "last minute threats." As for him sending out letters to other organizations who plan events, I don't see how that really matters as much. The man can do as he pleases as long as both sides are equally presented with room to speak. No one can deny that the university allowed Coulter to do so.

So again, I ask, as I still haven't gotten an answer. Where's the breach of freedom of speech? All I see is a publicity stunt.

Edited March 27, 2010 by nicky10013

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't see how? Was she prevented from speaking did anyone assault her?

Not only was she "prevented" from speaking for personal and public safety reasons, she was threatened by F. A-Houle before stepping foot in Canada.

[punked]

Not only was she "prevented" from speaking for personal and public safety reasons, she was threatened by F. A-Houle before stepping foot in Canada.

Where? Please show me?

[nicky10013]

Not only was she "prevented" from speaking for personal and public safety reasons, she was threatened by F. A-Houle before stepping foot in Canada.

See my above post. It's not like Houle's letter stopped her. She got it and continued to plan to speak.