Could James Cameron Speak @ U of O?

[Shady]

I'm was just kinda wondering if James Cameron, director of Avatar would be allowed to speak at the University of Ottawa?

Btw, this thread is just about James Cameron and the standards set by U of O. It's not about anybody else. So please don't make it be. Thank you in advance.

"Glenn Beck is a f****** a**hole"

...

"That's right," Cameron said. "I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads."

Link

Now, I could be wrong. But calling somebody a f****** a**hole sounds a lot like some pretty hateful language!

Now, I could also be wrong about this, but claiming to want to shoot and kill people who disagree with you over climate change sounds a lot like a call to violence of certain groups of people.

Has James Cameron disqualifed himself from ever speaking at a Canadian university? It seems as though the answer has to be a resounding yes. Of course, that's if we're applying standards evenly. Which it seems some people in acedemia have a difficult time doing.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Shady

[Smallc]

She could have spoke at UofO.

[punked]

Anyone who is invited can speak if they don't cry and run away like a baby because the people their don't agree with their views. So I think James could provided he wasn't scared off by a non violent crowd just because they didn't support his views.

[nicky10013]

Definitely. Lets be honest, here, U of O didn't bar her from speaking. The Coulter and Levant camp cancelled because they were afraid of protests.

[Muddy]

Would or should he get a warning letter first from the provost of U of O?

[Smallc]

Would or should he get a warning letter first from the provost of U of O?

Maybe. It depends on what kind of language he's used in the past...though, seeing as he is Canadian, it probably wouldn't be necessary.

[blueblood]

Definitely. Lets be honest, here, U of O didn't bar her from speaking. The Coulter and Levant camp cancelled because they were afraid of protests.

On "advice" from the Ottawa City Police.

[Smallc]

On "advice" from the Ottawa City Police.

Who also said that the protest posed no danger. CTV said they agreed with that assessment.

[blueblood]

Who also said that the protest posed no danger. CTV said they agreed with that assessment.

It was an out for Coulter et. al. It adds more fuel to Coulter's fire.

It wouldn't have mattered to the cops if they posed danger or not. If convincing Coulter et. al to cancel means that people will go home and stop protesting loudly, that's a feather in the cop's hat and they don't have to waste more time looking after protesters.

Edited March 25, 2010 by blueblood

[Smallc]

If convincing Coulter et. al to cancel means that people will go home and stop protesting loudly, that's a feather in the cop's hat and they don't have to waste more time looking after protesters.

The protestors though had as much right to be there as Coulter. Freedom of expression isn't the only one that is protected under the Constitution.

[blueblood]

The protestors though had as much right to be there as Coulter. Freedom of expression isn't the only one that is protected under the Constitution.

Oh they have the right to assemble, and the cops have every right to use every trick in the book to legally stop a protest. They used coercion and by gum it worked. No Ann Coulter, no protesters.

Cops 1, Ann Coulter 10, Protesters 0

[Smallc]

Cops 1, Ann Coulter 10, Protesters 0

[GostHacked]

Oh they have the right to assemble, and the cops have every right to use every trick in the book to legally stop a protest. They used coercion and by gum it worked. No Ann Coulter, no protesters.

Cops 1, Ann Coulter 10, Protesters 0

We know what happens when cops are involved in the coercion.

Quebec, Montebello

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2007/08/22/ot-police-070822.html

[Topaz]

Why is Harper so quiet on Coulter? As far as Cameron, first he would have to have a friend in the Tories to let him in, like levant.

[Smallc]

Why is Harper so quiet on Coulter?

Why not?

[Shady]

So apparently it's alright to now blame the victim? Protestors make violent and threatening remarks online. Protestors pull fire alarms. Protestors throw around tables and chairs. But if a speaker's security decides to err on the side of safety, then it's their own fault!? Beautiful!

You leftwingers are sure turning yourselves into pretzels over this whole episode. It's quite fun to watch.

But another poster posed a very good question. Would James Cameron get a letter from somebody like a-Houle, threatening them with legal action and warning them of what they can and should say when they speak? We all know the answer to that question. Not in a thousand years.

Welcome to the People's Republic of Canada. :angry:

[Michael Hardner]

Would James Cameron get a letter from somebody like a-Houle, threatening them with legal action and warning them of what they can and should say when they speak? We all know the answer to that question. Not in a thousand years.

Welcome to the People's Republic of Canada. :angry:

Ok on the pretzel thing, but seriously - threatening with legal action ? And besides, Cameron is Canadian so he should know what is legal here and what is not. Secondly, he didn't speak out agianst any group but against an individual.

Not that your premise is wrong - there's definitely a dual standard here, but your example is not good.

[Guest American Woman]

Has James Cameron even been asked to speak at the U of O?

[wyly]

Ok on the pretzel thing, but seriously - threatening with legal action ? And besides, Cameron is Canadian so he should know what is legal here and what is not. Secondly, he didn't speak out agianst any group but against an individual.

Not that your premise is wrong - there's definitely a dual standard here, but your example is not good.

"threatening with legal action" I read the message and I see an informative message cautioning someone who may not understanding our hate laws...and others see it as a threat?

and if Cameron slanders or libels an individual he faces the possible consequences just as Coulter could've had she violated our hate laws ...as any judge in the country will tell you ignorance of the law is not an acceptable excuse but now apparently informing someone who may fully understand our laws should be now construed as "threatening"...

[Guest American Woman]

This thread is totally ridiculous in that it's nothing but total speculation. James Cameron, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't even been invited to speak at the U of O. So should we look at everything every public person, Liberal and Conservative, has said to see if they've ever said anything "hateful" about one other person who they are more or less in a feud with, and who later even more or less retracted the "asshole" claim? And should we see if all of those people ever said one thing comparable to the "shoot out at high noon" comment? And then should we speculate as to whether or not they "could ever speak at a Canadian university?"

If all Ann Coulter had said was nasty things about one person who'd said nasty things about her, along with one other comment about a specific group comparable to the "high noon comment," if she weren't known for repeatedly making such comments, if she weren't known for that being her style, and if she weren't an American and therefore possibly not aware of Canada's laws, I would be willing to make a large wager that she wouldn't have received the letter she did, either.

There's no comparison between this fictitious speculation about James Cameron and Ann Coulter; who was asked to speak, and therefore "could" speak, making this statement-- Has James Cameron disqualifed himself from ever speaking at a Canadian university? It seems as though the answer has to be a resounding yes.-- totally off the wall, as Coulter didn't disqualify herself from speaking at a Canadian university, since not only was she invited to speak at the U of O, she actually DID speak at "a Canadian university" the night before.

Edited March 25, 2010 by American Woman

[Shady]

James Cameron, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't even been invited to speak at the U of O.

That's not the point. The point is whether or not we're going to hold everyone to an equal standard. Is calling someone an f'ing a-hole, and wishing to shoot and kill climate skeptics hateful language? If so, has he disqualifed himself, under the same standards applied to Ann Coulter, from speaking?

It's a very simple question, with a very simple answer. Either yes or no. Answer the question. All of you.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Shady

[Guest American Woman]

That's not the point. The point is whether or not we're going to hold everyone to an equal standard. Is calling someone an f'ing a-hole, and wishing to shoot and kill climate skeptics hateful language? If so, has he disqualifed himself, under the same standards applied to Ann Coulter, from speaking?

It's a very simple question, with a very simple answer. Either yes or no. Answer the question. All of you.

I already explained why you don't have a comparison. Many people have called another person they are angry at a "fing asshole," and if you think none of them could ever speak at a Canadian university as a result, I have to seriously question your intelligence in that regard. Furthermore, if all Coulter had made was one such remark, instead of having the reputation she does from the many such comments she has made, and if she hadn't been American and possibly unaware of Canadian law, I think most people would agree that she would not have received the letter she did either,

Anyway, as I pointed out, Coulter hadn't "disqualified herself" from speaking. She was invited. She was therefore most definitely not "disqualified from speaking," much less from "ever speaking at a Canadian university," since she had just done so the night before.

So the answer, if you seriously need one (), has to be a resounding "no."

[Shady]

I already explained why you don't have a comparison.

What about the shooting and killing of climate skeptics? How's that fit into the equation?

[KeyStone]

I'm was just kinda wondering if James Cameron, director of Avatar would be allowed to speak at the University of Ottawa?

Btw, this thread is just about James Cameron and the standards set by U of O. It's not about anybody else. So please don't make it be. Thank you in advance.

Now, I could be wrong. But calling somebody a f****** a**hole sounds a lot like some pretty hateful language!

Now, I could also be wrong about this, but claiming to want to shoot and kill people who disagree with you over climate change sounds a lot like a call to violence of certain groups of people.

Has James Cameron disqualifed himself from ever speaking at a Canadian university? It seems as though the answer has to be a resounding yes. Of course, that's if we're applying standards evenly. Which it seems some people in acedemia have a difficult time doing.

Where to begin....

1) Ann Coulter was never denied permission to speak in Canada.

2) You don't seem to understand the concept of 'identifiable group', as defined in the Charter.

[Guest American Woman]

What about the shooting and killing of climate skeptics? How's that fit into the equation?

This is the third time I'm repeating it now: .... if all Coulter had made was one such remark, instead of having the reputation she does from the many such comments she has made.....

You're trying to compare one comment made by Cameron with someone who has the reputation for making such comments; with someone who has actually made several such comments. Even you have to admit that James Cameron and Ann Coulter do not have the same reputation.

But the fact remains: In spite of it all, Coulter was not disqualified from speaking at Canadian universities. You do realize that, right?

Furthermore, Michael Moore's visit to Canada resulted in a complaint being filed with Elections Canada by the president of a university organization who hoped to have him banned from ever entering Canada again. You act as if no liberal has ever faced protest from conservatives.

Edited March 25, 2010 by American Woman