Super Free Speech Defender Mark Steyns Bans White Supremacist from Tal

[nicky10013]

http://www.am980.ca/channels/news/local/Story.aspx?ID=1304331

"We made a very difficult decision, but ultimately we decided to not allow him on the premises for any situation that might arise," Lawton told AM980's McArthur in the Morning.

He also expressed there may be security concerns if a controversial person like Winnicki was at the event.

Ironically, the Convention Centre said security was a concern when asked if Steyn could speak there -- something Strictly Right claimed would not be an issue.

His speech is expected to focus on political correctness, free speech and Islam in the West and is titled "Head for the Hills...Why Everything in Your World is Doomed

Just goes to prove that we all have limits on what we deem acceptable. I think we need to get past the righteousness and the comments about authoritarianism, agree that we all have an idea where free speech must end and try to find common ground as to where that is.

[William Ashley]

http://www.am980.ca/channels/news/local/Story.aspx?ID=1304331

Just goes to prove that we all have limits on what we deem acceptable. I think we need to get past the righteousness and the comments about authoritarianism, agree that we all have an idea where free speech must end and try to find common ground as to where that is.

This is sad, they should let him speak. If security is a concern the future problem is resolved. If only everyone who wanted to speak had an army. Their dictations would be so free - words flowing as freely as ones arms allowed.

I think it is sad - as hard as it is for a non racist as myself and someone in support of ethnocentrism and realizing modern reality colours are just a DNA encoding and white offers little more than a little less body heat and a few other things - all I can say is that there is nothing wrong with supremicists, until they start saying other people are problems. Afterall people claim one product is better than another opt to buy what they choose - race is no different. You can like one product over another and still like the other product.

None the less I disagree and not because I'm racist I'm actually one of the most non-racist people I know. My gosh if a lynching was in store that will solve it right there. I think this is an over reaction if people wanted him dead or injured they'd just do it. It's not like the guy never goes no where.

Edited November 2, 2010 by William Ashley

[Shady]

This is sad, they should let him speak.

Why? Nobody was there to see him speak. If he wants to hold his own talk, fine with me. But don't piggyback on the popularity and the event of somebody else.

[M.Dancer]

You left out the salient quote.

However, Andrew Lawton, who's with Strictly Right, says a private business like theirs rejecting a customer is far different from a government owned property like the London Convention Centre doing the same.

He is of course correct.

And his reasons....

"His reply was 'Mr. Winnicki, Strictly Right does not condone or support your views and the organizations you're involved with in anyway, furthermore, our organization does not wish to have any ties to you or your activities.'"

Are the same kinds of reason that are given to many types of businesses or associations looking for partnerships or co-branding opportunities.

[Shwa]

You left out the salient quote. He is of course correct. And his reasons....

Are the same kinds of reason that are given to many types of businesses or associations looking for partnerships or co-branding opportunities.

Good grief I had those same portions of the story in memory waiting to paste it!

It really isn't 'free' speech when you have to buy a ticket.

[ToadBrother]

Good grief I had those same portions of the story in memory waiting to paste it!

It really isn't 'free' speech when you have to buy a ticket.

It would be a free speech issue if the government forced this guy not to speak. It's not a free speech issue if organizers of a function say "You ain't comin'."

[nicky10013]

It would be a free speech issue if the government forced this guy not to speak. It's not a free speech issue if organizers of a function say "You ain't comin'."

The University of Ottawa and the U of O student council are private organizations as well. That didn't stop the screaming over Anne Coulter.

[M.Dancer]

The University of Ottawa and the U of O student council are private organizations as well. That didn't stop the screaming over Anne Coulter.

As private as the convention centre and as publicly funded too...more onus is on the University given they are supposed to foster discussion, not ban it.

[nicky10013]

As private as the convention centre and as publicly funded too...more onus is on the University given they are supposed to foster discussion, not ban it.

Gee, that's Mark Steyn's position as well. Considering Steyn continues to be so vocal about freedom of speech, it takes a special kind of hypocrisy to hold him to a lesser standard than the University of Ottawa. Like I said, they're both private organizations, both of which, apparently, equally agree on the right to free speech.

[Shady]

Gee, that's Mark Steyn's position as well. Considering Steyn continues to be so vocal about freedom of speech, it takes a special kind of hypocrisy to hold him to a lesser standard than the University of Ottawa. Like I said, they're both private organizations, both of which, apparently, equally agree on the right to free speech.

A University isn't a private organization. Stop conflating the issues. Nobody has a right to speak at someone elses event. Why are you being so obtuse?

Edited November 2, 2010 by Shady

[M.Dancer]

Gee, that's Mark Steyn's position as well. Considering Steyn continues to be so vocal about freedom of speech, it takes a special kind of hypocrisy to hold him to a lesser standard than the University of Ottawa. Like I said, they're both private organizations, both of which, apparently, equally agree on the right to free speech.

That makes little sense. Styen's group is not publicly funded and it is irrelevant if it has different standards than a university. CN has different standards too...

Convention centres and Universities are publicly funded.

[nicky10013]

That makes little sense. Styen's group is not publicly funded and it is irrelevant if it has different standards than a university. CN has different standards too...

Convention centres and Universities are publicly funded.

Universities are private institutions. The public money universities recieve are subsidies on tuition. If they didn't exist, Universities would operate the exact same way with the exception that they would charge more on tuition. They're privately run organizations. End of story.

This doesn't change the fact that Steyn is a hypocrit. Considering how many people here used the exact same arguements as him, and even over Juan Willians not a week ago, and are now skirting the issue goes to show the level of hypocrisy on these boards as well.

Edited November 2, 2010 by nicky10013

[Shady]

They're privately run organizations. End of story.

That receive public money in the form of subsidies and grants.

This doesn't change the fact that Steyn is a hypocrit.

Why are you being so obtuse? Surely you don't believe that everyone has a right to speak at other people's organized events? Did I have the right to speak there last night too?

[Alta4ever]

Why are you being so obtuse?

Why ask a rhetoric question, liberal, 20 something, it goes without saying.

[nicky10013]

That receive public money in the form of subsidies and grants.

Are you so stupid that you didn't even read what I said even 2 lines before? The subsidies they recieve is to make tuition cheaper for students that don't change the way the university is run. Grants are applied for seperately by individual researchers and are awarded based on merit.

Why are you being so obtuse? Surely you don't believe that everyone has a right to speak at other people's organized events? Did I have the right to speak there last night too?

I'm not the one being obtuse. Being obtuse is trying to use magical arguments to try and present this as something that it isn't.

The man who went didn't want to speak but wasn't allowed in due to his beliefs. Considering Steyn's own rhetoric over what the limits on freedom of speech should be (none) this is complete and utter hypocrisy. You can make the argument all you like that he's a private person and this shouldn't matter, however, if we're going to listen to his rhetoric and agree with it, we should at least ask him that he upholds his own values.

[M.Dancer]

Universities are private institutions. The public money universities recieve are subsidies on tuition.

Other way round...tuitions subsidize the public and private funding.

[M.Dancer]

Breaking non news...

In this thread, Nicky defends White supremacist against private company's right to control message....later, Nicky defends publicly funded groups choice to stifle free speech ...

[scribblet]

It does seem as if they were being hypocrital, but can you imagine the uproar and the press if this guy spoke at a Steyn event - Steyn would be tarred and feathered then accused of being in bed with a white supremacist. Oh yeah, I can see it now.

[nicky10013]

Other way round...tuitions subsidize the public and private funding.

Not quite. I sat on my university's board of directors. I have their financial statements for the past few years.

[nicky10013]

Breaking non news...

In this thread, Nicky defends White supremacist against private company's right to control message....later, Nicky defends publicly funded groups choice to stifle free speech ...

Hahahah of course. The good old smear job. When there's nothing left to argue with, paint him as a Nazi and a hater of free speech.

In the beginning, I said that everyone has a limit of where speech should stop. That includes me. I make no qualm of admitting that. I don't like hate speech and I wouldn't have wanted it there. Apparently Steyn feels the same way I do. The difference between him and I is that I'm not super righteous about the absolute nature of the right to free speech. I'm not a hypocrite, he is.

Edited November 2, 2010 by nicky10013

[nicky10013]

It does seem as if they were being hypocrital, but can you imagine the uproar and the press if this guy spoke at a Steyn event - Steyn would be tarred and feathered then accused of being in bed with a white supremacist. Oh yeah, I can see it now.

Apparently little Scribblet here has hsi own limit on free speech as well.

[M.Dancer]

Not quite. I sat on my university's board of directors. I have their financial statements for the past few years.

Quite...

In the 2006-2007 fiscal year, approximately 61% of the university's sources of funding were from operating and research grants. Tuition made up approximately 23%. Remaining sources of funding included investment income, donations, student housing, capital grants and sale of services, among other items.[79]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Ottawa#Finances

$136 million from government alone.

[M.Dancer]

Hahahah of course. The good old smear job. When there's nothing left to argue with, paint him as a Nazi and a hater of free speech.

Sort of like a juxtaposition between the decision not allow Coulter to speak at a publicly funded university and the decision not to allow a white supremacist to attend a private function?

I agree...you have nothing left to argue with.

[nicky10013]

Quite...

In the 2006-2007 fiscal year, approximately 61% of the university's sources of funding were from operating and research grants. Tuition made up approximately 23%. Remaining sources of funding included investment income, donations, student housing, capital grants and sale of services, among other items.[79]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Ottawa#Finances

$136 million from government alone.

Yeah, research grants. The majority of the work done by universities is research. Like I said, they're awarded based on merit. Individuals apply for them independent of the university organization itself.

This, of coures yet again, ignores the basis of the issue at hand. That Mark Steyn, the almost holy defender of free speech, isn't held to the same standards as everyone else. Like I said, we all have our limits on speech. The fact that no one on the right will admit it isn't my problem.

[nicky10013]

Sort of like a juxtaposition between the decision not allow Coulter to speak at a publicly funded university and the decision not to allow a white supremacist to attend a private function?

I agree...you have nothing left to argue with.

If he was so for free speech, he wouldn't have cared. Everything else other than this fact right here is an attempt to distract from the issue at hand. You'd expect that someone who is a staunch fighter for freedom of speech would be practicing it themselves despite whatever public private differences might exist. It's about the principle and not about the circumstances. Same with the people on these boards. However, of course this isn't the case which is why I argued what I did in the OP.

Funny, the only outcry from right wingers about freedom of speech is when one of their own is chastised for anti-muslim rhetoric. Yet, when the likes of Rick Sanchez comes out with anti-Jewish remarks and he was instantly fired, there was nary a peep from anyone defending his right to free speech. The hypocrisy is defeaning.

Edited November 2, 2010 by nicky10013