Jump to content

Cheney cancels speech in Canada due to safety concerns ‎


Recommended Posts

Thank you. I can't see how Cheneys speech was violated. Nobody banned him nor threatened violence upon him. Cheney has a lot of heart problemd and him being kept in a hotel for 7 hours again while people protest and fight with cops is not good for his health. Thats why he isn't coming. Too much stress.

Ya it sounds like a fairly simple answer for not travelling abroad.

What gets me though is that this guy has a lot of controversy surrounding himself which unquestionably resulted in some of his health problems but he still wants to imply that its everyone elses fault.

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 570
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

who threatened violence? cite me a quote threatening violence upon cheney

Seven hours trapped in a theater would be enough of a cite for me. But, that's not violence...right? Just good natured fun. However, if Dick Cheney trapped YOU for seven hours...well...different story, eh? Perhaps a war crime, even.

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now let's pretend it's 1938...the last time America decided it was not going to police the planet.

And Toulouse is the modern equivalent of Christallnacht.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seven hours trapped in a theater would be enough of a cite for me. But, that's not violence...right? Just good natured fun. However, if Dick Cheney trapped YOU for seven hours...well...different story, eh? Perhaps a war crime, even.

:lol:

Not one punch was thrown at Cheney.. the police handled it, so there is no threat to him personally..nobody will get close enough to touch him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not one punch was thrown at Cheney.. the police handled it, so there is no threat to him personally..nobody will get close enough to touch him

Right. It was a love convention. Well, if it happened to me, I'd be phoning the police. Either way, your goal was achieved and Cheney will not be doing any fireside chats in Canada, by the looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you're allowed to protest controversial people who want to give speeches!

that isn't a suppression of free speech, nobody banned coulter

Differing philosophies. I prefer contructive behaviour while others prefer destructive. I like my approach better. Less broken shop windows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer constructive behaviour while others prefer destructive. I like my approach better.

That's funny because Cheney & Coulter both prefer destructive behaviour.. Cheney with his illegal war & Coulter with her words .. but you say you prefer "constructive behaviour" You must not be a fan of either of them too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's funny because Cheney & Coulter both prefer destructive behaviour.. Cheney with his illegal war & Coulter with her words .. but you say you prefer "constructive behaviour" You must not be a fan of either of them too!

Goodness no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody threatened either of them. There were protests and one of them got out of hand. Get the heck over it.

That is not a suppression of free speech.

Temper. Don't go smashin' windows.

:lol:

Pitchforks and torches always put a damper on free exchange of ideas. Apparently change from within isn't in the ol' vocabulary. But, I do see the advantage of one using it to one's advantage. It is a shrewd tactical move. Personally, I'd rather get involved with some sort of actual solution rather than being a silly complainer and free speech suppressor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were no pitchforks or torches either

Modern day versions, yes there were. Plus, as I said before: protests of this nature aren't constructive. Instead of ponying-up, going in and asking those hard questions, they are content to scream nonsense and jibberish to a less-than-impressed world. All the while infringing on other folks' freedom by shutting down events they should have perhaps stayed away from. But, they're a selfish lot. As selfish as those they claim to oppose.

Smash another window...flip another police car. Are we done?

:P

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seven hours trapped in a theater would be enough of a cite for me. But, that's not violence...right? Just good natured fun. However, if Dick Cheney trapped YOU for seven hours...well...different story, eh? Perhaps a war crime, even.

:lol:

And how many delays have the US caused to Canadian visitors,add em up!

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. It was a love convention. Well, if it happened to me, I'd be phoning the police. Either way, your goal was achieved and Cheney will not be doing any fireside chats in Canada, by the looks.

Phoning police or calling 911 like Rob Ford?

And how many times would you call and would you use the language as Rob Ford did?

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Differing philosophies. I prefer contructive behaviour while others prefer destructive. I like my approach better. Less broken shop windows.

Its odd that you would use such an approach to defend someone who only has used destructive military action to assert American foreign policy????

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Temper. Don't go smashin' windows.

:lol:

Pitchforks and torches always put a damper on free exchange of ideas. Apparently change from within isn't in the ol' vocabulary. But, I do see the advantage of one using it to one's advantage. It is a shrewd tactical move. Personally, I'd rather get involved with some sort of actual solution rather than being a silly complainer and free speech suppressor.

Why are you defending a chicken?Ya thats right Cheney is a chicken!Or if you prefer a coward!

He can dish it out but he can't take it which also makes him a wimpy bully.

WWWTT

Edited by WWWTT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like some of these posters want to suppress Canadians free speech and rights to protest to appease right wingers like the despicable Cheney & Coulter

Shouting someone down or threatening someone isn't speech; it's misconduct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like some of these posters want to suppress Canadians free speech and rights to protest to appease right wingers like the despicable Cheney & Coulter

Seems like many protesters want to suppress Canadians' and others' free speech so as to uphold far-left philosophies and the supporters thereof. Cheney gives me the creeps and Coulter is an idiot, but I can still see the hypocricy on display when those who'd shout down anyone with whom they don't agree (like Cheney and Coulter) whinge about their right to free speech being denied when they aren't allowed to shout down anyone with whom they don't agree.

[ed.: c/e]

Edited by g_bambino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    robretpeter42
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...