Jump to content

Cheney cancels speech in Canada due to safety concerns ‎


Recommended Posts

More like the people sponsoring the event pay for it - most likely through the price of the ticket to see him/whoever.
No, that does not come remotely close to paying for public security. For somebody like Cheney for example, the RCMP VIP security detail and Secret Service would be involved as well as hordes of local police. Even without the damge caused by the riot tourists who flock to events like this, a ticket would not cover it. The organizers would have to put up large cash bonds and proof of liability insurance
That would apply to whoever is doing the inviting.

Um yeah, that is what I said.

As it is now, the public pays for nearly all this BS. As of now, the folks who invite the Galloways or Cheneys expect the cops/public to work for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 570
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's not true. When the site of the speech is forced to conclude they don't have sufficient security in place to guarantee safety and free speech then it is definitely suppression of free speech by a mob of violent rabble and that is apparent to anyone.

Sure as an example, if you tell me if you go into 'such and such' neighborhood without armed guards and you refuse the guards, obviously it's my choice, but not really. It's simply a matter of semantics. YOU know why Ann and others were UNABLE to give their opinions, they were silenced by a threatening mob.

Call it what you will, but, the bottom line is they were denied the right to freedom of speech under threats. That leaves ONLY...Hobson's choice.

People who are not citizens of Canada nor landed immigrants or have permission to live here do not have the same rights as Canadians.

In other words they do not have the right to free speech!

No-where in the Canadian constitution does it say that these rights are extended to people who do not reside in Canada and are not Canadian citizens?Absolutely no-where!

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with anybody coming to speak in Canada, with one requirement applying to everybody.

If you require public security beyond the usual contingent of police on normal duty that day, you pay for it yourself.

If Cheney or Galloway want to come and speak as a private citizen and it will require lots of cops and private security to ensure public order and personal safety, they pay for it all. If security is inadequate and property or people are damaged, their extensive , preapproved liability insurance pays. If they can't afford the security or insurance , they can stay home.

If Cheney or Galloway or anybody is here at the invitation of our government, the public purse coughs up.

Yes this is a good point.

When I last heard Bill Clinton was charging around $75 000-$100 000 per appearance.I am sure that when any of these others come here it is for profit only!

Good point!

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who are not citizens of Canada nor landed immigrants or have permission to live here do not have the same rights as Canadians.

In other words they do not have the right to free speech!

No-where in the Canadian constitution does it say that these rights are extended to people who do not reside in Canada and are not Canadian citizens?Absolutely no-where!

WWWTT

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms

Rights and freedoms in Canada

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.

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.

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

No, that does not come remotely close to paying for public security. For somebody like Cheney for example, the RCMP VIP security detail and Secret Service would be involved as well as hordes of local police. Even without the damge caused by the riot tourists who flock to events like this, a ticket would not cover it. The organizers would have to put up large cash bonds and proof of liability insurance

Fine. However they choose to cover the cost, it would be at their expense, not the speakers.'

Um yeah, that is what I said.

Um, no. That's not what you said. THIS is what you said:

If Cheney or Galloway want to come and speak as a private citizen and it will require lots of cops and private security to ensure public order and personal safety, they pay for it all.

You said if the government invited them, then the government should foot the bill. *I* said whoever invites them should foot the bill; in other words, not the speakers, as you said.

As it is now, the public pays for nearly all this BS. As of now, the folks who invite the Galloways or Cheneys expect the cops/public to work for free.

The cops aren't working for free, and those who are doing the inviting, and attending the event, are part of the "public" of which you speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms

Rights and freedoms in Canada

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.

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.

Nope under section 6 only citizens are given the right to earn money!

If Cheney came here and spoke for free thats a different story,but thats not the case is it.

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cops aren't working for free, and those who are doing the inviting, and attending the event, are part of the "public" of which you speak.

No, those who do the inviting are part of a commercial enterprise, not the public. The 'public' I refer to are taxpayers who pay the salaries of police and other security staff, not ticket buyers. My meaning is that the organizers of any event should cover the costs, inclduingnthat of police, all police. If you put on a rock concert, the venue will require that you hire cops, and the cops require you pay them. If the cost of the security or insurance is huge and makes the tickets unaffordable, oh well.

This should apply further afield than rock concerts to political events, so when the riot breaks out, the organizer pays. It does not matter if the cause of the riot is Galloway, Cheney or the Vancouver Canucks. if the organizer is the govt, same thing. Of course, the govt aleady does this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Charter applies to everyone in Canada, citizen, permanent resident, refugee, and tourist alike.

Yes you are right.

But does someone who is not a citizen of Canada have the right to enter Canada,move freely,earn money and vote?

Nope!

But the charter clearly reads that Canadian citizens have the right to do so!

In other words not everyone is equall under the constitution and Canadian citizens enjoy "more" rights.

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were talking about free speech:

Go back and read!

The constitution applies to people "in" Canada because only Canadian law is applicable and Canadian law is not enforced outside of Canada!

Cheney is not a Canadian citizen so he does not have the right to enter Canada!And constitutional rights do not extend to people who are not Canadian citizens and are not within Canada!

And upon entering he does not have the right to earn money from making a public speech/seminar/etc!

Yes maybe I could have bein a little more specific but that does not matter because this Cheney caracter would only come here to line his pockets.

You think this guy would come here for free or at cost?

If you believe that then you got bigger problems in life buddy.

The same(similar) is also applicable when foreign media wants to set up shop in Canada and has to ask the CRTC for permission.

This is different when domestic media/broadcasters publish/broadcast questionable material.

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were talking about free speech:

Where in the constitution does it say that someone who is not a Canadian citizen has the right to enter Canada for to purpose to freely express themeselves?

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in the constitution does it say that someone who is not a Canadian citizen has the right to enter Canada for to purpose to freely express themeselves?

WWWTT

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

And can someone who is not a Canadian citizen have the right to enter Canada for any of these purposes?

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently we are in agreement. I seriously did not get that from what you originally posted, and as I said, Cheney has legitimate security concerns in Canada. Your country isn't all sugar and spice, and demonstrators have been known to get out of hand. I do think it's too bad when people try to shut other people's voices down. If everyone succeeded in doing that, we would be left with silence. Furthermore, listening to someone we don't agree with is a learning experience. What is the point of only listening to those we agree with? I don't understand that mindset. At any rate, it's one thing to demonstrate against someone's views/politics - quite another to try to keep them from speaking (especially when their tactics to silence them go beyond exercising their freedom of expression).

Agreed.

Peaceful protesting is fine, but blocking people's right to speak is just wrong. Although, some speaking engagements have been cancelled in Canada seemingly just have from the shher size of the peacefully protesting (though loud and vocal & seemingly not happy lol) crowds being a safety concern in themselves even though they posed no imminent threat, which is understandable. I think that's what happened at one Ann Coulter event if I recall. But still, there have been more than enough other not-so-pleasant incidents.

Also, I apologize for being rude to you in one of my other replied. Not called for, I'm sorry. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

Peaceful protesting is fine, but blocking people's right to speak is just wrong. Although, some speaking engagements have been cancelled in Canada seemingly just have from the shher size of the peacefully protesting (though loud and vocal & seemingly not happy lol) crowds being a safety concern in themselves even though they posed no imminent threat, which is understandable. I think that's what happened at one Ann Coulter event if I recall. But still, there have been more than enough other not-so-pleasant incidents.

No I do not agree with this statement!

Dick Cheney was not coming to Canada to soley engage in free speech.

He was coming to Canada to earn money from speeking!

Cheney can use satelite/telephone or internet to do this,however no one would give him money to go attend a seminar where he does not make a live performance and only appears on a big screen via internet or phone or something like that.

So therefore he is not protected by the constitution since he is not a Canadian citizen and the citizens of Canada constitutionaly trump him!

The constitution is just is not granting a non citizen the right to come to Canada to earn money for conducting speeches.(aswell if Cheney was to conduct a speech via satellite from the US he still is not protected by the constitution because he would not be within the juristiction of Canadian law)

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Peeves

No I do not agree with this statement!

Dick Cheney was not coming to Canada to soley engage in free speech.

He was coming to Canada to earn money from speeking!

Cheney can use satelite/telephone or internet to do this,however no one would give him money to go attend a seminar where he does not make a live performance and only appears on a big screen via internet or phone or something like that.

So therefore he is not protected by the constitution since he is not a Canadian citizen and the citizens of Canada constitutionaly trump him!

The constitution is just is not granting a non citizen the right to come to Canada to earn money for conducting speeches.(aswell if Cheney was to conduct a speech via satellite from the US he still is not protected by the constitution because he would not be within the juristiction of Canadian law)

WWWTT

Bull puckey, convoluted and and untrue. Anyone entering Canada is granted the rights of our constitution and subject to our laws.

What Are My Rights as a Visitor to Canada?

The following basic freedoms are present in the Charter or Rights, included in the Constitution Act of Canada. Your temporary residence in Canada guarantees you each of these:

freedom of conscience and religion

freedom of peaceful assembly

freedom of association

freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression (including freedom of the press and other media of communication).

What Are My Responsiblities as a Temporary Visitor to Canada?

As a temporary resident in Canada, you are expected to abide by all Canadian laws. Law breakers will be fined or serve time in prison. No one is exempt from this rule. Committing a serious offence will result in deportation from Canada or inability to renew your temporary resident visa or study permit.

http://www.trentinternational.org/service/center/index.php?id=166

Clinton came here (and elsewhere)to make money.

So selective free speech is fine. A Clinton or other Democrat should be accepted but any other should be banned.

"Clinton has given dozens of paid speeches each year, mostly to corporations and philanthropic groups in North America and Europe, often earning $100,000 to $300,000 per speech.[7] According to his wife's Senate ethics reports, he earned more than $30 million in speaking from 2001 to 2005.[8] In 2007, it is estimated he amassed around $40 million from speaking.[9]

Clinton made his first visit to new United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in April 2007. The 45-minute meeting, called at Clinton's request, touched on a host of topics, including disease, war, famine and poverty in Africa, especially in the Darfur region. The Middle East, the conflict in Iraq, and Iran's nuclear standoff with the U.N. were on the agenda, as well as HIV/AIDS.[10]

He was the opening speaker at the Ontario Economic Summit held on November 13, 2007 in which he addressed people on various subjects including Canada's role in Afghanistan, environmentalism and access to healthcare.[11]"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bull puckey?Never heard that one before.

Anyways if you do not like our constitution then why are you arguing with me about how it is written?

Section 6 is very clear about ONLY citizens having the right to enter Canada,travel freely,earn money and vote.

Cheney and Clinton(or anyone else who is not a citizen) clearly do not have the right to enter Canada for any purpose.And when they are IN Canada they do not have the right to earn money,travel freely and vote.

If however Clinton or Cheney were to express their opinion then they have the right to do so(such as participate in a television interview while on a fishing trip in Canada and not be given any money for the interview)

This is not the case if they are offered money to do an interview or sell tickets at a convention.

However there may be something in a trade agreement between the Canada and the US that would allow them the right to do so.You will have better luck there then in the constitution because the constitution is clear on this matter.

And as a side note I would never pay one freekin red cent to attend any seminar from any American politician!Nor would I waste my time to protest one.If someone else wants to protest any politician for anything then all the power to them!Just the act of protesting would give that politician the aknowledgment that they had some kind of influence over others.

WWWTT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Agreed.

Peaceful protesting is fine, but blocking people's right to speak is just wrong. Although, some speaking engagements have been cancelled in Canada seemingly just have from the shher size of the peacefully protesting (though loud and vocal & seemingly not happy lol) crowds being a safety concern in themselves even though they posed no imminent threat, which is understandable. I think that's what happened at one Ann Coulter event if I recall. But still, there have been more than enough other not-so-pleasant incidents.

I believe that is what happened at the Ann Coulter event - that the crowds were too large for security to deal with. Yet I believe the purpose of the crowd was to silence her. The situation with Cheney in Vancouver was different, though - he couldn't even leave the premises for 7 hours - it took police in riot gear that long to get the crowd in enough control so it was safe for him to leave - and that's putting people at risk - especially people who could have a medical emergency, such as Cheney. I also read that protesters were harassing ticket holders, which is not right, and that there was an arrest over a protester allegedly choking a staff member, too. I believe this is why the U.S. has set up 'free speech zones,' assuring that protesters have to keep a safe distance from the person they are protesting.

At any rate, there is now a lost opportunity for people to listen to Cheney, to question his actions, because some people don't approve. I think this sums it up well: Ruppert [president of the organization that sponsored Cheney's appearance] lashed out at the demonstrators, saying they have only succeeded in blocking what could have been a frank talk with Cheney about U.S. foreign policy.

"You lost that conversation because you're talking about a group of thugs," Ruppert told Canadian TV.

Also, I apologize for being rude to you in one of my other replied. Not called for, I'm sorry. :)

Thank you. I really appreciate that. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BC you cant say anything you want without suffering consequences

every action has a reaction

Cheneys Free speech wasnt attacked

hes welcome to give his talk in canada. nobody banned him

Shows how much of a wuss he really is. He can handle going to Iraq and Afhanistan, but cannot handle us Canadians? Laughable.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...