Jordan Peterson Hates Free Speech


mentalfloss
+1
#1
Hypocrite.


Laurier University asks court to dismiss Jordan Peterson lawsuit

Wilfrid Laurier University is asking the court to dismiss a lawsuit against it from Jordan Peterson, saying the free-speech advocate filed it in an attempt to limit debate on matters of public interest, such as gender identity.

“There is inescapable irony in the fact that Peterson, who has come to prominence through vehement advocacy of free speech principles, is bringing a claim for the stated purpose of causing academics and administrators to be more circumspect in their words,” Laurier’s defence reads.

Mr. Peterson had alleged the university defamed him in comments made in a meeting with a student in which they cast doubt on his academic credentials and compared showing students his comments on gender-neutral pronouns with “playing ... a speech by Hitler." Laurier argues that because it did not record and distribute those comments, it is not at fault for the consequences of them becoming public.

The legal battle began after the university held a disciplinary meeting for teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd, who showed her class a clip of Mr. Peterson debating Bill C-16, the law that adds gender identity and expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Ms. Shepherd secretly recorded the meeting, which was posted online, leading to national backlash against the university. Laurier has since apologized.

Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd both filed suits in June against Laurier and the professors in the disciplinary meeting: Nathan Rambukkana, Herbert Pimlott and Adria Joel. Mr. Peterson alleged that he was defamed; Ms. Shepherd claimed the university ruined her future in academia. None of the claims have been proven in court.

The statement of defence claims that because the Laurier professors had no idea Ms. Shepherd would record and distribute audio of the meeting, they cannot be held responsible for the effects of their comments becoming public.

Anyway, the university argues, Mr. Peterson has “suffered no or insignificant harm” as a result of the incident.

Mr. Peterson called this notion “preposterous.”

“There’s been a large number of attacks on me for being associated with the alt-right," he said, “and a fair bit of that stemmed from what happened at Wilfrid Laurier.”

Howard Levitt, who is representing Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd, said the professors should have assumed their comments might be recorded and made public.

“Everybody has recording devices at all times,” he said. “That’s a realistic risk in 2018.”

In a public statement, the university highlighted that Mr. Peterson admitted to filing the suit in order to make academics more careful about what they say about him, which Laurier said is a “means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest, including gender identity.”

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,” Mr. Peterson said in a YouTube video after he filed the suit.

Laurier argues that this is grounds for dismissal under the Courts of Justice Act section 137.1, which in part seeks “to discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest.”

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/amp...erson-lawsuit/
Last edited by mentalfloss; Sep 1st, 2018 at 01:14 AM..
 
mentalfloss
#2
Uh oh, the Sun is getting into it now.

Jordan Peterson profited by releasing audiotape he alleged defamed him: Defence
https://torontosun.com/news/national...im-defence/amp
 
Serryah
Free Thinker
+1 / -2
#3
Eh, he's free to be an ignorant windbag all he wants.

But I personally don't like the guy due to his attitude, more than what he says. His ego needs several reality checks.
 
mentalfloss
+1 / -1
#4
His cult of morons (mormons?) need several reality checks too.
Last edited by mentalfloss; Sep 1st, 2018 at 06:46 AM..
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
+1
#5
LOL, you content free types are high larious!

Quote:

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,

HeH! MF defending "blinded by ideology". If you can't do, TEACH!

HaHa...That's funny right there!
 
Walter
+4
#6
As always the thread title is 180 degrees from the truth.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+7
#7  Top Rated Post
Dear Progressive Idiots,


The right to free speech is a protection of the individual against state power, as are all actual rights.


It is a protection against criminal prosecution, in the legal sense.


While, as a principle, free speech is an incredibly important aspect of a free society, it is not a tool to prevent the individual from seeking redress for civil libel.


Just like a progressive, to try and use the ideal of free speech to prevent the individual from exercising his legal right to seek civil redress when wronged.


You guys are goose-stepping morons.


Smarten up.


Thank you.


Yours, Colpy
 
Tecumsehsbones
+2
#8
Nobody ever went broke reassuring pussies that they're really monly men.

Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

Dear Progressive Idiots,


The right to free speech is a protection of the individual against state power, as are all actual rights.


It is a protection against criminal prosecution, in the legal sense.


While, as a principle, free speech is an incredibly important aspect of a free society, it is not a tool to prevent the individual from seeking redress for civil libel.


Just like a progressive, to try and use the ideal of free speech to prevent the individual from exercising his legal right to seek civil redress when wronged.


You guys are goose-stepping morons.


Smarten up.


Thank you.


Yours, Colpy

Actually, you are partially correct. You are correct in the sense that the Charter, the U.S. Bill of Rights, and other such documents protect speech from government sanction only. The concept, however, goes far beyond that, and also advocates more consequence-free speech in non-government contexts.

Re-reading my post, I wish to clarify. I agree with you. Those who weep and wail about how hard-done-by they are because somebody said something they don't like are pansies. In certain circumstances, they have a cause of action. But the important part of freedom of speech is protection from the crushing power of government. Invoking free speech against someone who doesn't have the power to jail you or fine you into the courthouse is like carrying a howitzer for self defense. Only cowards and fantasists do it.
Last edited by Tecumsehsbones; Sep 1st, 2018 at 07:56 AM..
 
taxslave
Free Thinker
+5
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Hypocrite.


Laurier University asks court to dismiss Jordan Peterson lawsuit

Wilfrid Laurier University is asking the court to dismiss a lawsuit against it from Jordan Peterson, saying the free-speech advocate filed it in an attempt to limit debate on matters of public interest, such as gender identity.

“There is inescapable irony in the fact that Peterson, who has come to prominence through vehement advocacy of free speech principles, is bringing a claim for the stated purpose of causing academics and administrators to be more circumspect in their words,” Laurier’s defence reads.

Mr. Peterson had alleged the university defamed him in comments made in a meeting with a student in which they cast doubt on his academic credentials and compared showing students his comments on gender-neutral pronouns with “playing ... a speech by Hitler." Laurier argues that because it did not record and distribute those comments, it is not at fault for the consequences of them becoming public.

The legal battle began after the university held a disciplinary meeting for teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd, who showed her class a clip of Mr. Peterson debating Bill C-16, the law that adds gender identity and expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Ms. Shepherd secretly recorded the meeting, which was posted online, leading to national backlash against the university. Laurier has since apologized.

Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd both filed suits in June against Laurier and the professors in the disciplinary meeting: Nathan Rambukkana, Herbert Pimlott and Adria Joel. Mr. Peterson alleged that he was defamed; Ms. Shepherd claimed the university ruined her future in academia. None of the claims have been proven in court.

The statement of defence claims that because the Laurier professors had no idea Ms. Shepherd would record and distribute audio of the meeting, they cannot be held responsible for the effects of their comments becoming public.

Anyway, the university argues, Mr. Peterson has “suffered no or insignificant harm” as a result of the incident.

Mr. Peterson called this notion “preposterous.”

“There’s been a large number of attacks on me for being associated with the alt-right," he said, “and a fair bit of that stemmed from what happened at Wilfrid Laurier.”

Howard Levitt, who is representing Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd, said the professors should have assumed their comments might be recorded and made public.

“Everybody has recording devices at all times,” he said. “That’s a realistic risk in 2018.”

In a public statement, the university highlighted that Mr. Peterson admitted to filing the suit in order to make academics more careful about what they say about him, which Laurier said is a “means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest, including gender identity.”

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,” Mr. Peterson said in a YouTube video after he filed the suit.

Laurier argues that this is grounds for dismissal under the Courts of Justice Act section 137.1, which in part seeks “to discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest.”

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/amp...erson-lawsuit/

There is a difference between free speech and libel or slander. THe University crossed that line. Never trust a lefty.
 
Dixie Cup
Conservative
+3
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Hypocrite.


Laurier University asks court to dismiss Jordan Peterson lawsuit

Wilfrid Laurier University is asking the court to dismiss a lawsuit against it from Jordan Peterson, saying the free-speech advocate filed it in an attempt to limit debate on matters of public interest, such as gender identity.

“There is inescapable irony in the fact that Peterson, who has come to prominence through vehement advocacy of free speech principles, is bringing a claim for the stated purpose of causing academics and administrators to be more circumspect in their words,” Laurier’s defence reads.

Mr. Peterson had alleged the university defamed him in comments made in a meeting with a student in which they cast doubt on his academic credentials and compared showing students his comments on gender-neutral pronouns with “playing ... a speech by Hitler." Laurier argues that because it did not record and distribute those comments, it is not at fault for the consequences of them becoming public.

The legal battle began after the university held a disciplinary meeting for teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd, who showed her class a clip of Mr. Peterson debating Bill C-16, the law that adds gender identity and expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Ms. Shepherd secretly recorded the meeting, which was posted online, leading to national backlash against the university. Laurier has since apologized.

Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd both filed suits in June against Laurier and the professors in the disciplinary meeting: Nathan Rambukkana, Herbert Pimlott and Adria Joel. Mr. Peterson alleged that he was defamed; Ms. Shepherd claimed the university ruined her future in academia. None of the claims have been proven in court.

The statement of defence claims that because the Laurier professors had no idea Ms. Shepherd would record and distribute audio of the meeting, they cannot be held responsible for the effects of their comments becoming public.

Anyway, the university argues, Mr. Peterson has “suffered no or insignificant harm” as a result of the incident.

Mr. Peterson called this notion “preposterous.”

“There’s been a large number of attacks on me for being associated with the alt-right," he said, “and a fair bit of that stemmed from what happened at Wilfrid Laurier.”

Howard Levitt, who is representing Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd, said the professors should have assumed their comments might be recorded and made public.

“Everybody has recording devices at all times,” he said. “That’s a realistic risk in 2018.”

In a public statement, the university highlighted that Mr. Peterson admitted to filing the suit in order to make academics more careful about what they say about him, which Laurier said is a “means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest, including gender identity.”

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,” Mr. Peterson said in a YouTube video after he filed the suit.

Laurier argues that this is grounds for dismissal under the Courts of Justice Act section 137.1, which in part seeks “to discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest.”

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/amp...erson-lawsuit/



I call BS and the court will likely throw it out.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dixie Cup View Post

I call BS and the court will likely throw it out.



Sorry, I meant that the court will throw out the University's objection and allow the suit to continue.... my bad cuz I wasn't clear.
 
CaptainTrips
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Hypocrite.


Laurier University asks court to dismiss Jordan Peterson lawsuit

Wilfrid Laurier University is asking the court to dismiss a lawsuit against it from Jordan Peterson, saying the free-speech advocate filed it in an attempt to limit debate on matters of public interest, such as gender identity.

“There is inescapable irony in the fact that Peterson, who has come to prominence through vehement advocacy of free speech principles, is bringing a claim for the stated purpose of causing academics and administrators to be more circumspect in their words,” Laurier’s defence reads.

Mr. Peterson had alleged the university defamed him in comments made in a meeting with a student in which they cast doubt on his academic credentials and compared showing students his comments on gender-neutral pronouns with “playing ... a speech by Hitler." Laurier argues that because it did not record and distribute those comments, it is not at fault for the consequences of them becoming public.

The legal battle began after the university held a disciplinary meeting for teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd, who showed her class a clip of Mr. Peterson debating Bill C-16, the law that adds gender identity and expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Ms. Shepherd secretly recorded the meeting, which was posted online, leading to national backlash against the university. Laurier has since apologized.

Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd both filed suits in June against Laurier and the professors in the disciplinary meeting: Nathan Rambukkana, Herbert Pimlott and Adria Joel. Mr. Peterson alleged that he was defamed; Ms. Shepherd claimed the university ruined her future in academia. None of the claims have been proven in court.

The statement of defence claims that because the Laurier professors had no idea Ms. Shepherd would record and distribute audio of the meeting, they cannot be held responsible for the effects of their comments becoming public.

Anyway, the university argues, Mr. Peterson has “suffered no or insignificant harm” as a result of the incident.

Mr. Peterson called this notion “preposterous.”

“There’s been a large number of attacks on me for being associated with the alt-right," he said, “and a fair bit of that stemmed from what happened at Wilfrid Laurier.”

Howard Levitt, who is representing Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd, said the professors should have assumed their comments might be recorded and made public.

“Everybody has recording devices at all times,” he said. “That’s a realistic risk in 2018.”

In a public statement, the university highlighted that Mr. Peterson admitted to filing the suit in order to make academics more careful about what they say about him, which Laurier said is a “means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest, including gender identity.”

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,” Mr. Peterson said in a YouTube video after he filed the suit.

Laurier argues that this is grounds for dismissal under the Courts of Justice Act section 137.1, which in part seeks “to discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest.”

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/amp...erson-lawsuit/


There is no hypocrisy on Peterson's part. Defamation is not protected by free speech.
 
DaSleeper
+1
#12
Just Mentalflush's usual style of Trolling..... either misquoting or misrepresenting an article to fit his ideology........
 
mentalfloss
#13
Pay attention Peternuts.




In the disciplinary meeting, which Shepherd secretly recorded and eventually published to YouTube, assistant professor Nathan Rambukkana, associate professor Herbert Pimlott and Laurier Diversity and Equity Office Staffer Adria Joel likened Peterson’s comments to Adolf Hitler, among other things.

But Laurier says that their comments are not defamatory for several reasons, including the fact that they were made in the context of a private meeting.

“They played no role whatsoever in uploading the recording of the impugned words to YouTube, and are not responsible in any way for any repercussions flowing therefrom,” the university says in its statement of defence.

“Rather, these defendants state that the impugned words were uploaded to YouTube by Shepherd, and that she is therefore responsible for the damages, if any, that flowed from the impugned words being broadcast on YouTube.”

The university says in its defence that Shepherd reportedly consulted with Peterson before making the recording public.

Moreover, the university says that Peterson has no grounds to sue for damage to his reputation, because this whole situation has only boosted his profile.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...y-shepherd/amp
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#14
There may be differences in Canadian law, but generally one has to prove damages to prove defamation. The four common-law exceptions to that don't apply here.
 
Serryah
Free Thinker
-1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

Dear Progressive Idiots,


The right to free speech is a protection of the individual against state power, as are all actual rights.


It is a protection against criminal prosecution, in the legal sense.


While, as a principle, free speech is an incredibly important aspect of a free society, it is not a tool to prevent the individual from seeking redress for civil libel.


Just like a progressive, to try and use the ideal of free speech to prevent the individual from exercising his legal right to seek civil redress when wronged.


You guys are goose-stepping morons.


Smarten up.


Thank you.


Yours, Colpy


Dear Colpy,

He's free to be a total dickwad all he wants.

People should also be free to have their opinions about what he vomits out into the world, positive or negative.

I personally think the entire situation is BS.

I think the student deserves the flack because she recorded a meeting *in secret* and published it out. If anything she ruined her own status in "Academia", not Laurier. If people are wary of her now, that's on her, not on the Profs she recorded or Laurier.

But I also think the Profs who spoke out against Peterson should have realized it'd get back to him and he'd whine like a little baby about it. Which he's doing. It's not just this situation that makes people think he's part of the alt-right, it was just one of the issues. And yes, I've listened to him and while people get too reactionary over him, I find again, he's got one of the worlds biggest egos and if you don't stroke it he hates you.

Peterson wasn't wronged, nor was the Peterson-pet-wannabe.

They both need to get over themselves.

I thought you Cons were all about being anti-wasting time over stupid, silly shit?

No love (Cause, you know, I likely have progressive cooties or some BS ),

Fellow NBer,

Serr.
 
mentalfloss
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

There may be differences in Canadian law, but generally one has to prove damages to prove defamation. The four common-law exceptions to that don't apply here.

The guy is a charlatan.
 
Gilgamesh
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Hypocrite.


Laurier University asks court to dismiss Jordan Peterson lawsuit

Wilfrid Laurier University is asking the court to dismiss a lawsuit against it from Jordan Peterson, saying the free-speech advocate filed it in an attempt to limit debate on matters of public interest, such as gender identity.

“There is inescapable irony in the fact that Peterson, who has come to prominence through vehement advocacy of free speech principles, is bringing a claim for the stated purpose of causing academics and administrators to be more circumspect in their words,” Laurier’s defence reads.

Mr. Peterson had alleged the university defamed him in comments made in a meeting with a student in which they cast doubt on his academic credentials and compared showing students his comments on gender-neutral pronouns with “playing ... a speech by Hitler." Laurier argues that because it did not record and distribute those comments, it is not at fault for the consequences of them becoming public.

The legal battle began after the university held a disciplinary meeting for teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd, who showed her class a clip of Mr. Peterson debating Bill C-16, the law that adds gender identity and expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Ms. Shepherd secretly recorded the meeting, which was posted online, leading to national backlash against the university. Laurier has since apologized.

Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd both filed suits in June against Laurier and the professors in the disciplinary meeting: Nathan Rambukkana, Herbert Pimlott and Adria Joel. Mr. Peterson alleged that he was defamed; Ms. Shepherd claimed the university ruined her future in academia. None of the claims have been proven in court.

The statement of defence claims that because the Laurier professors had no idea Ms. Shepherd would record and distribute audio of the meeting, they cannot be held responsible for the effects of their comments becoming public.

Anyway, the university argues, Mr. Peterson has “suffered no or insignificant harm” as a result of the incident.

Mr. Peterson called this notion “preposterous.”

“There’s been a large number of attacks on me for being associated with the alt-right," he said, “and a fair bit of that stemmed from what happened at Wilfrid Laurier.”

Howard Levitt, who is representing Mr. Peterson and Ms. Shepherd, said the professors should have assumed their comments might be recorded and made public.

“Everybody has recording devices at all times,” he said. “That’s a realistic risk in 2018.”

In a public statement, the university highlighted that Mr. Peterson admitted to filing the suit in order to make academics more careful about what they say about him, which Laurier said is a “means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest, including gender identity.”

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,” Mr. Peterson said in a YouTube video after he filed the suit.

Laurier argues that this is grounds for dismissal under the Courts of Justice Act section 137.1, which in part seeks “to discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest.”

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/amp...erson-lawsuit/

Wilfred Laurier has proved beyond doubt that they are shabby fascist liars.

On the other hand,Peterson has proved he is in favour of free speech.

Quote: Originally Posted by Serryah View Post

Eh, he's free to be an ignorant windbag all he wants.

But I personally don't like the guy due to his attitude, more than what he says. His ego needs several reality checks.

What you call 'attitude' is merely a competent person.

Obviously something you are unfamiliar with.
 
mentalfloss
#18
He's a scam artist.
 
Serryah
Free Thinker
-1
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Gilgamesh View Post

Wilfred Laurier has proved beyond doubt that they are shabby fascist liars.

On the other hand,Peterson has proved he is in favour of free speech.


What you call 'attitude' is merely a competent person.

Obviously something you are unfamiliar with.


LOL - I meet and work with competent people all the time.

I don't know if he's competent but he's got a huge ego that detracts from everything he says, for good or ill.

Sorry you buy into his BS.
 
CaptainTrips
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Pay attention Peternuts.




In the disciplinary meeting, which Shepherd secretly recorded and eventually published to YouTube, assistant professor Nathan Rambukkana, associate professor Herbert Pimlott and Laurier Diversity and Equity Office Staffer Adria Joel likened Peterson’s comments to Adolf Hitler, among other things.

But Laurier says that their comments are not defamatory for several reasons, including the fact that they were made in the context of a private meeting.

“They played no role whatsoever in uploading the recording of the impugned words to YouTube, and are not responsible in any way for any repercussions flowing therefrom,” the university says in its statement of defence.

“Rather, these defendants state that the impugned words were uploaded to YouTube by Shepherd, and that she is therefore responsible for the damages, if any, that flowed from the impugned words being broadcast on YouTube.”

The university says in its defence that Shepherd reportedly consulted with Peterson before making the recording public.

Moreover, the university says that Peterson has no grounds to sue for damage to his reputation, because this whole situation has only boosted his profile.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...y-shepherd/amp

doesn't make him a hypocrite.
Even if Peterson does not win the case it doesn't make him a hypocrite.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

The guy is a charlatan.

I don't care.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+2
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

He's a scam artist.


LOL!!


Yeah.


You're just like the guy that accused Peterson of being just like Donald Trump.


Ben Shapiro said "Peterson writes 800 page widely acclaimed and deeply philosophical books on the "Maps of Meaning" within biblical stories. Yep, he's just like Donald Trump"


In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

LOL!!


Yeah.


You're just like the guy that accused Peterson of being just like Donald Trump.


Ben Shapiro said "Peterson writes 800 page widely acclaimed and deeply philosophical books on the "Maps of Meaning" within biblical stories. Yep, he's just like Donald Trump"


In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about.

It's entirely possible to be both. Isaac Newton was.
 
Gilgamesh
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

LOL!!


Yeah.


You're just like the guy that accused Peterson of being just like Donald Trump.


Ben Shapiro said "Peterson writes 800 page widely acclaimed and deeply philosophical books on the "Maps of Meaning" within biblical stories. Yep, he's just like Donald Trump"


In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Peterson is no scam artist.

However, his detractors,especially here are ignorant fools.
 
HarperCons
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

Dear Progressive Idiots,


The right to free speech is a protection of the individual against state power, as are all actual rights.



this is correct, most people don't understand this. they also don't understand jordan peterson regurgitates ruling class propaganda.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#26
" Be here NOW" is ruling class propaganda?

well..waddya know?
 
HarperCons
-1
#27
what the **** is "be here now" lmfao.
 
Walter
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by HarperCons View Post

what the **** is "be here now" lmfao.

Go away, Avro.
 
Danbones
Free Thinker
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by HarperCons View Post

what the **** is "be here now" lmfao.

The Left's Mischaracterizations of Jordan Peterson Will Make His Followers Turn Right
https://www.thestranger.com/slog/201...ers-turn-right

LOL, 'Nuff said.
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+2 / -1
#30
Peterson got it wrong this time and Laurier is quite correct. Laurier did not release the recording. What they called him in private is not libel/slander/defamation. The fact the comments became public and ended up on Youtube via Ms Shepherd is NOT on Laurier.

Having said that, it's pretty goddam sad when university administrators call someone Hitler who has a problem with pseudo-science and the university's obvious ALT-left bent. Really shows not just a lack of maturity on their part, but that they're just a bunch of feckless c*nts. I mean c'mon, these are university admins and the best they can come up with is calling him Hitler? Even in acedamia the ALT-left are continually proving they are as f*cking dumb as rocks.
Last edited by Jinentonix; Sep 2nd, 2018 at 06:16 AM..
 

Similar Threads

166
Jordan Peterson Fukks Up
by mentalfloss | Mar 3rd, 2018