Excellent rebuttal there Gh.whatever Bear.....
Ok I admit, I can and will kiss other ass, but SCB is always there and she usually kissing it with me.and no...scb's isn't the only ass you kiss.
:lol:
Excellent rebuttal there Gh.whatever Bear.....
Ok I admit, I can and will kiss other ass, but SCB is always there and she usually kissing it with me.and no...scb's isn't the only ass you kiss.
Of course I would let her in. She's broken no Canadian Laws, does not support violence against any identifiable group, does not support terrorists, has no criminal record...
She's eligible to enter the country.
Gh, I completely disagree with her position on almost every level. But she, as do you, have the right to voice it.
If we silence her, we should silence you, we should all be worried about what will come.
As for ass kissing, SCB is 100% Grade A Canadian Venison. And her's is the only ass I kiss.
U of O didn't really silence her. What they did was make the atmosphere so toxic, that her security could not be guaranteed. Whether that's true or not, is open for debate.Just curious....how did we silence her? From my point of view she did it to herself by letting her handlers cancel the speech.
I think both sides need to grow up, and some balls.Sounds cowardly to me.
I agree.wanna know what's ignorant, reprehensible, and offensive?
Having damn near every spiritual thread hijacked and shyte upon by non believers with impunity.
You just decribed the contents of your own posts with the word crap. What does that tell you Gh?Watching you f*ckin asshats defend this non Canadian bitches right to spew her crap on one hand and on the other report my posts like they were the spawn of satan to try and shut me down or at least edit the crap out of them.
Perceptions.Don't talk to me about what I am "allowed" to do, because as far as I am concerned, the rhetoric I get deleted is no worse or different than the rhetoric I see that is allowed to stand.
I agree.
You just decribed the contents of your own posts with the word crap. What does that tell you Gh?
Perceptions.
U of O didn't really silence her. What they did was make the atmosphere so toxic, that her security could not be guaranteed. Whether that's true or not, is open for debate.
I personally agree with you.
But the fact of the matter is, the thousands of documented protesters, all of whom I presume despise Coulter, wouldn't hear of having her speak. Their actions are not conducive to an open and free society. Where discussion can route out and dissolve fallacy.
They preached all sorts of different things, but they certainly were not there to support free speech. That is the message I got.
I think both sides need to grow up, and some balls.
This page in her history, will undoubtedly be used as fodder for future shots at Canada. And sadly, we earned it.
She couldn't very well speak if the university rescinded their invitationYeah she will use it but I hardly think it's our fault. Her not speaking because of a protest is a dumb as any protester saying she has no right to speak.
I was referring to the protesters.How did they do that? By telling her about our laws on hate speech? I don't think it was needed but it hardly poisoned the atmosphere...Coulter being a bigot may have done that instead.
I know some crazy people that do to. :smile:Sane people would.;-)
As I said, I agree, and I think there is room for debate on whether or not her teams actions were necessary or not.Perhaps, but protesting doesn't necessarily mean you want someone silenced and even if they do it's their right to say it and if Coulter wants to hide behind the free speech banner that's her choice but to me it's cowardly.
Our definition of ballsy obviously differs.I think the protesters were pretty ballsy to bad Coulter doesn't have a pair....when the going gets tough.....she bolts.:lol:
Absolutely, hence why we played right into her hands and di ourselves a great disservice.However, it will get her great press on right wing media groups and radio.
You and I might have that perception, but we are hardly the average Joe Blow sitting in front of the boob toob.Yeah she will use it but I hardly think it's our fault. Her not speaking because of a protest is a dumb as any protester saying she has no right to speak.
A protest organizer, international studies student Mike Fancie, said he was pleased they were able to stop Coulter from speaking.
They didn't from what I gather.She couldn't very well speak if the university rescinded their invitation
Nowhere near as entertaining as yours juan. ;-)I hear she got a warm welcome in Alberta where the American oil companies and the oil are. I'm sure Coulter's rhetoric from there will be entertaining.
True, but that's not what happened. According to this morning's Globe&Mail it was her own people who decided to cancel the engagement. They didn't feel they could get her safely through the crowd of protesters into the venue where she was to speak. Given what I saw of that crowd on tv, that seems a prudent decision to me.She couldn't very well speak if the university rescinded their invitation
True, but that's not what happened. According to this morning's Globe&Mail it was her own people who decided to cancel the engagement. They didn't feel they could get her safely through the crowd of protesters into the venue where she was to speak. Given what I saw of that crowd on tv, that seems a prudent decision to me.
Ms. Coulter certainly has the right to say what she thinks, within the limits of things of like libel laws and threats and hate speech, just as others have the right to protest her opinions and utterances, within the same limits, and offer countering views and arguments. There's no absolute right to free speech anywhere and never has been. I've never encountered anything she's said or written that I agreed with, I find her opinions and the way she expresses them to be odious, inflammatory, and puerile, but I see no justification for suppressing her. Better such people should be in the open where we can see them; in any civilized society they'll eventually shoot themselves in the foot.
The protesters I think went over the top and were in fact trying to prevent her from speaking, and the veiled threats in the letter from the provost at the U of O looks to me like a fine example of the worst sort of political correctness. She is correct to dismiss that as bush league. A far more eloquent protest would have been simply to ignore her, have nobody show up to hear her speak. I hope somebody talks her out of filing a complaint with the human rights commission though, it seems to me to be a bastion of political correctness and there's zero chance it'll decide anything in her favour.
The best we can hope for is that this ignites a debate in Canada about what free speech actually means and what are reasonable limits on it. We've gone around bits of that debate before with people like Jim Keegstra in very specific circumstances, and we have a lot of high-sounding principles enshrined in law, but something's gone haywire. Ms. Coulter was denied the right to speak via threats and intimidation, and that, despite however odious and shallow her opinions may be, is just wrong.
They didn't from what I gather.
It was the event organizers that canceled the event, amidst an ever increasingly aggressive mob of protesters. So much so that 10 Ottawa police cruisers were dispatched to keep the peace at Marion Hall. Where activists from both U of O and Carlton had gathered. Both extremely left leaning institutions.
Given the ferocity of the group, as indicated by the photographic and video material available, I'm not so sure I would want to walk through them either.
There is a difference between protesting or countering the expressed views of an opposing train of thought, and actively trying to scare them off and shut them down.
What I think we witnessed here is the latter.
This was not a demonstration aimed at bringing light to the absurd beliefs of this pundit, what we see here is an attempt to stifle free speech in Marion Hall.
Although her voice will not be snuffed out, the students at Carlton and U of O, have sent a clear message. International depots, supporters of terrorism and violators of human rights are welcome at these institutions. So long as their ideologies mesh.
But be you an opposing ideology and you will be forced out.
Whether or not my assessment is accurate, this is a black day for U of O and Carlton. Not that my opinion of either could be much lower.
Now that you mention, I just got a shiver down my spine. ;-)What scares me is some of those students may be future politicians in this country.......not that what we have now is much better:grin: