Ann Coulter upsetting people....again

[TenPenny]

Ann Coulter is a rightwing nut bar that espouses to Elitist thinking and that is a load of crap. Typical Elitism I have more rights because I am not a minority in my country. That simply confirms that in Conservetivisem "equality" is not an important word.

You keep repeating the same thing: you don't like her, you don't like her views, and therefore she should be prevented from speaking.

That's the only point you have, and it's a weak one. Canada is better than that, we can allow people who say things we don't like, to say them. Then we can show why they're wrong.

 

[ironsides]

What ever happened to freedom of speech? I may not care about what she is saying either, but I would still let her speak, to many have died just protecting that right.

 

[Tonington]

Eventually people will do the proper thing...ignore her. She doesn't have anything new to say...it's a formula that works. Say something provocative, talk about the thing that was provocative, and use it to say more provocative things.

Wolf. Wolf. Wolf.

...

I'm sure this will make a nice story for her next book.

 

[lone wolf]

What? What? What?

 

[Socrates the Greek]

You keep repeating the same thing: you don't like her, you don't like her views, and therefore she should be prevented from speaking.

That's the only point you have, and it's a weak one. Canada is better than that, we can allow people who say things we don't like, to say them. Then we can show why they're wrong.

No u r, you are telling here that the students don’t have the right to protest when in fact her racial venom if OFFENSIVE. when YOU UNDERSTAND THAT we can go further into the discussion. She is a right wing nut bar and Elitist at best. Cupish...............The students realised that their learning of human understanding was compromised by a racist like her, and they wanted nothing to do with her, she is not a divine energy to help lift the intellect of the young, she is one telling the world to hate one another because she does.

 

[TenPenny]

No u r, you are telling here that the students don’t have the right to protest when in fact her racial venom if OFFENSIVE. when YOU UNDERSTAND THAT we can go further into the discussion. She is a right wing nut bar and Elitist at best. Cupish...............The students realised that their learning of human understanding was compromised by a racist like her, and they wanted nothing to do with her, she is not a divine energy to help lift the intellect of the young, she is one telling the world to hate one another because she does.

The students have a right to protest. However, if you could read what I said, I was commenting on you and others who think we should keep her out of the country. I never said the students don't have a right to protest. I never said the students were wrong. Try reading what I wrote.

Sure, she's a right wing nut bar. I like your use of the word 'elitist', though. That's a word that people use when someone is better/smarter/richer than they are, it's just a general term of jealousy.

 

[Machjo]

The students have a right to protest. However, if you could read what I said, I was commenting on you and others who think we should keep her out of the country. I never said the students don't have a right to protest. I never said the students were wrong. Try reading what I wrote.

Sure, she's a right wing nut bar. I like your use of the word 'elitist', though. That's a word that people use when someone is better/smarter/richer than they are, it's just a general term of jealousy.

I beg to differ. I think the student were wrong. They were not just protesting or expressing themselves. They were interfering with normal proceedings.

They had the option of ignoring her and the event. They had the option of participating in the event and asking questions or commenting if given a chance. The had the option of writing articles later commenting on her presentation. All of that was reasonable. But outright interrupting normal proceedings went too far.

 

[earth_as_one]

You keep repeating the same thing: you don't like her, you don't like her views, and therefore she should be prevented from speaking.

That's the only point you have, and it's a weak one. Canada is better than that, we can allow people who say things we don't like, to say them. Then we can show why they're wrong.

I don't like Anne Coulter. I disagree with her views. She is ignorant, racist and insulting. However, I completely support her right to free speech. Canada is a free country and people have a right to express their viewpoint up to the point where they incite violence or create a safety issue. Coulter did neither.

Let her speak.

 

[wulfie68]

Just so I understand this correctly:

The PMO ought to be free to decide on a whim who enters and who doesn't?

In a democracy, I don't think so. We decide collectively, directly through voting, and indirectly through our representatives enacting legislation defining who can enter and who cannot. In that way, we decide collectively as a democratic people who can come in ad who cannot. Whether Galloway can enter Canada or not should not be at the whim of the PMO, but rather in accordance to established legislation parliament has agreed to.

No you say Galloway has indeed violated Canadian laws. Fair enough. But if he's violated the law, then the right thing to do is not to tell him he can't come into the country, but rather to warn him that he have a warrant out for his arrest, even requesting that he come.

Also, if indeed he has violated a Canadian law, seeing that the UK is supposedly an ally, we should formally request extradition.

Either he's a criminal or he isn't. We can't have it both ways. If he's not a criminal, then as long as he meets whatever established requirement to enter the country, we should let him in. If he is a criminal, then we ought to prosecute. Which shall it be? Or are some foreign nationals more equal than others in Canadian law? If that's the case, then let's legislate accordingly, making it clear that foreign government representatives are granted diplomatic immunity from Canada's counter-terrorism laws. Of course if that's the case, why was Saddam Hussain not exempt?

No matter how we cut it, we need to follow through with the same standard for all. Our refusal to grant him entry is suspicious at best.

Except all the PMO and Jason Kenney's office did in the Galloway affair was decide not to interfere with the decision of the civil servants whose job it is to regulate who is or is not allowed within the borders. There were no efforts made to stop any distribution of Galloway's message or its delivery by other means (i.e. conference call, video conference, etc) ergo it was not an issue of censorship.

As far as undertaking extradition proceedings, you're being ridiculous: why should the gov't of Canada go through all the headache and expense of the proceedings for a foreign national who didn't commit their crimes within our borders? That is the prerogative of officials in his home country (the UK); our gov't acted reasonably in just barring the door to him.

 

[lone wolf]

Does anyone know if the girl without the magic carpet went with the intent to seek out something to be angry about? Opinionated bigots speak out all the time. For Coulter, it's gimmick to sell books. If one doesn't like the play, one should avoid going to see it.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

I beg to differ. I think the student were wrong. They were not just protesting or expressing themselves. They were interfering with normal proceedings.

They had the option of ignoring her and the event. They had the option of participating in the event and asking questions or commenting if given a chance. The had the option of writing articles later commenting on her presentation. All of that was reasonable. But outright interrupting normal proceedings went too far.

Human emotions are hard to control when race denigration fuels the fire.

The one and only protest would have been to have all students unite at the last minute and do not show up as an audience, which will give her the massage that she is irrelevant and they are not interested, Unfortunately the unity part did not take place and the protest got started. The argument is why she should not be allowed to speak, and given that she is extremely controversial the student attitude won over her.

 

[lone wolf]

It sounds like Calgary behaved - but that'll bring on all sorts of new allegations on an old theme....

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Does anyone know if the girl without the magic carpet went with the intent to seek out something to be angry about? Opinionated bigots speak out all the time. For Coulter, it's gimmick to sell books. If one doesn't like the play, one should avoid going to see it.

Where do you see a bigger bigot then her?

So lets say you are a Muslim, I call you a bunch of bad insulting names denigrate your human dignity and ethnic roots in order to sell my book, how is that fair? I thought on the 21st century we are past the days where blacks would not be allowed to ride with white folks on the bus or air planes.:lol:

 

[lone wolf]

Where do you see a bigger bigot then her?

So lets say you are a Muslim, I call you a bunch of bad insulting names denigrate your human dignity and ethnic roots in order to sell my book, how is that fair? I thought on the 21st century we are past the days where blacks would not be allowed to ride with white folks on the bus or air planes.:lol:

Let's say you knew ladies would be taking their clothes off in a stripper bar, would you go in then complain of the nudity? Coulter's reputation was known before one ticket was even sold, so why complain when she did what she does?

 

[Libertarian]

Coulter doesn't even have that odd of views. I don't really agree with her, she's too religious for me, but I have no problem with her expressing her views in a private function.

What we need is a diverse set of opinions. I'd like to see fascists, communists, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, anarchists, and more. I like to hear people's views that are radically different from my own, simply because it sparks change.

I like to debate, but it is also good to be open-minded. Never just listen to smears. Read what they themselves write, then make an opinion.

 

[Libertarian]

Where do you see a bigger bigot then her?

So lets say you are a Muslim, I call you a bunch of bad insulting names denigrate your human dignity and ethnic roots in order to sell my book, how is that fair? I thought on the 21st century we are past the days where blacks would not be allowed to ride with white folks on the bus or air planes.:lol:

Muslims typically riot and kill people when they are insulted. That is an overreaction. If someone called me names and insulted me, I'd ignore, and address the arguments.

If the arguments are JUST insults, then you have ad-hominems, which are logical fallacies. Muslims do on average need to learn to accept criticism, or at least not go ape**** when they are lightly insulted.

But don't confuse Muslim with Arab. Both are separate.

EDIT: While most Arabs are Muslims, many are not. Just like most White people are Christians, but many are also not.

It might be semantics, but religion != race. Furthermore, race != culture.

You could theoretically be an Arab Christian Canadian, or a White Muslim Iraqi, or stranger combinations even.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Let's say you knew ladies would be taking their clothes off in a stripper bar, would you go in then complain of the nudity? Coulter's reputation was known before one ticket was even sold, so why complain when she did what she does?

How about maybe the ones who protested vehemently against here intellect did not buy tickets, due to their disrespect for her racial discrimination, should that stop these students from protest, when in fact they had better things to do with their money instead of listening to a total self centered bigot.

 

[Libertarian]

It sounds like Calgary behaved - but that'll bring on all sorts of new allegations on an old theme....

If people can't conduct themselves civilly when presented with controversial or different viewpoints, they shouldn't even be at these functions.

If you can't argue your positions rationally and calmly, but instead get enraged and start getting violent, you've already lost the debate.

I remember a few years back there was a controversial speaker in the Maritime who was attacked by a mob of basically terrorists. I forget the issues though, or who was attacking or being attacked.

Still pretty pathetic if people can't debate, even, without fist fighting or throwing things or shouting.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Muslims typically riot and kill people when they are insulted. That is an overreaction. If someone called me names and insulted me, I'd ignore, and address the arguments.

If the arguments are JUST insults, then you have ad-hominems, which are logical fallacies. Muslims do on average need to learn to accept criticism, or at least not go ape**** when they are lightly insulted.

But don't confuse Muslim with Arab. Both are separate.

EDIT: While most Arabs are Muslims, many are not. Just like most White people are Christians, but many are also not.

It might be semantics, but religion != race. Furthermore, race != culture.

You could theoretically be an Arab Christian Canadian, or a White Muslim Iraqi, or stranger combinations even.

Nice definition between nationalities, here is what she said, "Muslims should not be allowed to ride on Air Planes, they should fly carpets"

Call them Arab Muslims , call them White Muslims call them anything that relates to a human being. Segregation is a past tense reality in the modern world of the 21st century. In a civilised country like the US this type of intellect doesn’t garner support for friendship. Most people kill when they get exploited and then they are told you are nothing but sh!t..

 

[Libertarian]

Nice definition between nationalities, here is what she said, "Muslims should not be allowed to ride on Air Planes, they should fly carpets"

Yeah but that was just a joke. It really isn't that offensive, but that quote is ignorant, because Islam != Arabic culture, or even Persian culture. Watch some comedians like George Carlin, Jimmy Carr, or Doug Stanhope to see offensive.

I mean if she is serious about banning Muslims from airplanes, then sure. Because first, you can't tell if someone is a Muslim, and a Muslim could easily lie, so it would be pointless. Second, Muslims need to fly, and only a minority of Muslims are actually terrorists.

Call them Arab Muslims , call them White Muslims call them anything that relates to a human being. Segregation is a past tense reality in the modern world of the 21st century. In a civilised country like the US this type of intellect doesn’t garner support for friendship. Most people kill when they get exploited and then they are told you are nothing but sh!t..

Segregation might be, but culture, race, political views, religion, gender, age, social class, and more, will always play a huge role in how people treat you, regardless of social change.

Some of these you have no control over, but still. But who is getting exploited? Muslims? You think an offensive joke is worth killing someone over? Maybe I misunderstand you.

I'm personally not a fan of any religion, because they all give people justifications for any type of wicked or bizzarre action, that they'd otherwise have no justification for.

Spiritualism is great, but organized religion is very dangerous, and that also has little place in the 21st century.

But then, who are we to decide what has place and what doesn't?