[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Coulter in Canada (click to view)
Date: March 27, 2010
Ann Coulter, the famously hyperbolic conservative pundit whom everyone loves to self-righteously denounce, was in Canada this week as a part of a speaking tour across various college campuses.

Her presence was not universally welcomed, as you might expect. A much anticipated speaking gig at the University of Ottawa ended up being preemptively shut down by the police, after massive student protests threatened to turn the event into complete anarchy.

The protests came in the wake of other concerted efforts by university bigwigs to shut Ms. Coulter up, including a rather pushy letter from the University vice president who implied Coulter could possibly face "criminal charges" if her commentary was too "hateful," and a campaign by the student union to deny approval of any on-campus advertising of her visit.

The whole episode has spawned a lengthy debate in the Canadian press regarding the state of free speech in this country, and, embarrassingly, in the international press as well. The Provost's claim that Canadians proudly employ a "strong tradition" of censoring potentially offensive speech is hardly a universally supported statement, yet Ms. Coulter's fame and status makes the U of O's bungled handling of her visit a disturbing precedent for the rest of the world to observe.

Coulter, for her part — as she is so good at doing — is laughing all the way to the bank. Her post-Ottawa appearance at the University of Calgary completely sold out, drawing much bigger-than-anticipated crowds. If Coulter has anything to gain from toning it down, it sure isn't obvious.

[andyt]

Coulter Coulter Coulter - Enough Already.....

[bootlegga]

That letter is seen as a disaster only by the right wing, everyone else pretty much sees it for what it really was, a warning (just like those signs on the side of the street telling you that traffic speeds are photo-enforced and if you speed, you might get a ticket).

The best statement I've heard about Coulter's visit was this;

Quote:

One small child held up a sign reading: "I don't have a camel or a flying carpet, can you lend me your broomstick?"

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1003 ... ontroversy

[PTBO]

The whole UOttawa thing was started by her 'take a camel' thing which is hilarious since its probably the less offensive thing she has said in the past decade. The interesting thing I find about Coutler is that she rarely takes a stand on conservative issue rather she just focuses only on attacking Democrats and 'liberals'. She has made a very good living for herself by saying that the Democrats are girlie man on national TV. The prefect illustration of the vacuum that is modern political debate.

And related to the tie article- I think the only pictures where I have seen Fidel Castro wear a suit is when Pope John Paul II came to visit Cuba in the 90s and when he was a pallbearer for Pierre Trudeau.

[Scape]

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2010/03/25 ... sity-.html

I was amazed she did a CBC interview at all. She seems to have her own version of 'censorship' in the form of thinly veiled time constraints. Shes made out like a bandit for this one though, that Provost made a huge mistake with that letter. Like it or not it was a threat as there was no such letter ever issued to any other speaker. If the Provost had such 'grave' concerns then why invite her to speak to begin with? Clearly she had a history of instigation. True the conservative group that invited her could have had her speak off campus but then that wouldn't have incited a mob then would it? And really, this is all about grabbing a headline to peddle books after all. It's not a freedom of speech issue if not one buys her book is it?

[andyt]

For a balanced look at the whole deal:

Quote:

Blocking Coulter doesn't strike a blow for free speech

http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Blocking+Coulter+doesn+strike+blow+free+speech/2723301/story.html

[Psudo]

You know, I was considering starting this thread. Thanks for saving me the trouble.

A college campus is supposed to be a broad mishmash of views ranging from controversial to insane as part of the whole finally-out-of-the-house, hedonistic declaration of one's adulthood. You're supposed to converse with people of different backgrounds, religions, points of view, and idiosyncrasies as training for dealing with the random assortment of people you find in daily adult life.

So what's wrong with Ann Coulter giving a speech? Do you really think there will be no crazy, loudmouth conservatives elsewhere in life that these college kids will have to deal with? Is she really the most controversial speaker to be scheduled to speak there? In both cases, I greatly doubt it.

In case anyone is interested in her side of the story, here it is.

[Proculation]

Personaly, I didn't understand Hyack.

JJ always sends his cartoons like this.

Ok, there's a big thread about the situation but JJ always uses present situation.

I'm glad the cartoons came back and everytime there's one, I like to read BEFORE and see the cartoon AFTER. And 9/10 are very good ! That one is again a great one

[Canadiansense]

I think Coulter or Gore should be allowed to "entertain" their fans.

We have a system in place to correct anyone who is guilty of hate crimes. The entire "safe environment" defence is simply undemocratic and can be used to muzzle dissenting views.

If Coulter or Gore tells us Elvis is alive, who cares? We are mature enough to laugh and ignore such people.

Pulling fire alarms, denying the freedom of assembly and respecting the Charter Rights of those who want to be "entertained" was another example of intolerance.

The same restrictions on access for campus groups that espouse Pro-Life views are being blocked.

[CKASlacker]

Psudo wrote:

A college campus is supposed to be a broad mishmash of views ranging from controversial to insane as part of the whole finally-out-of-the-house, hedonistic declaration of one's adulthood. You're supposed to converse with people of different backgrounds, religions, points of view, and idiosyncrasies as training for dealing with the random assortment of people you find in daily adult life.

It really seemed to me that U of Ottawa played exactly in Coulter's hands. What better way to build media coverage than to have your appearance canceled by protesters, thereby ensuring your next event will be massively attended and your books sold, and all the while claim that your freedom of speech is being repressed?

Of course she should have been allowed to speak - insert any relevant quotes from Voltaire, Jefferson, etc. at this point. I can't help but think that Coulter was a bit like an internet troll with her "magic carpet" speech in London, and U of O bit it hook, line and sinker.

It's a bit unfortunate that Coulter's bigotry obscured what is a more valid issue - namely the banning (or not) of the niqab or burqa. Quebec recently passed a provincial law to that effect, and it seems most Canadians are in favour:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Mos ... story.html

[Gunnair]

CKASlacker wrote:

It's a bit unfortunate that Coulter's bigotry obscured what is a more valid issue - namely the banning (or not) of the niqab or burqa. Quebec recently passed a provincial law to that effect, and it seems most Canadians are in favour:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Mos ... story.html

Yes... I find it interesting that the same members rupturing themselves over Coutler's publicity stunt to gag herself are not having similar conniption fits with Quebec limiting the freedom of expression by some Muslims.

Is it the racist right raising its ugly head or is it simply pathetic hypocrisy at its best?

[CanadianJeff]

If the students raise their voices so much against her and rally together against hateful speech then by shutting down the event one could argue that the students were successful at rallying THEIR freedom of speech.

The whole point of freedom is speech is not to let every person be able run around and say whatever they want. The point is to allow groups or individuals to express their opinions and concerns on what effects them.

The students in this case spoke very clearly and quickly. It doesn't destroy Coulter's right to speak so much as it shows that the students know and act on their ability to speak as well. Coulters visit really was a huge positive in forcing students to use the very right in question.

Frankly that's one thing I'm proud of about Canada's right of free speech compared to America. If we get someone whom we know is a hateful spiteful person we will use OUR RIGHT to freedom of speech to express our views quickly and strongly so the person know that their point of view is not tolerated.

We won't for example escort a group of Neo Nazis down the street because they "have a right to speak" instead we confront them head on knowing full well we have the right to tell them what we think just as much as they do. Freedom is a wonderful thing.

[andyt]

CanadianJeff wrote:

If the students raise their voices so much against her and rally together against hateful speech then by shutting down the event one could argue that the students were successful at rallying THEIR freedom of speech.

The whole point of freedom is speech is not to let every person be able run around and say whatever they want. The point is to allow groups or individuals to express their opinions and concerns on what effects them.

The students in this case spoke very clearly and quickly. It doesn't destroy Coulter's right to speak so much as it shows that the students know and act on their ability to speak as well. Coulters visit really was a huge positive in forcing students to use the very right in question.

Frankly that's one thing I'm proud of about Canada's right of free speech compared to America. If we get someone whom we know is a hateful spiteful person we will use OUR RIGHT to freedom of speech to express our views quickly and strongly so the person know that their point of view is not tolerated.

We won't for example escort a group of Neo Nazis down the street because they "have a right to speak" instead we confront them head on knowing full well we have the right to tell them what we think just as much as they do. Freedom is a wonderful thing.

Interesting argument, and seems very Canadian with it's focus on the group vs the individual.

But what if it turns out that we're the Nazis, and the voice we silenced is that of reason? Group think is very dangerous, and Canada is not above falling into it.

[Gunnair]

andyt wrote:

CanadianJeff wrote:

If the students raise their voices so much against her and rally together against hateful speech then by shutting down the event one could argue that the students were successful at rallying THEIR freedom of speech.

The whole point of freedom is speech is not to let every person be able run around and say whatever they want. The point is to allow groups or individuals to express their opinions and concerns on what effects them.

The students in this case spoke very clearly and quickly. It doesn't destroy Coulter's right to speak so much as it shows that the students know and act on their ability to speak as well. Coulters visit really was a huge positive in forcing students to use the very right in question.

Frankly that's one thing I'm proud of about Canada's right of free speech compared to America. If we get someone whom we know is a hateful spiteful person we will use OUR RIGHT to freedom of speech to express our views quickly and strongly so the person know that their point of view is not tolerated.

We won't for example escort a group of Neo Nazis down the street because they "have a right to speak" instead we confront them head on knowing full well we have the right to tell them what we think just as much as they do. Freedom is a wonderful thing.

Interesting argument, and seems very Canadian with it's focus on the group vs the individual.

But what if it turns out that we're the Nazis, and the voice we silenced is that of reason? Group think is very dangerous, and Canada is not above falling into it.

Welcome to society...

[CKASlacker]

Gunnair wrote:

Yes... I find it interesting that the same members rupturing themselves over Coutler's publicity stunt to gag herself are not having similar conniption fits with Quebec limiting the freedom of expression by some Muslims.

Is it the racist right raising its ugly head or is it simply pathetic hypocrisy at its best?

Neither - personally I find it a quite valid and reasonable limitation.

Western culture and social mores basically decree that you have to show your face in public transactions. Hiding or obscuring one's face is done to "disguise" your identity, often for criminal purposes (think ski-mask wearing bank robbers, kerchiefs in old Westerns, etc.) Obviously there are exceptions (Halloween masks), but generally you have to be face-identifiable in normal public activities.

It's unfortunate that this social more comes into conflict with this religious belief -- but in these cases, the state wins out. Some stricter elements of Islam might believe that stoning a female adulteress is an acceptable punishment. Fortunately, that isn't an option in Canada, and thereby prohibited.