tkhayes 140 #1 March 23, 2010 Quotehttp://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/23/ottawa-coulter-speech.html the really sad part is that 800 people showed up..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #2 March 23, 2010 Quote Quote http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/23/ottawa-coulter-speech.html the really sad part is that 800 people showed up..... Damn them for not properly hating any conservative, anyway!! Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #3 March 23, 2010 Quote Quote Quote http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/23/ottawa-coulter-speech.html the really sad part is that 800 people showed up..... Damn them for not properly hating any conservative, anyway!! I vote conservative, but I wouldn't go to listen to a lightweight like that speak. I really think Limbaugh, Hannity, et al understand that they are entertainers and while the general thrust of their arguments is true to their beliefs, the extent of the bombast is just the show business. I don't think she gets that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #4 March 23, 2010 Quote Quote http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/23/ottawa-coulter-speech.html the really sad part is that 800 people showed up..... Maybe she can stay for good and cougerize CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #5 March 23, 2010 QuoteQuotehttp://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/23/ottawa-coulter-speech.html the really sad part is that 800 people showed up..... I'd like to think that it was simply morbid curiosity. I'm assuming that someone paid her to speak. THAT's the real crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #6 March 23, 2010 disguise her as a wolf. Let Sarah Palin shoot her from a helicopter. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #7 March 23, 2010 Quote disguise her as a wolf. Let Sarah Palin shoot her from a helicopter. It would be a lot more fun to put her in a baby seal costume Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #8 March 23, 2010 Quote Maybe she can stay for good and cougerize CanuckInUSA I am sorry Coulter does nothing for me. Please show me one once of evidence where I have ever supported anything this woman has said. However it is rather interesting that the vice-president of the University of Ottawa Francois Houle has threaten Ms Coulter with a lawsuit if she says anything during her speeches that Mr Houle feels is inappropriate. Obviously free speech only applies to some in this ever so politically correct nation. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #9 March 23, 2010 Actually he didn't threaten her. He gently reminded her that the limits to freedom of speech are different here than in the US. The truth is she has said things in the past that could get her into trouble here. BTW University VPs don't press criminal charges, prosecutors do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #10 March 23, 2010 Quote Quote Maybe she can stay for good and cougerize CanuckInUSA I am sorry Coulter does nothing for me. Please show me one once of evidence where I have ever supported anything this woman has said. However it is rather interesting that the vice-president of the University of Ottawa Francois Houle has threaten Ms Coulter with a lawsuit if she says anything during her speeches that Mr Houle feels is inappropriate. Obviously free speech only applies to some in this ever so politically correct nation. Is there any truth to his statement that promotion of hatred towards a group is punishable by law? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbwing 0 #11 March 23, 2010 In short, yes. Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code make it a criminal offence to: -advocate genocide -publicly incite hatred -wilfully promote hatred against an "identifiable group An identifiable group is defined as any section of the public distinguished by: colour race religion ethnic origin sexual orientation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #12 March 23, 2010 Quote Quote Maybe she can stay for good and cougerize CanuckInUSA I am sorry Coulter does nothing for me. Please show me one once of evidence where I have ever supported anything this woman has said. However it is rather interesting that the vice-president of the University of Ottawa Francois Houle has threaten Ms Coulter with a lawsuit if she says anything during her speeches that Mr Houle feels is inappropriate. Obviously free speech only applies to some in this ever so politically correct nation. What other than being rather rabid conservatives that believe all liberals are traitors, etc etc etc, and so on and so forth???? Birds of a feather and all that Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #13 March 23, 2010 QuoteIn short, yes. Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code make it a criminal offence to: -advocate genocide -publicly incite hatred -wilfully promote hatred against an "identifiable group An identifiable group is defined as any section of the public distinguished by: colour race religion ethnic origin sexual orientation Well, she's pretty much done all that here in the US so one might think she'd appreciate the prescient letter from the Provost. Nah. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #14 March 23, 2010 Quote What other than being rather rabid conservatives You forget (or were not aware) I am not religious so this automatically excludes myself from being a Conservative. This also means I disagree with most of the crap Ms Coulter spews. Do not confuse my severe dislike of the "Liberal Party of Canada" for a perceived dislike of Liberal people. I do not agree with everything Liberal people say and do, but the two are very different (Liberal people and the "Liberal Party of Canada"). Being in the USA you and your media pay little to no attention as to what goes on up here. But my dislike of the "Liberal Party of Canada" has everything to do with their long history of stealing money from the Canadian tax payer while they continue to spew lies to their lemmings as they arrogantly still refer to themselves as "The Natural Governing Party, the only people who should ever be allowed to govern in Canuckistan". Back on topic, I could care less about Ms Coulter and her speeches while she is here. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #15 March 23, 2010 QuoteIn short, yes. Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code make it a criminal offence to: -advocate genocide -publicly incite hatred -wilfully promote hatred against an "identifiable group An identifiable group is defined as any section of the public distinguished by: colour race religion ethnic origin sexual orientation Good to see specifics, but what does that really mean? No free speech? None against popular groups? Or hardly any different from the US standard where inciting violence (or yelling fire) isn't protected speech either? Would a holocaust denier get jailed? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbwing 0 #16 March 23, 2010 QuoteGood to see specifics, but what does that really mean? No free speech? None against popular groups? Or hardly any different from the US standard where inciting violence (or yelling fire) isn't protected speech either? Would a holocaust denier get jailed? Holocaust deniers have been jailed - but that's been for publishing false information (subsequently, those convictions were overturned by the Supreme Court of Canada as being unconstitutional). I'm not sure of any high profile cases regarding hate speech convictions. Crown Prosecutors seem leary about charging people under 318 or 319. That is to say they will charge them, but usually, the charges are reduced to something less severe. It is interesting that there is a case right now of a university student Salman Hossain. He openly advocates the killing of Jews, Canadian soldiers and Canadian politicians. This has been ongoing for the last 2 years, yet the law doesn't seem willing to proceed with hate speech charges. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #17 March 23, 2010 Quote Good to see specifics, but what does that really mean? No free speech? None against popular groups? Or hardly any different from the US standard where inciting violence (or yelling fire) isn't protected speech either? Would a holocaust denier get jailed? Haven't got time right now to look it up, but in the '80s two high profile cases of anti-Jew nuts went to the SCOC. Jim Keegstra was charged with disseminating "false news" by teaching his high school class that the holocaust did not happen. The law was thrown out. At the same time Earnst Zundle was charged with promoting hatred against an identifiable group. The same court upheld this law. Both votes were 5 to 4 with one justice swinging. You can say the Jews are assholes, but you cannot say we should kill them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbwing 0 #18 March 23, 2010 Quote Haven't got time right now to look it up, but in the '80s two high profile cases of anti-Jew nuts went to the SCOC. Jim Keegstra was charged with disseminating "false news" by teaching his high school class that the holocaust did not happen. The law was thrown out. At the same time Earnst Zundle was charged with promoting hatred against an identifiable group. The same court upheld this law. Both votes were 5 to 4 with one justice swinging. You can say the Jews are assholes, but you cannot say we should kill them. Ahh. Right, I forgot about Keegstra. But I think that his conviction was upheld by the SCOC, but Zundels was overturned. Keegstra's conviction was on hate and fell within section 319, but Zundel conviction was on publishing false information. As I mentioned, that law was deemed unconstitutional by the SCOC. He was convicted twice (first time was thrown out on a technicality). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #19 March 23, 2010 Quote Quote Quote http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/23/ottawa-coulter-speech.html the really sad part is that 800 people showed up..... Damn them for not properly hating any conservative, anyway!! OMG ITS A SIGN OF ARMEGEDDON FOR SURE.. IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #20 March 23, 2010 QuoteQuote Good to see specifics, but what does that really mean? No free speech? None against popular groups? Or hardly any different from the US standard where inciting violence (or yelling fire) isn't protected speech either? Would a holocaust denier get jailed? Haven't got time right now to look it up, but in the '80s two high profile cases of anti-Jew nuts went to the SCOC. Jim Keegstra was charged with disseminating "false news" by teaching his high school class that the holocaust did not happen. The law was thrown out. At the same time Earnst Zundle was charged with promoting hatred against an identifiable group. The same court upheld this law. Both votes were 5 to 4 with one justice swinging. You can say the Jews are assholes, but you cannot say we should kill them. I'm glad to see the Canadian courts have more good sense about the suppression of speech than the Canadian legislatures do. By the way, "yelling fire in a crowded theater" is not the same as "hate speech"; the former is penalized not because it is offensive or even slanderous, but simply because of its risk that it will immediately cause a stampede that will harm people. On the other hand, to an American lawyer or political scientist, hate speech, even if vile and slanderous, should never be criminalized: thus the First Amendment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,434 #21 March 23, 2010 >Damn them for not properly hating any conservative, anyway! Right. Because if you don't care to see Ann Coulter in person you must hate conservatives. How many times have you seen her in person yourself? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Airman1270 0 #22 March 24, 2010 ...Right. Because if you don't care to see Ann Coulter in person you must hate conservatives... How many times have you seen her in person yourself?... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Really? Joe: "All seats for the final game of the '04 world series were sold out." Quanisha: "I don't believe you. Prove it. Give me the names of everyone who attended the game." Joe: "Can't. Don't know the names. All I know is the tickets were sold out. Couldn't get one." Quanisha: "This proves you're lying..." Good ol' liberal Democrat logic. Cheers, Jon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #23 March 24, 2010 Quote >Damn them for not properly hating any conservative, anyway! Right. Because if you don't care to see Ann Coulter in person you must hate conservatives. How many times have you seen her in person yourself? None, he PM'd me, he hates her. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbwing 0 #24 March 24, 2010 Coulter's speech in Ottawa cancelled amid security concerns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #25 March 24, 2010 QuoteHow many times have you seen her in person yourself? Factoid: when she stands in profile, you can't see her at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
