Colby Cosh

Colby Cosh

Maclean’s man in Edmonton writes about everything. Follow Colby on Twitter: @colbycosh

Coulter at UOttawa: song of the predictables

by Colby Cosh on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 9:42pm - 147 Comments

A crowd of columnists, tweeters, talking heads, and bloggers is already preparing to bore you with cynical proclamations that the Ann Coulter fiasco at the University of Ottawa was a “victory” for Coulter, that it was precisely the “martyrdom” she was looking for, and that it was “exactly what she wanted.” I would ask them to consider one question that is usually overlooked even by defenders of freedom of speech: what about the students’ right to hear Ann Coulter, or any other obnoxious political performance artist whose views they might like to entertain? Did they win too? Did they get exactly what they wanted? If we rebranded freedom to speech as the freedom to hear, as Robin Hanson has proposed, would the real nature of the harm be clearer?

When conservative students connect the dots and figure out that they too can assemble mobs and pull fire alarms—heaven forbid that there should ever be two sides to such undignified situationist power contests; the worst people are guaranteed to win no matter what—will we all greet that development with a dismissive sigh? (Would the Nazi metaphors stay locked in the drawer for very long?) One is tempted to compile a list of upcoming Canadian campus events featuring leftist speakers who have ever expressed a view objectionable to somebody or other. There must surely be about fifty of these a week, even if you don’t count ordinary scheduled classes. Ann Coulter’s safety is yours and mine. To which I feel I can only add: “Duh”.

Bookmark and Share
  • http://twitter.com/pottergold @pottergold

    Couldn't agree more. Except Hanson should be referencing Tom Scanlon — who re-oriented the debate around the "right to hear" forty years ago: http://philosophy.ucsd.edu/faculty/rarneson/Cours…

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/colbycosh colbycosh

      He probably picked it up from Frederick Schauer, if anybody.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

    "Ann Coulter's safety is yours and mine."

    Yeah, like George Galloway's right to enter Canada is yours and mine.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

    The University of Ottawa has the right to deny the opportunity to speak to anybody it pleases. It's not the State.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/colbycosh colbycosh

      So there's no problem then, is what you're saying?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

        No, just that there's no need to get all righteous about it. The fire-alarm puller broke the law against public mischief. End of story. Don't like it? Try holding another event. Or get mentally somewhat tougher. Or both.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

      The UofO was willing to hold the event until the mob of jerks made it impossible, Jack.

      And your concert blurb? Duh. Wrong story. The story is fans, including you, appear at a scheduled Blue Rodeo concert, and some schmuck who never got over the lack of respect shown to Corey Hart and Luba phones in a bomb threat, forcing everyone to evacuate. That is criminal conduct interfering with your right to hear.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/colbycosh colbycosh

        Is there a Luba Liberation Front?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

          Yeah. They keep trying to let it go, but someone pipes up that the best is yet to come. It's just the storm before the calm, Colby. The storm before the calm…

          OK, so now you know when this can-con radio listener went to high school…

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

      But the issue is not "the University has no right to schedule speakers as it pleases" so much as "people pulling fire alarms and trying to shut down a speech because they disagree with the speaker are hysterical loons". non?

      Although I'm all for any sort of law that forces Blue Rodeo to play at my whim.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

      It wasn't the university that stopped it, it was a bunch of students sabotaging the event and threatening violence. There was a huge crowd of people to see her. There was a group of 20-30 students sabotaging the event, while there were hundreds of people waiting for the event to start, many of them also students. Just like at any event, whether a sporting event or a concert, an unruly mob should be handled by the police, otherwise we risk a descent into barbarism.

    • Melanie

      You don't have to listen to her, you could stay away! Wait until someone tries to stop your free speech!!! Ann is not a hate monger, she likes to push buttons and says what many are afraid to say.

  • http://www.smalldeadanimals.com Kate

    Cosh, the two aren't mutually exclusive.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/colbycosh colbycosh

      Obviously not, but in free speech controversies, the absolutists often give themselves the hardest part of the assignment–defending the demagogue or the fringe nutjob or the Klansman, rather than the right of the audience to receive and evaluate information (or indeed even just to know what some kooks are thinking and saying). In this case there's going to be a lot of useless debate over whether Coulter is on this side or that side of some ethical line that hasn't even been explicitly drawn.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

        aren't occurrences like this one part of the process of drawing that ever evolving line?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/craigola craigola

        "the absolutists often give themselves the hardest part of the assignment–defending the demagogue or the fringe nutjob or the Klansman, rather than the right of the audience to receive and evaluate information (or indeed even just to know what some kooks are thinking and saying)."

        I always thought this was the point, that the principle of the freedom of expression applies when it's easy to defend, of course, but especially when it's difficult.
        That said, as has been acknowledged before, the freedom of expression doesn't give anyone a free pass to say whatever they want without getting answered back. Allowing for the possibility that Coulter's potential audience has the right to hear her speak, where, temporally, would this fit in with all the other freedom of expression going on? Should the protesters have held their tongues until after Ms. Coulter had been heard by her audience before they said anything?
        Wasn't it the police who pulled the plug? Wouldn't it have been the police, then, who prevented Ms. Coulter from speaking, therefore violating her audience's right to hear? Maybe someone should rein them in; it seems more and more of our rights are curbed every day in pursuit of a sense of security that is proving rather illusory.
        In any case, was it a severe violation? Ms. Coulter's body of work is quite available; do we have reason to believe that this speech would have contained material that differed substantially from that? So many questions, only one way to find out for sure: either she or someone from that audience needs to lawyer up.

  • DianeG

    Too bad the event was cancelled. Whoever pulled the fire alarm should be charged with mischief and assessed costs. Let the students hear and hope they learn that what Coulter offers is not wit and not "satire" but nasty nonsense.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

      The cops that eventually arrived did nothing to try to find the culprit, or to find a way to allow the event to proceed. They did nothing but clear people away from the doors, all they wanted was for the event to end so they could hop back in their cars and move on.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Blamo Blamo

        So not only are the universities, the media, and a minority of looney students lefty liberals, but the police forces as well?
        Well, they do support the long gun registry, so perhaps you're not entirely paranoid.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

        i have read in other accounts scf that one male individual was led out of the building by the cops.

      • wilson

        Typical of the Ontario police, no?
        Cave in to protestors.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

          In defence of the OPP in Ottawa, I've been at protests where violent counter-protesters showed up. In both cases the OPP did a superb job protecting us, risking themselves in the process.

          Go easy. The police in this case would have been taking orders; they're not going to press matters against students on their own campus unless the university specifically tells them to or unless outright violence is in the offing.

  • ex canuck

    U. of Ottawa and Canada itself needs to grow up. And those including security forces who cancelled the Ottawa meeting simply have made Canada yet more of a laughing stock. One is embarassed.

    • common sense

      You shouldn't be, you are an 'ex' …

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

    Freedom to speak and freedom to hear: cool. There is also a freedom to ignore. And a freedom to rebut. But no right whatsoever to conduct oneself the way these jackasses did tonight.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

      Instant modification for clarity: Protesters are more than welcome to voice their displeasure, disagreement, and even disappointment that WindBag Coulter has a podium. But any who threatened violence, and specifically the moron who yelled "fire" in the crowded theatre almost literally deserves jail.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

        do you have evidence for threats of violence? i am curious.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

          Nope. I wasn't there. And so far I have not heard of any smashed windows, or rocks thrown, etc. Hence the "any" word. If I had any evidence of violence or threats of same, the word choice should have been "those." And I hastily added my follow-up because the first post alone might have suggested that I was speaking against the crowd's right to protest. And I am not against their (and your, and my) right to protest. That's how you deal with speech you abhor. You denounce and debate with more speech.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

          Well, after reading Colby's next post, I now have a wee little bit of evidence, but it is a statement by Coulter herself, citing her bodyguard citing Ottawa police that threats were posted on Facebook. I would prefer to wait for better confirmation than just from the centre of the controversy herself, who may have a little much to gain from still more evidence of victimization.

      • Mike T.

        Jail seems like a lot for pulling a fire alarm. But I wasn't sure Rahim Jaffer got off too easily either.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

          In a crowded building, yelling "Fire!" (or pulling the alarm) could induce a stampeding panic that kills and maims. If the loser is caught and if (big if) judged competent to stand trial, anything less than jail would be too easy.

          As for reckless disregard for one's fellow humans because one wants to speed around in a vehicle with your faculties impaired, I would sleep better if such a creep would share the cell with the alarm-puller. But that's me. YMMV.

    • Andrew (not P or C)

      Unfortunately, Coulter has the right to be a jackass 24/7.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

        And YOU can believe, affirm and promote what floats YOUR boat thanks to that very same right. Feel free to remove th "un" up there.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

    " ….. usually overlooked even by defenders of freedom of speech: what about the students’ right to hear Ann Coulter …. "

    The problem is liberals and their embrace of invincible ignorance. Many liberals are incapable of listening to opposing views and do everything they can to shut down debate. And it is so heartening to see Canada has its own little version of Red Guards, universities should be so proud of the intolerance they are breeding.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/hardmouth hardmouth

      Being intolerant of intolerance is a good thing… otherwise tolerance can't exist in the first place

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

        Obviously the phrase intolerant of intolerance makes no sense. It's not tolerance of the people you like that makes you a tolerant person. It's tolerance of the people you don't like. And the reason you don't like them is often that they don't like you.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/hardmouth hardmouth

          I can not like someone and still respect them as a person. The reason I think Ann Coulter shouldn't be tolerated is separate from whether or not I like her (I really don't). For instance, I really dislike Stephen Harper, but I still respect him as a person and don't think he should have his speech limited.

          • wilson

            LOL, no just his powers limited!

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

      "The problem is liberals and their embrace of invincible ignorance. Many liberals are incapable of listening to opposing views and do everything they can to shut down debate. "

      Got that everybody? 20-30 protesters = all liberals everywhere. Is this a sweeping generalization based on a ridiculously small crowd of unidentified people? No sir, these were all liberals revealing their true selves.

      And when Grandpa Jolyon says it, you can take that to the bank.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

        20-30 protesters were the protagonists. Then there was also the fact that university security, the cops, and nobody else did not want to bother lifting a finger to allow the event to proceed. The university proctor was spurred on the 20-30 students by sending Coulter a warning.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

          No. It's "one guy pulling the fire alarm" equals "liberals and their embrace of invincible ignorance."

          Happily, s_c_f seems to know the identity, motive and political proclivity of the guy who pulled the alarm. You'll be sharing that info with the police, one would hope?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Blamo Blamo

      And this only applies to liberals, does it? The Conservative government wouldn't even allow into G. Galloway into the country, for pete's sake.

      • Andrew (not P or C)

        *crickets*

        • Mark R

          I though it was the Canada Border Services Agency who would not let him in. Of course Kenny didn't overturn it either. Which I think he could of.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/AJR79 AJR79

        G.Galloway, by his own admission(Isaw him admit this in a debate with Hitchens), funded Hamas, a terrorist group.

        If this isn't too "zionist" for you: http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=156863

        It was a civil servant, who determined Galloway not be allowed in the country.

        If you have any evidence of government tinkering here, please provide it.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/AJR79 AJR79

        G.Galloway, by his own admission(Isaw him admit this in a debate with Hitchens), funded Hamas, a terrorist group.

        If this isn't too "zionist" for you: http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=156863

        It was a civil servant, who determined Galloway not be allowed in the country.

        If you have any evidence of government tinkering here, please provide it.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

    I went to the event. Could not even get in the door despite the fact that I heard the auditorium was only 2/3 full. There was a line to get in 3 blocks long. People waited outside to get in from 7 to 8:30 and eventually realized that the event was canceled. It was very disappointing.

  • Dot

    Will you be liveblogging the Calgary gig?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

      I'll be there. I'm not a Coulter fan. Before all this insanity, I had no desire to attend. Now, I see it as a "can't miss" event. Hopefully, I'll be able to get in.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

        I like your attitude.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

        Sometimes it is very hard to tell when you're joking and when you're not. But that is all part of the fun, I guess. In this case my wager is on joking, of course.

  • http://twitter.com/Nuktubian @Nuktubian

    The university of Ottawa has the gall to refer to themselves as – "Canada's university". With the recent threats made by Mr. Houle, and the absolute contemptible actions of their students, they are now Canada's embarrassment.

    what ever happened to the supposed Canadian character of tolerance? Disgusting, whether you agree with Ann's viewpoints, or not.

    • BCer in Mtl

      In what way did Mr. Houle threaten Ms. Coulter?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

      Read the letter again, and you'll find no actual threats. Just a poorly thought out "behave yourself" letter by a university provost being overly catty.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

        Where in the world does he get off telling ideological opponents what they can and can't say in Canada? It was insulting and demeaning. Is this what academia is producing these days? Unbelievable.

        • wilson

          'Is this what academia is producing these days?'
          Yes, and then their students go on to become journalists.

        • Anon

          He didn't tell her what she could and couldn't say, he suggested that she familiarize herself with Canadian laws which differ from those in the US. Now you can't really read tone into an email. It might have been written as an FYI (though doubtful), but even if it was intended to suggest that she might want to censor herself, she was in no way obligated to do so. It isn't like he told her that her speak had to be pre-approved, nor did he publicly say she needed to censor herself (she is the one that made the email public). So any accusation that the email was partly responsible for the protestors (not that @Nuktubian made that accusation but others have) would put the blame on Ann for releasing the email in the first place. What I am curious about is the event was actually shut down. Yes there were protestors and yes someone pulled the fire alarm but that really doesn't sound like a reason to stop a political event (especially 45 minutes after the alarm is pulled). Isn't there almost always protestors at political speaches. Why cancel this one? Does anyone know?

      • http://twitter.com/Nuktubian @Nuktubian

        I always mention the criminal code when 'welcoming' someone to the country for the first time. Don't you?

        • Mike T.

          The new citizenship guide does!

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

            … and no-one denies that it's intended as a warning against importing barbaric practices to Canada.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

      uhm, how does laying out the differences in American and Canadian laws pertaining to the freedom of expression constitute a threat exactly?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

        Can we please dispense with the ridiculous conceit that Houle's "welcome to Canada" missive was just a friendly FYI? Call it a warning or call it a threat, it amounts to the same thing.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

          if a warning, threat or the provision of information all amount to "the same thing" why do we use different words to describe them?

          that anyone considers that letter to be a threat shows solely they have, fortunately, received the genuine item.

          that anyone cannot read through Coulter's bogus hate crime claim as a means of establishing a self-fulfilling prophecy (step 1: make bogus claim that one was a victim of a hate crime; step 2: pursue hat crimes remedy while suggesting that if the hate crime tribunal does not remedy the situation to one's satisfaction that lack of remedy is evidence that protections only apply to the left; step 3: have bogus claim tossed as a bogus claim; step 4: hysterically trumpet decision as evidence of self-fulfilling prophecy) is sad in that it makes clear an inability to think critically.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

            "if a warning, threat or the provision of information all amount to "the same thing" why do we use different words to describe them?"

            The 'provision of information" is certainly not the same thing. The difference between a threat and a warning, it seems to me, is the degree of specificity. A warning is "don't do that, you could get hurt," a threat is "don't do that or I'm going to hurt you." So there's room to debate between warning & threat, but there's no question that Houle was pre-emptively cautioning Coulter.

            As for Coulter's "hate crime" rubbish, it's not even worth genuine contempt. It is, as you say, pure idiocy.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

            building of your distinctions, I think you are correct that diff between a threat and warning is the ability of the individual delivering the message to carry out the 'danger/sanction'. in this case Houle did not have any srs recourse to lay criminal charges and hence his letter is not a threat but perhaps a warning in that he was "preemptively cautioning" her in the sense of notifying her of a potential danger – which i fail to see as egregious.

            I am glad we agree her counter claim is rubbish. that said i think what she is doing is worthy of contempt because it is a dishonest attempt to further erode our societal institutions. you and I might agree that our human rights institutions require serious reconsideration and revision and we could have a great debate as to the nature of the problems and potential fixes, and I would welcome that. but I fully resist this kind of underhanded approach to legitimization.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

    One of the craziest ironies is that the event would likely have went off without a hitch anywhere else in the city except at a university. But at the university the students could assemble a mob outside their residence door and kill the event. Universities are the worst place these days for different opinions to be heard and for people to speak without threat of violence.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/hardmouth hardmouth

    1. There are no young conservatives… (okay there are *some*. But they're all conservative party staffers.), or at least not enough to cause a riot.

    2. If the issue was just that Ann Coulter is controversial, I would agree with Cosh; not letting her express herself would be a pity. But Coulter is a hate-mongerer who often just makes stuff up. I'm not too fussed when someone who shows a complete lack of respect for others, is disrespected.

    • http://twitter.com/Nuktubian @Nuktubian

      If she is a hate-monger; what are the university organisers of Israel apartheid week? Nazi's? Anti-Semites perhaps?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/hardmouth hardmouth

        If someone talked about Jewish people and Israel the way Coulter talks about Muslims, the Conservatives and B'nai Brith would LOSE their minds and try and censor them immediately…. the government might even ban them entry to the country. 'Israeli Aparteid week' while inflammatory, and probably counter-productive, is not discriminatory towards a group; it's criticism of a state's policy. I guess you could make the argument that the only reason people are picking on Israel's human rights record is because they're anti-semites. While this is possible, it is not necessarily so; people can criticize Israel about human rights because they disagree with Israel's policy. Criticizing Israel isn't itself racist, although it's possible that criticism could be motivated by racism.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

      She is not a hate-monger. The only people who say that are the ones who've never read her books or listened to her speak.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/LaxAtlDfwYow LaxAtlDfwYow

    One might argue there exist meaningful parallels between the Coulter tour and the aborted Galloway visit a year ago this month: both can be seen as extremist; both have repeatedly made what many would consider racist and bigoted statements; Galloway is claimed to have defended and/or funded terrorism and Coulter appears to recommend that states engage in it against Muslims; and both seem to relish the attention generated by their extreme pronouncements.

    In Galloway's case, it was our government attacking our "right to hear". This evening, it appears the dirty work was done by the mob — or at least the mob handed Coulter a reason to bolt.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

      Galloway was not stopped because of what he said. He was stopped because he funded Hamas, a listed terrorist organization. Coulter does not fund anyone. She just writes books and does television appearances, and promotes conservatism.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

        "He was stopped because he funded Hamas"

        He disputes that. Until actual proof is offered to back up your statement, your claim is inaccurate.

        "I have not now, nor have I ever been a supporter of Hamas," Galloway told CTV's Power Play by phone from New Jersey on Tuesday. "If I had a vote in the Palestinian elections it would not go to Hamas
        http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20…

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/AJR79 AJR79

          http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=156863

          The money quote: "ZOA officials said Galloway visited Gaza in March, when he donated 100 vehicles and some $1.4 million. "We are giving them to the elected government of Palestine," Galloway reportedly said at the time."

          Hope that not too zionist to count as evidence.
          I heard Galloway admit as much, in his debate with hitchens.
          Right from the mouth of the cat.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

        "He was stopped because he funded Hamas"

        He disputes that. Until actual proof is offered to back up your statement, your claim is inaccurate.

        "I have not now, nor have I ever been a supporter of Hamas," Galloway told CTV's Power Play by phone from New Jersey on Tuesday. "If I had a vote in the Palestinian elections it would not go to Hamas
        http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20…

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

        "She just writes books and does television appearances, and promotes conservatism…."

        …and racist hatred. Hey scf, do you endorse her assertion that Muslims should be forbidden from flying?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

    Without for a moment supporting the people who shut down this event, I have to address: "One is tempted to compile a list of upcoming Canadian campus events featuring leftist speakers who have ever expressed a view objectionable to somebody or other. There must surely be about fifty of these a week, even if you don’t count ordinary scheduled classes."

    Indeed. So Colby, can you point to a few "leftist" speakers who have appeared in Canada in the last few years who have spouted the kind of raw, racist hatred that Coulter spews on a near-daily basis? If there's fifty a week, this should be a quick exercise.

    Again, without supporting anyone who would interfere with her right to spew her bile, or her supporters to lap it up, you do recognize the difference between controversial or unpopular opinions and sheer hatemongering agitprop, right?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

      agree with TJ that the quoted segment seems rather juvenile, no? well at least certainly tired. yes yes we know, every university class is left wing indoctrination….

      honestly, Macleans you think that kind of triviality is a good way to invest the money I spend procuring the magazine?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

        See, now you used the word "procure" and that brings to mind the thought that it may have been a Freudian slip in relation to the reason for such editorial content.

        And now, I have a cigar to smoke.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

      "So Colby, can you point to a few "leftist" speakers who have appeared in Canada in the last few years who have spouted the kind of raw, racist hatred that Coulter spews on a near-daily basis? If there's fifty a week, this should be a quick exercise."

      *crickets*

  • John D

    I would ask them to consider one question that is usually overlooked even by defenders of freedom of speech: Does freedom of speech mean that you get to speak anywhere you like even at an organized event in another country? I have some excellent notes drawn up and I demand a lecture hall at Harvard!

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

      She did not demand to speak there. That was the venue that was organized for her. People invited her to speak there. Nobody was using the auditorium for any other reason, and hundreds of students and others wanted to see and hear her. You don't seem to realize – the protesters don't own the campus.

    • Chris B.

      No, it doesn't. But if a student group at Harvard invites you and rents a hall, then you get speak. Wow, this is profound! Thanks for leading me through this Socratic dialogue!

      • John D

        You're quite welcome. There will be more exciting dialogues when the John D fan club presents John D live at Harvard.

  • biff

    Leftist don't debate. They're "correct" and as such are entitled to shut down debate.

    The greatest policy issue of our time – the apportionment/restriction of energy based on claims of AGW: to question it is to attract the label "denier."

    As much as question the applicability of multiculturalism as a policy and you'll get the "racist" label.

    Dare publicly condemn radical Islam that preaches death and violence, and your an "Islamophobe"

    All methods to shut down debate. The totalitarian leanings running through the modern left today is frightening.

    • west coast

      Did she condemn radical Islam or all Muslims. Why does a 17 yr. old canadian muslim student deserve to be belittled in her own country as she was in coulter's speech the previous night.

      • Blues Clair

        Indeed, it was sad watching the 48 year old Coulter make that awful camel comment towards that 17 yr. old Canadian Muslim girl.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

        Why did Coulter deserve to be belittled? Coulter held the event. The student decided to attend and attempted to discredit Coulter. And how on earth do you make the assumption that you are belittled when people disagree with you? That's arrogance.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

        She was applauded like a hero by the intolerant leftists in the audience, wasn't she? Hardly a victim. Coulter only had the courage to pour cold water on their celebration party. That was her crime.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Blamo Blamo

      I actually agree to a couple of your points, but you can't ascribe this trait of not listening to othger opinions as 'leftist' alone. Intolerant radicals and bigots exist at both ends of the spectrum – and *certainly* exists amongst right wingers and conservatives.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

        Really. Maybe you can point to us examples of conservatives trying to shout, scream, and bully opponents into silence. It's a tactic primarily used by the left, especially on campus. Remember that group at York that wanted to ban people from speaking against abortion, or that wanted to send speech cops into the lecture halls? Or how about that old lady terrorized by supporters of gay marriage in California?

        The modern left hates to be challenged. It's why they hate Harper, Coulter, or anyone else who threatens their agenda.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/craigola craigola

          "Maybe you can point to us examples of conservatives trying to shout, scream, and bully opponents into silence."

          The healthcare reform town halls in the U.S.
          Some even brought guns.

          Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_PX5L_v_7I

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

      Indeed. It's amazing that, after all those years of a lefty majority government, you're not forced to wear a hijab and speak finnish while eating jerk pork. Being as how the whole totalitarian thing works. Right?

      Thanks for posting, by the way. You've provided my evening smile.

  • Blues Clair

    I'm watching you biff… closely.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

    Are you seriously suggesting that the alarm was a coincidence?

    Here's another fact for you. The firemen came and left. The event was cancelled a further 30 minutes later. The alarm was not the reason it was cancelled, it was just one of many tactics employed to sabotage the event.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

      I don't think it was a coincidence. But i also can't say, with any certainty, who did it and what their motives were. Political statement? Prank? Drunken yahoo?

      Also, meant to type and reply to "Jolyon" in regards to the identity crack. my apologies.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

        Frankly, it's almost certain that the fire alarm was an attempt to shut down the event. Probably a protester who went too far. There were no drunken people around.
        Nobody even left the building when it happened (maybe a few). Like I said, nobody wanted to leave, everyone knew it was a false alarm. I think there was other stuff going on. Most people were really hoping the event would proceed.

  • http://www.smalldeadanimals.com Kate

    I'm starting to think the not-showing-up-to-riot is a failed policy.

  • James Connors
  • http://intensedebate.com/people/GeoffM GeoffM

    The Tea Party would like a calm, reasoned word with the both of you.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

      Name one example where they wouldn't let ideological opponents talk? In fact, they look like their beef is that they otherwise don't have a say in politics, especially through the political system. That leftists get so made at non-leftist protesters is just another example of what I'm talking about.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/GeoffM GeoffM

        Does shouting "faggot" at Barney Frank or "nigger" at John Lewis and (allegedly) spitting at Lewis this past weekend count as not letting ideological opponents talk? Or is it different when it's about identity rather than ideology?

        I think that's the difference. The liberal crazies get exercised over opposing ideology. Conservative crazies get worked up over opposing values and unconventional identities.

        The curious feature of conservative yellers, screamers and bullies is that sooner or later they end up with a show on Fox news. Bill O'Reilly used to be an expert at bullying people and not letting them speak (periodically turning off their mics, reputedly) but I suspect his meds are kicking in because you don't hear from him much anymore. He's passed the torch to a new generation of professional lunatics.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/GeoffM GeoffM

        Does shouting "faggot" at Barney Frank or "n-word"* at John Lewis and (allegedly) spitting at Lewis this past weekend count as not letting ideological opponents talk? Or is it different when it's about identity rather than ideology?

        There's the difference: Liberal crazies get worked up over opposing ideology; conservative crazies lose it over opposing values and unconventional identities.

        The curious feature about conservative yellers, screamers and bullies is that sooner or later they get to have a show on Fox. Bill O'Reilly used to be expert at not letting ideological opponents talk–reputedly to the point of turning off their mics. I suspect his meds are kicking in because we don't hear much from Bill anymore. He's passed the torch to a new generation of lunatics.

        *Irony alert! The administrators deleted my previous attempt at this post, I suppose because I spelled out the n-word. Note to bigots posting on MacLean's: n-word is unacceptable; "faggot"? No problemo

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

          Does shouting "faggot" at Barney Frank or "n-word"* at John Lewis and (allegedly) spitting at Lewis this past weekend count as not letting ideological opponents talk?

          No.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

          lol, you're comparing some hecklers who mainstream conservatives don't support to outright thugs who won't let people speak?

          You leftists keep proving my points for me.

          You hate Bill O'Reilly because he threatens your precious agenda, certainly not because of the nonsense you accuse him of.

          You see, you're allowed to do that in a free country. But you then turn around and say your opponents can't even speak. It's intolerance and, ironically, hate. It's how you want it. Just your side.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/GeoffM GeoffM

            Dennis, I had no Idea I was a leftist. Or that mainstream liberals supported outright thuggery. Or that I was turning around and saying my opponents can't speak–on that last point, I was pretty sure I sided with Coulter and Cosh–or the first paragraph of Cosh's post, anyway.

            How do liberals (I mean, LEFTISTS) and conservatives compare for making sweeping, simpleminded generalizations about each other?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

          Oh, and you engage in yet another tactic common on the left. Imperfection of opponents justifies outright malfeasance on your own side. Harper breaks an obscure promise on income trusts, so McGuinty can lie about his entire platform. Some nut screams a racist taunt at a rally, so we can lynch mob Ann Coulter.

          • Max

            a couple hundred kids show up to protest a hate monger, and the left is a bunch of pinko commie facists

          • Max

            Point being that if the right can point out commonly used tactics by the left, the left can do the same to the right, in fact those lists would look rather similar don't you think?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

          Does shouting "faggot" at Barney Frank or "n-word"* at John Lewis and (allegedly) spitting at Lewis this past weekend count as not letting ideological opponents talk?

          Just found out your claims are false. Good thing there is a real news outlet in America.

          http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589776,00.htm…

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

    named Wherry! lol

  • hosertohoosier

    It seems to me that the event organizers slipped up. If you think there is going to be a security issue, you can get RCMP at the event. It is costly but it salvages the talk.

    • Dot

      Unless the value of shutting it down exceeds the value of holding it. Levant before her Ottawa appearance was all over the air waves claiming it takes an American coming to Canada to demonstrate/remind us how free speech is a Canadian right. How better to reinforce your message?

      • hosertohoosier

        Oh I agree that at least some people behind the event probably wanted something like this to happen, because it highlights their issue. As much as they claim to oppose cultures of victimhood, the right loves playing the wounded victim. On the other hand Ann Coulter is probably not the best cause celebre out there. The other irony is that something like incitement to violence did take place on the part of the folks planning to bring rocks to the event.

        • Dot

          Alleged "folks planning to bring rocks to the event". I haven't seen any confirmation yet from police or Facebook page. Have you?

  • Mike T.

    Given the paucity of rulings on hate crime in Canada, it would have been interesting if she had given a speech at her most vile and been charged. Win or lose, it would have been worth watching.

From Macleans