Ann Coulter Speech in Canada Shut Down by Fascists
Ann Coulter is in Canada and was scheduled to deliver three speeches on Canadian college campuses. Before she left the U.S. however, she received a letter from the provost of the University of Ottawa. He suggested, without knowing the topic of her speech or any content contained therein, that Coulter should review her speech and he warned that she may commit a “hate speech” crime based on both the Ontario and Canadian speech code. Here is the important phrase from his letter:
I would, however, like to inform you, or perhaps remind you, that our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or “free speech”) in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here. You will realize that Canadian law puts reasonable limits on the freedom of expression. For example, promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges.
When Coulter arrived at the University of Ottawa, a large crowd of leftist Freikorps also showed up and created a number of disturbances. Though the crowd that was waiting in line to see Coulter outnumbered the Nazi-like protesters, the Brown Shirts began to disrupt the event and justified their miniature Kristallnacht by claiming they were entitled to a “safe, positive space.” Yeah, we all need our own Lebensraum don’t we; just like Hitler!
Although the liberal advocacy media has blamed the innocent Coulter, who never got the chance to utter a word of her speech (and to date, it has not been heard by anyone), it also appears to be uncannily celebratory that mob rule trumped the freedom of speech, the freedom of association,and exposed the Ottawa police as generally incompetent in the face of the Nazi Kampfzeit. The writers at the Der Sturmer-like Canadian newspapers have also been very quick to point out that this obvious faction of SS wannabes committed no violent acts while celebrating their cult-like, reactionary outrage.
Well, that is not entirely true, according to this reporter, who was actually embedded with Horst Wessel’s legions. There was the possibility that the situation could have become violent, as the Hitler Youth of Ottawa smashed fire alarms, broke into buildings, and physically threatened those there to see Coulter’s speech.
Now, Coulter says that she may file charges against this neo-Hitlerian mob and the University of Ottawa professor, based on the very hate speech human rights law that she was warned about.
Does she have a case?
According to the law in Canada, she does.
According to Part 1 of the Human Rights Code of Ontario, “Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to services, goods and facilities, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability.”
Also, according to Part 1, Clause 5 of the code: “Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to employment without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability.”
and; “Every person who is an employee has a right to freedom from harassment in the workplace by the employer or agent of the employer or by another employee because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or disability.”
Also, Clause 9; “No person shall infringe or do, directly or indirectly, anything that infringes a right under this Part.”
Thus, if Coulter can prove that she was deprived of employment and the services of the university because of discrimination based on her creed, she has a case. As she said in the You Tube video above, her creed is conservatism and she has been discriminated against for that.
It won’t be difficult to prove discrimination because it is not possible that the professor or the mob were reacting to anything Coulter said or wrote (because she never got the chance to speak) and they could never prove their faux outrage was caused by anything other than their own discrimination.
All I can say is, “You go girl!”
I also think it is obvious that mob rule like that exhibited in Ottawa, proves that liberalism is essentially eating itself. First, I think that the need to silence a speaker that you disagree with shows incredible weakness in one’s own intellectual position. It is one thing, for instance, if I reject comments on my blog (which I do not generally do) because I do not think they promote the overall purpose I intended for my blog. This blog is essentially my own creation, and I choose what goes in it.
It is quite another when you feel the need to deprive other people from hearing a speaker they want to hear. Although liberals will offer all kinds of convoluted logic for suppressing free speech, as most liberals do now in Canada, it is still the suppression of speech and deserves to be called “Fascist.”
I think it ironic that the mob that suppressed Coulter’s speech, may have violated the same law they no doubt felt they were acting in the spirit of when they shut down Coulter’s event. But, more importantly, it also shows that the real nature of hate speech laws are in their political effect; as it always seems to be conservatives who are at the butt end of this frivolous, petty, puerile bullshit.
At our You Tube site, we have the entire testimony of Mark Steyn at the Ontario Parliament after he was accused of hate speech by the Ontario Human Rights Commission for things he wrote in his book America Alone. If you have the time, it is really compelling stuff.