Ann Coulter Threatened With Criminal Charges In Canada

[Ian David]

Ann Coulter Threatened With Criminal Charges In Canada
Reported by Ellen - March 22, 2010 -

Fox Nation is reporting that Ann Coulter's hate mongering could get her into more than just the headlines in Canada.

A letter from the University of Ottawa where, apparently, Coulter is scheduled to speak tomorrow, states:

We are, of course, always delighted to welcome speakers on our campus and hope that they will contribute positively to the meaningful exchange of ideas that is the hallmark of a great university campus. We have a great respect for freedom of expression in Canada, as well as on our campus, and view it as a fundamental freedom, as recognized by our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

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. Outside of the criminal realm, Canadian defamation laws also limit freedom of expression and may differ somewhat from those to which you are accustomed. I therefore ask you, while you are a guest on our campus, to weigh your words with respect and civility in mind.

<snip>

Gee, they didn't even mention that she's a two-time voter-fraud suspect.

More:
http://www.newshounds.us/2010/03/22/ann_coulter_threatened_with_criminal_charges_in_canada.php

Hat-tip to: http://twitter.com/tlw3/status/10897107019

[MindandSoul]

1. I think that's a wonderful interpretation of "freedom of speech!"

I think we should adopt it here. . .can you imagine how many teabaggers and Right wing politicians would have been arrested yesterday????

[Bluebear]

3. There aren't enough prison cells!

[Mari333]

5. hahahahaha

[AsahinaKimi]

2. It would be very amusing to

See Ann Coulter hauled off to jail. Of course, it would have to be done by the RCMP.
In my fertile imagination it would have to be this guy, who made the arrest!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PINmbqb4Z18&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AJyb4lMXkg

[Bitwit1234]

22. OH that would be lover-- lee... wouldn't it.

She got off for voter fraud. But of course the republican state of Florida won't try republicans for anything. That's where I am afraid violence will start. Because the republicans won't do anything.

[awoke_in_2003]

27. hey you two...

take a cold shower :rofl:

[AsahinaKimi]

36. Well its true, despite he's married, Paul Gross is a hottie.

[awoke_in_2003]

37. Well, had you posted...

a pic of Salma Hayek, I would have probably had the same reaction :hi:

edit to clarify- I would have had the same reaction you two did. You would have told me to take a shower :)

[AsahinaKimi]

84. Would have never told you to take a cold shower...

I would have probably encouraged you to have some nice day dreams! Thats the fun of it!

[Better Today]

4. SHIT! Do we really need all this hyped exaggeration on our side too! She was informed, and

she may have even been warned, but she wasn't threatened.

That being said, I hope she screws up and ends up in jail.

[anigbrowl]

9. +1

Simply stating the legal difference between one jurisdiction and another is not a threat. One might as well say 'All Canadians threatened with imprisonment over free speech'.

[progressoid]

6. She'll wear that like a badge of honor.

[eppur_se_muova]

7. ONLY in Canada?

How can that be?

[Faygo Kid]

8. Throw away the key.

No wonder I like Canada.

[mzteris]

21. I wish Canada were further South. . .

it's too damn cold up there!


:rofl:

[HeresyLives]

66. Warm and sunny here.

[applegrove]

70. The USA got our weather this year. We had a very mild winter.

[upi402]

10. What about her voter fraud?

Did Jebbums make it all go away?

[Sgent]

11. LOL....

The irony of this letter is astounding.... I wouldn't loan Ann Coulter a life jacket in stormy seas, but the idea that you can have "great respect for freedom of expression" while at the same time putting "reasonable limits on the freedom of expression" is a 1984 scenario if I ever saw one.

[HeresyLives]

12. In Canada you aren't allowed to promote genocide.

We're picky that way.

[Sgent]

14. Yep

you also can't speak out against any protected groups, can be investigated for quoting the bible, etc.

Canada, the country of free speech... as long as it doesn't offend us too much.

[HeresyLives]

17. Mmm no, the criminal code is very specific.

[Lucy Goosey]

18. Not quite...

Look, I'm actually opposed to our hate speech laws, but "you also can't speak out against any protected groups" and you "can be investigated for quoting the bible" are simply not true - the law up here is much more selective about what legally constitutes hate speech.

[awoke_in_2003]

29. I wish we were. nt

[ShamelessHussy]

16. the irony that this kinda thing must be pointed out is what got me... and we have our limits, too

but...

"promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges'

i am a damn yank, and i WHOLE HEARTEDLY support that restriction... only a fool wouldn't, imho.

[proteus_lives]

25. Call me a fool then.

You shouldn't restrict free speech.

[OnyxCollie]

26. What about the consequences of that speech?

Canada's law appears similar to Germany's laws regarding speech, i.e. it's not only the speech that is considered, but its affect on the receiver and the receiver's ability to form opinions.

If the US had Germany's laws, someone would be doing time for "death panels" and the mortal wounding of ACORN.

[proteus_lives]

40. I don't believe that's right.

Stuff like the death panels should be refuted publicly.

But what law did they break?

I think it reeks of doing away with responsibility. I've read lots of dumb shit online and in the papers but it's not their fault if I hurt someone because of it. It's my fault because I committed the action.

[OnyxCollie]

43. There was no law broken here.

Freedom of speech in the US ends with the speaker. According to Germany's Basic Law, if one were to present misstatements as facts to deceive listeners, and through corruption of the opinion-forming process cause injury to a group of people, one would be violating the law. It's a protection against propaganda.

Here we call it "news".

[proteus_lives]

45. People should be allowed to see through propaganda.

Not be "protected" from it. That's infantile.

[OnyxCollie]

49. Right.

Fuck the 4,400+ soldiers that died in Iraq. They should have seen through the propaganda, not been "protected" from it.

[proteus_lives]

53. Wow, what a fail example.

So if Fox News was banned in 2002, you think the Iraq invasion wouldn't have happened? You think the world is that cut and dried?

[OnyxCollie]

63. "You think the world is that cut and dried?"

You seem to think you can successfully challenge opinions you don't like.

Do you own a television network? A radio station? Major newspaper? Billboards? Are you an editor or program director?

The best you can do is get on a message board that has about .001 percent of the US population. For all intents and purposes, you and your opinion don't exist.

Remember all the non-stop coverage of protestors before the Iraq War? No? I don't either.

[proteus_lives]

71. Really? I'm watching myself type these words. I'm seeing them posted.

They are available for many to see...hmmmm...Yeah, they exist.

People challenge opinions all the time.

I'm sorry, I just don't share your defeatist attitude.

I remember the protests, you could go a million different sites on the net for the archives.

You shouldn't want to silence people because you're unsure of your own position.

[OnyxCollie]

80. "They are available for many to see"

How many? I'll give you a hint; One fewer after I write this.

"I remember the protests, you could go a million different sites on the net for the archives."

And how many people got their news off the net in 2003? (Or even now, for that matter.)

I'll leave you to argue with yourself. Maybe you'll win!

[proteus_lives]

82. Guess what?

I don't want to silence you!

My parting advice is this: Don't give and live in fear. If you disagree with someone, argue right back. If you try and silence them, they're going to assume you're afraid because you secretly know they are right.

Have a good day!

[Canuckistanian]

64. Our laws aren't even close to Germany's

Germany has outlawed even FAVORABLE MENTIONS of Nazis or Hitler, with harsh punishments.

We've deported exactly ONE person for hate speech - Ernst Zundel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Z%C3%BCndel

And he wasn't even a legal Canadian citizen. He was even ejected from America, land of "free speech".

[Electric Monk]

90. I was trying to remember that guy's name, thanks. What a piece of work he was... nt

[Electric Monk]

28. You're a fool if you think shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater is ok unless there is one.

There are predictable consequences of that kind of "free" speech.

[proteus_lives]

31. Which isn't that they're talking about.

They're talking silencing someone because they don't like what they say.

I don't like what Coulter says either but I don't care if she says it.

[Electric Monk]

33. Re-read the OP. nt

[proteus_lives]

42. I've read the OP.

And I don't agree with it.

[ShamelessHussy]

38. "promoting hatred against any identifiable group" - FYI

that's what WE are talking about, from the OP.

that leads to MURDER, and worse... and has REPEATEDLY, on GRAND SCALES, even, in the near and distant past.

that should be outlawed in my opinion, and only a fool, imho, would embrace such harmful exhibition, and exhalation, of HATE.

[proteus_lives]

44. So people aren't responsible for their own actions.

I've always been of the mind that stupid and vile ideas should challenged, not silenced.

I've walked past neo-Nazis rallies. People spewing their hate. The crowd protesting them was far larger. That's freedom of expression.

If the Canadians have a problem with Coulter then they should protest the shit out of her.

Only a fool would embrace the moral cowardice of not letting someone speak.

[ShamelessHussy]

46. they are, and their words, that's the point

but to repeat myself, we have limits here, too... and imho, don't go far enough when promoting hatred & violence against identifiable groups of people is not prosecuted.

look, i agree with Canada, and Germany, on that point, and stated my reasons why, you apparently have no concern for weighing the consequences of someone's actions (yes, speaking is an action, too - and yes, you even noted it in your subject line) but, again, i am of the opinion, that only a fool would not be concerned with the consequences of someone's actions.

:bye:

[proteus_lives]

47. We disagree.

I have no problem with that.

I hope you don't try to classify my statement and get it silenced because you're afraid.

[ShamelessHussy]

54. precisely

but go ahead and say some dumb ass hate speech on here and you can BET, that I will SHUT U DOWN.

:hi:

[proteus_lives]

57. Because it's a privately owned site.

But I could walk outside and say what I wish, start my own website. Try to get a rally started, hand-out pamphlets.

Personally I don't think I would tombstone a single person on DU. I'd rather debate with them.

[ShamelessHussy]

62. walk out side and say some dumb ass hate speech in my neighborhood and you would have bigger worries

than just the law.

it is ridiculous to feel you can judge someone for their actions (as you stated previously) but not recognize that getting up and giving a speech that promotes hatred and violence against a group of people is not a wrong, VIOLENT, action, TOO.

later

[proteus_lives]

65. And that's reality.

People often attack each other over what someone says. I know that but I don't them silenced.

Your views on speech relieve people of personal responsibility, that I cannot get behind.

Why are you so scared of other people saying their piece?

[ShamelessHussy]

72. aight this is my last reply, but let me do it in pictures, maybe that will help you out :shrug:

WARNING: GRAPHIC

[proteus_lives]

76. Wow, epic fail.

You have no idea what you're talking out.

Ku Klux Klan?

Nazi Germany?

The Holocaust?

You think all those things occurred because of free speech?

:rofl:

And your shock tactic was an utter fail.

But guess what? I don't want to silence you!

[DirkGently]

97. Wow -- uncalled for

The Klan and the Nazis were both against free speech, and were both defeated without curtailing free speech. Way off base.

[OnyxCollie]

48. When Ann Coulter is on Fox News, spewing hatred into three million homes,

how will you challenge her? Will you be given air time to present your views? Do you own your own television network? No? I guess you won't be challenging anything, will you?

Maybe you can write a letter to the editor of your local paper and hope it gets printed.

[proteus_lives]

50. Or I can go on the net like we're doing.

Or I can simply change the channel. I change support the other networks who have different opinions.

We're challenging people all the time on DU.

Why do you wish to silence people? Are you so insecure in your positions?

Fight them if you disagree with them.

[ShamelessHussy]

52. try it

and i see a fresh pizza in your future :P

[proteus_lives]

56. From what?

I'm voicing my opinion. I'm not afraid of anyone here. I don't them silenced.

Why are you so scared?

[ShamelessHussy]

59. "promoting hatred against any identifiable group" - FYI

thats what we are talking about, remember... so go ahead and try practicing some dumb ass hate speech on here against any identifiable group on DU and see what happens to you.

PIZZA will be served.

bet

[proteus_lives]

61. It's their right. Privately owned site.

But I won't stop anyone from speaking their mind in a public forum.

And you shouldn't either, no matter now scared or unsure you are.

[OnyxCollie]

55. LOL!

How many people are you reaching with your message? Just a fart in the wind.:rofl:

[proteus_lives]

58. And I'm free to keep farting.

And Coulter should be free to spew her own vile opinions.

Why are you so scared?

[OnyxCollie]

67. Not scared.

Where did I say that? Or are you using "free speech" to put words in my mouth?

[proteus_lives]

73. Do you want to silence me?

I'm asking if you're scared because I think you're scared.

[Electric Monk]

75. I find it interesting how _you_ are bending over backwards to try and rationalize why *ANN COULTER*

should be allowed to spew her bile wherever and whenever she wants, even in sovereign countries with their own laws on what is or isn't hate speech.

[proteus_lives]

81. Ann Coulter is a vile creature.

I enjoy laughing at her and her spew.

But yeah, she should be allowed to spew her bile.

And part of my posts is I don't agree with how the Canadians approach free speech.

[elias49]

68. Adolph Hitler spewed vile speech, and he had an audience

was that OK?
What's to fear?
Ignorance.

[proteus_lives]

74. Until he started with the violence, yeah it was.

People laughed at him too. The problem was that the German didn't stand up for their system when they had the chance.

You're afraid of ignorance? Then educate yourself and others. Teach, discuss, debate, post, write, vote and the usual. It works.

Silencing others = ignorance.

Living in fear is a horrible way to live.

[elias49]

85. I don't live in fear - I live in despair

58 years old and I've been educating myself, I've been reading, writing to my congresspeople, discussing, etc, etc since the 60's and what did it get me? Republican obstinacy of the 21st century and the Scumbaggers.
As long as people with big megaphones and big bucks are permitted to set the agenda, there is no hope.
Hate speech has no place in a civilized society IMO.

[proteus_lives]

88. Giving up isn't a option.

You want the repukes and baggers gone? Then fight them.

[HeresyLives]

69. No, sorry.

We don't need people inciting genocide.

Neither do you.

[proteus_lives]

77. I don't expect you to support free speech.

You don't have the track record for it.

[HeresyLives]

79. You have no idea WHAT you think.

[proteus_lives]

83. Everyone knows what you think.

[HeresyLives]

87. No...you've never asked actually.

You just assign me various stances, and assume I agree with them

[proteus_lives]

89. I've never assigned you a thing.

You broadcast them.

[proteus_lives]

78. Dupe.

[Chemisse]

93. So what if that speech hurts someone?

I am not advocating a side here, just thinking out loud basically.

If someone tells somebody else they would like to see them naked, etc, etc, and those comments were not welcome, they would be sexually harassing them.

If somebody is bellowing a psychotic rant on a street corner, they are disturbing the peace.

If a person tells his friends he would like to see someone killed, and they do the deed, he is accessory to murder.

So it seems we have a lot of laws that restrict free speech if it causes harm to someone. Isn't that what Canada has? A restriction on speech that spews hatred toward a group, which could presumably cause them harm in a variety of ways?

[proteus_lives]

32. Also not what we're talking about.

[Electric Monk]

35. Is there an echo? nt

[proteus_lives]

41. Sorry, meant to reply to another poster.

[tabasco]

13. Is she going to visit with Canadian Vietnam vets?

She better study up on her history, too.

[msanthrope]

24. I will never, ever, forget that bit of Coulter idiocy.....n/t

[Auggie]

15. She still around? I thought she died of irrelevancy...

[RainDog]

19. LOL!!! Coulter's whole schtick is hate.

you know, since I stopped watching her videos online (I never saw her on tv, just clicked through online...

she doesn't exist.

she is a nonentity with nothing about her worth my trouble or time.

It would be HILARIOUS if Canada threw her ass in jail. I would love to see the right wing go off on a fucktard "war on canada" ala south park.

Thank you, Canada!!

[proteus_lives]

20. I have no use for Coulter but I'm glad US free speech is strong.

I have little respect for the Canadian version.

[dashrif]

23. thank you proteus

+1 :toast: they forget it can be a slippery slope

[HeresyLives]

30. Yes we see how happy you are with it everyday on here.

:eyes:

[dashrif]

91. Thank you

wow I have a group of people in the DU that wonder if I am happy or not with people for expressing how they feel it may be a hard job send me your email address and I will donate with paypal so you can support the DU and have a star by your name you will find I treat all my fans well

And sorry but I am just a dummy that believes in the BOR but hey I also believe when children play with loksi (turtles) it rains and my people where fools for believing Oklahoma would be their's as long as the sky was blue and the grass was green so that makes me a double dummy for believing in anything the great white fathers wrote or said but I do :eyes:

[IDFbunny]

92. Canadians don't have free speech anymore.

They have speech codes and am frankly a little appalled some here would repeal 1A and institute speech codes so as to end 'hate' and anything offensive to any group. If those that want speech codes should be honest with themselves and openly say that they oppose free speech and want it controlled with Orwellian speech codes. This is an up or down thing; there is no 'free speech' with qualifications. I'm uneasy with the 'FIRE!' exemption already; it has become the camels nose.

[lunatica]

34. But that means she'll have nothing to say!

She'll be speechless for once!

[HeresyLives]

39. I KNEW there was an upside!

:rofl:

[Canuckistanian]

51. No, she wasn't

She's not a citizen of Canada. It's highly unlikely she'd be arrested for hate speech.

There's a student association that's making that claim, but authorities here have no interest in charging her unless she causes a riot or actually threatens someone with violence. And even then, she'll probably just be asked to leave Canada.

[closeupready]

60. K&R - this made me snarf.

Haven't snarfed for so long, so thanks. :rofl:

[Dr Morbius]

86. I saw nothing in the story which even suggested...

...that Ms. Coulter's right to free speech would be curtailed in Canada. I saw nothing which indicates people can't speak freely in Canada. I did see that the Canadians are a lot tougher than the Americans when it comes to holding people accountable for their speech.

And I don't see anything wrong with that.

Freedom means embracing consequences. Freedom is NOT the absence of consequences; that's a childish fantasy.

[joeybee12]

94. She wasn't "threatened"...she was "informed" about their laws...n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

95. Does Ms. Coulter have her escape route planned?

That lady cannot open her big mouth without putting big foot in it.

[WeekendWarrior]

96. I gotta side with Coulter on this one

I hate her, but I value her right to say whatever the hell she wants no matter how repugnant it might be.

[Iggo]

98. That'd be wonderful if she was saying it in the U.S.

But she's in Canada. Their country. Their laws. She can fucking suck it.