Here's part of what Pravda has to say:
The administration of The Korea Times, an influential newspaper published in the English language has been fired after the paper published disgusting cartoons mocking the victims of the recent terrorist attacks in the Moscow metro. The publishers fired chief editors of the newspaper after the publication of the second cartoon.The Chosun Bimbo, Korean Rum Diary, and The Marmot's Hole have already blogged about this. However, there are no details about who was fired, nor is there any objective news piece or one from a credible source on this development. The Moscow News writes:
The first of the two cartoons (it has been deleted from the newspaper website) was published on March 30, the second one followed on April 2. The first of the two drawings depicts a train on the station. The train has a skull instead of the driver’s cabin. Passengers, all dressed in white, are rushing into the carriages. One of them is wearing black clothes and is carrying a scythe.
The second drawing . . . shows an exploded train. Bloody bodies of passengers are seen near the train. A weeping brown bear wearing a winter fur hat is seen above the picture of the explosion.
To add more fuel to the fire, the newspaper published an absurd column of a Canadian journalist, Gwynne Dyer, who offered readers to perceive extremists from the Caucasus as fighters for independence rather than terrorists. Mr. Dyer apparently believes that exploding people in the metro is a very good method to fight for independence. If he does, he needs to have his head examined.
The publisher of title fired its chief editorial writer and a managing editor on the day the second caricature appeared online.
We do know Oh Young-jin, a longtime editor there and owner of the unprofessional email handle "foolsdie," was moved to the Business Desk "due to a company reshuffle," as he writes in an incoherent piece on the opinion page, but it's not clear whether this is part of the cartoon controversy.
Robert Neff linked to that update from The Moscow News, which goes on to say:
The new managing editor Sah Dong-seok said that his paper did not want to insult Russia, reports Marker website. “Besides, the caricature was done by freelancers and placed in the Opinion column,” he said. “I did not know that this picture could hurt your feelings so much.
Tasteless cartoons and thoughtless opinion pieces have been on the Korea Times website for years but the editors never seemed to mind. I used to draw attention to the cartoons from time to time, but I figured it'd be far easier to alert readers when a cartoon there wasn't mocking some tragedy or other.
(1) Marking the death of a far-right Austrian politician in a car accident. (2) Having a laugh at the Australian bushfires last year.
The Times shouldn't be held accountable for creating these offensive cartoons. As I first brought up in 2009, these are done by a guy syndicated out of Thailand. They should, however, be held responsible for running them, for being woefully insensitive, and for ignoring the complaints of its readers for so long.
The Korea Times is "an influential newspaper" only because there's so little English-language media in South Korea to choose from. I consider the rotten articles by Kang Shin-who and others on native speaker English teachers "influential" only because so many readers are Korean English teachers and English students, but the paper is insignificant on the national level. The English-language media here is largely written by Koreans for Koreans, as either English practice or promotional material, and the Times has proven itself unresponsive to the needs and sensibilities of the expat community here and, as seen from this cartoonist, global readers. It's endured insults from bloggers and foreign English teachers for years, and especially over 2009 came to be held in especially low-regard and on the same level as a tabloid, so it's humorous---but typical---that it's upset Russians that brought about this "reshuffling."
31 comments:
I don't find those comics tasteless
The Korea Times and "tasteless" can't possibly ever go together!!!
And the comments on their articles are very enlightening as well.
In all seriousness, though, I'm not surprised.
In a rare instance I agree with muckefuck, notably the russian bear cartoon. Koreans tend to paint broad strokes and it might be reflected in the less than subtle nature of their editorial cartooning. But editorial cartoons are meant to be challenging, certainly.
Could someone explain what they see offensive other than possibly hearkening to a bear as a stereotype for a Russian? If it tied the bombing to the Russian invasion and made the bear a soldier, that might have communicated a certain "tit for tat" which would be tasteless.
And hasn't Pravda itself fashioned itself into a grocery store psychic/ufo magazine in recent decades too, no? I'd take little of its reporting seriously.
Gwynne Dyer is a highly respected military writer and broadcaster. The Pravda article seems to offer no direct quotes or even a link to what he said. We're to assume the author fairly represented Dyer's words.
Yes, right now there's only two articles about the "firing," from two outlets not any better than the Korea Times. There are no serious news articles on this, and nothing from a credible source.
I highly doubt myself anyone was fired, and I'll continue to hold those doubts until I see this reported in the other English-language papers, and in Korean. If reporters don't get in trouble for fabricating quotations and stories, and if the opinion page editor doesn't get in trouble for letting in stuff from Ron Jeremy, Vanilla Ice, and a 7-year-old girl, I highly doubt some Russians can come out of nowhere and restructure the entire paper.
But, we'll see.
The cartoonist in question is not so much offensive are just plain juvenile. His stuff belongs much more in a college newspaper than a city daily, but then again it's the KT. In case some of us have forgotten what editorial cartooning should look like, google Pat Oliphant or Brian Gable for a reminder.
And speaking of the juvenile, I'll have to quibble with Puffin on the nature of Korean editorial cartooning (the cartooning, not Puffin). While it's true that cartooning should be challenging, pandering to base prejudices is over the line. For example, the crude racial stereotyping periodically found in local newspapers. Whites with large noses is not so bad, but Japanese with beaver teeth, generic predatory foreigners and Africans with bones in their noses is too much. even for me. Imagine the uproar here if Koreans were portrayed in American newspapers as football headed grocers and dry cleaners.
I take exception to Puffin and Brian's characterisation of Pravda as a "a grocery store [sic] psychic/ufo magazine".
OK it's no ITAR-TASS but I would hardly put it on the same level as the K-Times.
As for the supporters of the cartoonist this isn't the first time he has raised eyebrows in certain segments, Australians twice have been maligned (Bushfires and Bali Bombers). The Pope was portrayed as a Nazi (Which is probably the least of his worries given the current situation) And now Russians.
All I'm saying is that if ever there was a time to "get in there" and start petitioning elements of the editorial board and the publisher because of their crap reportage, now would be the time since there seems to be an in thanks to the Russians.
In a rare instance Puffin agrees with me, and in an an even rarer instance is he correct.
The Pope was a member of the Nazi party.
People must be free to openly criticize everything. Muslims got offended at the Danish cartoons portraying Islam as a violent religion, and they responded with threats of violence and riots.
People get offended. Good. Let them. When people get offended at criticism, Dawkins had it right. We should retort we are offended that they are offended. No one has a right to their ignorance. No point of view is sacrosanct and beyond question.
I live in a country of pussy Canadians, too, who shouted down Ann Coulter instead of letting her speak. This is one reason I wish I were American.
I started to write a comment here but it got very long, so I just made a post.
But in a nutshell (and this will save you some time), Monsieur Peray's cartoons should have been discontinued for doing his job badly, not for doing it controversially. This is not a cause for celebration.
It is especially troubling that the KT bent to the will of Russia.
I'm encouraged to see some others here see it the same way.
You bring up good points on your post, kushibo.
I certainly don't want this to become a free speech debate, because I don't want to conflate this issue with the crap the Times has pulled in the past.
It still bothers me that something happened with the editors---it's not clear what---after complaints by Russians in Russia, not after tons of complaints by expats in Korea.
I read about FOOLSDIE's shuffle, but I didn't want to reference it in my brief, uninformative, written-at-one-in-the-morning post.
I like to mock the KT, but I'd never trust.
I wonder if FOOLSDIE was "fired" Korean style - simply told to move to a different position and let someone else with the exact same agenda and level of incompetence take over.
I've worked for a few different schools here and whenever a manager or director fucks up, they're always "reshuffled."
I live in a country of pussy Canadians, too, who shouted down Ann Coulter instead of letting her speak. This is one reason I wish I were American.
NO. FUCK. NO. THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED.
Jesus fuck. Seriously?
The EVENT ORGANIZERS overbooked/overcrowded the venue. The police suggested that they move to accommodate more people. ANN'S PEOPLE cancelled the event.
CBC:
http://bit.ly/a0mRFN
First, contrary to what Coulter seems to suggest in a brief phone interview with Macleans.ca scribe Colby Cosh, it was not the police who "shut it down." I spoke with Ottawa Police Services media relations officer Alain Boucher this morning, and he told me, in no uncertain terms, that it was her security team that made the decision to call off the event. "We gave her options" -- including, he said, to "find a bigger venue" -- but "they opted to cancel ... It's not up to the Ottawa police to make that decision."
CTV:
http://bit.ly/bv98Xl
CTV's Daniele Hamamdjian said "a combination of overcapacity and utter disorganization" contributed to the collapse of the event.
"It was a disaster in terms of just organization, which is probably one of the reasons why it was cancelled," Hamamdjian told CTV News Channel from Ottawa on Wednesday morning.
MacLean's:
http://bit.ly/cwMets
As for the protesters outside the auditorium, Boucher said, “I wouldn’t call them rioters. They were people there to voice their concerns.”
A statement issued Wednesday said that the university made no attempts to bar Coulter from appearing on campus. “Last night, the organizers themselves decided at 7:50 p.m. to cancel the event and so informed the University’s Protection Services staff on site. At that time, a crowd of about one thousand people had peacefully gathered at Marion Hall,” the statement said.
Seriously. If you're going to cry crocodile tears about Canadians being pussies, stop being such a pussy yourself, you dishonest little bitch. COULTER SILENCED HERSELF.
The protesters had A RIGHT to have their voices heard. Coulter had A RIGHT to have hers heard. The protesters exercised their rights. Coulter DID NOT. Stop distorting facts if you're going to even attempt to contribute to discussions. I'm embarrassed that you're Canadian if you can't bloody read and understand simple facts. Stop giving the rest of us a bad name.
I think this necessarily becomes a free-speech issue, because of the how and why of his firing.
Anyway, Monsieur Peray just responded to my email, which I reprinted here.
Nice job on the email Kushibo. The whole freedom of the press issue is worth discussing here, but I also think that the press has a responsibility to inform, or have a point.
From the point of view of the press's responsibly to inform, "Monsieur Peray," is very good at communicating a message...to elementary school students. His cartoons are something akin to the cartoons that Dokdo is ours has recently written about.
http://dokdoisours.blogspot.com/2010/04/special-classes-needed-on-dokdo.html
Now I wouldn't consider the KT cartoons to so much have a point as they do report about current events in an incredibly juvenile way, and they might have an informative affect on Korean KT readers who might not understand Korean very well, but aside from that, what the fuck is the point of making light of a tragedy?
This is me posting
First, go fuck yourself
Second, Coulter's people cancelled because of a security concern raised by the university due to the mob of protesters. It has nothing to due with overbooking.
"Instead, security concerns raised by the university kept the Republican firebrand from speaking." Toronto Sun March 23
Since you like quotes so much, here is one from the organizer, Mr.Levant:
"..it was the assessment of police, campus security and Coulter's own bodyguard that there was too much physical danger to Coulter and the audience to proceed. As Ottawa Police Sgt. Dan Beauchamp said, "it's a public safety issue."
In other words, that is exactly how it happened, unless your bleeding liberal heart thinks the Police Sergeant is a shill for Coulter.
Get your facts straight. The protesters stopped her from exercising her RIGHT to speak, but RIGHTS are meaningless unless there is someone there to enforce them.
It is people like you than give Canada a bad name.The police made the call, so again, fuck off and die.
If I may:
The Russian and Korean psyches definitely have one thing in common, and that is this:
Insecure-Nationalism.
Both groups are -- generally -- hugely confrontational self-aggrandizers, both will complain about dubious alleged affronts to them and bloviate on end about things like this [pretty tame] cartoon business, both will take extreme hardline stands on silly nonsense in an attempt to inflate their collective Ego, and both will whitewash history for the same purpose.
I would like both Russians and Koreans better if they could just relax in this way.
@Muckefuck
The Pope was never a member of the Nazi party. He was a child during The Second World War and, just like a million other German kids at the time had to join The Hitler Youth.
In no way is it fair to describe The Pope as a Nazi.
A disgusting bigot willing to brush under the carpet rampant and broadly known child molestation by clergy under his leadership? Well, that is another story.
It's interesting how this story as progressed - keep it coming.
@Muckefuck
Holy shit, seriously? You're that fucking dumb? Honestly?
Here's a quote for you:
"Coulter's people cancelled because of a security concern raised by the university due to the mob of protesters."
HOLY SHIT, REALLY? Coulter's people cancelled? NO SHIT. That's not what you said here:
"I live in a country of pussy Canadians, too, who shouted down Ann Coulter instead of letting her speak."
Your FIRST statement: Protesters shut down Coulter.
Your SECOND statement: Coulter shut down Coulter.
Next, the UNIVERSITY SHUT DOWN NOTHING BECAUSE OF NOTHING.
THE POLICE SHUT DOWN NOTHING BECAUSE OF NOTHING.
The police suggested that they MOVE VENUE. There was 2000 people (whether there to see Coulter or to protest) in a venue that holds 400 people. I doubt you can do basic math so let me help you out with it: 2000 > 400.
Once again, Coulter's people shut down Coulter. They had the option to move. They chose not to. Sorry you suck at this.
Also, your Toronto Sun quote CONFIRMS my point. It also doesn't say WHO cancelled it in your quote.
Furthermore, your Ezra quote (who is OF COURSE going to side with Coulter since he orchestrated this total fuck up of an event) doesn't exactly say WHO cancelled the event. Does it? Let me check again:
"..it was the assessment of police, campus security and Coulter's own bodyguard that there was too much physical danger to Coulter and the audience to proceed. As Ottawa Police Sgt. Dan Beauchamp said, "it's a public safety issue."
It IS a public safety issue when you have at least 1000 people (half of the total group. Is that fair for your logic challenge Conservative brain?) in a 400 person auditorium. I'm astonished at how dumb you are. You're actually talented at being stupid.
Once again:
- Protesters cancelled nothing
- Police cancelled nothing
- University cancelled nothing
- Organizers fucked up event co-ordination and too many people were there.
- All of my quotes were sourced and backed up with multiple legitimate sources indicating the same thing.
- Coulter's people STILL cancelled the event DESPITE that she was offered to speak IN THE SAME CITY, JUST AT A LARGER VENUE.
Why am I still amazingly right and you're still being amazingly stupid about this? Take it from me, you CAN'T win this argument: I have facts backing me up. You have delusion. SUCK IT UP, PRINCESS.
Lastly:
Get your facts straight.
AH-HAHAHA! Do you even know what the word "facts" means? Get the fuck out of here, you dumb fuck.
The protesters stopped her from exercising her RIGHT to speak,
NO. THEY DIDN'T. STOP MAKING SHIT UP.
but RIGHTS are meaningless unless there is someone there to enforce them.
Yeah. Police were there and said she could speak in a larger venue. She choose not to. HOLY SHIT, SOMEONE WAS THERE TO ENFORCE HER FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
You remember what you told me to do at the end of your post there? The door's that way =>
Feel free to use it, you dumb bastard.
@Muckefuck
Want to know how dumb you are?
You don't even realize that I'm DEFENDING Coulter's freedom of speech.
I'm saying she had every right to speak, and she should have gone to a larger venue. The event would have been MORE SUCCESSFUL. They would have made MORE MONEY. Instead, the organizers were too stupid to put something solid together and they cancelled the event leading to wild accusations, finger pointing, and stupid bastards like you not understanding a bloody thing.
Look, I know thinking isn't the strongest of Conservative traits, but you can see how my "bleeding liberal heart" is doing a better job of defending Coulter's right to free speech than you are... right? Right?
Yeah, I didn't think so. I know you tried hard, though. Here's a cookie. Now run along, kid.
Monsieur Peray has written me a second email, telling me "nobody was fired at the Korea Times."
This is me posting
Are you really that obtuse?
You need to learn how to read, you dumb fuck. Here is my second statement again, you cunt:
1)Coulter's people cancelled because of a security concern raised by the university due to the mob of protesters."
Contrary to your SRA reading level of purple, nowhere does this state that the protesters shut down the venue. Rather, it states clearly that Coulter's people cancelled. As the other quotes made clear, this decision was based on the advice of the police, her body guard and the university. Protesters have no administrative power to shut down a venue, but through their presence and actions they in fact were the basis of that shutdown. (I will add that Ann later said it was the police who cancelled the venue. Prove her wrong.)
Both my first statement and my second statement imply no contradiction. Here is my first quote, penis breath:
2) "I live in a country of pussy Canadians, too, who shouted down Ann Coulter instead of letting her speak."
In other words, the protesters' verbal behaviour (and their presence) was the means through which they accomplished Ann Coulter's cancellation..
As for your Einstein level of math, it is obvious that 2000 people cannot fit into 400 seats, a fact so obvious that the organizers were aware of it, which is why they didn’t book a hall for 2000 seats.Try not to put the result before the cause.
3) Nice psychologizing on the Ezra quote.
4) You stated that the police stated she could speak at a larger venue. Right—after the fact, which makes it irrelevant.
5) In regards to the police, George Jonas of the National Post provides a keen insight:
“Resisting any temptation to enforce the law, Ottawa’s finest exemplified Canada’s definition of moral leadership by observing neutrality between lawful and lawless.”
In other words, the protesters were there unlawfully. They had no permit to protest. Yet the police didn’t arrest the protesters for blocking a legal gathering, or for pulling the fire alarm. It is ironic that those claiming Ann might break the hate speech laws are themselves law breakers.
6) You won this argument? Your claim that you are a champion of free speech in Canada is laughable, if not just ridiculous.
You sound like those liberals that say, "Many of my best friends are black" as if saying so covers up the fact they have no black friends. You have no decency.
She also has no need to speak at a larger venue. The problem wasn’t the size, but the fact that the protesters blocked others from entering the hall to hear her speak. The 2000 were not there to listen, but to prevent others from listening. Also, event organizers have every right to turn people away at the door if there is no room inside without fear for their own safety. First come, first served. People get turned away all the time but they don’t break out in screaming and yelling.
7) You also miss the forest for the trees. It is obvious that Canada has no free speech. There is no evidence that Coulter’s words were hate speech. If Canadians don’t allow people with disagreable views to speak, then there is no free speech.
Stafford
The Hitler Youth party was a part of the Nazi party. Ergo, he belonged to the Nazi party.
So, yes, although it is technically correct to say he was a Nazi, that label now is more rhetoric than substance.
I also agree with your comments on his involvement in the scandal. Hitchens had an insightful talk on Maher last week. Worth a watch. Hitchens, as you probably know, just loves religion and all things Catholic. He thinks Mother Teresa is a bitch that should go to hell for various reasons, including her mistreatment of the poor in her hospice.
Thank God for free speech.
Muckefuck,
Read your history again. All youths had to belong to the HJ after the Nazis absorbed the various German youth organizations in the 1930s. However, not all adults could belong to the Nazi party. It was a restricted membership limited to those who had the correct racial and political credentials and displayed the proper enthusiasm for Herr Hitler's world view.
Don't tell me to read my history. It looks bad on you. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Be civil.
"All youths had to belong to the HJ after the Nazis absorbed the various German youth organizations in the 1930s."
True. The Nazis controlled the youth movement, so anyone who belonged to the youth movement fell under the umbrella of the Nazi party. The Hitler youth was a state-sponsored youth movement. Was it ever possible to be a member of a Hitler youth organization that wasn't under the Nazis? No, it wasn't.
"However, not all adults could belong to the Nazi party."
True, but irrelevant.
I will also add that no one knows how young Mr.Ratzinger felt about belonging to the party at that time. Perhaps he hated his forced conscription. In any case, it doesn't matter. His membership is on record.
I'd rather not have to go through the entire thing to find this out: What is the gist of what you two are going on about?
Pope Benedict was a Nazi? A Nazi sympathizer? Canadians are free-speech wimps? Ann Coulter is the anti-Christ?
Can you possibly restate your main thesis so the rest of us can chime in?
By the way, Ann Coulter is actually actor Peter Green in drag.
Kushibo:
1) whether the term Nazi includes members of the Hitler Youth. I say it does.
2) why Coulter did not give her speech in Ottawa. I say it was the fault of the protesters.
Read the comments before responding. Otherwise you will just repeat what we have said.
Thanks, Muckefuck, although wading through the vitriol in some of those comments is exactly what I'm trying to avoid.
I think #1 is immaterial, as he was not the pope or even clergy at the time, nor does he appear to harbor any views that would be Nazi-like.
Given the sweeping way in which youth in Nazi-occupied areas were co-opted, I'd say his Nazi or Nazi-linked youth — whichever you wish to call it — is about as relevant as, say, former President Kim Daejung's stint in the Imperial Japanese military.
Moreover, I think it may also be irrelevant to the situation at hand, as the cartoon in question may not actually be depicting Pope Benedict, but rather an infamous Catholic clergy whose excommunication had been rescinded along with others at the time the cartoon came out.
This is what I wrote at Korea Sparkle regarding this (before I was banned from there in a smear campaign), though I'm famous for being an apologist-for-hire for anyone:
If that’s supposed to formerly excommunicated Bishop Richard Williamson, then I would give this cartoon a pass. Yeah, it’s tasteless, but so are the views of the once-former Bishop, so that’s sort of the point.
But if it’s supposed to be Pope Benedict, then I think this is inflammatory and wrong-headed; it would be clearly missing the mark.
I'm fairly certain I'm right about this, though I suppose I should email Monsieur Peray and ask. The touchy issue was prominent in the press in late January and early February, the same time period the cartoon appeared.
In other words, Stafford may be wrong that it was the Pope portrayed as a Nazi. (No offense, Stafford).
As for #2, it is also immaterial why Mr Greene's, er, Ms Coulter's talk was canceled. It could be for any reason, but it will be spun as a lack of free speech in that country up north with the socialist medicine.
And I'm sorry if anything I said was a repeat of what others said.
@Muckefuck
I'm so proud of you using a word like "obtuse." You're a big boy, now.
Contrary to your SRA reading level of purple, nowhere does this state that the protesters shut down the venue. Rather, it states clearly that Coulter's people cancelled.
Thanks for pointing that out, Captain Obvious. That's why I said:
Your SECOND statement: Coulter shut down Coulter.
Because this was your SECOND statement chronologically. So thank you for pointing out that I made the right observation.
Protesters have no administrative power to shut down a venue
Agreed.
but through their presence and actions they in fact were the basis of that shutdown.
Agreed, only in part. You're forgetting the part about organizers not planning for that contingency and organizing the event better, which DIRECTLY lead to the event being cancelled. You're almost there, kid. You can do it.
(I will add that Ann later said it was the police who cancelled the venue. Prove her wrong.)
Easy. They didn't. It was her people that cancelled it. So says almost every single report on the incident. Ann Coulter says a lot of crazy shit. I'm not surprised she's blaming everyone but her people. Furthermore, it's NOT up to me to prove her wrong. Its up to her to prove herself right. That's how arguing works. You'd know more about this if you'd had any form of education. What you did is called the "Appeal to ignorance fallacy." Watch: People have told me that you're astronomically dumb. Prove me wrong.
Both my first statement and my second statement imply no contradiction.
INCORRECT. This is the REASON I'm taking issue with your dumb ass.
I live in a country of pussy Canadians, too, who shouted down Ann Coulter instead of letting her speak.
Not only is that INCORRECT, it makes NO MENTION of Coulter's people shutting down the event. She was still FREE TO SPEAK. There's a NUMBER of ways this could have been accomplished:
A) They could have moved to another venue. Speech continues.
B) Organizers could have planned the event better and anticipated protest. Extra security could have been hired to handle the influx. Organizers could have found a solution to the commotion. Speech continues.
C) Speech could have been delayed a few hours until things calmed down. Or until the next day. They could have then anticipated the crowd and dealt with it accordingly. Speech continues.
D) They kick everyone out of the room except those who they want to keep there. Speech continues.
I mean, come on. This isn't rocket surgery.
In other words, the protesters' verbal behaviour (and their presence) was the means through which they accomplished Ann Coulter's cancellation.
NO. That's not what you SAID. What you said was we Canadians DIDN'T LET HER SPEAK:
"I live in a country of pussy Canadians, too, who shouted down Ann Coulter instead of letting her speak."
Nor is it fact. Did Ann NOT speak in London & Calgary, or are those cities not Canada suddenly? She was shouted down in Ottawa, yes, but that's because she CHOOSE retreat. The protesters were the EXCUSE. They were not the REASON. The reason was Coulter's people cancelled the event. They HAD OPTIONS, they CHOOSE not to use them: There's a difference. You're still amazingly wrong and I'm using your own dumb words to show you you don't know what you're talking about and you don't even know what you fucking wrote. Furthermore, STOP MAKING SHIT UP.
[...]it is obvious that 2000 people cannot fit into 400 seats, [cut for space] Try not to put the result before the cause.
The JOB of an event organizer is to plan for overbooking/crowding. Their job is to plan for disruptions - like protests - ESPECIALLY in hot button situations like a known hate monger speaking at a respected academic institution. Someone organizing that event fucked up somewhere.
psychologizing
Yeah, 'cause... that one's a hard one to figure out. Ezra organized the event. And he's Republican. Of course he's completely unbiased in his reporting. Pfft!
You stated that the police stated she could speak at a larger venue. Right—after the fact, which makes it irrelevant.
WHAT? How is this irrelevant? Yes its AFTER the event fell in chaos due to POOR ORGANIZATION. Were the police supposed to plan the event for them? That's NOT their job. They weren't paid for that. They're paid to maintain order (which they did) and inform Coulter and their people what their options were (which they did). What more did you want them to do?
In other words, the protesters were there unlawfully. They had no permit to protest. Yet the police didn’t arrest the protesters for blocking a legal gathering, or for pulling the fire alarm. It is ironic that those claiming Ann might break the hate speech laws are themselves law breakers.
INCORRECT, to an extent. The majority of the protesters were U of O students protesting a U of O event. They have EVERY RIGHT to protest because THEY are the ones attending the university. Technically, students have an absolute right to trump outsiders in attending an event held on university campus. If anyone protesting was NOT a U of O student, you would have a point. But I'm not going to give you this one unless there's proof that 51% of the protesters weren't U of O students.
As for the fire alarm, I'm in agreement. That was a dumb move to pull. Then again, I was also 19 once. I'm not excusing it, but I understand it. But yes, you're right. That one person who pulled the fire alarm broke the law. Let's hope they catch him and send him to rape jail.
You won this argument?
Pretty clear that I have.
Your claim that you are a champion of free speech in Canada is laughable, if not just ridiculous.
Only to you, buddy. I'm saying that both protesters and Coulter had the right to be heard. Defend the protesters actions, and you MIGHT be able to talk about free speech. Until then, you clearly don't know what free speech means, so stop pretending that you do.
You sound like those liberals that say, "Many of my best friends are black" as if saying so covers up the fact they have no black friends. You have no decency.
I am Black. So, yes: Many of my friends are Black. Think twice before you start bringing race into this. Let's remain decent, okay dipshit?
Also, event organizers have every right to turn people away [cut for space] screaming and yelling.
AGREED. Gee, I wonder why this wasn't done. You know, if they had a person who, kinda, you know, organizes things... like for big events... that would fall under their jurisdiction, wouldn't you say? I know I would say that. Perhaps if someone had done their job properly, all this wouldn't have happened!
It is obvious that Canada has no free speech.
STOP MAKING SHIT UP.
There is no evidence that Coulter’s words were hate speech.
You've never read much Coulter, have you? You should get on that: See whom it is you're defending.
If Canadians don’t allow people with disagreable views to speak, then there is no free speech.
You're right! It's a good thing she wasn't allowed to speak in Calgary or London, which aren't part of Canada. It's also a good thing she wasn't offered to speak at a LARGER VENUE in Ottawa.
Again: STOP MAKING SHIT UP.
Here's another cookie. You tried REALLY HARD this time. Don't worry. I'm sure you'll come around eventually.
Also:
"You can disagree without being disagreeable. Be civil."
"First, go fuck yourself
your bleeding liberal heart
fuck off and die"
I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE.
This is me posting
You tried to play with the big boys. Now it is time to go home.
There is no way that Coulter could have anticipated that 2000 plus protesters would attend the event, which is why they didn't book such a large venue. The organization sold 80 tickets only to its registered members, and others had to buy tickets. So your argument that she should have booked a bigger venue is meaningless.
Second, many columnists agree that the protesters shouted down Coulter. Your claim that I am making shit up is again nonsense.
As to who cancelled the event, here is a nice quote from Bronwyn Eyre (Star Phoenix):
"University of Ottawa president Allan Rock (yes, our former justice minister), like any self-respecting university president, should have gone to pains to explain to the student body that a university that doesn't promote freedom of speech isn't a university at all.
And once he picked up on the gathering storm of threats preceding Coulter's speech, Rock should have gone to the venue himself to help make sure she wasn't shut down.
Instead, he refused interviews about the Coulter fracas and later contended it was cancelled by her own organizers. That's like saying the tailor closed his shop, without mentioning that the Mafia was putting a squeeze on him."
So again, Coulter's people cancelled on the advice of others.
Now go back to playing with your LARP buddies.
P.S) Try to tighten up your writing.
Post a Comment