Free Speech in Canada?

What mistake did these students make? They forgot to identify themselves as bombastic foreign Members of Parliament whom have provided material support to Hamas. Silly students… freedom of speech on the campus of a school at which you attend and live? Preposterous!

Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn, Human Rights Commissions, the public works protection act, pro-life voices shut down on campus…

Is it time we had a serious review of how flexible our rights to speech and assembly have become in this country?

Comments

comments

  • RunnertheFirst

    These folks were given the opportunity to exhibit their graphic pictures in a more private location and to set up a table in the University common area directing students to the location of the graphic pictures. These pictures were so graphic as to be offensive to people. It certainly gets their point across but at the expense of others. Very narrow focus by these students who need to understand getting along in society sometimes means compromise.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Yeah, I’m not a big fan of the dead baby pictures either and I think they actually put back their cause than advance it. But, free speech isn’t free speech when they put you in a “private room” where nobody can hear or see you.

  • Dan

    The opposite of diversity = university

  • Anonny Moose

    They were denied permission for the main location and broke the rules, they deserve what they get.
    These extremists who like to compare abortion to the Holocaust calling abortion ‘genocide’ are to put it kindly misguided, but maybe they would prefer to roll back the clock and see genocide of women !
    These extremists types would probably deny birth control to the same women they seem to prefer dead.

    GAP has caused many problems on campus and elsewhere, their aim is publicity and disruption, we also have the freedom to ignore them.

  • Liz J

    This is Canada? Are Trudeau’s Charter Freedoms not worth the paper they’re printed on?
    How are we threatened by a protest such as this? Are we not mature enough to handle a variety of views ? I’d say the only thing threatened is our freedom of speech. What’s next?

  • http://canadiansense.blogspot.com/ Canadiansense

    Is anyone shocked that a university administration is unwilling to accept a peaceful protest of deemed as “offensive” is protected by the Charter Rights?

    The abortion debate-criticism in a high traffic area is not allowed on campus because those who support abortion are offended by the graphic nature of the posters?

    The right of Staff and students have the right to not be offended by images is greater than the freedom of expression?

    Does this mean I can ask the administration to arrest students with bad haircuts or offensive T-Shirts next?

    I am willing to bet the Student Union will not be helping these students because their political views do not represent theirs and are worthy of equal protection.

  • Liz J

    The pictures of the dead babies is possibly the trigger that resulted in the action taken. It could be considered extreme and over the top.

  • batb

    ST: “Is it time we had a serious review of how flexible our rights to speech and assembly have become in this country?”

    ‘Damned right it is. I was infuriated watching this video, seeing the police acting as agents of the state to silence individuals who were perfectly within their rights, as per Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Carleton’s own bylaws, to assemble where they did in order to express their views, as unpopular as they might be with the jackboots at the university.

    How dare the university “director of safety and security” charge these peaceful, pro-life, tuition-paying Carleton students with “trespassing.” That is bull**it. That is bullying. That is unconscionable. My blood is boiling.

    The young woman who voiced the pro-life students’ rights was magnificent. I hope she runs for parliament sooner rather than later. Watching her being handcuffed and put in a paddy wagon by police officers who are charged with keeping law and order shook me — and made me mad as hell. Who do they think they are and who exactly does the university think it is? Some kind of defender of intellectual freedom? That’s a laugh and what happened to these pro-life students is a travesty of justice. A travesty.

    Carleton University, in my day, used to be known as Cartoon. Yesterday they proved in spades that they are, indeed, a joke: a bad joke. What happened yesterday reveals Carleton to be the opposite of a true university. It’s a washed up, politically correct bastion of illiberal, unjust, jackboot bullying.

    Absolutely appalling.

  • batb

    ST: “Is it time we had a serious review of how flexible our rights to speech and assembly have become in this country?”

    ‘Damned right it is. I was infuriated watching this video, seeing the police acting as agents of the state to silence individuals who were perfectly within their rights, as per Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Carleton’s own bylaws, to assemble where they did in order to express their views, as unpopular as they might be with the jackboots at the university.

    How dare the university “director of safety and security” charge these peaceful, pro-life, tuition-paying Carleton students with “trespassing.” That is bull**it. That is bullying. That is unconscionable. My blood is boiling.

    The young woman who voiced the pro-life students’ rights was magnificent. I hope she runs for parliament sooner rather than later. Watching her being handcuffed and put in a paddy wagon by police officers who are charged with keeping law and order shook me — and made me mad as hell. Who do they think they are and who exactly does the university think it is? Some kind of defender of intellectual freedom? That’s a laugh and what happened to these pro-life students is a travesty of justice. A travesty.

    Carleton University, in my day, used to be known as Cartoon. Yesterday they proved in spades that they are, indeed, a joke: a bad joke. What happened yesterday reveals Carleton to be the opposite of a true university. It’s a washed up, politically correct bastion of illiberal, unjust, jackboot bullying.

    Absolutely appalling.

  • Mthielen

    That is the most ridiculous comment ever. If you are a woman you are probably trying to defend your decision to abort, and if a male have probably been responsible for some abortions and want to ease your guilt.

  • http://canadiansense.blogspot.com/ Canadiansense

    If they had no posters are they still misguided “genocidal” extremists?

    If they chose a different graphical depiction: Jesus + Mohamed in a loving embrace riding on a Unicorn is that too offensive or worthy of the protection of the charter?

  • Mthielen

    Liz, seeing pictures of dead babies shows the abortion supporters that it is indeed a potential human being, not just a bunch of tissue. That is the reality the pro side doesn’t want women to know.

  • batb

    And, RunnertheFirst, aborting a living, breathing human being certainly gets a point across too — that the woman in question doesn’t want to be a mother just yet — an act which is “so graphic as to be offensive to people … [and] at the expense of others,” in this case, the life of the child and, in some cases, the biological father.

    “Getting along in society sometimes means compromise” has me rolling over on the floor laughing my a** off. Get real, RunnertheFirst. No one should ever be asked to compromise their convictions, especially when those convictions are protected by and enshrined in our freedom of speech and assembly laws. You’re asking these principled students to shut up because they “offend” some people? You’re asking them to become doormats because certain people’s sensibilities are “offended”? What a pushover you seem to be — or, at least, you’re asking these folks to fold to those with whom they disagree on a controversial issue. How on earth can there be any genuine debate if one side of an argument is told to shut up — and is rounded up by the police when they refuse to shut up?

    RtF, you seem to have been completely and successfully brainwashed by the illiberal, politically correct thought police in our schools and institutions of “higher learning” (sic).

  • batb

    What “rules” did they break? Name them.

    The young lady in the video read out what the “rules”/laws are in Canada and on the Carleton campus regarding freedom of speech and assembly rights. Nowhere did they break any rules. They simply “offended” some people at the university who took it upon themselves to use the battering ram of the Ottawa police, toadies if there ever were any, to abrogate these tuition-paying students’ rights.

    Trespassing?

    I don’t think so.

    Bullying?

    ‘You got it.

  • batb

    What “rules” did they break? Name them.

    The young lady in the video read out what the “rules”/laws are in Canada and on the Carleton campus regarding freedom of speech and assembly rights. Nowhere did they break any rules. They simply “offended” some people at the university who took it upon themselves to use the battering ram of the Ottawa police, toadies if there ever were any, to abrogate these tuition-paying students’ rights.

    Trespassing?

    I don’t think so.

    Bullying?

    ‘You got it.

  • Liz J

    True.

  • Mthielen

    Bet those bully cops feel so proud of themselves. Get the name of that security and safety guy in the grey suit. All I know if anyone with that university on their resume would never be hired by me.
    And if I had kids ready to go to university it would not be that one.

  • Anonymous

    Carleton shouldn’t have arrested them. Besides the right to free speech aspect, which I support, it would have done more harm to the anti-abortion message by letting people see what a nutty argument looks like.

    These protesters wanted to provoke, the Carleton folks overreacted, and the protesters thereby gained far more exposure than they would have otherwise. And we get to watch it on YouTube, and chat about it here. So, on the whole, I still think free speech is alive and well in Canada.

    I suspect the protesters were booked and released in less time than the video itself.

    Is it time we had a serious review of how flexible our rights to speech and assembly have become in this country?

    I’ll say. Freedom of speech is definitely in trouble if the sitting government bars entry to people they disagree with.

  • Anonymous

    “Bully” cops? I’ve seen preschool outings that were rougher than that arrest. The cops wanted to be anywhere but there, and they couldn’t have been more conciliatory or gentle. They still have to follow the law, though.

    Your beef is with Carleton. Stop picking on the poor cops.

  • Anonymous

    “Bully” cops? I’ve seen preschool outings that were rougher than that arrest. The cops wanted to be anywhere but there, and they couldn’t have been more conciliatory or gentle. They still have to follow the law, though.

    Your beef is with Carleton. Stop picking on the poor cops.

  • Anonymous

    From the Nat’l Post (so you know it’s not biased, right??):

    James MacDonald, a Carleton spokesman, said no students are allowed to set up displays on that part of the campus…

    …which clearly suggests that the protesters KNEW they were flirting with trespass by going there. So I now think they were deliberately trying for an arrest.

    For the record, most people go to university to, um, get a degree.

  • Anonymous

    Actually, now that I’ve read further, it’s clear the protesters deliberately chose THAT location because it had previously been denied to them, and because it’s Carleton policy that no-one can protest there. So, I now think the protesters wanted to be arrested, in order to provide oportunities for y’all to get worked up. We’ve been played, people. Stephen either fell for it, or he’s one of the playa’s too.

  • Concerned Canadian

    How about that actual dead babies is more offensive than pictures of them. Has that occurred to you?

  • ShawnC

    kenn2 wrote: “I’ll say. Freedom of speech is definitely in trouble if the sitting government bars entry to people they disagree with.”

    If you mean Galloway, it was never about free speech.

    as for the students arrested – Carlton U allows the University Centre Galleria (which includes the Tory Quad – where the incident occured). Use of outdoor areas are subject to charge 250.00$ (See Booking space oon Campus policy). I guess the biggest laugh is this:
    “The University requires tolerance, civil conduct and respect for the rights of others. It endeavours to provide a safe environment, conducive to personal and intellectual growth, which is not only free of discrimination, injustice and actual or threatened violence, but is also characterized by understanding, respect, peace, tolerance, trust, openness and fairness.”

    Having said that, the students are-were in the wrong. “The appropriate use of space for each booking in the Galleria will be determined by the Vice-President (Internal Affairs) in the case of space booked through CUSA Vice-President (Internal) and the Manager, Info Carleton in the case of space booked through the University”

  • ShawnC

    kenn2 wrote: “I’ll say. Freedom of speech is definitely in trouble if the sitting government bars entry to people they disagree with.”

    If you mean Galloway, it was never about free speech.

    as for the students arrested – Carlton U allows the University Centre Galleria (which includes the Tory Quad – where the incident occured). Use of outdoor areas are subject to charge 250.00$ (See Booking space oon Campus policy). I guess the biggest laugh is this:
    “The University requires tolerance, civil conduct and respect for the rights of others. It endeavours to provide a safe environment, conducive to personal and intellectual growth, which is not only free of discrimination, injustice and actual or threatened violence, but is also characterized by understanding, respect, peace, tolerance, trust, openness and fairness.”

    Having said that, the students are-were in the wrong. “The appropriate use of space for each booking in the Galleria will be determined by the Vice-President (Internal Affairs) in the case of space booked through CUSA Vice-President (Internal) and the Manager, Info Carleton in the case of space booked through the University”

  • http://canadiansense.blogspot.com/ Canadiansense

    “The appropriate use of space for each booking in the Galleria will be determined by the Vice-President (Internal Affairs) in the case of space booked through CUSA Vice-President (Internal) and the Manager, Info Carleton in the case of space booked through the University”

    What do you think the turn-out is for voting for Student Government? What was the number of ballots cast for VP internal affairs?

    Any bets that the majority of University-College student governments are by acclamation?

  • http://canadiansense.blogspot.com/ Canadiansense

    “The appropriate use of space for each booking in the Galleria will be determined by the Vice-President (Internal Affairs) in the case of space booked through CUSA Vice-President (Internal) and the Manager, Info Carleton in the case of space booked through the University”

    What do you think the turn-out is for voting for Student Government? What was the number of ballots cast for VP internal affairs?

    Any bets that the majority of University-College student governments are by acclamation?

  • Anonymous

    Thanks for the information re Carlton policies.Yes, that line was about Galloway, and yes, sorry, it totally was about the government suppressing freedom of speech. Don’t take my word for it; take the government’s own actions as evidence – they let him in this past weekend. What – did he take the ambulances back from Hamas?You can also take a Canadian judge’s word for it:

    One year after Ottawa branded George Galloway a terrorist, effectively barring him from entry into Canada, one of Britain’s most controversial public figures touched down in Toronto Saturday.Dozens of placard-waving supporters welcomed former British MP George Galloway to Toronto’s Pearson International Airport, less than a week after a Canadian judge ruled Ottawa’s decision to bar the outspoken firebrand was politically motivated. …[Judge] Mosley’s ruling came from an investigation into the actions of staffers in Kenney’s office, in particular his director of communications, Alykhan Velshi, as well as the decisions of other bureaucrats prior to Galloway’s visit. Mosley was mulling a request by Galloway supporters for a judicial review of the government’s decision to prevent Galloway from entering Canada.Mosley denied the request for a review on the grounds that Galloway chose not to attempt to enter Canada after being warned he would be denied entry.But he did agree with Galloway’s supporters that “that the main reason why the respondents (the government) sought to prevent Mr. Galloway from entering Canada was that they disagreed with his political views.”… When consulted [last year], CSIS advised CBSA that they had no concerns with Mr. Galloway’s visit from a security perspective,” Mosley wrote.In his ruling, Mosley said the government failed to establish sufficient proof that Galloway is a terrorist.

    If we’re going to allow free speech, it has to include provocative and controversial speech, and it has to come from all directions, not just the ones you happen to agree with.Anyone else here find it ironic that in two adjacent topics in this forum, we’re lavishing praise on a gory anti-abortion protest, and then condemning a gory (but funny) video promoting a green initiative? Hypocrisy much?

  • ShawnC

    I don’t know what that judge was smoking, but Galloway was banned from Canada for his actions, namely giving quite a lot of money and hugs to Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, and gave him £25,000 of his own cash. IOW, he funded a terror group.

    having the freedom to strut around the world funding murderous terrorists and to be denied entry in our country is not the same thing as freedom of speech.

    Galloway said in this speech to toronto says that he doesn’t defend freedom of speech to be given to absolutely everyone.

    Back to the issue at hand: section 34(1) of Canada’s immigration act:

    A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on security grounds for:

    (a) engaging in an act of espionage or an act of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada;

    (b) engaging in or instigating the subversion by force of any government;

    (c) engaging in terrorism;

    (d) being a danger to the security of Canada;

    (e) engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives or safety of persons in Canada; or

    (f) being a member of an organisation that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c).

    What else did Gorgeous George call for?
    “Galloway said he personally would be donating three cars and 25,000 pounds (35,000 dollars) to Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniya as he dared the West to try to prosecute him for aiding what it considers a terror group.”

    “So I call, in conclusion, on the great people of Egypt, on the heroic armed forces of Egypt, and the heroic army of Egypt of 1973, to rise up and sweep away this tyrant Mubarak.”

    Yeah, you are right – It is about free speech in Galloways case.

  • Anonymous

    The world is a bit more complex than Harper would have you believe.

    Yes, many Western governments have labelled Hamas a terrorist organization. But it’s also a fact that Hamas is the elected and de facto government of part of Palestine, and you simply cannot provide aid to that part of Palestine without involving Hamas, because they are the on-the-ground government providing daily services. Should that part of Palestine NOT receive any outside aid? Because that’s what you’re asking for.

    Also, last I checked, Hamas did not lob any of the ambulances or medical aid (shepherded by Galloway) at Israel.

    Thanks for quoting section 34(1) of our immigration act. Please review it closely: Galloway has not violated or is likely to violate any of those.

    Can you not accept CSIS’s conclusion that Galloway poses no threat to Canada?

  • ShawnC

    What does Harper have to do with this debate?

    Sure, I can accept CSIS conclusion that Gorgeous George was not a threat to Canada. And I never said he was a security threat – I just informed you of the reasons why he was persona non grata.

    kenn2 wrote: ((Should that part of Palestine NOT receive any outside aid? Because that’s what you’re asking for.))

    On TV, he handed £25,000 of his own cash to Ismail Haniyeh, the senior political leader of Hamas. ((This is not charity, he clarified. This is politics.))

    Guess that cancells the aid argument.

  • Anonymous

    I just informed you of the reasons why he was persona non grata.

    So then, what changed, that makes him “persona grata” now? (other than the gov’t realizing that they didn’t have grounds to bar him)

    What does Harper have to do with this debate?

    The directive to block Galloway came from a minister’s office, and no such directive would ever be issued without, at minimum, Harper’s approval.

  • p.f.

    Although I have mixed feelings on the cause, I wish the young people luck at Carleton, especially if they are in arts or social sciences.

  • ShawnC

    Although the judge’s ruling made clear there was no specific ban to overturn, it was critical enough of the government that Galloway would be granted admission, and he was, after a long interview.

    Besides, you missed the judge’s ((dismissal an appeal by supporters of Mr. Galloway, ruling the court could not grant their request for judicial review of a government decision that barred the outspoken pro-Palestinian politician from giving a series of speeches in Canada last year.

    That’s because Mr. Galloway never tested the government by actually trying to enter the country after political staffers denounced him as a terrorist and the Canada Border Services Agency said he wouldn’t be allowed into Canada.

    “In the absence of such evidence, I find that there was no legally reviewable decision to bar Mr. Galloway from Canada and that this application must be dismissed.”))
    (Globe and Mail)

    (Harper’s approval) – unless you got inside information, you’re just guessing.

  • ShawnC

    Although the judge’s ruling made clear there was no specific ban to overturn, it was critical enough of the government that Galloway would be granted admission, and he was, after a long interview.

    Besides, you missed the judge’s ((dismissal an appeal by supporters of Mr. Galloway, ruling the court could not grant their request for judicial review of a government decision that barred the outspoken pro-Palestinian politician from giving a series of speeches in Canada last year.

    That’s because Mr. Galloway never tested the government by actually trying to enter the country after political staffers denounced him as a terrorist and the Canada Border Services Agency said he wouldn’t be allowed into Canada.

    “In the absence of such evidence, I find that there was no legally reviewable decision to bar Mr. Galloway from Canada and that this application must be dismissed.”))
    (Globe and Mail)

    (Harper’s approval) – unless you got inside information, you’re just guessing.

  • Anonymous

    I didn’t miss the suit being dismissed, in fact it’s in the quote I pulled. What is with people’s basic grasp of English around here?

    Re Harper – you’re kidding, right?

  • Anonymous

    I didn’t miss the suit being dismissed, in fact it’s in the quote I pulled. What is with people’s basic grasp of English around here?

    Re Harper – you’re kidding, right?

  • Anonymous

    For future reference, then… if I’m ever about to be arrested for trespassing, I simply have to dig out a gross picture of an aborted fetus, and the pro-life brigade will rush to my defense?

    Cooool….

  • ShawnC

    I guess I worded it poorly. How about this – Galloway’s freedom of speech was never in peril as he could (and did, I think) present his views through video conference.

    I don’t recall JasonK barrring him from Canada on the grounds that he was a terrorist – he was barred on the grounds of funding terroists – like it or not, Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization (by Canada, the US and the Euroweenie Union). Of course, we can debate that until the cows come home.

    As for Harper, I only calls them as I sees them or prove it.

  • Anonymous

    As for Harper, I only calls them as I sees them or prove it.

    Do you seriously think that a senior minister can issue a directive in a very high profile situation without first notifying the PM (regardless of who the PM is)? Also, we know that the current government is light on that whole accountability thing, but the PM is still the head of the government and hence responsible for all its actions, especially those coming directly from the Cabinet.

    So, yeah, Harper.

  • batb

    You’re being embarrassingly facetious.

    Go away.

  • ShawnC

    kenn2 wrote: “Do you seriously think that a senior minister can issue a directive in a very high profile situation without first notifying the PM (regardless of who the PM is)? Also, we know that the current government is light on that whole accountability thing, but the PM is still the head of the government and hence responsible for all its actions, especially those coming directly from the Cabinet.

    So, yeah, Harper.”

    Granted, Harper’s the man and was probably given a heads-up, but I doubt if Harper gave the directive. Sure, Harper loves to micro-manage but Kenny is the minister responsible and he, in theory anyway, is responsible, answerable, and accountable to the House of Commons.

    My two cents

  • ShawnC

    kenn2 wrote: “Do you seriously think that a senior minister can issue a directive in a very high profile situation without first notifying the PM (regardless of who the PM is)? Also, we know that the current government is light on that whole accountability thing, but the PM is still the head of the government and hence responsible for all its actions, especially those coming directly from the Cabinet.

    So, yeah, Harper.”

    Granted, Harper’s the man and was probably given a heads-up, but I doubt if Harper gave the directive. Sure, Harper loves to micro-manage but Kenny is the minister responsible and he, in theory anyway, is responsible, answerable, and accountable to the House of Commons.

    My two cents

  • Anonymous

    As soon as I can find where I left my jackboots, I’m outta here.

    How dare the university “director of safety and security” charge these peaceful, pro-life, tuition-paying Carleton students with “trespassing.”

    Ooo, that’s a tough one. Maybe… because they were trespassing?

    (you lay off the drama and jackboots crap, maybe I’ll stop pointing and laffing.)

  • batb

    You deny leftard institutional blackboots, kenn2 (whatever happened to kenn1?)? We have this instance and the Ann Coulter debacle at the University of Zero as exhibits one and two.

    Cowardly statist-quo leftists always deny they’ve been less than Kumbaya-sensitive.

  • batb

    You deny leftard institutional blackboots, kenn2 (whatever happened to kenn1?)? We have this instance and the Ann Coulter debacle at the University of Zero as exhibits one and two.

    Cowardly statist-quo leftists always deny they’ve been less than Kumbaya-sensitive.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Leftard?

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Leftard?

  • Anonymous

    batb has a schoolyard crush on me.

  • Anonymous

    batb has a schoolyard crush on me.