Ann Coulter responds
And she still hasn't been arrested.
Ann Coulter has responded to the University of Ottawa’s provost Francois Houle suggestion that she choose her words carefully, unless she wants to wind up with criminal charges. Coulter is scheduled to speak at the University of Ottawa this evening. In an email to the Ottawa Citizen, Coulter says that Houle is promoting “hatred” and “violence” against people with conservative views. She also told the newspaper that she would like to file a human rights complaint. Coulter spoke at the University of Western Ontario Monday evening, and will also be speaking at the University of Calgary this week.
As the Citizen reported:
“Now that the provost has instructed me on the criminal speech laws he apparently believes I have a proclivity (to break), despite knowing nothing about my speech, I see that he is guilty of promoting hatred against an identifiable group: conservatives,” Coulter wrote in an e-mail on Monday.
The Citizen had requested a telephone interview with Coulter. Instead, the newspaper received the e-mail from the author.
She questioned whether every speaker booked at the university received a similar warning or just the conservative ones.
“The provost simply believes and is publicizing his belief that conservatives are more likely to commit hate crimes in their speeches. Not only does this promote hatred against conservatives, but it promotes violence against conservatives,” Coulter wrote.
She added she would ask the human rights commission to investigate, but didn’t specify which one.
“I was hoping for a fruit basket upon my arrival in Canada, not a threat to criminally prosecute me,” Coulter said.
After the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, Coulter notoriously wrote of Muslim countries, “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.” She has also suggested that Muslims use “flying carpets,” as opposed to airplanes.
At Coulter’s University of Western Ontario talk, a Muslim student challenged her on her previous comments. The student said, as reported by the Sun media chain, “As a 17-year-old student of this university, Muslim, should I be converted to Christianity? Second of all, since I don’t have a magic carpet, what other modes do you suggest.” To which Coulter responded, “take a camel.”
Ann Coulter is absolutely correct. What a sad state of affairs that someone would need to be so concerned about every word they say. Freedom is allowing your enemy the ability to spew even the horrific stuff. Then we can speak out against it, freely.
The ideas of some don’t go away just because we prevent them from speaking. It is better to have nasty hateful stuff out in the open. Where it can be condemed in the open.
Hate can be very objective. What is allowable today can be considered unacceptable tomorrow. Only freedom of the press and freedom of speach protects us from the whims of people in power to stiffle decent.
In war, it is probably ok to hate your enemy.
I have not heard this speaker, so still reserve comment, but the media and university administrations are certainly far left in this country and I suspect that they have over reacted because it conflicts with their own, uninterrupted political messages.
I am in favour of free speech. Even in our nanny state, we are all still smart enough to disagree with the message. If the university administrators, the government and the media want to take away our right to hear a person’s opinion and think for ourselves, then that is far more repulsive than any message that the person could possibly deliver.
Allowing absolute free speech exposes the truth about a person. Now we know what a looney the person is and can mock her. Making a hate-speech vendetta against her would raise her profile, spread her crazy remarks all over the place where they were never heard, and make her a ‘martyr’. Why doesn’t everyone understand these things and stop the continual blabbing about the need to restrict free speech? Think it through people.
I think Ann Coulter is echoing the feelings of many Canadians but we are always jumped on as being racists. Why is it illegal to be publicly opposed to any or all religions. It has become apparent in the last 15 years of scientific discoveries that the three major religious playtoys…the bible, quran and the torah are utter nonsense….nice stories written to keep people in line.
Ann Coulter is a strong Christian which also qualifies her as a cult member…if they want to cancel her out for THAT reason I am not opposed……but not for free speech. Our Charter protects those that arrive her with hidden money and live off our benefits, it protects turbans the military and daggers in schools but not anyone opposed to these things ……
Ever since Anne said that Canada is lucky that it is allowed to exist on the same continent (as the USA) I couldn’t care less about her. She is obviously an idiot.
“The provost simply believes and is publicizing his belief that conservatives are more likely to commit hate crimes in their speeches.”
Not all conservatives, honey. Just you. And a scan through YouTube shows why he thought it was prudent.
Ann Coulter denigrates a group of people based on the actions of a few and then when she is challenged on her views, says the views she expounds on are those of all conservatives?. I am not sure how she can say her views represent those of all conservatives. I am a conservative and quite frankly, I would like to see her come to Canada, spew racists comments and get locked up.
I thought Ann coulter was a comedian
Can’t have freedom of speech in Canada can we. Well except for liberals hating and condemming the evil right wing extremists, or worse yet the evil Christian extremists and the worst, evil Christian right extremists from the USA.
When we pay attention to these people it encourages them.Its their little problem-needing to be the cenntre of attention even though they really have nothing to add. So they take an extremist but simple viewpoint and, sure enough, they get people talking-about them. Works for talk radio.Works for Palin. Works for Beck and most of the guys on Fox. It works because we can’t seem to get ourselves to ignore them.Actually a fairly small percentage of us agree with them.I assure you Coulter and the rest do not care about you. Just try to forget about them.
Universities should promote the exchange of ideas including conservative ones. If Houle doesn’t want Ann to speak why was she invited? Because his aim is to foster anti-american, anti-republican, anti-white, etc… propaganda. The progressives/socialists running the UofO are the real ones fomenting hatred. They are truly intolerant.
Ann Coulter is an idiot… this fact is clear if you pay any attention to what she espouses as beliefs. Apparently, she is surpassed only slightly by Francois Houle now… It sounds to me like Provost is a pretty important job… You have to worry about what anyone visiting the University might have to say to your delicate and obviously stupid audience (since they can’t think for themselves?). Geez… both of these people need to be given new careers.
I agree with many of the other comments. While I’m not partial to everything that Ann Coulter has to say I don’t think that her speech should be restricted.
In all honesty it’s refreshing to not hear the same repeating bleeding heart rhetoric for a change.
What I can not understand is how this certifiable Ding Bat was even allowed to enter our country. Customs and Immigration should have completed the requisite body cavity searches, then tunred her around to head back to the USA.
Adam says, “ALL of the would-be and successful airline bombers were Muslims, end of story.”
Well, not quite the end. Using that logic then I’d say that:
- all the rowdy diners at the restaurant table near me were university students so all university students are rowdy;
- all the members of the Nazi Party were white, Anglosaxon males so all white, Anglosaxon males are Nazis;
- all the short, round cooks at my church’s fowl supper were good perogy makers so all short round women are good perogy makers (sigh. I wish it were so).
Plus, of course, “ALL of the would-be and successful airline bombers were Muslims” except for the ones that weren’t. Like the shoe bomber. Timothy McVale too, though of course he successfully bombed a building because of American policies against Muslims, not an airplane.
My concern is that this is just part of a bigger issue. The media has made up its mind on things and rather than just reporting the facts, they’re telling you what to think about those facts, on the left and the right.
We’ve got newspapers that are calling for Ms. Coulter to be banned from the country. Is that really their job? To set public policy rather than simply reporting on it? In a sense, we’ve all become fascistic. We’re okay with totalitarian rule and having rights taken away, as long as they’re not our own. Our politicians are totally indifferent from each other, merely changing the demographic they restrict. Both sides have their targets. Both sides think they have the moral high ground and believe in their inerrant rightness, and as a result they feel it’s their duty to purge society of some ill.
In essence, our efforts to shut this lady up will backfire on us, as censorship always does. Prejudice and ignorance in this country persists largely because we don’t address it. We try to sweep it under the rug and pretend it doesn’t exist. Kids are being brought up today to know WHAT to think rather than HOW to think, which, obviously is fine if you agree with the agenda that’s being shoved down the kids’ throats, and if you don’t, tough.
It’s ironic that we call ourselves a progressive nation because in actual fact progressivism leads to no progress but rather stagnation. One government gets in, pushes their agenda through without regard for the will of the people, and that invariably leads to the necessitation for them to be toppled so that another group can use exactly the same tactic to oppress a different demographic. Ultimately, both sides are trying to drag you over to their side by convincing you the other guy is evil.
What scares me now is how open some members of the mainstream media are about presenting their opinions as facts. If you agree with the agenda, the reporting is unbiased. We’ve redefined the terms fair, balanced and biased. What used to mean free of opinion now is merely based on whether or not you’re in agreement with the particular opinion of the reporter.
I hardly think if Walter Cronkit were alive today he would consider Fox News any more biased than MSNBC or any other network. I’m sure he’d be disappointed with the bias itself, but targeting one network for something they’re all doing is ludicrous. It’s like going after McDonalds and ignoring Burger King and Wendy’s.
I didnt know hate speech was part of freedom of speech. If this is the case then KKK should hold daily conferences in every university. Maybe we can ask the Taliban to give a speech on Canadian television advising us that Israel is the the true evil. Get out of my country!!!!!!!!!
I find it offensive that Francois Houle feels free to intimidate and threaten people who have a differing opinion from his own.
Thanks for revealing yourself as an ugly Canadian, M. Houle.
I realized that if “conservatives” like Ann would just shut up and stop acting like self centered boors , then they would not be an identifiable group, you wouldn’t be able to tell them from any other person. None of this would be necessary.Lets be really honest this woman is not interested in free speech only in creating controversy and media attention. Taking this to a human rights commission is pretty much the height of hypocrisy.
It’s extremely unlikely her human rights complaint will succeed, assuming that she bothers to file it.
I rather doubt that it is illegal to inform someone of slander and hate speech laws in this country. Particularly when that speaker has made statements in the past that could be actionable in Canada.
It was predictable however that Coulter would paint herself as some kind of victim of a hate crime.
Mr Houle was simply being polite and demonstrated a typically canadian concern for Ms. Coulter’s well being and that of her intended audience.
There was no threat. Neither direct or implied.
So everyone has freedom of speech, no matter what they say? When have we changed the rules? People, better that Ms. homophobic, racist etc. have been banned from Canada. I guess it’s the politics of those in charge that counts. As for Rex sorry but Al Jazerra is less biased that Fox. Saying that Mr. Cronkite would find MSNBC and FOX equally biased certainly tells us all what side of the spectrum you come from…
all she does is talk and talk and talk..most folks actually work for a living..she is like the damn energizer bunny and just keeps talking and talking..An expert on nothing, productive to no one and nothing to offer.Why do we even want her here in Canada, all she ever does is take childish jabs at us .
“Ann Coulter is a strong Christian which also qualifies her as a cult member…if they want to cancel her out for THAT reason I am not opposed……but not for free speech. Our Charter protects those that arrive her with hidden money and live off our benefits, it protects turbans the military and daggers in schools but not anyone opposed to these things ……”
So your saying yah to free speach but no to freedom of religious beliefs… So why not cancel you out for being an extreme atheist or agnostic?
What a bunch of narrow minded politically correct bigots at Ottawa U.
So everyone can bash everything she says? Just listen to you jerks!
Ann brings up a good point. Is a request for restraint or consideration promoting hate? If I promoted a film where the main character walked like Ann, talked like Ann, had a name amazingly similiar to Ann’s and (please forgive this LORD) I shot,killed and or assaulted the “avatar or character” on screen. Would this be a violation of her human rights as understood under The Canadian Charter Of Rights? Would this be a violation of the rights of all those who are tall like Ann or conservative like Ann or just plain American? On the flip side, would it be a violation of my rights if Ann or conservative/American’s were to ask me to use consideration and restraint particularly if my film or animation was marketed to a student audience? Does a request for restraint promote hate and or violence or is it simply an appropriate civil request for consideration?
This woman is so nutty that her response to being warned not to make a hate speech is to accuse such a warning to be spreading hatred and violence against conservatives.
She has referred to former Vice President Al Gore as a fag. Let’s all show up and call her the “C” word. And I don’t mean conservative. That wouldn’t be hateful at all. Let’s show her how much we love free speech.
Mr Houle should have kept his mouth shut and law should take its course if and when Ann Coulter says something illegal.
Ann Coulter actually has said things in other speeches that might qualify as hate crimes in Canada, so the University is simply being a good host to give her a heads up about where she is coming. It’s got nothing to do with “leftist” media, for heaven’s sake, or any kind of anti-Christian sentiment.
The fact is, our country has laws to limit the ability of certifiable wingnuts to stir up hatred and violence against any minority protected by our charter rights. Coulter, if anyone, needs to be aware of that!
I personally don’t like Coulter but have to admit she did a good job of turning the tables on the provost. I don’t understand what the provost was trying to achieve. Why warn her? She is not a stupid women, and probably not easily intimidated, she knows exactly how far she can go. Coulter is all about one thing-making money,controversy is her calling card. If you really want to nail someone like Coulter you just let them talk, and talk alot, and sooner or later her mouth will do her in.
Hate crimes are just a way for the government and politically correct groups to ensure that it’s dangerous to tell the truth. Canadians are sick and tired of this, and even though many of us may not like Coulter, we are glad she piped up in this regard.
Canadians are sick and tired of being threatened with hate crimes, and even though many of us may not like Coulter, we are glad she piped up in this regard.
Ann Coulter is a master of lazy racist comedy, quite simply she’s one of the best.
“take a camel.”= classic comedy.
They don’t make em like Ann anymore I tell ya, Ann Coulter is a throwback to generations past when casual ignorant racism flourished in society.
Without Ann around, how would we truly know how far we’ve come? This lady is doing us all a public service, she’s a walking monument to our bigot forefathers and criminally forgotten foresisters.
Having heard a lot of Anne Coulter’s little nuggets, I would say she has it wrong about the U of O provost. He does not think that all Conservatives are prone to spread hate just Anne Coulter. And he is right.
There was a time when we would take this kind of diatribe seriously. When a wave of extreme conservatism seemed like a propaganda that could have real life force. ]
But that time has passed I hope. As someone on the political center left I do believe there are areas of serious separation between left and right but this is just a cry for attention and the book sales and interviews that follow that.
It is a simple concept. Some people (Canadians, Americans, Muslims, Asians… etc) don’t enjoy listening to their fellow man insult people. With all the injustice in this sorry planet for which we live, one would think that if you had the free will to limit it, you would.
Ann Coulter has every right to allow her opinions to be heard and I respect her for being so very different in a crowd of cautious folk.
That being said, it is absolutely ludicrous to think that that e-mail from Houle was threatening by any means. It may be read in that way, but the words themselves express nothing more than the facts of law in Canada.
How Houle’s words incite “violence against conservatives” is beyond me.
I respect her opinions, as she is allowed to hold them in a democratic society. But the way she goes about expressing them leads me to hold the opinion that she is more of a political comedian than any sort of decent commentator on politics.
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of
civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”
–Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816.
If she said the same sorts of things about Jews as she says of Muslims, she wouldn’t be allowed in Canada.
Coulter spits out hateful insults at anyone who does not agree with her extremist views, and calls it “free speach”. Sure it is, but any idiot can do that, and he or she will have simple and like minded followers to cheer. Coulter might not be an Idiot, becasue she knows how to feed her admirers and get the media attention to keep it all going for her pockets and ego . She surely understands one thing, Albert Einstein’s: “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.”
Some of the comments on here, as well as the many comments on the CBC forums, clearly demonstarte that she is right. The liberal left and University of Ottawa’s provost Francois Houle, are violating the current laws by encouraging hatred against an identifiable group. THe problem is that when the liberals drafted this law and created the human rights commissions, they had a more orwellian-animal-farm idea in mind, i.e. that only certain groups are deserving of these extra special rights, while it is open season for discrimintion and hate speech against certain other groups.
I find it strange that after all the vicious vitriol launched by Coulter toward Canada these past few years, she somehow sees no hyprocrisy in loosening her extremism to make money here for appearances, and even more insanely, threatening to complain to what is more than likely Canada’s own human rights commission. This woman is a walking contradiction.
Coulter is intelligent but emotional, and as a result a blithering fool for allowing her baser instincts to prevail.
AS a 70 year old centralist, I want to hear the unedited speeches of all fringe speakers, whether it’s from the left or the right.
In a ethnically diverce country as Canada we must hear where these nut bars are have to say.
But I will defend there right to speak there believes, without interference.
Wow, the ‘right’ cannot make a statement without adding the ‘liberal’ tag to it. because, as they will insist, liberal = bad. But what it really does is show how lazy the extreme right is. They have no interested in debate or passionate discussion; they are dismissive.
The provost was an idiot for sending out the letter. It was a tactical effort, I believe, that blew up in his face. Agreed. And yes, Coulter will find that in Canada freedom of speech truly does exist (more so than in the states where flag burning, as an example, is NOT permitted because, heaven forbid, someone have an opinion counter to the conservative patriots.)
But this woman should be pointed out as the fraud that she is. She lies, misinforms and relies on extensive personal attacks to avoid serious discussions. There are numerous and intelligent right wing pundits out there for whom I agree with often. She is a caricature that even makes them roll their eyes. When you support what she says and how she says it, your prove your own ignorance. Sad.
She is allowed to say any weird stuff she wants. At her home. After she bashed the French-Canadians and said they should be kicked out of the country, after she wished Canada was occupied by her cowboys, and other nice stuff, I would not have let her enter the country. Other foreigners were banned for less. But the Conservatives seem to have preferences with regard to who is allowed to bash Canada. In the end she is just in search for publicity.
Just because freedom of speech is a right, let us not assume that everyone has earned the right to be heard.
Never mind the speaker, what about the those who give the podium? What is the state of the audience?
I was at Ann Coulter last night and this is actually the reaction of the young Muslim girl’s question.
The young Muslim girl asked if “As a 17-year-old student of this university, Muslim, should I be converted to Christianity? Second of all, since I don’t have a magic carpet, what other modes do you suggest.”
Ann Coulter began by explaining a historical background of times when American Evangelical Missionaries provided aid to countries after wars. She began with Japan, then moved into talking about South Korea; by then the audience began chanting ‘Answer the question’. Ann apparently got frustrated by the audiences impatience and answered “Yes I think you should become a Christian” and something a long the lines of “why not try a camel”.
This answer was especially offensive, not because of the camel remark which was clearly a joke, but because of her belief that religion belongs with government. She preaches about small government, however, she believes that the government should have the right to dictate someones religion? Talk about contradictory. A conservative movement is about empowering individual choices rather than appointing someone to govern over you and make all decision.
Ann Coulter serves a useful purpose by exposing the stultifying political correctness of the so-called enlightened class.
What they don’t get is that she uses irony and hyperbole to almost comic effect. Do you really thing she is suggesting that the US invades muslim countries and convert them?? She is simply juxtaposing that against the expressed intention of the jihadis who literally aim to overthrow Western civilization by whatever means.
Scott and Brad – if you can’t accept Coulter having her say, at least have a modicum of civility towards the readers of this forum.
If the point was to assure Ms. Coulter of packed houses wherever she plays, (and “plays” is the right word for she is an entertainer) then Mr. Houle et al have succeeded. Is she hateful? To some. Presumably to the same level Bill Maher and John Stewart are hated by others. So precisely what? Poster children of the Left or Right gain their status by annoying the other side. That’s a characteristic of the rabid partisanship in the States. C’mon, Canada, we don’t have to do that. Do we?
When I was a student at Carleton, we learned a song (sung to the tune of “Battle Hymn of the Republic”). I’ve taken liberty to make small changes for the sake of the U of O’s recent actions:
There’s a hole in the city
And it’s name is Ottawa U
If you’re afraid of offending
Then it’s the place for you
If you care about hurt feelings
More than sharing views
Then be don’t be an Ottawa U