I wouldn't embrace them or go see them, you're implying i'm a racist which I'm not. I think it's vile and disgusting what they stand for but they have a right to speak.You on the other hand want to shut everyone up who doesn't agree with you,that's censorship and facism, is that what you stand for? If the universities want to have them speak at their campus, that's up to them, not you. They have a right to speak. For example in most southern United States they believe abortion is murder, should pro-choice people not be allowed to speak on their campuses because they are in the minority? In the eyes of the people there, they are advocating murder. While we are in this thread, this guy has been charged with intimidation and other crimes. Do you still think he didn't do anything wrong?
The Al-Soufi family is facing new threats as police investigate individuals
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
There's still a trial to be held, before anyone gets to declare he did nothing wrong. Or did. Today's news is about police charges, not a conviction.
All we 'know' from this Forum is that the video that posters claim is proof his actions were criminal, actually shows him standing peaceably, with his hands in his pockets throughout.
Yes, there's a trial to come.
Since he was just "peaceably" standing in the old lady's path, I wonder whether he perhaps was lined up with his companions in expectation of a free kick? I didn't see a ball, referee or goaltender, but the wall must have received instructions to shift, as they did so a couple of times (according to the lady), co-incident to her attempts to pass around them.
But you're right, a trial will sort out what actually happened here. Maybe his parents have been apologizing for nothing? How embarrassing for them! They might owe their son an apology!
I admit I was wrong, he was there.
Though in the video its hard to see that he was doing anything that merits arrest.
And as a reminder, its usually the far right racist groups that are arrested at these events.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50148024
That said, even though Bernier is a racist, protests must be non-violent.
Agreed still a trial to be held, but they didn't charge him for no reason. He is charged with intimidation. You can intimidate an old lady by wearing a mask and blocking her path with his hands in his pockets. He is not accused of a violent act but of intimidation. The old lady in question said she was intimidated. I assume you think he didn't do anything wrong but just put yourself in her position. I assume by your name that you are old. If 3 young people in masks were blocking your path to get somewhere and when you tried to go around them they moved with you would you not feel intimidated? Maybe not I guess you condone this behavior. I'm sure if it was an alt-right person doing it you would feel differently.
He isn't charged with a violent act, he is charged with intimidation. The old lady in question said she felt intimidated.
Wrong, I do not want to shut everyone up who disagrees with me. In Universities everyone has a right to speak as long as they do not offend other fellow students based on their race, religion, colour, ethnicity, gender, and disabilities. Would it be okay with listening to speeches that make fun or mock people's disability on the University premises?? After all according to your definition, it is "free speech". Where do you then draw the line?? People's rights are not about offending others deliberately. That is why the students have the right to demonstrate against such individuals being offered such platforms at their place of learning!!
We live in a time where people get offended over nothing. If we go by what you're advocating no one would be allowed to speak because someone would always be offended. In the 60's and 70's, universities played a big part in getting the Viet Nam war stopped, however they were insulting and degrading soldiers who fought there. That wasn't right. Sometimes you have to offend people to make changes. That's the problem with our society these days people get offended easily. BLM has spoken at universities and they promote hate against the police, is that right? You have also had Alt-right speakers promoting hate as well as Muslim Imam speakers who promote hate. They are giving their point of view which should be heard. That's Democracy and higher learning. If someone is speaking at a university that some students don't like they don't have to go or can go and protest, but let them speak because there are other students who want to hear what the speakers have to say.
Again you have not answered the question. Is it right to then mock the disabled people in society during the so called "free speeches"? Where do you set the bar in the Universities.
If the students want to hear such hate speeches etc, then there are numerous locations to choose from. Universities should not be the place for hate speeches in order to bar certain students based on race, religion, gender, disability etc. Are you stating that such students should be left out of the conference halls in University Campuses, during presentations by hate groups?? Remember that nearly all the students will not attend such speeches and will be opposed to it!!
I suggest you at least consult the Criminal Code section defining the offence before you crawl out to the last twigs of argument at the end of your limb. It takes more than 'feeling' intimidated to merit a charge.
Your imaginings about what I feel are not relevant to the discussion. Old or young as I may be I can express myself, and I prefer to contribute and deal with thoughts, ideas and facts.
How embarrassing for the elderly couple's grown son to have minimized the criminality his parents allegedly 'suffered' by making nice with the parents of their 'intimidator'.
Seems to me if it wasn't for media — mostly fake alt-right — who inflated this because there was video, it would have passed as the usual pushing and shoving typical of political street encounters. I saw similar in 2015 when Conservative supporters attempted to physically block cameras from covering the Green supporters excluded from the Leaders' Debate. That 'wall' was almost certainly not by instruction; I wonder why you imagine this bit of hostility was?
BTW: I haven't yet seen a statement that the couple actually abandoned their effort to attend the rally. Have you?
I don’t know if the elderly woman actually attended the rally; however, she has requested that the Right Wing thugs stop harassing this family. Her requests have apparently been ignored.
It surely worked out for the protester's parents that neither the elderly couple nor their son were hateful Nazis after all (being prepared to reconcile with foreign interlopers). I wonder how they knew that their apology would be gracefully accepted? Perhaps they could help their son learn to discern between Nazis and those whose political views merely differ from his own?
I'm not familiar with this "camera blocking" incident you speak of, although I once had a very tall person get in the way when I was trying to take a picture of LeBron James in downtown Toronto! I'm not sure why Conservatives would ever try to interfere with Green Party activities. The Greens only take votes away from the Liberals or NDP. Maybe the Conservatives in question were just trying to get a better look at Ms. May themselves? Some Conservatives can be pretty kinky in their private lives. Too bad for them that she's off the market now.
Sometimes the media does post misleading videos or publish misleading stories - just not this time.
Let's not send mixed messages to these young people. We don't want them to be confused about whether what they did was wrong, do we? Isn't that why the one fellow's parents are speaking up about it?
I did find that info, hidden away in a CBC-TV interview: The couple did make it into the building, without anything worse than the video showed.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/dorothy-marston-bernier-protest-mohawk-1.5305661
I wonder how you knew that was why they apologized. I'm also kinda curious about the "foreign interlopers" you dragged into this, but that's for a thread where they're relevant. Kinda like your doin's with LeBron. Had he invited you to take his pic?
Since you seem curious about the camera blocking: It was outside the City-TV studios, where the debate was being held without May. As the camera and boom operators tried to cross the street to video a Green Party protest, Conservatives left their cheering section to block them and their camera crossing with their signs, and called their gang to join them. Which they did, until most of their squad was playing road-block. They continued blocking the shot even after the reporter began, and only dispersed when she threatened not to show them at all for the rest of the night. Like I said: In the street, that sort of argy-bargy's pretty much par for the political course. A few secs of shoving on the news that night, and no one remembers now.
I don't quite get your mixed messages reference; the notion that the original incident was some sort of high-crime or misdemeanour worthy of death threats in response certainly must be discouraged. Nothing mixed about it. The media that carried the misleading and entirely false message that there might have been any such significant offence, should be taken to task. There were no death-threats by anyone, until their stories inspired them.
As for courtesy to the elderly, and helping rather than impeding people trying to navigate our crowed streets; I'm all for that. But I think a heavy-handed criminal prosecution arising from one specific political event won't help at all.
Wanna bet the only charge that finally sticks is the 'mask-wearing'?
--------
PS: Since you dragged them in: The Liberal and NDP squads pretty much stayed put, although a couple of individuals did do some of the usual horning-into shot, that everyone expects
I'd rather play 3 Card Monte with The Great Deceiver than bet on the courts to straighten out a wayward leftist. If I had to wager, I'd rather take the under.
How benevolent of you to suggest there might be a leftist who isn't wayward.
Although I think it borders on delusional to imagine courts straighten anyone out, I'll consider that overstatement a rhetorical device.
Agree. if you watch the video the 3 morons are trying to intimidate her, if you can't see that, I can't help you. You just don't want it to be true.
No it's not right if disabled people are mocked. I haven't heard of a story where a university speaker mocked disabled people, am I missing something? Why do you think some of these speakers are asked to come and speak at these universities? It's because students have requested them. The universities don't do it just for kicks. These students pay to go to these schools and can request whichever speakers they want. But again you only advocate for speakers who don't offend. I pose this question to you. If a university books a pro-life speaker, which they have in the past. There are some students who believe abortion is murder and would be offended by such speaker. should they be allowed to speak?
