I’ve just finished analyzing the video of the latest public crossing of swords between pro-life students and the Carleton Apparatchik, which occurred on October 27. In that incident, the brave Ruth Lobo caught a university administrator in the act of inventing free-speech policy on the fly and ignoring the University’s real policies (as opposed to the make-believe stuff the guy was pushing). The guy also disregarded a recent court ruling that body-slammed another Canadian university and which will set a precedent for the Carleton case.
Let’s face it: the guy got his butt handed to him.
In the video below, the university guy keeps saying that the images held by the students are offensive and go against the “very strong policy” of the university. But at about 8:00 on the video, Ruth presses him to show her the precise policy that forbids offensive images. The guy’s response?
“Well, I think it’s been demonstrated across the country at a number of universities where the Genocide Awareness Project was put up, or similar images.”
That’s right, folks, Carleton’s alleged “policy” doesn’t really exist. They’re just copy-cats of other universities. Monkey see, monkey do. We already knew that there was no policy, but it’s awesome to catch the guy saying it on video. That will come in handy during the court proceedings. Thanks for the gift. 😉
The statement also clearly shows that various lefty universities are in cahoots with each other to suppress the pro-life message. That’s why this battle is so important: other campuses will rely on this precedent to put the jackboots to their own students.
Of course, Ruth didn’t fall for his lie. She immediate brought the discussion back to the specific case of Carleton, not what other universities are doing. After all, each university sets their own policies. She accurately points out that since Carleton has no policy forbidding their display, she is in compliance with university rules.
At this point, seeing that he has lost the argument (and his face), the university guy pulls out the threat of punishment by invoking the “Failure to Comply” rule. The rule, as applied here, essentially means that you do whatever I tell you otherwise you’ll be punished for failure to comply. Again, Ruth responds brilliantly with a wisdom well beyond her years. She points out that the University’s own policies state that the “Failure to Comply” rule is subordinate to the Freedom of Expression and Assembly. She’s not making this up (unlike the university guy). It’s really written in the University’s official documents!
Undeterred by such mundane considerations as the rule of law, the guy proceeds to warn her that corrective actions will be taken. After all, there’s no crime more heinous that the non-violation of an inexistent policy, right? Then he walks away.
What an embarrassment for the University. But there’s something worse that isn’t included in the video.
Keep in mind that this incident at Carleton took place on October 27. Two weeks earlier, an Alberta court ruled that the University of Alberta violated the Freedom of Expression of two students when they punished them for criticising a professor on Facebook. The court also ruled that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms definitely applies to university campuses. So when the Carelton guy in the video refers to examples of what’s happening on other campuses, he conveniently omits the fact that one of those campuses had gotten thumped by the courts two weeks earlier for a similar free-speech suppression as what he was doing to Ruth and her friends. The other campuses will also get slammed when their date in court comes. Just watch. But as they say, never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Inventing policies, ignoring court rulings, threatening students beyond your legitimate authority — all in a day’s work at Censorship U.
If you’re a student considering going to Carleton, do yourself a favour and go to another institution where they’ll actually respect your rights.