Fredericton "Peace" Coalition admits anti-yellow ribbon campaign ill conceived
Clearly the Fredericton "Peace" Coalition got the message loud and clear that their campaign to remove the yellow "support the troops" ribbons at businesses and churches was going over like a lead balloon. The feedback at their own site was proof enough of that let alone what was being written to newspapers, blogs, message boards, Facebook, etc. across the country.
So they've changed their tactics, softened their stance and more or less turfed their spokesperson in favour of someone else to portray a new image.
Still, it might be too little, too late. Their harsh approach at the beginning has left their motives in serious question in the public's eye and I'll be surprised if their yellow question marks start popping up all over town to any great degree.
Although their "peace" moniker is a bit of a misnomer (the group began to protest the Israel-Hezbollah war but only Israel's involvement while turning a blind eye to Hezbollah) I have to give them credit for recognizing their tactics were seriously flawed. You really do get more flies with honey.
posted by
Spinks at 9:57 AM -
link
...
... 
15 Comments
It's funny because I thought an anti-free speech campaign against those who support those who are fighting for free speech and freedom would be a #1 hit.
I guess I'll never make a good commie, eh spinks. ;-)
1:30 PM
Again, it wasn't 'anti free speech', it was passing out information to make sure businesses and churches knew all the facts and got people talking about it.
By the way, if you think there is free speech in Afghanistan now, you're pretty out of the loop.
So you have it backward, its actually all the people protesting the war protestors that have made sure there is no free speech. So I guess you'd make a pretty good commie.
3:56 PM
I don't have a problem with people putting up stickers in their store window or church basement supporting a movement or group.
Furthermore, I don't have a problem with the Fredericton Peace Coalition putting up "Bring Them Home! stickers or asking people to support their effort or change their mind. They have that right to do that in a free society.
Where I have a problem is when a group tries to shut down another opinion because they disagree with it. What next? Will a fringe leftist group demand that a store shut down because they don't agree with their style of capitalism. Please.
These people have broken no rules and have not hurt anyone or anyone's property. So I would suggest that the Fredericton Peace Coalition move along.
1:18 PM
Again, you misunderstand. Read the initial article. There WAS NO DEMAND. Get that?
Free speech means a lot of things, and it doesn't just mean shooting off your mouth. Even more importantly is the right to challenge what may very well be a bonehead opinion.
By most standards this groups was actually way too lenient. WHen the Dixie Chicks came out with their statements about Bush, media companies set up massive boycotts of the Dixie Chicks. When Cat Stevens had some comments taken out of context that made it sound like he supported the fatwah on Salmon Rushdie, radio stations were BURNING Cat Stevens albums.
In each of those cases when those groups were chastised for such extreme demagoguery, their answer was "its their right to speak out, and its out right to speak out against them". And they were right. However, the effect is quite clear, you DON"T speak out against the war or else you pay the cost. There is more than one way of shutting down free speech, and usually government isn't even needed.
And this group COULD have 'demanded' they remove the signs, that's perfectly within their rights. Spinks was making 'demands' of Camille Theriault but nobody accused him of being fascist or trampling on free speech.
Even if they HAD made demands, they have no power to enforce them. There is lots of things that COULD have been done. They could have not made any announcements, they could have snuck around at night with spray paint and painted over them.
Ironically, with all this hoopla, people are making it so that if people want to oppose the war they HAVE to do something like that, because even moderate public opposition to the war won't be tolerated.
But again, these are huge issues, which like they said was one of the reasons they did this. What about the workers in those restaurants? What about THEIR rights? What if people came and accosted them after work as fascist imperialists or something?
Although nobody has still mentioned what churches have them up, does it speak for the entire congregation? Or it is the resulte of a majority of elders who get their own way?
These are all very complex and sophisticated issues, because people are involved. This group was being pretty even handed until bloggers and a very few people blew it out of proportion. They COULD have had boycotts or held signs outside the storefront to dissuaded customers-and it might have worked. Again, ironically, all the protest against the original ideas means its more likely they WILL have to do stuff like that. Extremism breeds extremism.
And those boycotts and signs will be perfectly justified as THEIR free expression. But its clear from this that 'some' people don't like 'freedom of speech' when it confronts others freedom of speech. BUt that's exactly what that right is for. Again, it is ironic to see people say "we support freedom of speech so long as it doesn't challenge anybody". Without the challenge, freedom of speech is useless-hell, Pravda had freedom of speech and people could have said 'well, we just don't support people challenging Pravda's freedome of speech'.
10:15 AM
You're confused. As I said before, people have the right to hold an opinion either way. It's when people start imposing their views on others by demanding the group opposed to their view be shut down or put out of commission. That is not a trait of someone, or a group, who upholds the right to free speech.
Where I come from, there are no limits to free speech. If there are individuals out there who hold a very controversial view, I say let 'em have it and express it. At least then it's out there for people to debate and offer a counter view.
For the record, that was not the [initial] tactic of the Fredericton Peace Coalition as they were looking to sully the views of those opposed to them by stamping out their message. Trust me, that's not the way to go. Furthermore, if their message was that good in the first place then they wouldn't have to worry about silencing people opposed to their view. In the end, I think they came across as controlling and autocratic, unlike the individuals who still uphold the right to free speech.
2:12 PM
No, you are confused, you can reread my post, but maybe it was badly stated. This group DID NOT 'try to silence' anybody. They DID NOT 'make demands'.
The scenario you are describing DOES NOT EXIST. The group said they were going to present 'their side of the story' to those places posting the signs, thats it, that's all.
But thats a perfect example of why blogs can be so important. If people didn't read the article then they may just read Spinks or Gypsy's blogs which were outright lies about what the group said.
Yours is an easily justifiable view, although again, 'demanding' anything is merely free speech. But this group didn't 'demand' anything, they were merely exercising there own free speech. So the new idea about the new ribbons is not that different, they are still going to talk to these people, and try to get them to change their ribbons. It's still the same thing.
10:03 PM
Threatening to boycott a business sure sounds like a demand to me. Spin it all you want. This "peace" group demanded the ribbons come down or they would boycott businesses (not that I suspect any businesses would notice any great loss anyway). That's a demand not a "pretty please". A demand is you will do this or else. A request is simply that a request. I can appreciate that you're in Ontario and can only read the story Mike but you're respectfully dead wrong on this. Their very goal was to silence support for the troops by seeing the ribbons completely gone. They have since (wisely) softened their stance and are (at least publicly) no longer making demands.
10:17 AM
The support the troops ribbon could be shown by those who want the troops home as well as those who support the mission. This cannot be said of the "Bring them Home" signs the Peace Coalition wishes to replace them with. They wish to replace a politically neutral ribbon with a politically loaded one.
12:47 PM
Face it, Mikel. We triumphed over the big bad Fredericton Peace Coalition. We were right and they (and you) were wrong. The Peace Coalition has admitted it. Why can't you?
2:44 PM
Two yellow ribbons stolen so far from my car in Moncton over the past two years. Peaceful maybe, criminals definitely.
3:44 PM
The Fredericton Peace Coalition has on their website an open forum blog. I assume they leave it open only to allow people who support THEIR ideas can post. I say this because I decided to peruse their forum and noticed several glaring mistakes that they were trying to pass off as truth. They were incorrect an I corrected them. I then went to a QMJHL game and when I came home I was shocked that their web admin had banned my IP and deleted my posts. My three posts were non-inflammatory, they were polite but they contradicted their ideas. Kinda reminds me of the way the Taliban, Nazis' etc operate. Censor those who oppose them. God im so PROUD(sarcasm) that these idiots walk amongst us. I actually have to vomit soon.
6:43 PM
Feel free to post here anon.
10:09 PM
I must agree that threatening to boycott someones business counts as a demand rather than a request.
Also, there is a possibility that the Peace Coalition is selective with what they allow to remain on their site. Not 100% sure, but I have seen very few posts on the yellow ribbon issue since many months ago, though they may consider it a dead issue.
Lastly; I would STRONGLY agree that the purpose of the functions of this organization is somewhat political in nature for sure. They show films, etc... that will generally not have a pro military bent.
They are a peace coalition, but I still believe the real peace activists are over there fighting for it!
Support our troops!
4:15 PM
Good Job! :)
6:42 AM
Thought you'd like to know that the Fredericton Peace Coalition are up to their tricks again. They placed an article on their blog about Charles LeBlanc being arrested for trespassing on the legislature. I commented that 'if you play with fire, you can expect to get burnt'and they answered by accusing me of being a fascist. When I commented further than was an insult, and pointed out that even Mahatma Gandhi had been called a fascist in his time, they deleted the comment. I commented once more that they obviously had no regard for the democracy and open discussion that they espouse, and that they were hypocrites, they deleted that too. They obviously don't like any opinion that is different than their own.
Perhaps the Fredericton Peace Coalition agree with Karl Marx when he said "The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism", because they certainly don't like opposition to their ideas !
4:33 PM
Post a Comment
Home