Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

UPDATED: Canada Border Services Agency: Keeping our streets safe from … George Galloway? Really?

by kadyomalley on Friday, March 20, 2009 7:26am - 51 Comments

From today’s Sun (UK):

ANTI-WAR MP George Galloway is to be banned from Canada.

Border security chiefs have declared the Respect MP “inadmissable” because of his views on Afghanistan and the presence of Canadian troops there.

Mr Galloway is due to make a speech in Toronto on March 30, following a US lecture tour, but will be turned away if he tries to enter Canada.

The Canadian High Commission in London was last night contacting the MP’s office to inform him of the decision.

Canadian rules say he will be allowed in only if he has a special permit from immigration minister Jason Kenney.

But Mr Kenney’s spokesman said: “George Galloway is not getting a permit — end of story.

He defends the very terrorists trying to kill Canadian forces in Afghanistan.”

UPDATE: More from the Daily Mail, which reports that Galloway is prepared to fight the ban:

Mr Galloway was due to give a speech in Toronto on March 30 but has been deemed ‘inadmissible’ to Canada under section 34(1) of the country’s immigration act.

Mr Kenney’s spokesman Alykhan Velshi said the act was designed to protect Canadians from people who fund, support or engage in terrorism.

The minister has the right to issue special exemption permits but will not do so in Mr Galloway’s case.

Mr Velshi said: ‘We’re going to uphold the law, not give special treatment to this infandous street-corner Cromwell who actually brags about giving ‘financial support’ to Hamas, a terrorist organisation banned in Canada.

‘I’m sure Galloway has a large Rolodex of friends in regimes elsewhere in the world willing to roll out the red carpet for him. Canada, however, won’t be one of them.’

“Regime”? Somehow, that doesn’t seem like a very friendly way to describe the government currently in power in the country to our immediate south, which doesn’t seem to have a problem allowing Galloway to cross the border. 

Tags: , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • archangel

    Is it me, or has that URL been hijacked?

    • knb

      Are you referring to all the spyware pop ups?

      • archangel

        Yes that infamous Vundo trojan morphed as Antivirus 360.

        • knb

          I confess that it gave me a start. Your comment clued me in though, thanks.

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    Works fine here – what’s it doing for you?

    • archangel

      Working now, thanks. Transient exploit for sure.

  • anon

    So much for freedom of expression. I guess it only protects Canadians.

  • http://myblahg.com Robert McClelland

    When did Jason “scurry in a hurry” Kenney become the Minister of McCarthyism?

  • an online reader

    Give me a term in office & you won’t recognize this North Star Welfare State !
    “Rule by decree is a style of governance allowing quick, unchallenged creation of law by a single person or group, and is used primarily by dictators and absolute monarchs, although philosophers such as Giorgio Agamben have argued that it has been generalized since World War I in all modern states, including representative democracies. ”
    “When states of emergency such as martial law are in place rule by decree is common. While rule by decree is easily susceptible to the whims and corruption of the person in power, it is also highly efficient: a law can take weeks or months to pass in a legislature, but can be created with the stroke of a pen by a leader ruling by decree. This is what makes it valuable in emergency situations. Thus, it is allowed by many Constitutions, among which is the French Constitution. U.S. presidential executive orders share some similarities with rule by decree. “

    • an online reader

      Changes to the Unemployment Employment Insurance Act written into the Budget Implementation Act & to take effect 2 weeks prior to ROYAL ASSENT of Act of the second part is a decree inside another undebated decree ?

  • Bill Simpson

    George Galloway has openly supported declared terrorist organizations and was planning to promote them in his visit to Toronto. I don’t see why we have to entertain him and his views; we would not tolerate him if he was Canadian.

    • http://gapingwhole.wordpress.com/ Em.

      Yes we would. Unless it could be determined that his speech incites hatred or willfully promotes hatred against an identifiable group. I am not sure the extent of his claims and it’s a shady area because it deals with terrorism, but it seems to me that this may fall into the category of protected speech.

    • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

      “we would not tolerate him if he was Canadian”

      Bill S

      I disagree. Galloway is anti-west, pro-terrorist, he would fit in just fine here in Canada. As far as I can tell, we would probably funding his schemes if he lived here.

      Kady, be careful using The Sun as a source for anything except Page 3 girls. The Sun totally makes things up, fake quotes, the lot.

      • TJ Cook

        “Pro-terrorist”?

        Strong words. Just who in Canada are you calling pro-terrorist? And whose pro-terrorist schemes are we funding?

        Agree with you re: the Sun. It’s almost as bad as the Post.

        • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

          I am calling Galloway pro-terrorist because he thinks Hamas and Hezbollah are great. And there are plenty of useful idiots in Canada who think the same way.

          • TJ Cook

            “there are plenty of useful idiots in Canada who think the same way.”

            Like who?

          • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

            The last pro jihad/hamas/hezbollah rallies held in Canada were on Jan 10 ’09. Thousands of people in Toronto, Montreal and a few other cities came out to support terrorists but I guess it didn’t happen because I don’t know the names of each and every person in attendance.

          • TJ Cook

            And you know perfectly well those rallies were in support of *Gaza* during a massive Israeli assault. Those rallies were not pro-Hamas and they were not pro-terrorist tactics.

            Perhaps you’d describe the subsequent pro-Israel rallies as being pro-group punishment? Maybe those rallies were in favour of killing 100 Gazans for every Israeli killed?

            Smearing people you disagree with using such extremist, inflammatory, untrue rhetoric as “pro-terrorist” puts you in the same category as Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity. But then, you self-identify as “conservative” so you’re clearly not concerned with the company you keep.

        • A reader

          Just saw the same story in the Guardian too, though.

      • John D

        “Galloway is anti-west, pro-terrorist, he would fit in just fine here in Canada”

        Wow, you really are an a-hole, and not the good kind like Dennis Leary.

      • knb

        Another source is what you are after?

    • an online reader

      We will NOT allow woman to excite , impair judgement , pervert society and otherwise upset peaceful goat herders . Ban them from public by decree . ( if steve agrees )

  • TJ Cook

    ” I don’t see why we have to entertain him and his views; we would not tolerate him if he was Canadian.”

    You know, if we eliminated the widespread rank ignorance about Canadian civil society, conservatism would cease to exist. I swear, it’s an ideology designed by nothing more than a hyperactive id.

    • archangel

      You forgot to add the i-o-t to the end of the last word.

  • Just Visiting

    Wasn’t it just this past week that the same government allowed a war criminal to cross our border to speak to a bunch of Texans in Calgary?

    Quite a flexible policy, isn’t it?

    - JV

    • an online reader

      Far less than 75,000 Texacans wooped the entire Mexican army when they tried to reclaim their land & resources eh .

  • Ken S

    Our government is barring a sitting MP from the UK? I can understand the government and their attempts to curtail free speech, since they suck at using debate and dialogue in getting their message out, rather relying on propagranda and scare tactics!!! Next Harper plans silence the CBC and we tax the internet….. doesn’t anyone else see the Harper manifesto in action?

  • CAPS

    What is that old saying? … Something about disagreeing with what you say but defeding your right to say it … or some bullshit like that.

    But to be aware of that would require some book learnin’ and that is even more anathema to this government than “terrorist-lovin’” MPs from the UK.

    I’m not crazy about Gorgeous George either but I have no problem allowing him to into the country to speak.

    There’s something else about in a free and open society debate should be welcomed or words to that effect. Given this government’s track record I’m sure they’ve never heard of that either.

  • PolJunkie

    I don’t know why everyone is surprised. After all, we are talking about a government that referred to those who question the handling of Afghan prisoners as Taliban lovers and those who supported the would-be coalition government as traitors and seditionists.

    We should count ourselves lucky that those who express such opinions within Canada’s borders haven’t had their passports revoked.

  • seaandthemountains

    we rule people “inadmissible” because of their disagreement with current policy positions?

    This is clearly censorship. And Kenney’s aid seeming enthusiasm for it is both unsurprising and unsatisfactory.

    Galloway seems like an idiot in a lot of respects that go beyond his views, but there is no argument that they are dangerous.

    I would expect Macleans, Steyn and the usual suspects to be taking up this matter with full intensity given their commitment to free speech.

  • archangel

    I wonder what Jason Kenney would say if Osama Bin Laden were invited to speak in Canada and accepted ?

  • ben

    George Galloway is a traitor to this country I am pleased Canada has the sense to ban him.I would not let him into America after the vile speeches hes made against America.This man is very dangerous.

    Ben

    • http://coyne kc

      How can he be a traitor to this country, does he hold citizenship? If we can let that clown W in, i think we’re big enough to survive Galloway!

  • Cael

    I’m afraid we’ve had our allotment of controversial Georges for the year.

  • Critical Reasoning

    I don’t think he should be barred from Canada, but Galloway really is an unsavoury clown. He used to be Saddam’s BFF, back in the embargo days when Iraq was starving its children to raise cash.

  • PolJunkie

    This is the kind of stunt that shows how utterly amateurish this government really. The worse possible way to handle someone like Galloway is to deny him entry into the country. They have just handed Galloway an enormous soap-box from which he will launch into a major media offensive against the Harper government.

    Galloway is probably already salivating at that one.

    • Critical Reasoning

      He may be salivating, but I don’t think anyone in Canada is worried about Galloway’s “enormous soap box”. I’m sure any “major media offensive” by the likes of Galloway will have all the impact of a wet fart in this country.

      • Lord Kitchener’s Own

        Well, whatever impact Galloway will have it’ll be more now than if they’d just let him in.

        • Critical Reasoning

          His impact is pretty close to zero, either way.

          • Lord Kitchener’s Own

            Yeah, that’s probably true…

    • Lord Kitchener’s Own

      Yeah, I’ve got to say, if the government hadn’t done this I’d wager that 99% of Canadians would never have heard that Galloway was coming, and would probably have no idea who Galloway is.

      They’ll definitely hear about it now!

      Honestly, in a million years Galloway would never have thought to ask for this, but I’d bet he’s tickled pink about it.

      The only thing more dangerous than letting nutjobs speak is barring nutjobs from speaking.

      • Critical Reasoning

        I’d wager that 99% of Canadians have never heard of Galloway and don’t care.

        • Canuckistanian

          id’ wager that 99% of Canadians will hear about him now and will care immensely about efforts by our gov’t to stifle free speech.

          is it 1984?

        • John.K

          I’ll wager 99% of Canadians can’t define “infandous”….

          • Canuckistanian

            indeed ;-)

  • Canuckistanian

    nevertheless, i must commend the gov’t for this. all right thinking canadians should relish the opportunity to witness our gov’t make utter fools of themselves (again and again and again…really the Minister of Science & Backwards Christianity has got nothing on the Minister of Immigration Censorship & Ethno-Politics)

    • Wayne

      I hope more canadians do indeed pay attention as the more they do the more we can deal wiith those that support terrorism like this guy and the more likely we can weed his ideas out of the gene pool.

      • Canuckistanian

        Castration! bring back eugenics!

  • Wayne

    Hey Folks! I have an idea let’s try a thought experiment on all of our tolerance for ‘ free speech ‘ let’s say that galloway rather than being a purveyor of hate and financial supporter of a terrorist organization was instead coming to give a speech as a member of the NAMBDA or some such group I heard of awhile back that promotes having sex with children – no age limit of course – hmmmmmm … now imagine this how would you post here? be honest now : ——–

    • Sophia Geffros

      Don’t be deliberately obtuse.

  • Santamaria

    Shame on Canada!
    We let our fallen soldiers being ridiculed on FOX , whil we prevent British MP`s from entering our country?
    Freedom of speech will soon become a mirage , going at this speed.

Previous

Next

From Macleans