I'm assuming that with the majority of people on this site being from England and North America, someone is going to have an opinion on this.
Like the title says: George Galloway banned from entering Canada.
What does everyone think about the decision of Canadian Minister of Immigration Jason Kenney? Is anyone here in favour of the ban? Does anyone here believe that George Galloway is, in fact, a terrorist? Has the Canadian Government gone too far?
They haven't said he's a terrorist himself. The ban is for a number of factors, including providing support for a known terrorist.
Since he himself pledged three cars and £25 000 to someone who is considered by Canada, among other countries, a known terrorist I think they're fully within their rights here.
In response to your statement that Jason Kenney never claimed George Galloway is a terrorist:
George Galloway was denied access under Section 34 of Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), on items (c) "Engaging in terrorism" and (f) "Being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts refered to in paragraph (a), (b), or (c)."
The document in which this claim is made is available for your scrutiny at www.defendfreespeech.ca. The High Commission of Canada letter to George Galloway.
If you read the letter in full you'll note that they go on to state that the reason he is being banned is because he has funded an organisation considered to be terrorist's by Canada.
I notice that on the website there are various criticisms of Canada's decision, and only the letter as a statement from the Canadian government.
I also find it hard to sympathise with a man who attempted, the day after slaughter in London, to turn deaths to his own advantage in order to try and make a point. I'm not saying I agree with the way, that's outside the scope of this, however his words in response to the attacks were, as many have said, despicable.
As to free speech, I don't see how that comes into this. As far as I am aware they are not censoring any statements he might wish to put out, or broadcasts he may wish to make. They are simply saying that they do not want him in the country, as he is known to have funded a terrorist organisation (at least one that Canada states is a terrorist). He's made no secret of this fact, and takes it as a point of pride.
He donated Ambulances, food, medical supplies, clothing, and money to the democratically elected government of Palestine. In my estimation the terrorism issue is a moot point.
The United States gives aid to Israel in form of military hardware, many types of aid, and unwavering support of their terrorist acts in and occupation of Palestine. So, why haven't they banned George Bush(He visited the tar sands last week)? Perhaps terrorism is only moot if you're part of the United States government.
I am a Canadian, and I disagree with this ban. I will be taking to the streets along with other Canadians around the country to protest this ban.
I actually like George Galloway. He's proven to be right on issues such as the Iraq War and Israeli over-aggression, he's articulate, fights his corner and obviously knows his stuff.
I don't know enough about this story to comment but if it is for the reasons timberwulf says then I don't support the Canadian government's actions.
He seems to me to be yet another opportunist politician who'll seize on anything which allows him to make his point, uncaring about the effect an event may have had on people. The moment a cause stops being popular he'll drop it and seize on whatever the latest cause celebre is.
If Mr Galloway has been banned for the reasons stated under Canadas terroism act then its ludicrious. Only last month Mr Martin McGuiness, former IRA Leader and for last decade member of Sinn Fein political party to the PIRA has been dancing and meeting the leaders of the USA.
Its shows how outdated our laws are and how ineffective and obscene.
This decision smacks of a backhander to the british government whom for yrs have seen Galloway as a thorn in their side for numerous reasons.
The truth is this, every countries leaders are guilty of terrorism or acts deemed illegal by someother state or body at sometime whilst they are in power. Its simply that as a western world power we enforce ours more stringently and others do not
Wasnt it only last year G.W.Bush was calling Venezula a terrorist state and their leader a madman, for what? was he engaged in acts likley to kill thousands of people? NO but he didnt fit the status quo of western democracies so he was black listed. The people who are afraid of change ie our governments are the real killers of freedom and democracy
At the end of the day George Galloway is not a dangerous man and his ideas evenif youdisagree with him still create debate.
And true what you say that its hardly as if our 'approved' governments are any better.
Posts: 33
Like the title says: George Galloway banned from entering Canada.
What does everyone think about the decision of Canadian Minister of Immigration Jason Kenney? Is anyone here in favour of the ban? Does anyone here believe that George Galloway is, in fact, a terrorist? Has the Canadian Government gone too far?
Posts: 116
Since he himself pledged three cars and £25 000 to someone who is considered by Canada, among other countries, a known terrorist I think they're fully within their rights here.
Posts: 33
George Galloway was denied access under Section 34 of Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), on items (c) "Engaging in terrorism" and (f) "Being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts refered to in paragraph (a), (b), or (c)."
The document in which this claim is made is available for your scrutiny at www.defendfreespeech.ca. The High Commission of Canada letter to George Galloway.
Post Edited: 26th Mar 2009 (8:31pm)
Posts: 116
I notice that on the website there are various criticisms of Canada's decision, and only the letter as a statement from the Canadian government.
I also find it hard to sympathise with a man who attempted, the day after slaughter in London, to turn deaths to his own advantage in order to try and make a point. I'm not saying I agree with the way, that's outside the scope of this, however his words in response to the attacks were, as many have said, despicable.
As to free speech, I don't see how that comes into this. As far as I am aware they are not censoring any statements he might wish to put out, or broadcasts he may wish to make. They are simply saying that they do not want him in the country, as he is known to have funded a terrorist organisation (at least one that Canada states is a terrorist). He's made no secret of this fact, and takes it as a point of pride.
Posts: 33
The United States gives aid to Israel in form of military hardware, many types of aid, and unwavering support of their terrorist acts in and occupation of Palestine. So, why haven't they banned George Bush(He visited the tar sands last week)? Perhaps terrorism is only moot if you're part of the United States government.
I am a Canadian, and I disagree with this ban. I will be taking to the streets along with other Canadians around the country to protest this ban.
Posts: 116
My personal opinion of George Galloway may be colouring my perception of this matter, of course.
Posts: 119
I don't know enough about this story to comment but if it is for the reasons timberwulf says then I don't support the Canadian government's actions.
Why do you dislike him ozymandius?
Posts: 116
Posts: 1
Its shows how outdated our laws are and how ineffective and obscene.
This decision smacks of a backhander to the british government whom for yrs have seen Galloway as a thorn in their side for numerous reasons.
The truth is this, every countries leaders are guilty of terrorism or acts deemed illegal by someother state or body at sometime whilst they are in power. Its simply that as a western world power we enforce ours more stringently and others do not
Wasnt it only last year G.W.Bush was calling Venezula a terrorist state and their leader a madman, for what? was he engaged in acts likley to kill thousands of people? NO but he didnt fit the status quo of western democracies so he was black listed. The people who are afraid of change ie our governments are the real killers of freedom and democracy
Posts: 119
At the end of the day George Galloway is not a dangerous man and his ideas evenif youdisagree with him still create debate.
And true what you say that its hardly as if our 'approved' governments are any better.