George Galloway, free-speech activist

[The Federal Court has upheld Galloway’s exclusion from Canada – see Update III below. – DP]
Canwest News:

Canada should allow British MP George Galloway to enter the country to speak at peace rallies in Toronto, Mississauga, Ottawa and Montreal because “free expression is the matrix of every other freedom,” a lawyer for Galloway told a federal appeals court judge Sunday.
[…]
About 150 free-speech and antiwar advocates picketed outside a federal courtroom in Toronto in the rain and later packed the court for an unusual Sunday court hearing. Court officials scrambled to rig up a screen in an overflow room so all those present could hear the case.
Many of the supporters wore stickers on their shirts, which used the “C” of the federal Conservative party logo to spell the word “censored.”
“Mr. (Jason) Kenney (Canada’s minister of immigration) may well believe that they are acting legally, but he cannot quell speech,” Barbara Jackman, a prominent Toronto immigration lawyer, told the court. “This is legitimate political comment. This is not hate speech.” She asked the court to grant an injunction permitting Galloway to speak.


Damian P.
Update: Rob Breakenridge wonders when the NDP and Canadian Islamic Congress suddenly became so flexible about letting controversial characters in the country.
Update II: Hitch weighs in: “The British House of Commons has room for a man as appalling as George Galloway; why should Canadians not have the chance to make up their own mind about him? If Geert Wilders is persuasive enough to get himself elected to parliament in The Hague, is there any reason to believe that the British people are so lacking in robustness that they need to be protected from what he has to say?”
Update III: breaking news: Galloway’s martyrdom is secured:

Controversial British MP George Galloway will not be allowed into Canada to deliver a series of anti-war speeches across the country, a Federal Court judge has ruled.
Earlier this month, border security officials deemed Galloway inadmissible saying he was guilty of providing material support for terrorism.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “George Galloway, free-speech activist

  1. Can someone explain to them that he was banned by a “hands off” agency for what he did (give material comfort to the enemy), and not for anything he said?
    Please?

  2. The argument by Galloway’s lawyer is somewhat ironic given Galloway’s own opinions on letting in controversial speakers:

  3. “Can someone explain to them that he was banned by a “hands off” agency for what he did (give material comfort to the enemy), and not for anything he said? ”
    Can some one explain to right-wingers that giving money to a government is not the same thing as giving money to the political party that was elected?

  4. I see. So the Hamasshole who collected the money just took off his terrorist hat, put on his government hat, and all is well with the world?
    Hamas is banned. People who give material comfort (i.e., beyond speech, but actual cash) should be banned.
    He wanted this confrontation, he got it. I hope that his travels are now as limited as a white South African’s during the apartheid boycotts. You remember those, don’t you? Same principle.

  5. Galloway publicly announced his intention to do something (namely, fundraise for a terrorist organization) that would get Canadian citizens arrested if we did it. So he got banned, boo hoo. Would he rather go to jail?
    He wasn’t banned merely for his views — though come to think of it, free speech can be a punishable crime in Canada too. A fact our liberal friends seem quite comfortable with, so the outrage is a mite mystifying.

  6. If Galloway is anti-war it is because documents unearthed in Baghdad claimed that he took money from Saddam Hussein in the Oil for Food programme and that Galloway was a spy for the Iraqi secret service. Anyone with big bucks at stake would oppose a war that would bring an end to their financial windfall. It is world class cynicism for Galloway’s Canadian supporters to refer to him as anti-war leaving the impression that he is performing a noble role.

  7. Galloway is a useless piece of turd who actually loves war and mayhem – as long as he is making money off it, either from the Soviets when he backed their invasion of Afganistan, from the mass murdering terrorists Saddam Hussein or Yassir Arafat.
    He can say whatever he likes – this isn’t about free speech. He just can’t say it on our soil.
    Galloway is a traitor, a usless prick who makes money by supporting our enemies. As long as we have our soldiers in the field fighting Islamic terrorists, the very people this asshole supports and raises funds for, he stays out.
    And anyone – this means you Olivia Chow et al, who promotes him is directly insulting Canadian soldiers, literally pissing on the graves of the fallen. You are more despicable than Galloway.

  8. “Can some one explain to right-wingers that giving money to a government is not the same thing as giving money to the political party that was elected?”
    I’m not giving money to the Nazi Party, I’m giving it to the Chancellor of Germany!
    (And yes, I *am* comparing Hamas to the Nazis. I think they have many important similarities, starting with their views on a certain religious group.)

  9. Every single accusation that was reported here has been proven false.
    Let’s clear something else up: giving money to the Canadian government and giving money to the Conservative party are two different things.

  10. (And yes, I *am* comparing Hamas to the Nazis. I think they have many important similarities, starting with their views on a certain religious group.)
    If you canèt tell the difference between Germany 1939 and a bombed out, run down, open air prison camp that is being slowly starved to death, then I am very disappointed in your judgementé

  11. “Let’s clear something else up: giving money to the Canadian government and giving money to the Conservative party are two different things.”
    True, but irrelevant. The real comparison is how much difference there was between party and government in Hitler’s Germany.
    “If you canèt tell the difference between Germany 1939 and a bombed out, run down, open air prison camp that is being slowly starved to death, then I am very disappointed in your judgementé”
    I’m sure there are plenty of differences between Germany and Gaza, but as you should have figured out by now, I’m comparing what the Nazi Party and Hamas think about the Jews.

  12. “If you canèt tell the difference between Germany 1939 and a bombed out, run down, open air prison camp that is being slowly starved to death, then I am very disappointed in your judgementé”
    Who said anything about 1939?
    “a bombed out, run down, open air prison camp that is being slowly starved to death” is a much more accurate description of Germany in 1944 than the Gaza strip now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s