NationStates Jolt Archive

Coming so close on the heels of Bush's visit to Calgary, I thought this was an interesting decision on the part of "teh gubmint". Apparantly Canadian Immigration officials aren't completely asleep at the switch when it comes to visiting politicians, they're just inconsistent.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/20/george-galloway-banned-canada


Originally posted in The Guardian
Earlier today the Sun said border security officials had declared Galloway, 54, "inadmissible" because of his views on Afghanistan and the presence of Canadian troops there and would be turned away if he attempted to enter the country.

A spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada said the decision had been taken by border security officials "based on a number of factors" in accordance with section 34(1) of the country's immigration act.

The act states:

"A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on security grounds for:

(a) engaging in an act of espionage or an act of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada;

(b) engaging in or instigating the subversion by force of any government;

(c) engaging in terrorism;

(d) being a danger to the security of Canada;

(e) engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives or safety of persons in Canada; or

(f) being a member of an organisation that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c)."

Galloway, MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, is consulting the organisers of his north American speaking tour and exploring whether legal action can be taken to overturn the ban.

Jason Kenney, Canada's immigration minister, has the right to exempt people from the act if it is felt that their presence would not be "detrimental to the national interest".

But a spokesman said Kenney would "decline to exercise that discretion" in Galloway's case.

A few thoughts spring to mind:

George Bush should have been denied according to Section 34(1)b.

Jason Kenney's discretionary power is obviously discretionary, but labelling a sitting MP in the Parliament of an ally, indeed the "mother country", a threat to public security is ludicrous. In letting Bush slip through and denying Galloway, the Minister is applying the law in a petulant, uneven fashion.

seems good to me.

My minuscule respect for America Jr. has just increased several fold.

My minuscule respect for America Jr. has just increased several fold.

Because we apply our laws arbitrarily?

Because we apply our laws arbitrarily?

Eh? No. Every government applies laws arbitrarily. You'd better get used to that.

No, I mean excluding GG. I fucking hate that wanker.

Eh? No. Every government applies laws arbitrarily. You'd better get used to that.

No, I mean excluding GG. I fucking hate that wanker.

What ever for ??
You mean his using the oil for food program for personal profit, or do you mean his ties to Hamas?

You'll note the Phelpses were denied admittance as well, hrm?

So they're saying he's supported Hamas:

"We're going to uphold the law, not give special treatment to this infamous street-corner Cromwell who actually brags about giving 'financial support' to Hamas, a terrorist organisation banned in Canada," he said. "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."

One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. While Canada didn't agree with Bush on everything, there was some ideological connect. Someone who claims to support Hamas has no such connection whatsoever in the eyes of this gov't.

Is there actually reason to believe he could be a threat to Canadian security? Would his speech in Toronto, for example, end up in violent protest? I think it's stretching things prrreeeeetttty thing to say yes to this man, and no to Bush. We've had any amount of extremely controversial figures giving talks and stirring things up...there should be more certainty about who gets in and who does not.

That being said, Jason Kenney is a fucking moron.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/05bp6Q86TI7nt/610x.jpg

Go back to Calgary you right wing bitch.

Eh? No. Every government applies laws arbitrarily. You'd better get used to that.

No, I mean excluding GG. I fucking hate that wanker.

:rolleyes: Whatever. I'm not interested in suppressing opinions I don't agree with. Either they both should have been allowed in, or both turned away. End of story.

George Galloway really is infandous.

You'll note the Phelpses were denied admittance as well, hrm?

Actually I hadn't heard that. I know they were denied entry to Britain; I thought they had already made a lot of noise about how they were never coming here.





One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. While Canada didn't agree with Bush on everything, there was some ideological connect. Someone who claims to support Hamas has no such connection whatsoever in the eyes of this gov't.


Ideological connect or not, Galloway is a sitting MP in a democratic country we have close ties with. It's akin to the UK denying entry to Keith Martin, or at the very least André Arthur.



That being said, Jason Kenney is a fucking moron.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/05bp6Q86TI7nt/610x.jpg

Go back to Calgary you right wing bitch.

Well, no argument there.

Actually I hadn't heard that. I know they were denied entry to Britain; I thought they had already made a lot of noise about how they were never coming here. Bluster to the contrary, they didn't make it in (http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=707624).

Ideological connect or not, Galloway is a sitting MP in a democratic country we have close ties with. It's akin to the UK denying entry to Keith Martin, or at the very least André Arthur. I agree, it's a diplomatic faux pas. It's also very clearly ideologically charged. There is a lot of anti-Bush sentiment in this country, but he's okay to let in because the Harper government was at least partially aligned with his interests.

I'm interested in seeing what sort of headway he'll make in the appeal...unfortunately when it comes to Immigration and Citizenship Canada, you don't have many options outside of the country to complain.

Bluster to the contrary, they didn't make it in (http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=707624).


Hmm. I have to admit, this doesn't bother me too much. WBC is pretty much a geek show anyway. I'm much more uncomfortable with CUPE's call to ban Israeli academics from campuses.


I'm interested in seeing what sort of headway he'll make in the appeal...unfortunately when it comes to Immigration and Citizenship Canada, you don't have many options outside of the country to complain.

I don't imagine he'll get anywhere.

Ideological connect or not, Galloway is a sitting MP in a democratic country we have close ties with. It's akin to the UK denying entry to Keith Martin, or at the very least André Arthur.



Or Geert Wilders. So the Canadian course of action isn't exactly something that the UK is innocent of. However, I don't see how George Galloway would pose a threat to the Canadian people or Canadian democratic institutions. He's weird but harmless.

Earlier today the Sun said border security officials had declared Galloway, 54"inadmissible" because of his views on Afghanistan

Thank God for the thought police, eh?

*is saddened*

Ideological connect or not, Galloway is a sitting MP in a democratic country we have close ties with. It's akin to the UK denying entry to Keith Martin, or at the very least André Arthur.

Damn right. does nobody understand how diplomacy works anymore?

Ha, what a dick.

Ha, what a dick.

Who ? Canada or that terrorist guy ?

Damn right. does nobody understand how diplomacy works anymore?

Thomas Walkom (http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/606073) had some interesting thoughts on what the hell Kenney is up to.

Who ? Canada or that terrorist guy ?
Galloway.

Galloway.

So i am taking it Canada banning him doesn't piss off the UK in the slightest?

So i am taking it Canada banning him doesn't piss off the UK in the slightest?
No. That tosser is alost universally hated.

EDIT: That said, the decision of the Canadian government is nonsense, but what do you expect when you elect Conservatives?

No. That tosser is alost universally hated.

So Canada Banning him improved relations. Wow to think people thought the Candain government didn't understand diplomacy.

So Canada Banning him improved relations. Wow to think people thought the Candain government didn't understand diplomacy.
I really doubt Milliband is losing any sleep over this whatsoever.

I really doubt Milliband is losing any sleep over this whatsoever.

I imgine him laugh his ass off drinking some brandy.