I'm not saying that the decision the Canadian Government made was right, but addressing the larger issue that the government is selectively interpreting the law to the whims of the presently elected leadership.

If the Canadian government applied the laws that they cited in banning George Galloway consistently, George Bush should have never made it into the country either.

^So, because Mr.Galloway happens to have a different point of view about a conflict thousands of miles from Canadas shores, and happens to be quite skilled in making good points about why he has these beliefs through debates, the constructive solution to the problem is to ban him from ever entering the country, try to supress his oppinions in anyway possible, and add to that, threaten to monitor and investigate any Canadian who would have the audacity to want to listen to what the other side has to say about the issue?

It's not about defending Mr Galloway and it's not about attacking George Bush, it's about addressing the Canadian governments blatant hypocrisy and disregard for its own laws. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is quite clear.

>> ^Offsajdh:
Ouch, I think Halloway hit a nerve at around 4.10. Just watch as Weinstein tries to look around the room in search of an answer and only manages to fall back upon some ridiculous "proxy agent of hamas" claim. It sounds so familiar to US republican tactics of making up bullshit terms whose only purpose is to be inflamatory and fear-inciting.
Watch out! Galloway is a Hamas (proxy) agent!


It's not so funny when it is in fact true.

Galloway is a skilled debater and orator, winning this debate does NOT make him right. He exerts enormous effort to rally support and defense of all manner of the worst organizations and criminals in the world.

I think it is accurate to describe a dedicated propagandist who supports Hamas both with his own finances and every word he speaks an agent for Hamas.

>> ^SpeveO:
Did your pride also swell when Canada let George Bush, unrepentant war criminal, tap dance across the border? Oh right, he's not a war criminal, he's a humanitarian who saved the Iraqi people from blah blah blah insert hypocrisy here.


I would in fact be quite happy if Canada would try him for crimes against humanity in allowing torture and refusing to abide by the Geneva Convention. Just note that the list of people I would want to be on the list with Bush is extremely long and extends to far more outside America than in it.

What, is anyone actually surprised that attacking Bush doesn't actually fly as a defense for even worse scum like Mr. Galloway?

Ouch, I think Halloway hit a nerve at around 4.10. Just watch as Weinstein tries to look around the room in search of an answer and only manages to fall back upon some ridiculous "proxy agent of hamas" claim. It sounds so familiar to US republican tactics of making up bullshit terms whose only purpose is to be inflamatory and fear-inciting.

Watch out! Galloway is a Hamas (proxy) agent!

>> ^rougy:
Galloway is one of the few people who dares to call Israel what it is: a regional bully, and an unapologetically racist one at that.


He's better known for being one of the few people who dares to promote and defend the worst dictators and terrorists in world with not only propaganda and out right lies, but also with direct financial aid. It's the direct financial aid to Hamas president that got him barred from Canada and I'm proud my country kept the scumbag out of our country.

Good stuff. This is fair retribution for the Brits refusing Wilders.

Sad thing when you've got a British politician with ties so close to radical and violent Islamists that it impedes his foreign travels. See this video for the direction the UK is taking: http://www.videosift.com/video/Labour-MP-Predicts-Total-Islamification-of-Britain

At least Wilders' "offense" falls under free speech. Galloway is just pandering to the Muslim vote with the most straightforward means possible. I would not be surprised to find his website in Arabic.

i don't always agree with george galloway, but i fucking love him.

Meir Weinstein is a fucking moron though. mr. galloway would run circles around him in a debate.

Galloway is one of the few people who dares to call Israel what it is: a regional bully, and an unapologetically racist one at that.

Being critical of Israel, and playing along with the 'Great Satan-Little Satan' discourse are very different things. Why did you think Galloway would be a convincing example?

Crake,

Consider your source, Paul Bogdanor is notorious for his criticism of everyone on the extremist left everyone from Chomsky to Galloway, who he singles out as being holocaust deniers, defending neo-nazis and so on or basically any body who expresses critical readings of Israel foreign policy.

The document itself basically quotes sentences out of their contextual grounding, which is always an exercise in folly and distortion. As we can quote anything Obama says out of context and make it mean something else entirely.

>> ^Farhad2000:
bcglorf,
Galloway was against the economic sanctions against Iraq because he understood correctly what the international community did not want to, that economic sanctions never affect the ruling apparatus of any regime but directly affect the living standards of the general population.

"Sanctions imposed on Iraq have been comprehensive, meaning that virtually every aspect of the country's imports and exports is controlled, which is particularly damaging to a country recovering from war. Since the program began, an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of five have died as a result"
- Economic sanctions as a weapon of mass destruction http://www.harpers.org/archive/2002/11/0079384

No, that's only what Galloway says was his reason for opposing the sanctions. He went to Iraq after the first gulf war and as misterwright points out addressed Saddam saying "Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability. I can honestly say there was not a single person to whom I told I was coming here, hoping to meet with yourself, that did not wish me to convey their heart felt support and fraternal greetings". Galloway's defense is that he was addressing the Iraqi people, not Saddam himself. Fortunately for the world, the above lines are on video and show Galloway for the lying SOB that he is. After Saddam invaded Iran, Kuwait and exterminated the Kurds, Galloway still went over and congratulated Saddam and encouraged him. To this day he has never defended this statement in any fashion except to declare he is misquoted and wasn't speaking to Saddam, knowing full well even with the video most people won't bother looking at it.

bcglorf,

Galloway was against the economic sanctions against Iraq because he understood correctly what the international community did not want to, that economic sanctions never affect the ruling apparatus of any regime but directly affect the living standards of the general population.

"Sanctions imposed on Iraq have been comprehensive, meaning that virtually every aspect of the country's imports and exports is controlled, which is particularly damaging to a country recovering from war. Since the program began, an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of five have died as a result"

- Economic sanctions as a weapon of mass destruction http://www.harpers.org/archive/2002/11/0079384

From our good buddy Wikipedia:

Galloway is perhaps best known for his vigorous campaign to overturn economic sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s and early 2000s and to avert the 2003 invasion of that country. He made visits there in 1994 and 2002. As part of a speech in his 1994 visit in which Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was in attendance, he said "Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability", although Galloway has always stated that he was addressing the Iraqi people, and that he is not an admirer of Saddam.