Demonstrators at the Ann Coulter speaking event at the University of Ottawa on March 23. Ellen Ocran in the foreground.
Canada Border Services Agency officials today declined admission to notorious Hamas sympathizer and British MP, George Galloway, spawning immediate conspiracy theories of political interference. “There was little doubt that’s what Immigration Minister Jason Kenney wanted,” wrote Cambell Clark in the Globe.
“Little doubt”? What do the wants of Jason Kenney have to do with anything?
George Galloway is an admitted material supporter to Hamas, a recognized network of terror by the nation of Canada. Indeed, Canada classifies the military wing of Hamas as a “radical Sunni Muslim terrorist organization.”
George Galloway insists he has never been a member of Hamas, and that he’s being barred for his political and “pro-Palestinian” views. But the fact is that Canada isn’t the only country to have refused admission to the activist who is so leftwing that the Labour Party had him expelled.
Egypt, a country that can’t exactly be described as being pro-Israeli, deported George Galloway and his colleague Ron McKay on January 8 of this year, after the two had attempted to take 200 trucks of aid into the Gaza Strip through the blockade. The Foreign Ministry of Egypt released a statement reading: “George Galloway is considered persona non grata and will not be allowed to enter into Egypt again”.
A year earlier, on March 10, Mr.Galloway attended a press conference in Gaza City attended by representatives from the Hamas government, to announce the donation of 100 aid vehicles. He personally donated three cars and 25,000 British pounds to Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya. It was this act that earned Mr.Galloway the designation of providing material support to a terrorist organization.
It isn’t just that Mr.Galloway has extreme views on Palestine, but that his views on Israel could properly be described as antisemitic and “hate speech”. At a pro-Palestinian demonstration in London in 2006, Mr.Galloway said that Hezbollah “has never been a terrorist organization” In fact, Australia, Canada, Israel, the United States, and Great Britain all formally recognize Hezbollah as a militant, terrorist organization. Although Great Britain only recognizes the military wing as terrorist, Canada designates the entire organization as such.
George Galloway consistently disguises antisemitic language by using the euphemistic “Zionist” in its place. And while many people are hesitant to outright designate him as being antisemitic, the fact that remains that he has expressed broad support for individuals and organizations that are antisemitic, terrorist, and deny the existence of the holocaust.
He has in the past blamed the country of Israel for the tension in the Middle East, referring to Israel as a “settler state” who used the holocaust to further their own expansionist interests in the Arab world. Going further, he once said on al-Jazeera television “I was re-elected despite all the efforts made by the British government, the Zionist movement and the newspapers and news media which are controlled by Zionism.”
That newspapers are all controlled by the Jews is a very old complaint of the conspiracy theorists who believe in a global Jewish agenda.
Despite all of this, Galloway’s supporters in Canada have jumped on this most recent denial of admission as a politically motivated move by the government of Canada, specifically the Conservative Party and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, whom the NDP have dubbed the “Minister of Censorship”.
It’s interesting, because NDP followers weren’t very keen on free speech when Ann Coulter visited the University of Ottawa last month. And the last time I checked, Ann Coulter hasn’t been seen donating to any terrorist organizations.
Ellen Ocran, one of the individuals who can be seen stridently screaming her opposition to the University’s guest speaker, was later revealed by a blogger to be an assistant to Pat Martin, the NDP member of Parliament for Winnipeg Centre.
The free speech vanguard for the left were awfully quiet about the Ann Coulter fiasco, or else wound up making blatantly digressive arguments about how it was Coulter’s security detail which actually made the final decision to cancel the event. Not that the Ellen Ocrans waiting for Ms.Coulter’s car had anything to do with that decision, mind you, screaming and chanting in an aggressive and hostile manner.
But while no single political party was blamed for that event, the Conservatives are being dragged out before the court of media opinion, and asserted as a fact that they barred George Galloway from Canada because of Jason Kenney’s personal political prerogative. And that, friends, is what we call the selectivity of objectivity.
Mr. Stewart forwarded the case to senior officials including Stéphane Larue, the director-general of the Immigration Department’s case-management branch, who said he would ask CBSA to do a “very quick inadmissibility assessment.” Mr. Velshi chimed in that if it came up to Mr. Kenney, “I can fairly predict that he will not ever give a [entry permit] to someone who advocated the kind of things George Galloway advocates.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/court-will-hear-bid-to-lift-canadian-entry-ban-on-british-mp-george-galloway/article1546100/
The Government asked for a quick decision and told the staff they would not over rule against denying his “admissibility”.
Expediting a request for a quicker decision is hardly an example of political interference. Telling the CBSA how to vote? That’s political interference.
I’m still trying to figure out why many on the left want a fascist like Galloway to come to Canada…
The left, for whatever reason, have always kind of aligned themselves with the Palestinians.
“NDP followers weren’t very keen on free speech when Ann Coulter visited the University of Ottawa last month…”
Were they suggesting she be banned from the country?
I do not think the two situations are comperable.
“I do not think the two situations are comperable.”
I agree.
One person likes to use outrageous comments to infuriate her opponents and get publicity.
The other person provided material support for a banned terrorist organisation.
Even when the Palestinian “government” is under the control of fascists…bizarre.
good picture. i wonder what type of speech a cavity that large spews. i also wonder if the cavity in the skull is as large.
Hmmm
Way to totally ignore the point.
One person is truly being censored, and the other is the subject of various groups exercising their own right of free speech through organized protest.
But you keep trying to draw those distinctions. I am not surprised that people like you would support censorship of people with whom you disagree, and whine about it (and exaggerate it) when it happens to people with whom you do agree.
Has Pat Martin ever commented on his staff member, and is she still working for him.
Gayle, this is really getting old. I realise it’s a slow news time, but it seems that whole staged Ann Coulter debacle refuses to die.
No, she wasn’t banned from the country. It was her own people including the bombastic Ezzy Levant who cancelled the event and no one else because they failed to organize properly.
However, what I’m curious about is that according to many commenters here and elsewhere think that Ann Coulter’s obvious anti-semitic rhetoric is perfectly acceptable (Remember, Jews need to be ‘perfected’; sounds awfully reminiscent of Hitler’s “final solution” if anyone remembers their holocaust history,) and yet, George Galloway is banned for sympathizing with the Palestinian cause. Why is that?
Because they are hypocrites.
Careful Gale you are going to fall off your lofty perch Dear. His voice wasn’t silenced the loopy left heard his free speech via video conference. Here’s a tip to the loopy left stop supporting terrorists’ supporters or you might find yourselves confined to Canada’s borders because other nations will come to view you as a threat to public saftey.
Campbell Clarke isn’t digging deep enough. This is way bigger than that. Admit it Adrian. You did this!
We all know that there is little doubt that this is exactly what you wanted.
It’s not that curious CK.
A good number of readers here and elsewhere believe there that there’s a difference between odious free speech, (i.e. Ann Coulter), and allowing those who fund terrorists into Canada.
Adrian’s wrong to make the comparison between Coulter & Galloway. Ann Coulter is an attention seeker who says offensive things for money. George Galloway supports terrorists.
Hamas is a terrorist organization and is listed as such in the Canadian Criminal Code. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas) The referenced Montreal Gazette article is no longer available unfortunately.
George Galloway provides direct financial support both to Hamas and personally to the leader of Hamas. This has nothing to do with speech.
Adrian shouldn’t have made the comparison between Coulter & Galloway. They are apples and oranges. (Or whatever works well in a fruitcake.)
Coulter’s comment about Jews was just one of her pro-Christian “jokes”. You have to put it in context. She didn’t say that the media is controlled by the Jews.
I think the comparison is interesting because in observing the reactions of the left, there is an obvious tendency to downplay the extremists who had Coulter barred from speaking, whilst at the same time using Galloway to attack the Conservative Party.
“One person is truly being censored, and the other is the subject of various groups exercising their own right of free speech through organized protest.”
Sorry, but using intimidation and brown-shirt goon tactics is not exercising free speech.
Had Galloway not donated money to a fascist terrorist organisation, I’m sure that he would have been let into the country.
http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/2010/04/latest-george-galloway-stunt-expect.html
Actually, in this country all speech is free and subject to the protection of the Charter, except for speech that is violent. You need to read the SCC decision in Irwin Toy.
There are reasonable limits permissible by virtue of s. 1 of the Charter, but that does not include protests.
Hate to break it to you, but the truth is those protesters were exercising their right of free speech. To be consistent you should be supporting their right to protest as they see fit.
Does she look like Muslim-rage-boy, or what!
“Ann Coulter’s obvious anti-semitic (sic) rhetoric”
Not quite.