Galloway fights exclusion from Canada Part 2

Response to A_J's last post on the old site:

 A_J wrote:

"I think his constituents managed to make do while he spent a few weeks on Big Brother a couple of years ago."

What? you're equating his participation, in that show, with the possibility of being detained, possibly for weeks, across the Atlantic, on "terrorist"-related charges?

 you'll need to uncrumple your (hopelessly flawed) logic on that one...

@Michelle.

Indeed, it is the point that he might have been detained. If that had wrecked the event. So much the better. The entire case that there was no harm would be trashed by that alone.

Yeah, I should have mentioned that Strombo was quite visibly jet-lagged last night. He did a good job, notwithstanding that dumb comment about Galloway pandering to his Muslim electorate - but at least Galloway had a great response.

I wish we had a Galloway here.

ps: thanks for starting the new thread - my dialup is unusually slow today.

I think it was a good thing that George S brought up the dumb comment about pandering to the Muslim electorate. I'm sure that a number of viewers would be marginalizing Mr. Galloway's perspective without knowing that background so I'm glad it was asked and answered. 

Good point, Loretta.

 A good point but Galloway's answer was obvious to anyone that knows the least about the MP or anyone not blinded by hate. And that, in any case, works both ways.

Those that are prejudiced against Palestinians and, therefore, prejudiced against Galloway as well, will find in the MP's Muslim voters all they need to "happily" jettison any conclusions, ideas, statements, etc.,  that the outstanding British MP made. They'll find their odious prejudices confirmed and continue to support the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians unclouded by moral or ethical concerns.  This whole steaming pile of Conservative droppings has been premised on crapping on the freely-expressed democratic views of the electors of Gaza to begin with. Why wouldn't others of like mind crap on the wishes of the voters of Bethnal Green?

Yes, I can see both points regarding Galloway's electorate and Strombo's question.

But in the end the response of Galloway's was accurate, why would Canada have a problem with him if the USA and indeed Britian does not?:

The policy is incoherent as policy. But it makes sense from the point of view of criminalizing solidarity. Hence the necessity for all the subterfuge: banning Galloway from Canada, pretending NOT to have made a final decision, conflating the bringing of medical aid with supporting terrorism, spitting in the face of the democratic wishes of the Gazans, etc.. Galloway has also outlined other events that have taken place in his own country: (from the previous thread and Galloway's own website)

"The timing speaks for itself – the BBC ban a charity appeal for Gaza; last Friday, the Murdoch press inform me that a George Bush-supporting government minister in Canada has banned me from the country on account of my views on the Middle East; the following day news breaks that the British government is demanding the sacking of the deputy general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain on account of his recognition of the government of Palestine; on Monday a couple of hours before I touch down [in the US for a speaking tour] with a substantive letter from the Viva Palestina campaign to the Charity Commission, one of its officials briefs journalists in a way that invites damaging innuendo.

It's all too much of a coincidence.

What is happening is a dangerous and sinister attempt to criminalise efforts to build solidarity for the besieged people of Palestine to choose their own government."

(highlights are mine - N.B.)

Well, it has come to my attention (maybe I mentioned this already) that the United Church of Canada has given financial aid to the people of Gaza. Does that make the moderator a terrorist or all of the membership?

It's utterly bizarre reasoning but I'm preaching to the choir, so to speak, with that comment.

on the other hand, Mr. Galloway's exposure - via one single interview, on a fairly-exclusive stage, which a lot of Canadians simply don't watch anyway - doesn't account for much, really

In the larger picture,  the private - and larger - entities can completely skip any worthwhile "coverage" of the issue - this anti-Muslim, "Remake The Middle East for Israel and Big Oil" thingy that's happening as we speak

 - but the little CBC - which is (generally presumed to be) NOT told what to air, on any given subject (presumably) is "allowed"(*), in so many words or gestures  

("In these tough times we gotta cut you and maybe you - and oh, by the way, this Galloway guy's a security threat to our troops and to British troops and Israeli troops and the future of freedom loving peoples everywhere, so, like... let's not get too butter-churn-chummy with him...")

 to interview him .. it lets steam escape, from the potentially-threatening pressurization of the issue.

then there's Strom, who, while he does display an apparent level of awareness, occasionally, of what IS going on in the world, never ceases to amaze me, both by how shallowly he HAS actually covered many, very deep issues, and a few ssues he's never covered at all

Galloway's appearance on the mothercorp de-mystifies him, via the familiar - and limited - Strom pkg

whereby, of course, thereafter, the Cons can confidently stand up to any future criticism of their "trampling on freedom of speech" (not by Iggy, tho (**)) by using Strom's interview as an example! - if it sounds Rovian, it is.

(*they DO hold cbc's purse strings, and they were yanking(*), pretty hard, ON those strings - if memory serves - precisely when this flap, over Galloway's exclusion from Canada, arose)

 (**who then may have to "okay" a full airing of Mr. Galloways opinions - which would sink all of their hopeful little craft in a nanosecond  )

 let's hope that the pressure grows and a full and open hearing is had, and bloody soon

It's no coincidence at all -

The immoral, illegal attack, invasion, and purposeful destruction of Iraq, by Bush 44's White House became a "dangerous and sinister" fulfilment of a plan to begin to besiege - not just the Palestinian people - but Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Saudi Arabia - Afghanistan is in there, too

and it's all been engineered to "fail" - like "the plan" in Iraq "failed", too, until "the surge" saved it all - and, coincidentally, got the co-conspirators OF this "plan" into power AGAIN

George Galloway knows exactly what's going on, in that regard (as does Harper & Kenney, et al - incl. Iggy, Manley, the rest), and I'm quite convinced that he, Galloway, is just aching for nothing more than a complete explosion of dialogue on the topic- Canada would be a good forum - hence his "ban"

it's all here: the choir may hum it, by heart...

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC20Ak07.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090330.wgalloway31/...

He challenged Mr. Kenney to a one-on-one debate about peace in the Middle East, though the Canadian minister's portfolio is as Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism.

"Come out and debate with me like a man," Mr. Galloway bellowed.

...

"I am not a supporter of Hamas. I have never been a supporter of Hamas," Mr. Galloway said, speaking from New York and adding that neither the British nor American governments have limited his travel. "I did exactly what any non-governmental organization, government organization or super-national organization would do. I gave this aid to the democratically-elected government."

 ...

In refusing to overturn the CBSA ruling, Federal Court judge Luc Martineau said he was not ready to act without a detailed hearing, but suggested Mr. Galloway might still have an interest in fighting a decision that brands him as a terrorist.

He wrote that the wording of the government's preliminary decision, before Mr. Galloway actually arrived at the border, "may also give credence to the applicant's argument that the whole matter is being prejudged, particularly in light of certain other public comments made by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration's spokesman..."

 I think it's worth some bucks from the opposition parties to help George fight this, to embarrass Kenney and Harper!

Too bad you know iggy won't pikc up the torch. Jack is looking at it and is probably thinking he will get burned instead of lighting the way.

while I enthusiastically share your first smiley-face assessment, not so much the second

Not to hi-jack the momentum there, but the problem with the "big bucks from the opposition parties" idea, is that - in case you missed it - the  "big buck" - there! on the Liberal side of the aisle! is in Cahoots! with EXACTLY the people Galloway wants to STOP- - much like Harper is

they seem to me to have conspired together on their respective responses to Galloway

Harper intoned - in that low, grave voice he drags out, for effect - he must practice on Jason Kenney - that Galloway - without naming him - was a threat

Then, Iggy leapt, seemingly, to the mike - make that mic - and pronounced George Galloway MP "...  a clown!"

Both ends of the spectrum, I'd say - with nothing left to stand on in between - when, in fact, we all know that NEITHER of those categorizations is True!

Harper AND Iggy have said what is is they're gonna say, re Galloway, and that's IT, believe me!

So why - you may ask - that yawning gap...

or is that the choir?

Charming fellow, isn't he?  

no, these are "charming fellows": http://bit.ly/imperialism_or_apocolypse [19] also http://bit.ly/new_world_disorder [20]

"

The repetition of falsehoods tied to the war on terrorism and the war against Iraq has eroded the American capacity, if not to tell the difference between what is true and what is a lie, then to think the difference matters much. The administration distorted fact ahead of the invasion, when the American people could not refute what had not happened yet. And the administration distorts fact now, when the American people do not remember clearly what we were told a year ago. That Bush retains the confidence of a sizable proportion of the electorate suggests that Americans don't particularly worry anymore about truth as a guiding principle of their government.

In that lies the irony. The Bush dynasty has in fact initiated a new order of things. The United States of America has become its own opposite, a nation of triumphant freedom that claims the right to restrain the freedom of others; a nation of a structured balance of power that destroys the balance of power abroad; a nation of creative enterprise that exports a smothering banality; and above all, a nation of forcefully direct expression that disrespects the truth. Whatever happens from this week forward in Iraq, the main outcome of the war for the United States is clear. We have defeated ourselves."

Charming