Galloway fights exclusion from Canada: Official documents attached

138 posts / 0 new
Last post
contrarianna

Cueball wrote:
All I can say, is that if Galloway is aiding and abetting "terrorist" organizations, then they should let him in and charge him with such.

Unfortunately, in Harper's Canada, that would likely mean yet another secret trial.

G. Muffin

Way back, M. Spector said:  "Reminds me of a certain troll named "punch drunk" who was also a big Terry Glavin fan. He was  banned last New Year's Eve."

I'm bored tonight so I went to see what happened on New Year's.  I have no idea if these two posters are one and the same but Punch Drunk was certainly vile.  I really have to say, though, that encouraging someone to commit suicide, even in jest, is an awful thing to do.

Sorry about the thread drift. 

Fidel

[url=British">http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12913][... MP George Galloway barred from Canada under the Canada Israel "Public Security" Agreement[/url]

Quote:
British MP George Galloway was refused entry to Canada on the pretext that he supported Hamas, which is categorized by the Canadian government as a "terrorist organization." 

Contrary to what has been reported in the media, this was not a unilateral decision by the government of Canada

In all likelihood, the decision was taken in close consultation with Israel under the terms of a farreaching agreement on "public security" signed in Tel Aviv on March 23 2008. The "Declaration of Intent" establishes a framework of bilateral cooperation between Canada and Israel in the area of "Public Security". The agreement has not been the object of debate in the Canadian parliament, nor has it received media coverage.  

Under the proposed agreement, the Deputy Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of Canada is in liason with his Israeli counterpart the Director General of Public Security for the Government of the State of Israel. Together they chair a joint Management Committee.

Are stooges are like dead fish. It makes it easier to go with the flow

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

And now the Conservative attack on free speech, moves to the courts:

Gov’t will attempt to ban pro-Galloway submissions from court: supporters

 

Quote:
Supporters of British MP and outspoken antiwar crusader George Galloway say federal lawyers are now attempting to have their submissions in his case excluded from a federal court hearing in Toronto Sunday.

Loretta

I hope someone who has access to timely weekend reporting will post the decision here...please.

contrarianna

 Not the decision--but a good article here:

 Galloway Ban Mocks Canadian Justice
Written by William A. Cook   
Saturday, 28 March 2009 16:56

http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/3941-galloway-ban-mocks-canadian-...

Benjamin

Decision to be released Monday according to CTV.

 

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090329/galloway_ba...

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture
Eliezer Zusken

I have read much about Mr. Galloway in the last while and certainly one cannot describe him as progressive. He has supported the banning of Gert Wilders and Jean Marie LePenmfrom the UK (two facists that are hatemongers nonetheless have not supported terrorist groups), he appeared on a bizarre UK reality tv show and acted like a complete lunatic, the list is endless.

 

All that said he most certainly should not have been banned but no one who calls himself progressive should have a thing to do with this clown!!

Cueball Cueball's picture

Apparently the judge asked the lawyer for the government to produce evidence that Galloway was a terrorist. The lawyer said no.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Eliezer Zusken wrote:

I have read much about Mr. Galloway in the last while and certainly one cannot describe him as progressive. He has supported the banning of Gert Wilders and Jean Marie LePenmfrom the UK (two facists that are hatemongers nonetheless have not supported terrorist groups), he appeared on a bizarre UK reality tv show and acted like a complete lunatic, the list is endless.

All that said he most certainly should not have been banned but no one who calls himself progressive should have a thing to do with this clown!!

 

And I'd say you're up the creek without a paddle.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

The outstanding MP for Bethnal Green will be on Strombo's show, "The Hour", on Monday. Maybe the racists can try to silence Galloway by silencing  Stroumboulopoulos. Good luck with that, losers.

http://www.georgegalloway.com/

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Very nice response, contrarianna.

Stockholm

I am totally opposed to Galloway being barred from speaking in Canada. But apparently Galloway himself demanded that the British government bar Jean Marie LePen from setting foot in Britain to give a speech. That seems very hypocritical - either you support freedom of speech or you don't.

Cueball Cueball's picture

The best part of Jackman's submission today, was when she pointed out that the "terrorist" supplies that Galloway was taking to Gaza actually cleared Israeli customs.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stockholm wrote:
I am totally opposed to Galloway being barred from speaking in Canada. But apparently Galloway himself demanded that the British government bar Jean Marie LePen from setting foot in Britain to give a speech. That seems very hypocritical - either you support freedom of speech or you don't.

Galloway has made no statements about freedom of speech being an absolute right. He has said that the reasons given for limiting his freedom of speech (that he is a terrorist) are wrong. He did supported banning these Fascist people from speaking, because they were going to promote Fascism in the UK. The reasons given for barring Galloway is his supposed support for terrorist organization.

There is nothing hypocritcal about it. No one has suggested that Galloway will be engaging in hate speech or any such thing, or suggested that this would be the basis for barring him from Canada.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

aka Mycroft wrote:

I doubt the court case will go very far - I'm not a lawyer but my feeling is that the government has quite a lot of discretion, excessively so, when it comes to determining who can and can't enter the country...

Indeed the government does have a lot of discretion, but it is not unlimited; otherwise the rule of law would be out the window. In theory, that discretion must be exercised judicially and not for any purposes other than the fair administration of the Act. Partisan political purposes or personal vendettas, for example, would not be a proper exercise of discretion. 

Cueball Cueball's picture

The arguement against the injunction is basically that no decision has been made by immigration, and so the injunction is premature. If you look at the documents they suggest that Galloway may make a submission. Galloway's lawyer is arguing that the ministers public statements not only taint any decision that might be made by subordinate immigration officials, and guarantee a negative decision, but also that the timing of the issue and the fact that the immigration department has yet to make a final judgement is a de facto decision, given that he is to arrive tomorrow.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Injunctions are never premature, as their purpose is to prevent some future action from being taken.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Ok. I don't know why Jackman spent the better part of the afternoon arguing that a decision had been made, to oppose the governments position that no determination had been made.

An injunction is made against a decision that leads to an action, not against a hypothetical decision that might be made. The purpose is to pre-empt the action being take upon the decision.

Stockholm

How is calling LePen a "fascist" any different from someone calling Galloway an "Islamist" or what have you?? My view is that no one should ever be barred from a country just on the basis of words they have uttered. If there is evidence that they have actually done something criminal that is another story. i would not even have Fred Phelps barred from Canada. Its good to have him here - every time he opens his mouth support for gay rights goes UP! 

Cueball Cueball's picture

"Isalmism" (whatever that is) is not crime under the law. Nor did the state, its agents, or its Ministers say that Galloway was barred from entering Canada because of his views, "Islamist" or otherwise, they barred him for allegedly supporting terrorism by bringing material aid to the people of Gaza under the tuttelage of Hamas, aid mind you that was checked and approved for distribution in Gaza by the Israeli government.

That, not his beliefs, are the crux of the case for barring Mr. Galloway from speaking in Canada. Galloway argued that LePen should be barred for his hate-mongering. The state of Canada has made no such case against Galloway.

Michelle

Cueball wrote:
The best part of Jackman's submission today, was when she pointed out that the "terrorist" supplies that Galloway was taking to Gaza actually cleared Israeli customs.

Yeah, that got a big laugh in the courtroom. :D  After saying that, she concluded that the Canadian government characterized the aid convoy as "terrorist" even though the Israeli government did not.  That was when the laughter broke out briefly. :)

I went this morning and scored front row seats for my son and I this morning - we just stayed until 12:30, at which point I had a hungry and bored 10 year-old on my hands, so we went for lunch and saw a movie afterwards.

Jackman was brilliant, as expected.  From what I could gather, the government side argued that Orr's letter (you can read it at the beginning of this thread) did not constitute a "decision" because he is not a border guard, and the decision rests with the border guard.  They apparently also tried to claim that because Orr was not specifically employed by border services, that the letter was not made on behalf of border services, despite the fact that he specifically says at the beginning of the letter that he was writing on behalf of them.

She argued back, sensibly, that this was clearly a ruling, because not only was the letter claiming to be a "preliminary decision" on behalf of border services, but it also invited submissions to be made to Orr himself, and it was also backed up by public statements from the Minister of Immigration and his spokesperson.  

Which was another funny part of the hearing - she made a funny statement something like that Kenney was blabbering all over the country about it.  (Can't remember the exact verb she used - Cueball, help me out here...)

She said that there is no way that any border guard, having seen the Minister of Immigration saying in the news that the decision has been made, and having been informed of Orr's letter that the "preliminary decision" is that he is inadmissable, would go against such a judgement when people over his head are declaring him inadmissible.  So it's ridiculous for the government to claim that this letter and their public statements do not constitute "a decision".

The judge said he would want to reserve his decision until tomorrow (Monday) and asked whether the activists could delay Galloway's border crossing until later in the day instead of crossing first thing in the morning in Quebec.  Jackman said she didn't think he'd mind crossing in Toronto but she'd have to check with StopWar during the next break.  I had to leave before I heard what was decided.

I wish I could have stayed for the whole thing, but I wanted to spend time with my son doing other stuff too, so we didn't go back.

Michelle

Cueball wrote:

An injunction is made against a decision that leads to an action, not against a hypothetical decision that might be made. The purpose is to pre-empt the action being take upon the decision.

Actually, she specifically suggested to the judge this morning that he could simply rule that he is admissible to the country.  Her reasoning is that this would be a "prohibition" (which she defined as preventing something that is certain to happen)  against an unjust ruling by border officials based on the prejudicial tainting of the process by Orr (the official who wrote the "preliminary decision" letter) and by Jason Kenney and his spokesperson.

The best thing is that she told the judge that "this is a no-brainer" and that he could keep it simple and just make that decision today instead of reserving until tomorrow.  Hee!

al-Qa'bong

Quote:
How is calling LePen a "fascist" any different from someone calling Galloway an "Islamist" or what have you??

You don't think the Front National is fascist?

If LePen had the chance, he'd have you and me both put up against a wall and shot.

While Galloway's been calling for free speech, guess what LePen's been saying lately.

 

Euro MPs in move to block Le Pen

Quote:

Mr Le Pen has again called the Nazi gas chambers "a detail of history".

The Nazis murdered at least six million Jews in death camps in World War II. Hundreds of thousands of others were also killed there, including Roma gypsies and disabled people.

"I merely said that the gas chambers were a detail of the history of the world war, which is an obvious fact," Mr Le Pen, leader of the National Front (FN), told the European Parliament on Wednesday.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Michelle wrote:
Cueball wrote:

An injunction is made against a decision that leads to an action, not against a hypothetical decision that might be made. The purpose is to pre-empt the action being take upon the decision.

Actually, she specifically suggested to the judge this morning that he could simply rule that he is admissible to the country.  Her reasoning is that this would be a "prohibition" (which she defined as preventing something that is certain to happen)  against an unjust ruling by border officials based on the prejudicial tainting of the process by Orr (the official who wrote the "preliminary decision" letter) and by Jason Kenney and his spokesperson.

The best thing is that she told the judge that "this is a no-brainer" and that he could keep it simple and just make that decision today instead of reserving until tomorrow.  Hee!

Yes she made both these arguements.

She also, quite cleverly, asserted that the charter of rights pertains to the Galloway case because the charter applies to Canadian law and how it is applied, not to the person.

She said that Kenney was "mouthing off all over the world" about his decision.

The bad decision will be that the judge will agree that he has jurisdiction in this case in as far as he will inform the immigration officer to disregard the Minister's statements, and the previous decision, and review the Galloway case without this information in mind. Much in the way that a judge orders that juries disregard inademissable evidence that they hear in a court room.

Michelle

That's right!  "Mouthing off all over the world".  I just about howled when she said that, although of course I remembered where I was and settled for a stifled chuckle instead. :)

Michelle

So, does anyone know whether Galloway's still going to try to cross tomorrow morning at a Quebec border?  Or is he going to wait for the judge's decision and then attempt to cross here in Toronto?

al-Qa'bong

I posted this in another thread, but this is probably a better place for it:

Quote:
March 27, 2009

For Immediate Release

Urgent Galloway update


Minister of Censorship Jason Kenney's decision to ban British MP George Galloway from speaking in Canada has ignited a firestorm of protest across the country. Kenney's office ­ and the entire Conservative caucus ­ has been bombarded with thousands of e-mails, phone calls and messages of protest. A legal challenge has been launched by Galloway's legal counsel in Canada, and the media is reporting new developments every day.

The movement to reverse the ban on Galloway is big, and is growing by the minute.

We can defeat Jason Kenney's ban, but we need your help over the next few days. Please read below and forward this message everywhere!

Here's how you can help:

1. Promote the Defend Free Speech website: www.defendfreespeech.ca.

This site is the clearinghouse for all update about the campaign and includes documents from the legal challenge, breaking news, ticket information, and action items. Please upload a link of this site to your website, upload it to all Galloway groups on facebook and on your profile, and forward it to all your friends. If you have any news or updates for the website, email [email protected].

2. Join our next organizing meeting in Toronto.
If you're not in Toronto, get active with local groups in the Palestine Solidarity movement or the anti-war movement. The Toronto meeting is as follows: Friday, March 27 from 6:00pm to 8:00pm at Trinity-St. Paul's Centre, 427 Bloor Street West, Toronto (TTC: Spadina). The Toronto meeting will provide updates, distribute new materials, and make plans for weekend actions.

3. Picket Conservative MPs' offices on Saturday and Sunday.
This weekend, we need to make sure we keep the pressure up. Organize pickets at your local Conservative MP's office to say you want Jason Kenney to reverse the ban on Galloway. Ask passers-by to sign the petition, distribute leaflets to them, and display free speech placards. All materials ­ petition, leaflets, and placards ­ can be downloaded from www.defendfreespeech.ca. When you've filled out the petitions, fax them to Kenney's offices: 613-992-1920 (Ottawa office) and 403-225-3504 (Calgary office). A picket in Mississauga is already organized for Saturday, March 28 at 2:00pm at the office of Conservative MP Bob Dechert (Mississauga ­ Erindale), 1270 Central Parkway West, Suite 101, Mississauga.

4. Come to federal court on Sunday in Toronto to hear the legal challenge to Jason Kenney¹s ban.
Galloway's legal team was informed that the hearing will be open to the public, so we need to pack out the courtroom to show how much opposition there is to Kenney's attacks on free speech. The hearing will take place on Sunday, March 29 at 11:00am at the federal courthouse at 180 Queen Street West, Toronto (TTC: Osgoode). This is where we'll find out if Kenney's ban on Galloway is overturned. Seating is limited, so show up early! In addition, Toronto organizers will hold a free speech rally outside the courthouse at 10:30am. Bring your flags and banners! And bring lots of people!

5. Keep e-mailing and phoning Jason Kenney's office.
If you've contacted him already, do it again. Tell them you won't stop until Kenney reverses the ban. Tell them you want a formal response in writing, explaining why Kenney has banned Galloway. If you phone and there's only voicemail, leave a long message asking that they call you back. Don't let up the pressure now. Keep phoning, e-mailing, faxing, etc. Kenney's e-mail addresses are: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]. His phone numbers are: 613-992-2235 (Ottawa office) and 403-225-3480 (Calgary office). And don't stop e-mailing the entire Conservative caucus. You can find all their e-mail addresses in one block at www.defendfreespeech.ca.  

6. Keep buying tickets.
George Galloway has personally committed to deliver a live, original, interactive speech to each of the four cities where he's scheduled to speak ­ either live in person or live via broadcast. We want to make sure that he can see how many of us have come to hear his speech and to stand up for our right to hear it. Every empty seat or unsold ticket is a defeat for free speech and a victory for the Minister of Censorship. Buy your tickets now and help us sell out the event. Ticket information for all four events is available at www.defendfreespeech.ca.

7. Broadcast Galloway's live speech in your town or city.
If you live in a city where Galloway is not scheduled to speak (if you're not in Toronto, Mississauga, Montreal or Ottawa) but would still like to hear his speech, let us know. We are organizing now to broadcast his Toronto speech on Monday, March 30 to locations all over the country where he is not scheduled to speak. Book a room now that can accommodate large numbers of people, start promoting your event, and get a laptop/LCD projector so you can broadcast his speech live. We'll send you a private URL to log onto the Toronto broadcast. To get the private URL, please e-mail [email protected].

8. Join the ban-busting caravan to meet Galloway at the Canada-US border.
Organizers in Montreal are organizing a caravan of MPs, lawyers, anti-war activists and supporters to meet Galloway at the Canada-US border on the day he is scheduled to enter Canada. If we reverse the ban, we'll bring him across. If we don't reverse the ban, we'll hold a solidarity rally on the Canadian side while a delegation of MPs and lawyers meet Galloway in the US. Galloway will address the Canadian rally by phone (with sound amplification).

Here's the call-out from Montreal organizers:

On Monday, March 30, Montreal organizers for the Galloway speaking tour (SPHR) are
calling for a mass presence at the Canadian-US border in Lacolle, Quebec to support Canadian and Quebec MPs and MNAs who plan to escort Galloway into Canada, if the ban is reversed.

A solidarity caravan will leave from Montreal on Monday morning. Please show up by 9:30am at Carre Cabot, on Ste. Catherine and Atwater, corner of rue Lambert Closse (across from the Pepsi Forum). There will be buses. If you have a car, we need you to help caravan people there to arrive by 12:00pm (noon).

If you have a car, please let us know how many people you can take. If you need a ride, please let us know how many seats you need. E-mail us at [email protected].

9. Don't let Kenney silence anti-war voices! Demonstrate on April 4.
The Canadian Peace Alliance and Le Collectif Échec à la guerre have called a pan-Canadian day of action for Saturday, April 4 to protest the 60th anniversary of NATO and to bring Canadian troops home from Afghanistan. Now that Kenney has expanded his attacks to the peace movement and our right to free speech, it's even more important to be in the streets. Tell Kenney that we won't be silenced! If Kenney doesn't overturn his ban on Galloway, join us on April 4 to demand that Kenney be fired from his job.

For more information, please visit www.acp-cpa.ca.

aka Mycroft

Eliezer Zusken wrote:

I have read much about Mr. Galloway in the last while and certainly one cannot describe him as progressive. He has supported the banning of Gert Wilders and Jean Marie LePenmfrom the UK (two facists that are hatemongers nonetheless have not supported terrorist groups), he appeared on a bizarre UK reality tv show and acted like a complete lunatic, the list is endless.

All that said he most certainly should not have been banned but no one who calls himself progressive should have a thing to do with this clown!!

So let me get this straight - you support Galloway's right to enter Canada and speak here but you don't think anyone should stand up and defend this right when it's denied? That's not a principled position. 

Truthfully, I'm not a Galloway fan - I think he and RESPECT have taken some horrible stances (or have not taken stands when they should have) on abortion, women's rights, gay rights etc and that they've been bad for the Left in the UK - I also think he's a vain self-promoter who has often done more harm than good to the positions he supports (one exception being his brilliant performance when testifying before the US Congress a few years ago). While I opposed both wars against Iraq I  think his obsequiousness towards Saddam Hussein was lunacy and that his completely uncritical attitude towards some rather nasty dictatorships makes him the sort of caricature of a "loony lefty" that the right loves to point to in order to discredit us all. I didn't go to see him when he's been here in the past and, until the ban, I wasn't planning on going to see him this time.

That being said, this action by the government is the latest in a long line of attempts to bar left wing speakers from entering the country (including, in one case, a former US military officer who had turned against the Iraq war) and the charges against Galloway are clearly specious and are yet another attempt by the right to demonize and now criminalize support for the Palestinians and cannot be allowed to stand. 

aka Mycroft

Michelle wrote:
So, does anyone know whether Galloway's still going to try to cross tomorrow morning at a Quebec border?  Or is he going to wait for the judge's decision and then attempt to cross here in Toronto?

The latter I believe.

Michelle

I agree with Mycroft's assessment of George Galloway.  I wasn't planning to go and see him before and I probably won't now, either (I'll decide today whether to run over to the RSU and pick up a ticket - and if I do, it will be to support the organizers of the event and to show solidarity with the activists who have fought against this political abuse of power). 

But I certainly went yesterday to the rally outside the court, and then attended the hearing, and I fully support his right to come to Canada and speak.  I also support his aid caravan, including giving the aid to the Palestinian government.  (As I was explaining to my son yesterday, who is only 10 years old but still managed to understand what Jason Kenney, his spokesthingy, and the dumbasses in the JDL, B'nai Brith and CJC can't quite figure out), it's not like you can just go to Palestine and hand out ambulances and medical supplies and aid money on the streets to passersby. You have to give it to the government so they can distribute it to the people.  So they handed it over to the democratically elected government.

I explained it to my son this way: imagine Canada went through some sort of natural disaster, and other countries wanted to send us supplies to help us through it.  They would give those supplies to the Canadian government.  Currently, the Conservatives are holding government.  But that doesn't mean that just because Stephen Harper would be accepting the money and the supplies on behalf of the Canadian government, that this means the other countries are giving the money to the Conservative Party.  They're giving it to the democratically-elected Canadian government to distribute to the Canadian people, not to the Conservative Party.

It's the same thing in Palestine.  Galloway gave the aid to the democratically-elected government of the people of Palestine, so that they can distribute it through their government.  The people in government happen to be Hamas, but that doesn't mean the aid is being given to Hamas.  It's being given to the government, and to the Hamas leader in his role as democratically elected leader of the Palestinians, not in his organizational role with Hamas.

It's hard to know whether Jason Kenney, his spokesperson, the JDL, B'nai Brith and the CJC are too stupid to understand this, or do understand it but are deliberately misleading people about it.  Either way, whether they're stupid or liars, it sure makes them look bad.

contrarianna

Eliezer Zusken wrote:

.....

All that said he most certainly should not have been banned but no one who calls himself progressive should have a thing to do with this clown!!

Some of what you say is true, and it's unfortunate, in my opinion, that any hopes of having any high visibility dissent from the fast creeping fascism of this Government, and major media, should rest on the shoulders of this exhibitionist rather than more serious voices--which are readily available, but suppressed.

That said, Galloway, clown or not, is feared as someone who could actually bear true public witness to the suppressed reality of the horrors in Gaza to the sheltered Canadian public. On this point, I refer again to:

Galloway Ban Mocks Canadian Justice
Written by William A. Cook   
Saturday, 28 March 2009 16:56

http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/3941-galloway-ban-mocks-canadian-...
====
As to your previous post of Glavin, I read it, too.

Glavin is most amusing as a kind of low-rent Christopher Hitchens, whose ideology, locutions, vocabulary and propaganda techniques he apparently emulates.

One of Hitchens' favorite techniques is to throw out a blizzard of so many half-truths that it takes 10 pages of commentary just to enumerate them--by the end of which, by the law of diminishing returns, everyone is asleep.

So, here just one of many half-truths Glavin uses in his smears of Galloway:

Quote:
...Galloway was ejected from the British Labour party for counseling the murder of British soldiers."

Wow! "Murdering" them in their beds?--or just when they stroll down Piccadilly?  

What is true in that statement is that Blair's Labour did eject Galloway; it was obviously a politically smart move for the party, considering Iraq war fever in 2003.
Here are the "crimes" for which the Labour Party found Galloway guilty, (from Glavin's own link):

Quote:
....
    * he incited Arabs to fight British troops
    * he incited British troops to defy orders
    * he threatened to stand against Labour
    * he backed an anti-war candidate in Preston
....".

Consider Glavin's arrogance and imperial mindset in equating "murder" with any (Iraqi) citizens' armed resistance of the illegal foreign invasion--a country invaded in a blatant resource grab, and to install permanent military control -- all under the cover of the fabricated excuse of WMD.
Glavins belief that armed resistance is "murder", leaves the Iraqis only the "freedom" to submit to the invaders and their puppet government.
===
With a mindset like that, it is all the more troubling when Glavin wants the subversion clause of the Immigration Act "wholly rewritten" to allow only Canadian approved (ie Glavin?)  "freedom fighters" into the country:

Quote:

The "subversion by force of any government" is the problem. The effect of the law is to close Canada's doors to any freedom fighter engaged in armed struggle, or even advocating armed struggle, to overthrow precisely the tyrannies Galloway can't stop himself from sucking up to.

As to who is really "sucking up" to fascism in the Galloway affair is apparent from my  first link in this post. 

Michelle

Okay, I decided solidarity was more important than disagreement, so I bought a ticket 15 minutes ago.

Who's going tonight?  Just curious.  :) 

Brendan Stone

I will be there for sure, rain or shine!

Michelle

I'm dying to know the judge's decision.  If anyone hears, post it right away!

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

""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."

 

George Galloway (from his website)

Paul Gross
remind remind's picture

Unreal, I hope this further enrages people across Canada.

pogge

[offtopic]

thanks wrote:
apologies to Donovan

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGWsGyNsw00]Buffy Sainte-Marie[/url]

[/offtopic]

 

Benjamin

Federal Court decision:

http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/rss/IMM-1474-09%20decision.pdf

One can basically just skip to paras. 21-25 for the meat of the analysis that resulted in the dismissal.

remind remind's picture

[more off]

Speaking of Buffy, she was on the Juno's last night and looks exactly the same as she did 40 years ago.

And yea Nickleback!!!!!

[/end off]

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Wow. I hope Galloway will be able to follow through on a Plan B, whatever that may be.

It's Me D

This decision is such a cop out; the judge is a coward. Galloway will be allowed in to Canada in the long-run, just not in time to speak tonight.

I am sure he will have a plan B ready for speaking tonight though. I hope he will return to Canada in the future.  

johnpauljones

I did not think that the court would rule against Galloway. I am not a lawyer so maybe one of the legal eagles from babble can tell me if the reasons in paras 21-25 are valid

 

also will the supreme court hear this on appeal?

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Good grief. What a cowardly decision. In other circumstances and cases before the courts, the judiciary pretends and claims that public events, public pressure, etc., has no bearing on their decision making. This time around, near as I can make out, the strongest argument by the judge against the injunction is from Galloway's own public remarks that the latter will, in any case, be heard in Canada (through other means) and will, therefore, not suffer irreparable harm.

 

Bravo to MP George Galloway for exposing the disgraceful Canadian government. He's done us all a favour for which he deserves our thanks. 

josh

Essentially, the court denied the injunction because there was a lack of irreparable harm since Galloway can still be heard, and the record needs further development since no "final decision" has been made.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

All the more reason for the outstanding MP from Bethnal Green to make a triumphant visit to Canada in the not-too-distant future. And maybe we could get a full, cross-country tour. That will really give Parliamentarian Galloway a chance to outline all the facts in regard to the Israeli war crimes, atrocities and attempted genocide in Gaza. Canadians really DO need all the facts in this matter publicized in the widest and broadest manner. 

martin dufresne

Meanwhile, we can petition our media to cross the border and give us no b-s extended interviews with Mr. Galloway, dutifully shaming the Harperites in the process.

lagatta

Absolutely. It is punishing Galloway and all the organisers of vivapalestina.org , in support of the beleaguered people of Gaza.

That said, I agree with Mycroft and Michelle about some of Galloway's more reactionary views - and his frequent misogynistic statements about female politicians he crosses swords with - and the problems his showmanship has caused the British left.

Pages

Topic locked