The Shotgun Blog
Saturday, May 02, 2009
British MP George Galloway is suing Jason Kenney
The Western Standard reported extensively on the decision by Immigration Minister Jason Kenney to ban British Member of Parliament George Galloway from Canada for his anti-war views.
Galloway was deemed inadmissible to Canada in March on national security grounds under Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, although no information was publicly released as to precise “threat to national security” Galloway posed.
The decision generated outrage from the anti-war left, but also from conservative circles, including National Post columnist Lorne Gunter who wrote:
Kenney saw things differently and stood by the decision of the Canadian Border Services Agency, under his jurisdiction, arguing that Galloway supports terrorism.
The Calgary Sun is reporting today that Galloway intends to sue Kenney and a senior aide for the defamatory remarks.
"I welcome robust criticism, but the comments made about me crossed the line," Galloway said in a statement.
"They are not only untrue, they are outrageous. As an elected member of the British Parliament, I am compelled to exercise my legal right to clear my name."
Posted by westernstandard on May 2, 2009 | Permalink
Oh so it's not okay for one person to support terrorists but all the people who show up at Tamil Tiger rallies, they're a-okay.
Posted by: Pete | 2009-05-02 5:29:44 PM
Galloway is suing because he doesn't like being called a supporter of terrorists. Why does he even bother. There's YouTube evidence of him giving money to a well-known terrorist organization:
Posted by: Werner Patels | 2009-05-02 5:40:16 PM
Werner, I agree but then does this not remind us of a Canadian with similar behaviour?
Posted by: Alain | 2009-05-02 5:59:38 PM
Galloway was all for the British Home Sec barring the MP from Holland (Geert Wilders), from entering Great Britian. Why,because he dared to splice together clips of actual Terrorist Fanatics and their murderous attacks! He called it Fitna!
Ole George should have been barred based on his Terrorist connections as well!
Good for Canada!
Posted by: Denise | 2009-05-02 8:16:27 PM
Can you link to the statement Jason Kenney made banning George Galloway, because I don't remember Kenney banning him.
Jason Kenney, "...Mr. Galloway received a preliminary notice of determination by the Canadian Border Services Agency that he might be inadmissible to Canada, I gather based in large part on his public admission that he provided funds to Hamas, a banned illegal terrorist organization, which would seem–on the face of it–to constitute grounds for inadmissibility under Section 34(1)f of the Immigration Refugee Protection Act. He was invited to provide submissions to the CBSA to inform their consideration of his potential application to enter Canada. He never provided them with any such submissions and he never presented himself to a point of entry..."
You can read the rest here.
I guess it's not only the MSN that can over look facts.
Posted by: lqz | 2009-05-02 9:55:26 PM
He's a shameless media whore, like most narcissists. Marc Emery, Jack Kevorkian, Walter Freeman, Henry Morgantaler--they all belong to this type. Often lauded and feted in their own time, they eventually become some of history's most notorious villains. Sometimes they even live to see it.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-05-02 11:20:11 PM
Oh yeah mathews, Marc Emery is surely destined to become one of histories most notorious villains, lol.
All those dangerous seeds of destruction sent hurtling through the mail to suspecting victims, who wittingly sent their money to buy exactly what they wanted and then recieve it on time...the horror!
History will remember Marc Emery a lot more favourably than it will remember prohibition. And you? Just like now, no one will care about you, or remember your misguided opinions.
Posted by: DrGreenthumb | 2009-05-03 9:29:36 AM
Pete wrote: “Oh so it's not okay for one person to support terrorists but all the people who show up at Tamil Tiger rallies, they're a-okay.”
That’s an interesting point, Pete.
Here’s an explanation of the law from a post I wrote on the updated Criminal Code list of terrorist:
This enemies list is more than an inventory of curious bad guys. Under the Criminal Code it is a criminal offence to knowingly do business with any of the entities listed, and the court can at any time order that the assets of these entities be seized or forfeited. In addition, it is a crime to knowingly participate in any activity of a listed entity that would enhance its ability to carry out a terrorist act. While membership in these organizations is, according to the law, not a crime by itself, virtually any activity beyond simply being a card-carrying member of the Vanguards of Conquest, for instance (catchy name), will likely land you in trouble. In fact, when the Tamil Tigers made the list in 2006, the Liberals had to stop showing up at their fundraising galas.
The law seems to focus on financing terrorist activities. (If membership is allowed, then I wonder how the law would treat membership fees?)
Blogger Werner Patels writes that:
“Galloway is suing because he doesn't like being called a supporter of terrorists. Why does he even bother? There's YouTube evidence of him giving money to a well-known terrorist organization: Handing Cash to Hamas.”
Giving money to Hamas does violate Canada’s law, but as Lorne Gunter points out, Galloway didn’t do this in Canada:
Galloway is an elected British MP. That doesn't excuse him if his purpose is to break Canada's anti-terror laws. But until he has broken them, until he has stood on a podium in this country and asked, directly, for donations to Hamas or Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad, we have no reason to bar him from entering the country.
Whether or not this happened in Canada or elsewhere doesn’t matter much to Denise who wrote:
Ole George should have been barred based on his terrorist connections as well! Good for Canada!
Lqz makes a fair comment when he writes:
“Can you link to the statement Jason Kenney made banning George Galloway, because I don't remember Kenney banning him.”
In my defence, I wrote that “Kenney saw things differently and stood by the decision of the Canadian Border Services Agency, under his jurisdiction, arguing that Galloway supports terrorism.”
Is it an unreasonable extension of the concept of ministerial responsibility to say that Kenney, as the Minister in charge, bared Galloway?
A more interesting fact brought up by lqz is that “[Galloway] was invited to provide submissions to the CBSA to inform their consideration of his potential application to enter Canada. He never provided them with any such submissions and he never presented himself to a point of entry..."
Lqz is arguing that Galloway was never actually bared from entering the country.
Should we conclude that Galloway was lazy or sloppy in failing to provide submissions? Or that he did all of this for media attention and didn’t try to get into the country? Or perhaps that he didn’t present himself at the border or make a case for his admissibility because the thought his case was hopeless given Kenney’s comments? I think the latter is most likely.
Conservatives seem to want to congratulate Kenney for his stance, and distance Kenney from the incident at the same time.
Shane Matthews wrote that Galloway, like Emery, will be remembered as a notorious villain.
Dr. Green Thumb disagrees, writing:
History will remember Marc Emery a lot more favourably than it will remember prohibition.
I agree with the good doctor.
That’s everyone. Thanks for commenting.
Given my general misgivings about defamation law, I hope Galloway in unsuccessful in this lawsuit against Kenney and company.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2009-05-03 10:35:28 PM
"...History will remember Marc Emery a lot more favourably than it will remember prohibition..."
and rational people will remember more important things from 2009 than a plush toy Yuppy bandit pot drunk
hey liberty seekers- the Marc Emery ( TM ) memorial 420 super vapourizer comes with an oversized mouthpiece, oversized drug fume filled windbag gets you so stoned you won't even remember what normal cogntive function feels like-talk crap in couchlock just like the real prince of Pot-
retail price- $700.00 US - replaces a two cent rolling paper
& available before Christmas 2009:
the Marc Emery model prisoner, non action figure-
comes with a 700 page blank autobiography journal
dressed in authentic beetlejuice pajamas or orange jumpsuit decades of fun for the wipehead in _your life
price: complete loss of liberty for 10 - 30 years
order now " [email protected]
um, whatever happened to " free the BC3 ?" oh ya, his co accused dear friends ratted him out to the DEA in person last week in exchange for a greatly reduced sentence-the BC2 provided such great and detailed information about Mr Emerys seeds business that they will be recomended for probation--no Guantanamo Bay torture required , and talk about good sports- --the BC two travelled to the USA to answer the DEAs questions- and theres a DEA office in Vancouver
watch for the overgrow the govt fanclubs' new T shirt"
---------------- " free the BC One " ---------------------
Posted by: 419 | 2009-05-03 11:32:04 PM
You are such a pathetic dumbass 419, Marc had already offered long ago to make a deal with US prosecuters that would have freed his co-accused. He had already agreed not to fight extradition in exchange for his friends freedom. Marc is an honorable man, unlike yourself.
BTW your mom wants you to clean up your cardboard box basement suite, and pick up all your Star Trek dolls, oops I mean action figures.
Posted by: DrGreenthumb | 2009-05-06 7:11:04 AM
"History will remember Marc Emery a lot more favourably than it will remember prohibition." - I agree with the good doctor. That’s everyone. Thanks for commenting.
On what do you base this opinion? Will history remember Kevorkian more favourably than the law against murder, Freeman more favourably than therapy instead of lobotomies, and Morgantaler more favourably than babies?
You seem to think that the "me first" boomer attitudes that currently favour these self-indulgent sicknesses will persist forever. As the boomers are now learning to their bitter cost, that's not true.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-05-06 8:12:08 AM
History won't remember your opinion, either, Greenthumb. It will remember the baby boomers and drug culture though, and not favourably. Nobody likes a selfish bastard.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-05-06 10:21:01 AM
Forgot about him handing over 45,000 dollars in cash on tv. How about his statement of 'drive them away' (the jews), revolution to victory...and people are going to say he doesn't support terrorism??..He handed money over to people that have in their Hamas Charter "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).Not only that they have their children dress up in fatigues with guns and teach them to want to kill Jews and call them pigs and how wonderful it would be to be a martyr by strapping a bomb to themselves..It's one thing to hand over medical supplies and food, which is perfectly fine as well as protest..but to hand money over to them...when apparently they dont have the supplies to get in the first place..doesn't make any sense..Not only that they handed over vehicles..which im assuming these poor children will eventually eat??. This guy was already investigated for the food for oil program and hides his bank accounts from Britain. He stands in front of a Palestinian flag with all the Jewish cities gone and he smiles..He's encouraging more violence from Hamas "drive them away, revolution to victory,because he knows Isreal will respond and kill more Palestinians and keep the cycle going. He says one thing in the Middle East and gets caught in ridiculous lies and says other things when he goes somewhere else. Nobody should be funding Isreal or Palestine financially from Canada or United States, Or Saudia Arabia or Iran..outside of humanitarian aid for these children, nor should they be abused by their "democratic" but Terrorist regime. People like Galloway don't give a damn about the children nor do Hamas, they only care about their agendas.
Posted by: brian | 2009-05-16 7:37:29 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.