Galloway Lapping Up the Attention

As I posted a little more than a week ago, it was a mistake to bar George Galloway from Canada.

With the ensuing controversy, he's become a media star. You can find reference of him in every major Canadian newspaper and he appeared via video-conference on CBC's The Hour. He's ratcheted up the grandstanding by asking Jason Kenny to debate him.

In a speech delivered live to more than 600 supporters in a Toronto church, the outspoken Galloway called the ban over his support of Gaza's Hamas government – a decision upheld hours earlier by a Canadian judge – as "foolish and counterproductive."

Loud applause greeted his challenge to Kenney for a one-on-one debate: "Let's book the biggest hall in Canada," said Galloway, "and you and I will debate these issues of war and peace and freedom of speech and censorship.

"You won't be able to hide behind your spokesman. You won't be able to hide behind your immigration officials that can't speak up for themselves (or) behind the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. It will just be you and me and the Canadian public ..."

He continued, "It's just not credible, Mr. Kenney, to call a man touring the United States of America, playing to packed audiences ... a terrorist or a security threat."

He would have been greeted with almost no fanfare had they allowed him entry in the first place. Now he's a free speech martyr.

Funnily enough, we find new free speech advocates:

Or take the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) --perhaps best known for its human rights complaint against Mark Steyn and Maclean's magazine.

As for George Galloway, the CIC maintains that people should be free to "draw their own conclusions" about what he has to say. The spectacle of the CIC leading the charge for freedom of speech is certainly absurd, but the depths of their hypocrisy reach even deeper.

Most people who supported barring him claimed it was not a speech issue but a security choice by a sovereign country. It certainly doesn't look that way, and ends up bringing you down to the level of the censors at the Canadian Islamic Congress.

Jason Kenney has had a lot of good publicity lately, but this was a really bad decision.

Integration Canadian Style

Naomi Lakritz, writing in the Calgary Herald points out something I was unaware of:

It's been quite a while since I've heard the kind of common sense talk about Canadian identity that I heard when Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, visited the Herald editorial board on Thursday. Kenney admits he used to have some trepidation about wading into what he calls the politically correct minefield around this issue, but no more. He obviously realized that when political correctness runs up against common sense, there's just no contest. New Canadians, says Kenney, "have a duty to integrate." Further, he says, "We don't need the state to promote diversity. It is a natural part of our civil society."

To that end, the government has sensibly ceased funding programs such as heritage language classes. Why should the federal government pay for children to learn the language of the country their parents and grandparents come from? It's the family's responsibility to teach children about their heritage, including the language.

"I think it's really neat that a fifth-generation Ukrainian Canadian can speak Ukrainian-- but pay for it yourself," Kenney says. Kenney's right--it is neat. If you can speak your family's mother tongue, your life is just that much more enriched. But such immersion in heritage shouldn't come at the expense of you identifying yourself as a Canadian first --and it certainly shouldn't come at Canadian taxpayers' expense...

I knew about the Canadian government paying for English and French lessons for new immigrants. I think it should be the duty of the immigrant to learn that at their own expense, but still it's in the countries interest to have them speaking the official languages. What the heck is the point of taxpayers paying people to learn Ukrainian or Punjabi? Thankfully they've ended it.

Hat tip: Strack Attack

Predictably the Galloway Ban Backfiring

As I mentioned a few days ago, barring British MP George Galloway from entering Canada was a mistake. It gives ammo to to far-left, conspiracy theorists. They are already making noise:

"We think this move is politically motivated and is simply about silencing someone who has very strong views on our position on Afghanistan and other issues," Clark said.

He said Galloway has been elected five times to British parliament, has never been charged with a crime, has no criminal record, and "it's unclear just how the government sees him as a national security threat."

The groups campaigning to bring Galloway to Canada include The Council of Canadians, Canadian Civil Liberties Union, Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, as well as anti-war coalitions, labour unions and community groups.

Now they can feel very self righteous. Their free speech is being unfairly stopped. This gives strength to their cause. Next thing you know we are going to be hearing that the Free Masons secretly ordered it stopped.

As much as I detest the treasonous Galloway, you can never win this sort of battle by silencing people.

Galloway Barred Entry to Canada

Many people on the right might applaud the decision to bar entry to far left George Galloway to Canada. (story)

Outspoken anti-war MP George Galloway has vowed to fight an 'outrageous decision' to ban him from Canada on the grounds of national security.

Mr Galloway said the ban was 'not something I'm prepared to accept' and pledged to use all means at his disposal to challenge the ruling.

But a spokesman for Canada's immigration minister Jason Kenney insisted the decision, taken by border security officials, would not be overturned for a 'infandous* street-corner Cromwell' (*'infandous: too odious to be expressed or mentioned).

Mr Galloway was due to give a speech in Toronto on March 30 but has been deemed 'inadmissible' to Canada under section 34(1) of the country's immigration act.

Mr Kenney's spokesman Alykhan Velshi said the act was designed to protect Canadians from people who fund, support or engage in terrorism

This is a bad decision. I personally think Galloway is scum. While British troops were in Iraq, he was clearly cheering for the other team. But he's not a terrorist. The conspiracy theory loons are going to say that they are "stopping him from speaking the truth" or some such nonsense. It also makes our terrorist defense look like a joke. They aren't banning him because he might blow something up, but for political reasons.

Hat tip: Strack Attack