Galloway blocked from entering Canada?

[faceless]

GG in Santa Clara on Monday 6th of April.

[modern]

500 American trucks carrying aid, driving into Gaza would be fantastic!!!

[faceless]

Q&A: Jason Kenney on George Galloway and free speech
‘The prime minister presses ministers, not the other way around’
macleans.ca
27th April 2009

Q: Why is a self-described free speech hawk banning George Galloway from Canada?

A: He’s not. I reject the premise of your question. 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 where he would have had, at that point, a final decision on his admissibility, and had he been determined to be inadmissible by an officer at a port of entry he would have been able to apply for an inadmissibility hearing. So there’s a whole process that we have under our law to make determinations independently of politicians about admissibility. I simply said publicly that I would not use my extraordinary ministerial power to effectively overrule a decision of a CBSA officer on his admissibility. Why? Because I didn’t see any compelling reason. And by the way, this had nothing to do with freedom of speech, he exercised his speech in Canada, volubly, as he does everywhere. That was never the issue. The issue was not about what he might do or say in Canada, it’s what he did in making financial contributions to an organization that uses money to buy explosives and strap them to teenagers and send them into school buses and discos.

Q: Do you agree with the prime minister’s decision not to seek elimination of free speech prohibitions under the Human Rights Act?

A: Well, the prime minister is a well-known advocate of freedom of speech, he led by example as president of a national citizen’s coalition in that respect, and I have no reason to believe that’s changed. It’s a matter of record that our party convention adopted essentially unanimously a motion on this matter, and that the Canadian Human Rights Commission commissioned a report of their operations in this respect, which I believe actually recommended elimination of Section 13. My understanding is the prime minister has said the government doesn’t have any intention to act on that at this point, but obviously our government takes note of those facts.

Q: But when the party is 98 per cent in favour of it doesn’t the government feel an obligation to act? Don’t you?
A: My job is to act in my areas, like immigration and citizenship and multiculturalism.

Q: But you’re an influential party member, and you speak out on a variety of issues.
A: I was at the convention, I voted for the resolution–I think along with everyone in our caucus–and I understand the prime minister has said that at this time we don’t have any decision to make, any legislative changes. Obviously it’s a subject of ongoing interest and debate.

Q: So you’re going to press him, then, to change his mind on this?
A: The prime minister presses ministers, not the other way around.

Q: So you don’t plan to push the issue at all?
A: My views on this are on the public record.

Q: But you don’t plan to do anything about it.
A: I bought Ezra’s book.

Q: Well okay!
A (Kenney Aide): He got it for free.
A: No, I went and bought one too, just to support him!

-------------------

Wht a slimy bastard he is. Government ministers are in their jobs directly to provide information and advice to the Prime Minister. If that weren't the case then there would be no need for individual ministers!

[VivaGalloway]

Yet he rolled out the red carpet for George Bush. What a hypocrite.

[faceless]

Video of a small, but vocal protest against Jason 'no balls' Kenney. The fact that Faria is gorgeous hasn't affected this post at all. No way.

[faceless]

Court agrees to hear complaint by barred British MP
The Canadian Press
Nov. 2, 2009

TORONTO — Federal Court has agreed to review a decision by Ottawa to bar a controversial British member of Parliament from entering Canada. George Galloway says he's "delighted" by the decision and will argue his case, likely in January.

In March, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney banned Galloway from entering the country on the grounds he engaged in terrorist activities. The MP strenuously denied any such connection. Galloway was to speak about his opposition to the war in Afghanistan and his humanitarian support for Hamas in Gaza. He delivered his speeches via remote video link from New York.

[faceless]

Jason Kenney's 'Anti-Semitic' charge angers Christian aid group
December 18, 2009
Les Whittington
TORONTO STAR

OTTAWA–Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has accused Christian aid group KAIROS of being anti-Semitic and disclosed that's why the group suddenly lost its federal funding.

In a speech in Jerusalem about what he said was Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government's leading position combatting the enemies of Israel, Kenney lumped KAIROS – a Toronto-based ecumenical group that works for social justice abroad – in with what he described as other anti-Semitic organizations.

He said this is why Ottawa recently ended 35 years of funding for KAIROS, which encompasses Anglican, Catholic and other mainstream Canadian Christian churches. "We have de-funded organizations, most recently, like KAIROS who are taking a leadership role in the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign" against Israel, he told the Global Forum for combating anti-Semitism.

A spokesperson for KAIROS, which has tried to get answers from the Harper government on the group's funding, expressed shock. Executive director Mary Corkery said Kenney's statement was based on incorrect information about her group's positions and raises serious questions about the politicization of the aid process by the Conservative government.

"If any group that criticizes an action by the government of Israel is called anti-Semitic by the government of Canada, that's very serious. You cannot label someone anti-Semitic because they criticize a government," she said. "That's outrageous."

KAIROS was stunned by Kenney's remarks because International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda told the public and Parliament the group lost its funding because of shifting priorities at the Canadian International Development Agency. Corkery denied that KAIROS favours a boycott of Israel or advocated divesting funds from Israeli corporations.

"We have taken positions that critique actions of the Israeli government, as have people in many organizations," Corkery said. "We have raised issues that we think cause suffering among people. But we have never spoken out against the state of Israel or tried to harm Israel."

Alykhan Velshi, Kenney's director of communications, said the minister's words "speak for themselves." The federal Conservatives have taken steps to "disentangle" the government from groups that are anti-Semitic or anti-Israel, he said.

Until late November, when KAIROS learned it was cut off by Ottawa, the group had hoped to receive $7 million in funding over several years. The $7.1 million for which the group had applied – $1,775,000 a year for four years – works out to about 0.04 per cent of the development agency's annual official development assistance budget, which was $4.73 billion in 2008, according to the Library of Parliament.

KAIROS would have used the money to help resettle people who have lost their homes and livelihoods because of rising sea levels, and at a legal clinic in the Congo that assists rape victims, among other projects, Corkery said.

-------------------

This Jason Kenney, the rats who work for him and the rats he works for are a fucking disgrace to humanity. Putting the Israeli war criminals ahead of humanitarian help for the victims of their war crimes makes them guilty of aiding and abetting those war criminals.

[faceless]

Canadian high commissioner to London objected to banning outspoken MP Galloway
By Jim Bronskill
(Canadian Press) –
3 hours ago

OTTAWA — The Canadian high commissioner to London flatly objected to barring British MP George Galloway from Canada, saying it would simply provide "a greater platform" for a vocal politician who's "not taken seriously" in his homeland. At the height of the controversy, Jim Wright said in an email to a Privy Council Office official that the British could be "taken aback by such a Canadian decision" - one that may "look odd" since the United States planned to allow Galloway to speak at several prominent universities.

Newly filed court documents also reveal officials in Immigration Minister Jason Kenney's office were concerned that Galloway, despite being declared unwelcome, might inadvertently be waved in to Canada by an unsuspecting border officer.

Galloway, a rabble-rousing politician and outspoken supporter of the Palestinian people, was told last March he would not be allowed to enter Canada for a speaking tour because he had provided financial support to Hamas, a listed terrorist organization.

The Canada Border Services Agency cited his involvement in an aid convoy that delivered clothing, medical items, relief money and vehicles to the elected Hamas government, as well as Galloway's donation of three cars and $44,000 to Prime Minister Ismail Haniya. Galloway and his supporters consider Canada's move a politically motivated salvo and defend his participation in the aid mission as an act of solidarity with the Palestinians following an Israeli bombing of Gaza.

The documents lay bare stark differences of opinion within government on the wisdom of the move and indicate the minister's office, while not directly involved in the decision to reject Galloway, made its opposition to his visit abundantly clear to department officials.

Candid internal emails and other sensitive documents usually shielded from public view were recently filed by the government in the Federal Court of Canada in response to a legal challenge of the border agency's move to turn him away.

The Toronto Coalition to Stop the War, which had invited Galloway to speak in Toronto and nearby Mississauga, has joined with other supporters to contest the federal decision in a case likely to be heard in April.

According to the documents, the drama unfolded last March 16 when Alykhan Velshi, Kenney's director of communications, sought the advice of Edison Stewart, a senior communications official with the Immigration Department, about a media call asking why Canada would let Galloway enter.

Stewart passed Velshi's inquiry to Immigration officials including Stephane Larue, director general of the case management branch, who suggested asking the border services agency to do "a very quick inadmissibility assessment."

Larue indicated that if Galloway were found inadmissible to Canada, a temporary resident permit would be his only means of entry. Stewart advised Velshi of Larue's plan. Velshi said in a reply that if the British MP's admission were dependent on a temporary permit, he could predict one would not be forthcoming given "the kind of things George Galloway advocates."

Two days later another Kenney aide, senior special adviser Kennedy Hong, advised Larue and two officials at Public Safety, the department that oversees the border agency, that Galloway might be in the United States and "may well be approaching our visa offices" via the U.S. "There's something on the border security system already so he doesn't get let in accidentally I presume?" Hong asked. He later inquired of Larue: "How can CBSA ensure that he won't just be waved into Canada? Can we provide them with a profile? . . . photo?"

Velshi also expressed concern to Larue that Galloway not be admitted "under any circumstances" - either from the United States or England by way of Toronto's Pearson Airport. "Can you confirm that if he tries to cross the Canada-U.S. border, or tries to fly in via Pearson (either from the U.S. or the U.K.) he will be turned back. The minister has said he will not issue a (permit) and doesn't want one issued."

Kenney has stressed that neither he nor his political staff were ever "in direct touch" with border services officials about Galloway. The minister said following the border agency's decision that people "supporting and promoting and helping terrorist organizations" are not needed in Canada. From his vantage point in London, Wright thought otherwise.

"There is no question that George Galloway is outspoken and while extremely clever and media savvy, is not taken seriously in the U.K.," he wrote to Claude Carriere, a foreign policy adviser in the PCO. "Denying him entry to Canada will simply give him a greater platform." Wright also feared that inevitable coverage of the Galloway tempest would detract from Prime Minister Stephen Harper's "key economic messages" during a visit to London during the same period. Carriere responded that the Prime Minister's Office was "comfortable" with denying the MP entry.

Galloway ended up addressing Canadian supporters in a broadcast from New York, and organizers said publicity over the immigration dispute boosted ticket sales. He called the attention windfall "poetic justice."

Both Velshi and the Foreign Affairs Department declined comment, saying it would be inappropriate to discuss a matter before the courts.

-----------------

"Galloway, a rabble-rousing politician"

It's news, not opinion, news, not opinion, etc...

[faceless]

This could turn out quite nicely in the end! The thought of this Kenney character getting his comeuppance would be excellent.

[major.tom]

Excellent summary. Rabble.ca has been exhaustive in their analysis.

I hope you're right about Kenney's "comeuppance". Insider leaks to a Murdoch paper. I wonder what recent gov't this reminds me of...

[faceless]

[faceless]

George Galloway: leaked papers reveal Canada's torment over banning MP
George Galloway's lawyers will argue that the Respect party MP is not a threat to Canada's national security
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
guardian.co.uk,
21 April 2010 21.34

Documents leaked today reveal the contortions the Canadian government went through over its decision last year to ban the British MP George Galloway. The leak, on a Canadian website, comes just days before the start of a court case in Toronto in which Galloway and his supporters will seek to overturn the ban which has turned the British MP into a cause célèbre.

Galloway was banned from entering Canada to speak round the country on the Middle East and Afghanistan. The government claimed it was acting on national security grounds because he had provided material support to the Palestinian organisation, Hamas, which is proscribed in the country as a terrorist organisation.

Galloway's defence team will argue in the federal court on Monday that he poses no threat to national security. Although he took a convoy of aid to Gaza, which is controlled by the elected Hamas government, his lawyers will say that he is neither a member, or supporter, of Hamas, and that, in fact, he has been a lifelong supporter of Hamas's rivals, Fatah, which is not branded a terrorist organisation.

The 66 pages of emails and letters, covering the four days up to the ban and available at www.rabble.ca , reveal how opinion within the government was deeply divided over the decision.

One of the documents, written by the Canadian high commissioner in London, Jim Wright, cautioned against the ban. "There is no question that George Galloway is outspoken and, while extremely clever and media savvy, is not taken seriously in the UK. Denying him entry to Canada will simply give him a greater platform."

Wright said he had not been involved in the discussions about the grounds for the ban. "However, my suspicion is that the Brits will be somewhat taken aback by such a Canadian decision," he said, adding that it would look odd that Canada was banning him while the US was not.

The correspondence reveals almost comic attempts to establish the MP's whereabouts amid concern that he might arrive at the US-Canada border and be allowed through by a border guard unaware of the ban. Galloway's supporters said the documents also suggest there was political interference in what should have been a matter purely for civil servants.

Galloway, who is standing for election in Poplar and Limehouse for the Respect party, said today he was confident the ban would be overturned. "The Canadian government is not as it was. It has become the most pro-Israel government in the world. The fact that a British MP of 23 years' standing can travel in and out of the US but not be allowed into Canada is simply ridiculous," he said.

The journalist who received the leaked documents, Cathryn Atkinson, said: "It's a fascinating look at the inner workings of the bureaucracy as they panicked." The contents of some documents have been reported by Canadian Press in February, but most had been previously unseen.

The papers were leaked in November when they were accidentally sent to Galloway's legal team. Government lawyers asked for them to be returned unopened, saying they needed to be redacted for national security reasons, but the package had already been opened and read. After reviewing the government request, a judge ruled that, other than on a few pages, there were no national security grounds for blacking out the documents.

Much of the correspondence revolves round Alykhan Velshi, director of communications at the department of citizenship and immigration. Both Velshi and his minister, Jason Kenney, are strong supporters of Israel. In one correspondence, Velshi said news of the ban was "copacetic", a dated phrase meaning excellent.

A rally of his supporters is planned to coincide with the opening of the case, which is being brought by Galloway along with the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War, the Ottawa Peace Assembly, and Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights.

---------------------

[faceless]

'It's all nonsense': George Galloway on Canada's cold shoulder
British MP George Galloway says he didn't give money to Hamas, but rather to the ministry of health in Gaza to cover the salaries of doctors and nurses who hadn't been paid.
Sarah Boesveld
Globe and Mail
Apr. 25, 2010

As the George Galloway case goes before a federal court in Toronto Monday, Mr. Galloway tells The Globe and Mail what he thinks about the whole ordeal and shares what he considers are the real reasons behind his ban from the country.

The thrust of the ban is that you support terrorist organizations. What do you say to that?
Well, I’m five times elected to the British Parliament and I travel freely and widely in the United States of America. So that can hardly be true, can it? The British Parliament would not have a terrorist in it and the United States of America would not admit a terrorist. So to be banned from Canada, it’s just preposterous.

You were recently booted from Egypt, too.
I was declared a persona non grata by the dictatorship in Egypt because I showed the world that they are the reason why there is a siege on Gaza. I’m content to be banned from Egypt because that’s a dictatorship, but I’m not content to be banned from Canada, because that isn’t.

The Canadian government says you gave about $45,000 to Hamas and that’s part of why you shouldn’t be allowed here.
I didn’t give any money to Hamas, I gave it to the ministry of health in Gaza to pay for the salaries of the doctors and nurses who hadn’t been paid. By the way, we’re talking about 20 odd thousand pounds, not millions. It’s a symbolic donation. I gave it to the ministry of health in Gaza and I’m proud to have done so.

What are your views on Hamas?
It’s all in the court documents. I have never been a supporter of Hamas, I am not a supporter of Hamas now. On the contrary, I was with President Arafat for the best years of my life, from 1983 until the day that he died in Palestine, I was at his bedside. So, I’m sorry but it’s all nonsense. As the revelations of these documents prove, this was a political job.

Jim Wright, Canada’s high commissioner in Britain, has said you’re “not taken seriously in the U.K. and that denying [you] entry to Canada will simply give [you] a greater platform?" Does that reveal further motives for barring you?
If you want my honest opinion, I think the Canadian government is more afraid of my views on Afghanistan than they were on my views on Palestine. The Canadian people know that the blood of their soldiers is being spent and the treasure of their treasury is being spent in a doomed enterprise. And I’m far from not being taken seriously. I’m surely to be elected for the sixth time. I am the leader of an anti-war movement in Britain that is millions strong.

What are your impressions of Canada as a nation and how might they differ from your reaction to this case?
Well, as a Scotsman, and Canada being a place where very many Scottish people immigrated, I always regarded Canada, to which I’ve travelled often, as a home away from home. It was the kinder, gentler, North American state. But I’m afraid the Harper government has made it the last bout of Bush-ism on the continent.

How has this situation become a battle for free speech as well as a pursuit of human rights and political justice?
Well, I addressed all the audiences and more than I was going to address if I had been allowed into Canada. I just did it by the technology that is today available. And I achieved the remarkable thing, really, of packing thousands of people into halls and churches to watch a video screen and watch someone broadcasting from New York. And the irony was not lost – I’m banned from Canada, but I’m broadcasting from New York. It’s just ridiculous.

[major.tom]

[faceless]