Tories Ban “Infandous” Galloway

I’m sure we’ll be hearing howls of protest from the valiant defenders of free speech that populate the ranks of the Bloggin’ Tories about the Harper government banning British MP George Galloway from entering the country to speak at an anti-war event in Toronto on the grounds that he’s “infandous”… Seeing as the usual suspects worked themselves up into a lather of outrage over Britain denying Gert Wilders entry into that country because of his anti Muslim views, I’m sure they’ll be just as upset at this. I mean, it’s not like they’re all a bunch of two-faced, hypocritical slimebags or anything…

By the way, “infandous” is a pretty rich accusation coming from an odious prick like Jason Kenney, especially so given that just this week the Harper government reprehensibly flouted our own laws by allowing a suspected war criminal into the country to address a well-heeled audience of conservative supporters in Calgary.

Oh, and another thing… Doesn’t it seem more than a little odd that Galloway can speak before the U.S. Congress, but isn’t allowed entry into Canada?

38 Replies to “Tories Ban “Infandous” Galloway”

  1. Kady O’Malley, says…

    “some posters, both pro- and anti-ban, seem to have mistaken for a ministerial decision, has nothing to do with Kenney or his department. Canada Border Services Agency is a quasi-independent agency,”

    I have no idea, so i’ll trust O’Malley, though no doubt this debate is about to get awfully dum.

  2. What is George going to say that is so bad.? Is he going to terrorize us? He is a peace activist, so why is everybody afraid of him? You don’t have to listen, although he is most interesting.

  3. High profile visitors are always vetted through the minister’s office. O’Malley should know that Kenney has the authority to over-rule the border agency one way or the other.

  4. Come on guys, Kenney is completely powerless, it all those evil liberal government employees that are trying to making him look bad. His hands are completely bound.

  5. The only powerless thing around Kenney is his electric shaver.

    A problem he shares with Porky Van Loon, apparently. Really, Harper needs to sic his psychic fashion adviser on those two, armed with a Gillette Mach 3.

  6. Harper would probably call upon the opposition to stop preventing the Flintstone brothers from shaving.

  7. this is even more embarrassing than ignatieff’s response. it is nonetheless good in the long run to expose this gov’t for the freakshow it most certainly is.

  8. I wonder if there would be a popular support to have Jason Kenney banned from British Columbia for (name your reason here)…

    Right or wrong I’m sure the support could be found.

  9. this is even more embarrassing than ignatieff’s response.
    Uhmm no.
    Ignatieff is being his normal self – an idiot.
    And he’s the leader of Liberals…. Good luck in the next elections.

  10. it was far too meek; far too deferent to the gov’t rationale; consisted mostly of cat-calling Galloway for holding despicable views. look it up on ITQ or BCinTO (doubt if you’ll be very impressed).

  11. From a CTV article:
    Political reaction

    In Winnipeg, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said he didn’t agree with Galloway’s views.

    “We let into Canada all kinds of people who say ridiculous and absurd things and Galloway has said his share of ridiculous and absurd things. The issue … is whether the security services know something about George Galloway that I don’t,” he said.

    “The minister of immigration is becoming the minister of censorship,” NDP immigration critic Olivia Chow said. “We don’t have to agree with everything Mr. Galloway talks about.

    “But, at bare minimum, they should be allowed to express their points of view so Canadians can make decisions themselves. This is pure censorship and it’s wrong.”

    Everytime I see Ignatieff say stupid shit like this, I imagine him saying it in Jon Stewart’s Lieberman voice.

    They even defended our creationist minster of science and technology.

  12. Here we go:

    ‘In Winnipeg, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff suggested that, on the face of it, the decision does not appear justified. But he cautioned that security officials might know something he doesn’t.

    “I have never in a long life of listening to George Galloway heard a single sentence out of his mouth that I believed,” said Ignatieff. “But that’s not the issue.

    Yep, that’s pretty weak.

  13. I have never in a long life of listening to George Galloway heard a single sentence out of his mouth that I believed

    Oh gawd.

    When will you ever learn that “less is more,” Mr Empire Lite?

  14. Presumably if there is a security issue Kenney will want to forward the details immediately to the British Parliament. Not to mention the American congress where he appears from time to time.

    (Sound of throat clearing and crickets.)

  15. Anyone who can lead a convoy of trucks with humanitarian supplies from Britain to Gaza gets my vote.

  16. Sorry to be anal, and I know this was addressed earlier in the comments, but it’s *Geert* Wilders ( )

    Also, I though Galloway’s ban was more to do with his apparent connections to anti-semitic organizations such as Hamas? And the ban was more to do with an unwillingness to allow him to gather more funding for organizations such as Hamas?

    Or am I wrong on that? If I am, feel free to show me your sources of info, because I’d like to be in the know as well 🙂

    P.s. ‘Infandous’? Somewhat pretentious, isn’t it?

  17. Personally, I thought was Ignatieff said was okay, not startling, but okay. Fact is, he doesn’t know what the Harper bunch have on this guy (the secret society of Harper wouldn’t let anything be known) and if Iggy said more the Tory war room would accuse him of supporting terrorists. I think he’s trying to keep ahead of their possible attack ads, etc.

    BBC claims Galloway is financially helping terrorists groups.

    I think they should allow him here – keeps it out in the open.

  18. If Mr. Galloway can’t get into Canada, maybe he can give a speech along the Quebec-Vermont border. He can stand in the US while those in attendance can be on either side.

  19. That is very fascinating, You are an excessively skilled blogger. I’ve joined your rss feed and stay up for in the hunt for more of your wonderful post. Also, I’ve shared your site in my social networks!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s