RE: George banned from Canada (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

FullCircle -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/21/2009 12:48:58 PM)

Ask yourself Ken what would the headlines have said if Fatah had won that uprising in 2007 even though they had a minority in government? The transition was never going to be easy not when people are entrenched in positions of power with political motivation such as the security services. 
The most just thing for democracy occurred in the end.



LadyEllen -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 6:13:58 AM)

OK - back to the main discussion point!

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
But the greater issue - alike with the banning from the UK of the Dutch MP over his anti-Koran movie - is whether this is in any way a proper way for democracies to proceed, banning certain people because they have things to say which contravene government policy?

E



DomKen -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 7:53:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

OK - back to the main discussion point!

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
But the greater issue - alike with the banning from the UK of the Dutch MP over his anti-Koran movie - is whether this is in any way a proper way for democracies to proceed, banning certain people because they have things to say which contravene government policy?

E


So someone known to have provided material support to terrorists should be allowed free entry to any country?



FullCircle -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 7:56:06 AM)

One man's terrorist is another man's President.



Arpig -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 8:27:14 AM)

quote:

One man's terrorist is another man's President.

Very good point



DomKen -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 9:16:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle

One man's terrorist is another man's President.

So what? Would anyone think letting Slobodan Milosevic roam about unhindered was a good thing either?



FullCircle -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 9:28:55 AM)

So now you are comparing Slobodan Milosevic to George Galloway? Security decisions shouldn't be based on politics and in this case all there is to it is bad politics. The major problem with the west is it's sanctimonious holier than thou approach to informing everyone who the bad guys are and what causes we should and shouldn't believe in. Was there black lists banning IRA fundraising in the us, if there was it wasn’t at all effective. We can go down this route if you like but not one is pure as snow, I think before blacklists are drawn up governments should consider if the people being blacklisted are a threat to anyone and what it says about their proclamation to support free speech.



DomKen -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 10:10:49 AM)

You better check my posting history before trying to hang US support of the IRA around my neck. I oppose terrorists period. Galloway did a bit of political grandstanding in support of people who think blowing up civilians is a good idea. I don't care about anything beyond that point.



FullCircle -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 10:18:15 AM)

All you have to do is look at what beneficial effect blacklisting has had on people like Mugabe. To start with we couldn't reason with him and now we can't even try to reason with him. Isolating people rather than engaging them never works. Mugabe doesn’t worry about not being invited to the party he just uses it as political capital to prove his bizarre point that the west is against Africa.

Galloway supported aid convoys, he isn't beyond suing people for slander and he has done so in the past succesfully so you'd better be cautious in the accusations you level at his door. I’m not a great fan of the man, I just think he like other people deserve a fair hearing; let him speak then make the legal judgments as to if he should be prosecuted for it.
 
My observations of the man have given me the impression he is a pretty selfrighous petty individual.



MrRodgers -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 10:31:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/20/george-galloway-banned-canada

UK MP George Galloway has been denied entry to Canada, a few days after delivering an aid convoy to Gaza which he handed over to an organisation with the means to hand it out, that is the democratically elected government of the territory - that is, Hamas.

Hamas is not the legally elected government of anything. Hamas is at the kindest a political party. The Palestinian Authority is the legally elected government of Gaza and it has been violently expelled by terrorists. That those terrorists were members of Hamas and that Hamas has propped itself up as the ruling junta in Gaza doesn't change the facts. Galloway gave aid and comfort to a terrorist organization responsible for the intentional murder of thousands of civilians. The UK government has laws governing this behavior and why they aren't being enforced is baffling.

People tend to gloss over the news and pick up the most telling parts...or useful parts but almost never the whole story. Here is a larger part of that story...

Hamas in Gaza as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon operate like the nazis did it in Germany. They go into the community (all politics is local) they take over often by force of arms...the mail delivery, the trash pick-up, the fire and then local police protection...even water and electric power.

NOW your community is DEPENDENT on these terrorists groups for the operaton of civil society. Then they ralley these people again often by force to hit the streets. Soon as they can then, they arrange for new elections.

Voting is not protected as in the west...who are you going to vote for ? Now you see how 'democracy' works after the fact.

Most Palestinians and Lebonese HATE these groups unlike reports that they are beholden because of all that they 'provide' civil society. They don't provide shit...they take over and don't do anymore than necessary to just stay in power.



antipode -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 11:10:57 AM)

quote:

banning certain people


There is no overly political statement inherent in Galloway's not being allowed entry into Canada. The Canadians have, in the past few years, significantly tightened up their immigration rules, under American pressure. This was precipitated by multiple Middle Eastern bombers entering the US from Canada - terrorists that were living in Canada under its generous asylum rules. It is even possible for Americans with drunk driving convictions in the US to be refused entry, under a rule the Canadians put in place so they could bar folks with any type of conviction abroad.

During a recent Vancouver layover on my way back to D.C. from China, I had trouble persuading the immigration officer to let me in for a few hours, just so I could have dinner, a smoke and a nap at the airport Sheraton - this despite the fact that I am a long term U.S. resident, and native holder of a Western European passport. In years past, when I was living in NYC, I could drive across the New York - Quebec border just on the strength of my New York license plates.



DomKen -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 11:33:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle
Galloway supported aid convoys, he isn't beyond suing people for slander and he has done so in the past succesfully so you'd better be cautious in the accusations you level at his door.

Let him try. I'm in the US as is the computer this forum is hosted on. Our slander laws are significantly different than the UK's and here the truth is an absolute defence. Hamas is a terrorist group, as defined by a whole host of national and international bodies, and it is beyond dispute that he provided material aid to Hamas.



MadAxeman -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 11:52:58 AM)

Actually, the grounds provided by a spokesperson for Mr Kenny for the ban are that Galloway’s opposition to the deployment of Nato troops in Afghanistan make him “inadmissible” to Canada.



ShaktiSama -> RE: George banned from Canada (3/22/2009 3:06:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
But the greater issue - alike with the banning from the UK of the Dutch MP over his anti-Koran movie - is whether this is in any way a proper way for democracies to proceed, banning certain people because they have things to say which contravene government policy?



In a word?  Yes.  Ostracism as a political strategy was introduced by the first operating democracy in the West, Athens.  It served then just as it serves now, as a more civilized alterative to imprisonment and murder.

Every country has a right to sovereignty.  The idea that foreign nationals have a right to enter the country when they are hostile to the values which the people collectively uphold is extremely dubious.

"George" is not being denied a right; he chose to throw away a privilege.  No one is obligated to coddle him or anyone else who encourages and supports terrorism as a political strategy.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2026
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125