George Galloway

Like my colleague Luke Savage, I am disappointed that the Harper Government not too long ago barred George Galloway from entering Canada. I say this not because I share Galloway’s views (they are reprehensible and misguided) or find him to be an admirable person (he is a pathetic and disgusting human being), but because I believe in the right to free speech and movement. Yes, there are limits to both - I endorse restrictions on incitements to violence and persons with criminal records entering the country. But a brief reading of Galloway’s profile does not put him in either of those cases. Of course, I am open to further investigation if prompted by the right facts.

In fact, I think it’s necessary that people like Galloway enter the country, or people like Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn top best seller’s lists. Their very existence and fame disproves their claims that capitalist, western societies are undemocratic and systematically repressive. The free market seems to provide plenty of attention to critiques that undermine its very raison d’etre.

My only problem with Mr. Savage’s article is the insinuation here:

Despite the Immigration Ministry’s assertions that it was not directly responsible for the ban, it’s likely that the move was motivated by a request from the Jewish Defence League. A pro-Israel organization, the League wrote an open letter to the government requesting that it “keep this hater out of the country.” The director of the organization’s Canadian chapter, Meir Weinstein, participated in a joint interview with Galloway for Britain’s Channel 4 News on March 20th (widely available on YouTube), in which he stated: “We are determined to uncover any proxy agents of Hamas and Hezbollah, and we’ve been successful with regards to Mr. Galloway […] we will be looking into these organizations in Canada that have invited him […] their links to terror groups as well.” Galloway responded by promising that if the ban was not overturned, he would speak using “other means,” possibly via video conference. Weinstein replied, “If he uses those other means we will see to it that the Canadian government will be monitoring every individual and organization that has anything to do with it.”

I am not here to disprove this claim, because I have no facts to go either way. But the evidence in the article itself doesn’t seem sufficient: 1) Harper is pro-Israel 2) the JDL is intrasigently pro-Israel and 3) the JDL promised to have Galloway barred from entering the country. But there is no reason to believe for the claim that the JDL has the influence within Conservative circles to pull off such a move. My own experiences suggest that it is not even influential enough among Canadian Jews (though I may be wrong) and certainly doesn’t speak for all Israel supporters. I say this with concern because speculations of Jewish influence peddling don’t play well in the realm of public opinion. I’m a little late to the debate in the comments section, but I would suggest (and request) more facts.

ShareThis