George Galloway in Canada

(This is basically an expanded video version of an earlier blog)

 

George Galloway vs. Stephen Harper

Now things might get interesting for Stephen Harper...

Canada's Federal Court ruled earlier this week in the case of ex-Scottish MP George Galloway, whom the Harper government banned from entering Canada a year and a half ago, for supposedly supporting a terrorist organization. While the appeal itself (on Galloway's behalf) was thrown out, because Galloway never formally challenged the ban, the ruling also made it abundantly clear that the government was out of line and banned him solely for political reasons (ie. criticizing Israel). Almost immediately, Galloway was announced to be coming to Canada for a speaking engagement this weekend.

Honestly, I'd love to see Harper's cronies try to pull something this time. The whole reason that the "terrorist organization" bullshit didn't work was because all that Galloway did was donate food, medicine and diapers to the Palestinian people (albeit through Hamas). Frankly, even if Hamas were inclined to hold on to those goods, they'd be pretty hard-pressed to find ways to conduct terrorism with them. Then again, this is using logic on Zionist sociopaths who think that trying to bring wheelchairs to Gaza warrants storming a passenger ship in international waters, and shooting civilians armed with sticks (at best).

Besides, if Galloway's actions really did count as supporting terrorism, he would definitely have been arrested by now, and he never has been. That tells me pretty clearly that HarperCons are talking out of their asses.

Furthermore, I find it very rich that the same people demanding that Galloway be silenced -- er, I mean "kept from our country" -- rolled out the red carpet for Ann Coulter, who not only made what can be called direct threats against Canada, but is a genuine Anti-Semite and terrorist sympathizer (look up her remarks on Timothy McVeigh if you think I pulled that one out of my ass). Galloway's critics keep playing the Jew Hater and Terrorist cards, so let's see them get serious.

It's for reasons like this that any claim the right wing has, to be the true heroes of free speech, goes up in smoke pathetically easily.

The Complaint Department (Encore)

Well Season Four of Bored on the Corner is coming to a close, so in the usual tradition I'm taking some parting shots at the issues I touched on in the last couple of months, and in some cases the responses to them.

Former American Vice-President Dick Cheney is still fuming over Barack Obama's wish to close down the prison at Guantanamo Bay -- would someone please explain to this man that giving terrorist suspects a fair trial isn't going to cause the sky to fall, or seas to boil? Honestly, Cheney's rhetoric is such an insult to common sense that it's a wonder that heads haven't exploded over it yet.

After Scottish MP George Galloway was banned from entering Canada, due to his Pro-Palestinian views and actions, he has sued the Canadian government for falsely accusing him of terrorism. I'm all for this, something needs to be done about the appalling double-standard in this country that says it's perfectly fine for Israel to shoot families and blow up hospitals, but donating medicine and diapers to Palestine is somehow siding with mass murderers. Incidentally, I've made an Access to Information Request to the RCMP, asking why they don't seem to be keen on shutting down the Jewish Defence League -- a very well known terrorist group, operating in Canada -- so far, there has been no response.

Evidently my rant about Twitter didn't fare very well -- possibly due to the scene where I jokingly go into a psychotic fit over how much the social networking sites on the internet just rip each other off, or spawn a ton of useless features. Alright, I won't try to be funny anymore, or go after pop culture. Ah who am I kidding, I've got an opinion and I'm sharing it dammit.

When I went after the continuing melodrama from the Christian Right, over gay marriage, I had this response from "IanLowen". He said, "Even if you are not Christian, you still cannot change a definition to fit your convenience." Once again, conservatives do not pay attention to a thing I say. First of all, show me where in the American Constitution, it says that only religious conservatives have rights? Second, open a history book: the definition of marriage has already changed a lot over time; back in the stone age it was defined as a caveman smashing a woman over the head, dragging her to his home, and raping her. More recently, it was just an elaborate business transaction. So stop using this bullshit about gays trying to destroy traditional marriage, unless your idea of picking up women involves carrying a club.

Speaking of gay marriage, I withdraw my sympathy for Carrie Prejean, aka Miss California. I'd previously stood up for her, after she got dragged through the mud by Perez Hilton over her views on same-sex marriage. I originally respected that she supposedly supported the choice, if not the philosophy itself... too bad she later turned around and said on national television that it shouldn't be around at all.

In more recent news, with the recession in such dire shape that Canadians from coast to coast are screaming at Ottawa to fix our pathetic Employment Insurance system -- or do ANYTHING besides waste millions of dollars on pet projects -- all we get from Emperor Stephen Harper are weak excuses, and ads on TV that go after Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff for having lived outside of Canada for over thirty years. So let me get this straight: a private citizen spending much of his adult life abroad is somehow a travesty, yet wasting time and public money on things that the people of this country hate and don't need, is good leadership? Get the fuck out of town.

Finally, I got some pretty hostile comments -- all from one person -- when I attacked the Oxford Police's handling of Tori Stafford's abduction and murder. In a nutshell, I was screamed at publicly for having such a strong opinion, and allegedly not doing anything direct to help search for the girl when she was believed to be alive. First of all, I don't recall it ever being said that I have to proclaim myself to be directly involved in a hot-button issue, in order to have a point of view. Canada -- at the moment -- still has Freedom of Speech. Second of all, there wasn't a lot I could have done; Woodstock is a part of the country I have hardly ever been to, I don't have a way to really get there, and even if I did, the Oxford Police were so stupid that they called off all searches mere days after Tori was taken. When the OPP came in to clean up that mess, they already had all the ground covered, so pretty much all I could have done was what I did anyway: keep Tori's name and face in the public eye.

I was also criticized somewhat for saying that the Oxford Police should be punished for their lax attitude towards the whole case -- I concede that my language at the time was more vicious than it needed to be, but the point still stands. The Oxford Police had every reason and oppourtunity to treat Tori's vanishing as a kidnapping, but they didn't. For some reason, a video that they insist shows a stranger walking Tori away from school doesn't constitute an abduction to them, though I suspect a lawyer or judge would disagree. At the very least, this was both stupid and extremely negligent. Therefore, I still maintain that unless Tori died before or just after she was reported missing, then the Oxford Police are partially responsible for her death, by their inexcusable lack of action. They are not only expected to, but paid to protect the public from these sort of crimes, and they dropped the ball for seemingly no good reason. If the officers in question are not willing or able to use some judgement and do their jobs, then they should find another line of work.

The good news about all of this is that I'm not the only one having these thoughts; since I pay attention to the world around me, and the way people think, I know for a fact that thousands -- even millions of people -- are equally pissed off at this bullshit. So to all the stupid and power tripping people out there, consider this a warning: you are being watched, and you are already wearing out your welcome. Push us further at your own risk. Enough said.

George Galloway vs. Ottawa

Well quel suprise, the Stephen Harper Thought Police are at it again. There's a Scottish politician, George Galloway, who was supposed to speak in Canada this week about war prevention and the Gaza bombardment. However, he has been banned from entering this country by the federal government, because he gave medical supplies, food, and clothing to the Palestinian people, via Hamas. As I'm sure you know, Hamas is the legitimately elected government of Palestine, but it's also an official terrorist group, according to many countries. Because of this, Mr. Galloway has been branded a terrorist sympathizer, despite the fact that he has no criminal record. The problem with this view, is that it bears no resemblance to reality.

First of all, it's completely out of step with the attitudes that the rest of the world is having about Hamas, these days. So many governments around the world are supporting peace talks with Hamas, including certain elements within Israel, and the U.S. Government -- which has previously been Pro-Israel at all costs. Further, Galloway's views are hardly new -- he was thrown out of the British Labour Party because of his opposition to the Iraq invasion -- but even in the most tyrannical days of George W. Bush's rule he was allowed to spread his views in America. In fact, Mr. Galloway's current speaking tour includes the U.S. Presumably they would have arrested him if they thought his humanitarian acts were really sympathizing with terrorists, yet he is still a free man. Gee, I wonder what that means?

The second issue is one of fairness and honesty, in regards to the Gaza Strip. As I've said before, I freely admit that Hamas isn't exactly a group of angels, but realistically they just aren't that much of a threat to Israel. I've never heard of them firing anything larger than a couple of small rockets, whereas during the Gaza skirmish alone Israel bombed them with pretty much anything they could get their hands on -- including illegal chemical weapons. Some of Israel's front line soldiers have recently revealed a chilling willingness on the military's part to shoot unarmed civilians for no reason, and ransack their homes. There are even prominent members of Israel's government who have said that it would be a good idea to fire a nuclear bomb into Palestine -- the majority of which wants peace, I might add. So if Hamas is considered a terrorist body, then why not the government and military of Israel, which is clearly capable of doing much more damage?

Further, an Ontario union leader recently got heat for proposing a boycott on Israeli scientists and academics speaking in our universities, unless they denounce Israel's actions -- this was called Anti-Semitic by many Pro-Israel groups, and thus was dropped. So why isn't blocking Mr. Galloway considered Anti-Palestine? Also, why does the government ostracize Hamas, yet tolerate the Jewish Defense League, a terrorist group operating in Canada, known to stage bombings and assassinations -- and a group that is quite glad to see Galloway silenced, I might add.

Typically, the Conservative government and its supporters deny that this is an attack on free speech, but as you can see I strongly disagree. I'm also not at all surprised, because this has been typical business for Emperor Harper from the beginning: bully, vilify, and ultimately silence anyone who disagrees with you, no matter what. Not only that, but this is yet another example of the Harper cabinet completely ignoring what the rest of the world is doing, and just continuing with policies that have failed several times over. Mr. Harper: there is a big difference between marching to your own drum, and walking off of a cliff that everyone else has the good sense to avoid. That's it for me.