George Galloway

[Shady]

I apologize if I'm mistaking your belief then. Generally speaking, most of the people who start making noises about the JDL and other Jewish organizations controlling government are those who like to wear white sheets at night and set fire to crosses.

Exactly. We can't forget that it's Galloway's conduct that's ultimately in question, not the JDL, or any other crutch of bigots and racists.

[normanchateau]

No it was Harper who voted against a bill which could have criminalized the bible, the Koran and a whole lot of other religious books which all said nasty things about fags.

Stephen Harper voted against Bill C-250, the legislation which made it a hate crime to promote or advocate the murder of homosexuals. At the time, Harper claimed that C-250 would take away the religious rights of Canadians to discriminate against homosexuals. In other words, Harper thought it necessary to protect the freedom of speech of churches to discriminate against homosexuals.

Accordingly, Liberal Member of Parliament Derek Lee proposed an amendment to C-250 which was adopted. "It creates a defense from prosecution for opinions expressed 'in good faith' or based on a belief in a religious text" like the Bible.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat6.htm

The amendment clearly allows churches to discriminate and protects the Bible. Despite that, Harper voted against C-250 even after it was amended.

Harper uses free speech as an argument to allow religious extremists to discriminate against homosexuals but has no use for free speech when it suits his political purposes as in the Galloway case.

Hypocrite Harper has yet to reveal where he stands on free speech in general.

Does anyone on this board seriously believe that Harper opposes the Canadian hate crime legislation which makes it a crime to promote or advocate the murder of people based on their religious beliefs? Why only invoke free speech when homosexuals are involved as opposed to the religious rights of Christians and Jews?

[Argus]

Stephen Harper voted against Bill C-250, the legislation which made it a hate crime to promote or advocate the murder of homosexuals.

Promoting or advocating murder has always been against the law. The homosexual lobby has constantly and shrilly tried to use all manner of justifications like this despite how self-evidently dishonest they are, to support laws which would benefit them.

There never was any real reason for this law other than political correctness. All the reasons homosexuals came up with were already illegal. What this law actually does is give them special protection above what others get. I'm against all hate crime laws as they basically create a different category of crime for the same action. Why should a guy who beats me up because he's a jerk be punished less than a guy who beats up a fag because he's a jerk? Why should I have less protection under the law, then some gay guy? It's not as if gays are routinely attacked in this country so that they require special protection.

At the time, Harper claimed that C-250 would take away the religious rights of Canadians to discriminate against homosexuals. In other words, Harper thought it necessary to protect the freedom of speech of churches to discriminate against homosexuals.

Actually, Harper and all religious organizations worried that the chilling effect of a law which calls all derogatory speech about homosexuality "hate speech" would cause immense problems for churches, temples and mosques, and the people who have strong religious beliefs.

The amendment clearly allows churches to discriminate and protects the Bible. Despite that, Harper voted against C-250 even after it was amended.

Not as clear as all that. You can find a summary of legal objections to the bill here

Bill C-250

But perhaps the most relevant aspect of the legal analyzes is the following:

Media reports indicate that the proposed changes to the Code will exempt anyone expressing an anti-same sex perspective based on a religious text. The Bill's author has repeatedly assured the public that religious leaders will continue to have this protection as a result of the exemption in subsection 319(3). However, even a cursory examination of subsection 319(3) clearly indicates that this protection only applies to someone charged with the "promotes hatred" offence under subsection 319(2), not in relation to the "communicating" offence under subsection 319(1). Further, the "promotes hatred" offence has an additional legal safeguard in subsection (6) which requires the consent of a Provincial Attorney General. In contrast, the "communicating" offence in subsection 319(1) requires only that a peace officer have reasonable and probable grounds or that a private citizen is able to convince a Justice of the Peace to commence the criminal process. What follows from these observations is that free speech, or "communicating" about sexual orientation within a church or religious organization will not be protected.

[normanchateau]

But perhaps the most relevant aspect of the legal analyzes is the following:

Media reports indicate that the proposed changes to the Code will exempt anyone expressing an anti-same sex perspective based on a religious text. The Bill's author has repeatedly assured the public that religious leaders will continue to have this protection as a result of the exemption in subsection 319(3). However, even a cursory examination of subsection 319(3) clearly indicates that this protection only applies to someone charged with the "promotes hatred" offence under subsection 319(2), not in relation to the "communicating" offence under subsection 319(1). Further, the "promotes hatred" offence has an additional legal safeguard in subsection (6) which requires the consent of a Provincial Attorney General. In contrast, the "communicating" offence in subsection 319(1) requires only that a peace officer have reasonable and probable grounds or that a private citizen is able to convince a Justice of the Peace to commence the criminal process. What follows from these observations is that free speech, or "communicating" about sexual orientation within a church or religious organization will not be protected.

The same arguments could be made about the law which makes it a hate crime to promote or advocate the murder of people based on their religious beliefs. As you must be aware, religious writings frequently advocate murder based on religious beliefs. Yet Harper has no objections whatsoever to hate crime legislation which makes it a crime to promote or advocate genocide based on religious beliefs.

[lictor616]

What's illogical is for you to not want foreign trash into Canada - except for this foreign trash. A more logical and appropriate belief would be that we should not let ANY foreign trash into Canada, regardless of what kind of trash it is.

what's illogical is that we AREN'T EVEN DISCUSSING or letting the people vote on the relatively FAR MORE DISASTROUS large scale floodgate style importation of biological refuse from the third world...

so why this single one man?

Again what are we afraid of? Are we frightened zombies? Let the wretch speak ... let us retain our decency and dignity as a civilized nation that does not resort to coercion to restrict freedom of speech. I would hate to live in a country where debate takes that kind of form.

If he wants to claim that the earth is flat or that he is elvis ... let him... for god's sake!

Edited March 22, 2009 by lictor616

[lictor616]

What's illogical is for you to not want foreign trash into Canada - except for this foreign trash. A more logical and appropriate belief would be that we should not let ANY foreign trash into Canada, regardless of what kind of trash it is.

also please note that Galloway is not up for citizenship, he's not trying to live here in permanence... the other foreign trash we are talking about are HERE and many are maintained BY OUR TAX dollar...

which is the immediate problem?

[waldo]

Canada can't muzzle me

To ban me from the country for my views on Afghanistan is absurd, hypocritical, and in vain

The Canadian immigration minister Jason Kenney gazetted in the Sun yesterday morning that I was to be excluded from his country because of my views on Afghanistan. That's the way the rightwing, last-ditch dead-enders of Bushism in Ottawa conduct their business.

[lictor616]

Exactly. We can't forget that it's Galloway's conduct that's ultimately in question, not the JDL, or any other crutch of bigots and racists.

definition of bigot: a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own...

notice that it is the JDL, and similar organizations that ARE barring a person from OUR country, because of his possibly negative remarks on Israel (the world's foremost violator of Geneva convention statutes, a state currently engaged in racist liquidation of entire ethnic group)

it is they who are the racists and bigots.

[lictor616]

Canada can't muzzle me

To ban me from the country for my views on Afghanistan is absurd, hypocritical, and in vain

The Canadian immigration minister Jason Kenney gazetted in the Sun yesterday morning that I was to be excluded from his country because of my views on Afghanistan. That's the way the rightwing, last-ditch dead-enders of Bushism in Ottawa conduct their business.

unfortunately, Galloway is entirely wrong to blame this cowardly attack on free speech on so called "right -wingers", the majority of the people minded responsible for this (and other infamies such as the extradition of Ernst Zundel) are all liberal left wingers, who might as well be far leftist communists like Galloway...

In fact, liberals are ideologically in agreement with nearly everything in Das Kapital.

I suspect that he calls them right wingers for his own purposes or to supplement his own belief system.

[lictor616]

The same arguments could be made about the law which makes it a hate crime to promote or advocate the murder of people based on their religious beliefs. As you must be aware, religious writings frequently advocate murder based on religious beliefs. Yet Harper has no objections whatsoever to hate crime legislation which makes it a crime to promote or advocate genocide based on religious beliefs.

Big-brained liberal "intellectuals," busily engaged in defacing and sapping Western civilization and its rational approach to freedom of speech, know that, if they are members of the "white/ european majority", they must fawn on the "minorities" and frantically wag their tails. It is simply apodeictic to them that no European Canadian can be permitted freedom of speech to defend his own civilization or question what the JDL or other outfits decide.

But when Salman Rushdie steps up to incite hatred of Israel's enemies, or when a university professor praises the homicidal acts of Baruch Goldstein, or when a scurvy and mangy haitian prats on about "white devils" there must be NO curving of freedom of expression in such speech... of course not!

But all that suppression of intellectual integrity, to say nothing of freedom, never evoked a squeak from the intellectual lions who roared so loudly for Rushdie's freedom of speech, when they pretended it had been endangered by a vain threat that ended up making him rich.

what a sick and perverse nation we have allowed canada to become.

Gone are the Enlightenment beliefs in objectivity, reason and evidence, and principles of freedom and justice that apply equally to all individuals.

INstead we have a multiracial morass of every ethnicity, each competing for victim status, and a creeping soviet style surveillance state where European canadians find themselves prisoners in the country their forefathers founded.

[normanchateau]

In fact, liberals are ideologically in agreement with nearly everything in Das Kapital.

Sounds like you've been reading from the collected works of US Senator Joseph McCarthy who once said:

"You are seeing today an all out attempt

to marshal the forces of the opposition,

using not merely the communists, or their

fellow travelers-the deluded liberals, the

eggheads, and some of my good friends

in both the Democratic and Republican Parties

who can become heros over night in the eyes

of the left-wing press if they

will just join with the jackal pack"

[lictor616]

Sounds like you've been reading from the collected works of US Senator Joseph McCarthy who once said:

"You are seeing today an all out attempt

to marshal the forces of the opposition,

using not merely the communists, or their

fellow travelers-the deluded liberals, the

eggheads, and some of my good friends

in both the Democratic and Republican Parties

who can become heros over night in the eyes

of the left-wing press if they

will just join with the jackal pack"

as it turns out McCarthy was right!

"McCarthy's detractors, Communists, and Soviet sympathizers never anticipated two things: One, the Venona intercepts and their subsequent release; Two, the collapse of Communism and the opening of Soviet files.

From 1943 until 1980, unbeknownst to virtually everyone, the National Security Agency intercepted every Soviet message going from or to the United States. It was not until 1994 that their existence was even acknowledged, and 1995 when the first 1,400 of 240,000 intercepts were released to the public. Their content was damning and supportive of the contentions of not only McCarthy but Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, Hoover, and others."

and alas, if we look at socialistic Obama america... we see how harrowingly correct McCarthy was... he was inaccurate only in that he greatly UNDERESTIMATED the extent of communist penetration...

McCarthy should be praised, he at least resisted and attacked a conspiracy that was greatly larger then him. He was a brave and noble son of Europe...

[normanchateau]

and alas, if we look at socialistic Obama america... we see how harrowingly correct McCarthy was... he was inaccurate only in that he greatly UNDERESTIMATED the extent of communist penetration...

Something McCarthy did not anticipate is godless atheistic communists becoming billionaires in their relentless drive towards penetration. Some of the wealthiest men in the US, people like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, now turn out to be Democrats and therefore supporters of the socialistical Obama. Communists are constantly evolving and only in the post-McCarthy era have they fooled the masses by disguising themselves as money-hungry billionaires supporting liberal causes. And of course Obama's links to a communist terrorist would never have been exposed were it not for the heroism of anti-liberal, pro-family values Sarah Palin.

[tango]

It's not as if gays are routinely attacked in this country so that they require special protection.

-thread drift- ... but I just wanted to make you aware, Argus, that you are wrong:

Julian Roberts, professor of Criminology at the University of Ottawa and author of Disproportionate Harm: Hate Crime in Canada, echoes this stance. This document, also for the Department of Justice, points out that

Research in other countries such as the United States has clearly shown that gays and lesbians are a principal target for hate crimes. In addition, there are several reasons to believe that members of the gay community are less likely than any other victimized group to report incidents to the police. For this reason, police statistics are likely to seriously underestimate the extent of the threat to the gay community in Canada.

Comparative studies of similar questionnaires from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Vancouver, and Philadelphia were also cited. Results were startling. 20.6% of the respondents from Toronto had experienced violence such as being punched or beaten, 18% in Nova Scotia and 16% in New Brunswick. In Toronto, 25.8% of the respondents had objects thrown at them, 25% in Nova Scotia and 17% in New Brunswick.

http://www.mun.ca/the/research/hatecrimes.html

-resume thread topic-

[Argus]

The same arguments could be made about the law which makes it a hate crime to promote or advocate the murder of people based on their religious beliefs. As you must be aware, religious writings frequently advocate murder based on religious beliefs. Yet Harper has no objections whatsoever to hate crime legislation which makes it a crime to promote or advocate genocide based on religious beliefs.

There is certainly material in the bible, the Koran, and other religious writings which is quite gruesome. I'm not aware of people frequently advocating murder, however, based on this writings, and I believe that would be against the law even without resorting to hate speech provisions.

And how do you know Harper has no objections to that part of the hate speech law? That part of the law was in place before this. Do you know for a fact he supported it? I don't support any of it. I suppose I could be brought to support a very much toned down version which really only targeted - to use the wording for begging "pressing and persistent" hate speech. But that's about as far as I would go.

[dub]

I apologize if I'm mistaking your belief then. Generally speaking, most of the people who start making noises about the JDL and other Jewish organizations controlling government are those who like to wear white sheets at night and set fire to crosses.

ah. yeah. okay.

It's certainly true that the JDL won't like Galloway, and it's certainly true the JDL does its best to suppress any kind of speech which they find to be anti-Semitic. I disagree with them and find that stance to often be stupid and counter productive. But to suggest it has any undue influence on government is idiotic. This government has lots of reasons on its own to dislike Galloway and his ilk. I dislike him rather a lot myself and so far as I'm aware there isn't a drop of Jewish blood in my body.

there is a difference between galloway and millions of others protesting israel's actions against palestinians and hating jews.

personally, i find galloway can be a tad bit obnoxious and even hypocritical at times, but that doesn't mean that he should be banned from coming to canada.

for you or anyone else to deny that JDL was not the main reason that the federal government put this ridiculous ban on galloway entering canada is quite bizarre. JDL itself has said that they were the ones who pressured the Canadian government to make this happen.

[Argus]

Comparative studies of similar questionnaires from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Vancouver, and Philadelphia were also cited. Results were startling. 20.6% of the respondents from Toronto had experienced violence such as being punched or beaten, 18% in Nova Scotia and 16% in New Brunswick. In Toronto, 25.8% of the respondents had objects thrown at them, 25% in Nova Scotia and 17% in New Brunswick. [/i]

http://www.mun.ca/the/research/hatecrimes.html

-resume thread topic-

Those numbers are meaningless, I'm afraid, without terms and definitions, not to mention comparisons with straights of the same age, gender and social groups. How many gay men had been punched or beaten compared to straight men in the same area? And what are the terms? I recall a study once which suggested that most women had been the victims of violence, yet it emerged that the definition of violence included everything from a push to "oral violence". All I can say is that in my experience, and in reviewing the media, I have rarely encountered stories of gay bashing. And I know the media would report any such incident.

[dub]

unfortunately, Galloway is entirely wrong to blame this cowardly attack on free speech on so called "right -wingers", the majority of the people minded responsible for this (and other infamies such as the extradition of Ernst Zundel) are all liberal left wingers, who might as well be far leftist communists like Galloway...

In fact, liberals are ideologically in agreement with nearly everything in Das Kapital.

I suspect that he calls them right wingers for his own purposes or to supplement his own belief system.

i wouldn't call Jewish Defense League of Canada liberal left wingers.

[Argus]

for you or anyone else to deny that JDL was not the main reason that the federal government put this ridiculous ban on galloway entering canada is quite bizarre. JDL itself has said that they were the ones who pressured the Canadian government to make this happen.

They can say whatever the hell they want. They don't really have much, if any influence on the feds, and even within the Jewish community they are considered somewhat fringe characters. Galloway is exactly the sort of left wing blowhard the Tories would despise, and the numerous allegations about him, along with his support of Hamas and other terrorist groups gives them plenty of excuse to crap on him - which they've done. So what? Screw Galloway. I'm not going to shed any tears for him.

[lictor616]

i wouldn't call Jewish Defense League of Canada liberal left wingers.

well its complicated the JDL is right wing, fascist, nationalistic and vigorously racist when it comes to defending the Jewish people and Israel.

but when they are disseminating propaganda for the hoi polloi (us goy serfs) then the attitude is the usual: "more diversity, more equality, no white racism and more tolerance"

and we as European Canadians get to sit while the JDL spreads its excrement on our faces...

and thank them for it...

Edited March 22, 2009 by lictor616

[dub]

They can say whatever the hell they want. They don't really have much, if any influence on the feds, and even within the Jewish community they are considered somewhat fringe characters. Galloway is exactly the sort of left wing blowhard the Tories would despise, and the numerous allegations about him, along with his support of Hamas and other terrorist groups gives them plenty of excuse to crap on him - which they've done. So what? Screw Galloway. I'm not going to shed any tears for him.

are you going to shed any tears for free speech or are you're okay with selective free speech?

Edited March 23, 2009 by dub

[lictor616]

I'm not going to shed any tears for him.

howabout shedding a few for our inability to call ourselves a civilized free nation? Perhaps surrendering a few tears for the cage that the Canadian people are building for themselves?

[Argus]

are you going to shed any tears for free speech or is you're okay with selective free speech?

I don't owe any care to foreigners for their freedom of speech, especially their right to come here and cause trouble.

If some ignorant blowhard here wants to mouth off like Galloway they are, of course, free to do so with my blessing.

[lictor616]

I don't owe any care to foreigners for their freedom of speech, especially their right to come here and cause trouble.

If some ignorant blowhard here wants to mouth off like Galloway they are, of course, free to do so with my blessing.

cause trouble? by using words?

notice that that makes idiocy our claim to be a progressive, free and enlightened country. If we can't handle the pinprick of such a mediocre individual as Galloway that really doesn't say much about us does it?..

[lictor616]

I don't owe any care to foreigners for their freedom of speech, especially their right to come here and cause trouble.

If some ignorant blowhard here wants to mouth off like Galloway they are, of course, free to do so with my blessing.

you know, I'd wager that despite your pretense of concern for foreigners causing trouble, you have not a peep to say about the countless Muslim extremists who are at THIS VERY MOMENT squatting WITHIN our country... and causing a great deal of ruckus.

rember in the summer of 2007 police arrested a group of young Muslims in toronto— "homegrown terrorists" — who were going to storm the Canadian Parliament, hold politicians hostage, and maybe even behead the prime minister.

i bet you dont have a word of reprimand for that... but George Galloway? OH THAT BASTARD HOW DARE HE SAY "WORDS"!

ridiculous.