threats to national security

For people so concerned with freedom of speech and the Human Rights tribunals across the country, does this not smack of hypocrisy?

Barring someone from entering the country because of an ideological difference with the ruling party. Sounds awful draconian, wouldn't you say?

Look, George Galloway may very well be a full-blown wackaloon- and indeed, given some of his statements, that seems to be the case- but there's no way this guy is a threat to national security. He's a British MP, for Chrissakes. He's good enough to take his seat in the UK House of Commons, but entering Canada to speak at an anti-war rally? Nope, Canadian soil is too sacred for that.

This isn't about Galloway, or the war, or immigration policy- this is about a government that increasingly lets its paleo-conservative views creep into the non-partisan operations of our bureaucracy. From cuts to arts and culture funding, to the continued vendetta against the CBC, to Jason Kenney (surely, a friend to immigrants everywhere) disallowing a crackpot Scot- heaven forbid the masses hear some anti-war talk- this government has continually allowed its tired and staid ideology make a mockery of Canada on the world stage.

Iggy said it very well- he has a right to free speech, however daft his support for the Taliban and other such intelligent measures are. We don't censor Gary Goodyear when he makes an apish fool of himself in front of the national media; why should we censor someone else for making stupid but legitimate comments? Stupidity, however depressing, is not a threat to national security. Censorship at the highest levels of government, and a government that exploits the bureaucracy for political gain are much more dangerous.