Fisk on Galloway

Robert Fisk has a piece in the Independent today on the Canadian government's odd refusal to admit George Galloway into the country on the grounds that he's 'a security threat'. These claims have grown increasingly farcical with the immigration minister's spokesman calling Galloway 'an infandous street corner Cromwell'. Now you can think what you like about George Galloway (personally I think Fisk gets it about right when he calls him a "self-publicist, friend of dictators, reality TV show performer and general silly ass"), but surely nobody actually thinks Galloway making his speeches in Canada puts anyone directly at risk? And if that's the case then the only motivation for denial of entry can have been to make a political point. Sounds to me like a poor precedent to set. Any thoughts?