George Galloway=leftist liar and crook

[Mulhollanddose]

Maverick British lawmaker George Galloway solicited and received nearly $600,000 in profits for himself and a charity he ran from secret deals under the Iraq oil-for-food program, Senate investigators charged yesterday.

The new charges, released by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs permanent subcommittee on investigations, come five months after Mr. Galloway, a fierce critic of U.S. policy in Iraq, emphatically denied under oath to the panel that he had taken bribes from Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein or participated in any Iraq oil deals.

Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Norm Coleman, Minnesota Republican, said the new findings "clearly demonstrate that the testimony given by Mr. Galloway in May was false and misleading."

WashingtonTimes

[creaturecat]

[juanbenae]

sounds like he is qualified for a position in the bush cabinet!

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by k911sc
sounds like he is qualified for a position in the bush cabinet!

Galloway is a communist (similar to American Democrat)...no way.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by creaturecat

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Saddam Hussein, not a single time, never."

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose

the new findings "clearly demonstrate that the testimony given by Mr. Galloway in May was false and misleading."

WashingtonTimes

[rrpjr]

The provincial American Left’s brief infatuation with Galloway was mostly put to rout by his recent "series" of debates with Christopher Hitchens (Galloway canceled the series after the first skirmish at Baruch College in New York last month). Hitchens decimated him. Yes, Galloway is a communist. But that is the least of it. He has also, along with many in the British Left (who at least have the virtue of honesty over their American counterparts), openly declared his support for the insurgents in Iraq. He is a longtime friend of Hussein (had a guest room in the palace), as well as an apologist for dictators in many places. As Hitchens has remarked, one tyrant is hardly dead before he leaps into the arms of another.

Anyway, Hitchens says it better than I, and from personal experience:


Fawning on dictators, posing and posturing for a state-controlled press in front of a coerced audience, managing to overlook the existence of death squads and torturers, and praising the invasion and occupation of neighboring states—this is the same George Galloway who in 1994 flew to Baghdad and addressed Saddam Hussein in the following terms, commiserating with him on his failure to annex the Arab and Muslim state of Kuwait:

"Your Excellency, Mr. President, I greet you in the name of the many thousands of people in Britain who stood against the tide and opposed the war and aggression against Iraq. … I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability."

Now, you can be a flatterer of dictators and murderers and still—just about—be a pacifist, or "anti-war." But here is what Galloway said about the car bombers and beheaders and suicide fanatics of Iraq, again this July 30 at the Al-Assad Library, as broadcast by Syrian state TV and by Al Jazeera the following day. He informed the Arab world:

"Two of your beautiful daughters are in the hands of foreigners—Jerusalem and Baghdad. The foreigners are doing to your daughters as they will. The daughters are crying for help, and the Arab world is silent. Some of them are collaborating with the rape of these two beautiful Arab daughters …"

As for the jihadist and Baathist resisters: They "are writing the
names of their cities and towns in the stars, with 145 military operations every day."

Change only the name, and this is flat-out Bin-Ladenist hysteria. (It also fails to mention the fact that even Saddam Hussein's constitution recognized that Iraq was a state of Arabs and Kurds. There are at least 1 million Kurds in Baghdad alone, and I doubt that the ancestral Jews, Armenians, Greeks, Russians, and Druse of Jerusalem consider themselves members of "the Arab nation.") As for the "operations," they may not amount to 145 per day, but they have included the demolition of the U.N. and Red Cross offices in Baghdad, the deliberate murder of schoolchildren, the video-slaughter of journalists and aid workers, the leveling of Shiite mosques, and the assassination recently of Sheikh Omar Ibrahim al Duleimi, a Sunni cleric who opposes the coalition presence but who urged his followers to vote in the upcoming elections. I might add that the "operations" have also included the killing of hundreds of American soldiers, including Spc. Casey Sheehan, who died in the successful attempt to bring order and water to Sadr City, and over whose graves Galloway invites us to shed the tears of the crocodile—and then to capitulate to the killers. No shame. No shame at all.

There has been a real question as to whether or not Galloway does all these favors to despots for free. A shallow and superficial press has allowed itself to be used as his megaphone and has allowed him to change the subject by means of tirades of abuse that are considered brilliantly apt and witty. At www.hitchensweb.com, you will find a compilation of the hard evidence that he has very good reason to try and change this dangerous subject; you will also find a great deal more chapter and verse about the record and the true opinions of this disgusting figure.

[rrpjr]

For those interested, here is a link to last month's debate between Christopher Hitchens and George Galloway.

http://www.seixon.com/blog/archives/2005/09/galloway_vs_hit.html

[rrpjr]

New evidence today that Galloway committed perjury befroe the US Senate, and that he, his wife and business associate profited from the Oil-for-Food scandal.

http://www.slate.com/id/2128742/?nav=fo

[jyl]

I've never even heard of this person. And I am an American and, by some standards, a leftist. So I'm not sure you can say the American Left was "infatuated" with George whats-his-name.

Sorry Mul, this thread is one of those "straw man" arguments. Where you set up a straw man, pretend it represents your opponent, work up a sweat pummeling the hay out of him, and then declare victory. Meanwhile other people wonder what in the world you are getting so excited about.

[rrpjr]

Jyl: You're lucky.

But Galloway had indeed been a favorite of many leftist intellectuals for a long time before he really lit up the sky like a comet last spring when he publicly tongue-lashed several US Senators, in Senate hearing rooms, over the war in Iraq. It was a spectacular performance (broadcast over C-Span), mostly for his harsh language in the usually rather austere setting, and it made him many new fans who had no previous awareness of his long Leftist pedigree or his shady associations with despots around the world. If he could humiliate Senators like that, what else could he do! Most of the Senators had not heard of him, either, and were obviously unprepared for this former member of Parliament with his blistering Scottish burr and impressive erudition.

As it has turned out, however, he has proved a rather nasty customer. His debate with Christopher Hitchens in September at Baruch College and broadcast over many NPR stations and on C-Span, was probably the moment of his undoing. Many on the far Left were obviously looking for a Galloway knockout of Hitchens, whom they despise for his support of the war. But Hitchens had been following Galloway for years, and dealt with him handily. Galloway, unable to handle the truth about his personal relations with Hussein, Taraq Aziz, Arafat, and his support of the insurgents (all of which I've cited above) called Hitchens a "slug", a "drunkard", etc. Since the debate, Galloway seems to be shrinking. He was going to tour the country with Jane Fonda, but that plan has fizzled.

He was no straw man at all, and one need only look at the glowing tributes he was getting on many of the NPR stations, at least out here. It now seems as if much of what he said before the Senate was a lie.

[creaturecat]

Not an evil commie!
Shady association with despots!

Look familiar?

[Mulhollanddose]

Too Rummy!

[RoninLB]

I saw the C-span debate. They played it a few times. I also saw him with the Senators. They were flabbergasted about his performance. He was rude and disgusting. It was pretty amazing that this guy was/is a leftist hero.

[widebody911]

I'm still not sure where this "leftist hero" tripe comes into play. I can't recall a single previous discussion about this guy. He's not even an American!

I call Shennanigans/Straw Man/Red Herring.

Of course, if you get us arguing about Galloway, we might miss the tidbit about the arrest warrant being issued for Tom Delay

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4358830.stm

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by widebody911
[B]I'm still not sure where this "leftist hero" tripe comes into play. I can't recall a single previous discussion about this guy. He's not even an American!

There IS hope for you Thom (jk)...Galloway is (er, was) the hard-left golden-boy.

[RoninLB]

Galloway was a screaming anti-war, anti-Bush spokesman. I should have been more clear above.

[Mulhollanddose]

[hardflex]

I had never heard of Galloway either, but started watching the Debate to see what Hitchens had to say. Very entertaining stuff, a "BATTLE OF THE TITANS" as Hitchens called it, but Hitchens was thoroughly humbled and beaten.

The thing went about an hour and a half, each had his say, and there was no need for more debates as they would have been redundant.

But don't take my word for it, watch it on Cspan Booknotes if it's shown again, and judge for yourself. Much better than a dry transcript. Whichever side you're on, you won't be sorry.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by hardflex
Very entertaining stuff, a "BATTLE OF THE TITANS" as Hitchens called it, but Hitchens was thoroughly humbled and beaten.

Interesting...I saw Galloway foaming at the mouth (quite in character for him) while lying out his teeth, and Hitchens strategically staying calm and collected while expounding facts. It seemed to have worked in my estimation.