It seemed more to me, Paul, that GG just didn’t know, nor much cared, where the money came from rather than flatly “taking bribes.” Different interpretations, I suppose. :shrug:
Too bad there isn’t a video link for the Hardball show. If it was half as entertaining as The Senate testimony, it should have been some good TV.
Thanks The Tooth, that was excellent stuff.
The difference between Coleman, who basically waffled and did not answer any questions substantively and Galloway’s plain speaking was marked. America really needs politicains like Galloway. President’s Question time wouldn’t be a bad idea either.
Off Topic note: I must say I’m a little miffed that this was moved, I guess I should have put some swearwords into the OP. I didn’t realise it was compulsory to curse in the Pit, I just wanted people to be able to express themselves freely about this subject.
Now it’s stuck in MPSIMS where nobody will go looking for it.
Well I feel I should add some balance …
Now, I believe that the senate thing was a witch hunt – and the cynic in me wonders if there was some favour trading going on, Gorgeous George ain’t one of Blairs favourite people – and I think the GG did a fine job in defending himself. He’s also been investigated for the same things several times and found clean.
Having said all that, I should make something clear: George Galloway is a publicity whore, madder than a sack of cats and all round not the nicest guy on the block. I suspect some of the UK posters have stronger anti-Galloway opinions but are being restrained by where this thread lives at the moment.
I think he was right to go and defend himself, and I think he did a good job, but it was as much of a publicity stunt as anything else and a very sucessful one at that.
Just my 2 pence,
SD
Are they going to call up that Texas oil company that also benefited from “oil for food”?
The Daily Telegraph (UK national newspaper) printed today that the committee actually said they were unable to get the information they wanted on Galloway’s charity.
( I would give a link, but you need to register.)
Maybe, but… Galloway is a very visible, very very vocal opponent of Blair and Bush’s policies re: Iraq and has been for a long time.
If there was any dirt to find, I seriously doubt that the combined resources of No.10, the US administration, the British charity commission and the Daily Telegraph could have failed to turn it up.
At this point, he seems to be enjoying the attention they are giving him by repeating these accusations, he’s already soundly refuted them, so now he’s just using it for publicity, and who can blame him?
This is the statement issued yesterday by the Charity Commission and this is their original report on the subject.
In fairness to Galloway, one can see why his lawyers would have advised that the Appeal didn’t qualify as a charity, but they really ought to have checked this with the Charity Commission. And the Commission has a point when they say that they only exonerated him on the specific allegation they actually investigated.
George danced circles around the senators.
Someone needs to teach those chaps how to debate…and thrust and parry and how to come out the other end not looking like a doofus.
No matter who said what, George came out looking like the superior debater, he wiped the floor with all the senators thrown at him.
The one thing that confuses me is what they thought they’d get out of Galloway.
Did the not know the kind of bulldog that was going to sit in front of them? Did they not know that he’d show them no respect because of their position or office?
Galloway was always going to use this as a way to get his anti-war message across. Why bring a man like that into a committee with no hard evidence other than very suspect documents and statements from men either in US custody or pocket?
Frankly, he could be the biggest rotter around and I would not care.
I hope that the Dems took notes on how to deal with the Opposition.
This is why I liked Dean-he wasn’t afraid to speak his mind. When did we become a nation of wafflers and spin doctors? We used to known for our plain speaking–Truman(or Johnson) would probably be arrested today for their plain speaking.
Isn’t the chimp in chief held up as a honest straight talking kinda guy?
There really should have been a 
in that last post.
It would be interesting if we could put George Galloway into a time machine , transport him back 50 years and see him and Senator MacArthur battle it out in the anti-Communist witch hunts. I bet G.G. would come out tops in that encounter as well !
“Are you or have you ever been a member of the comunist party”
“YES, now fuck off” 
Heh…the reply would probably be more like “Are you now or have you ever read the U.S. Constitution?”
Because they’re idiots? Or maybe because they’ve started to believe their own version of the facts and are not used to getting a stand-up challenge on them.
Frankly I don’t understand why others are criticizing him for using the opportunity as a publicity stunt. As has been pointed out; this committee trashed his name without so much as asking him for an explanation. Why shouldn’t he have the right of reply? Why wouldn’t he use the provided platform to its full extent to answer allegations previously given full prominence?
Yeah that a possibility. Most Dems don’t seem to be up to the job of calling the GOP out on stuff due to fears of them being seen as anti-troops or unpatriotic or other such shite.
Yep. Coleman was on BBC last week saying that Galloway definitely got money. No evidence to that other than the crap we saw yesterday however.
But what about those Food for Oil documents?
dated before the food for oil program was put into effect.
It’s embarrasing how sloppy their case was.