Galloway says killing of Blair "justified"

[Azrael]

I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I made some moments ago. (post #11)

I'm not in the mood to fuck around with daft semantic distinctions. Both war and murder are, unquestionably, violence, and the state claims a monopoly on one while vigorously prosecuting the other. The lines between them are drawn by the masters of war and are often arbitary.

 

[bluestreak]

heh, i agree with galloway too. blair's actions have condemned thousands to needless death and injury. it would be neither unexpected nor, i dare to say it, undeserved, should someone decide to bomb the bastard.

i'd do it myself, but i don't believe in using violence except in self-defence.

 

[liampreston]

Damn, must have missed the Lib Dems announcing their support for total disarmament and disbandment of our armed forces!

I think we all know the context in which Ming is talking with that quote. And I am in full agreement with him.

 

[liampreston]

watch this space for the 'police to investigate Galloway's bomber remarks' headline...

If it's within the boundaries of the law then perhaps an investigation should be made. Being on the fringes of the political spectrum does not give anyone a wing of steel against feedback to statements such as these.

 

[Azrael]

I think we all know the context in which Ming is talking with that quote. And I am in full agreement with him.

I know what context he was trying to speak in, but he made himself look an utter cock by not being specific.

Even if he had been, a vigorous supporter of state violence getting sniffy about personal violence is a joke.

 

[Azrael]

If it's within the boundaries of the law then perhaps an investigation should be made. Being on the fringes of the political spectrum does not give anyone a wing of steel against feedback to statements such as these.

It's not. He no doubt spoke to his lawyers and covered his own arse by framing it as an abstract moral argument. Clearly saying he doesn't literally want exploding mullahs to visit Downing Street is more than enough to get him off.

 

[jiggajagga]

I'd dance all night if someone was to blow up that fucker Blair, and I don't think I'd be alone!

I agree Yos!

It would be very interesting if a private poll was done on urban to see just how 'outrageous' Galloways statement is...Anybody?

 

[X-77]

I think we all know the context in which Ming is talking with that quote. And I am in full agreement with him.

you mean the context in which he condems violence against warmongers but supports it fully when it's just the thousands of nobodies who are going to be at the other end of it in an all-out war which uses some of the most deadliest weapons known to man?

It's just remarkable how some people here justify warped actions to themselves - actually it's pretty scary.

 

[X-77]

I agree Yos!

It would be very interesting if a private poll was done on urban to see just how 'outrageous' Galloways statement is...Anybody?

yay, do a poll!

 

[JoePolitix]

So more bullshit and counterproductive retoric from comrade Galloway. Nice one.

And maybe instead of swanning about on Cuban state tv comrade Galloway could have been in Parliament to vote against Blair's new appalling Education Bill?

What a waste of space.

 

[liampreston]

So more bullshit and counterproductive retoric from comrade Galloway. Nice one.

And maybe instead of swanning about on Cuban state tv comrade Galloway could have been in Parliament to vote against Blair's new appalling Education Bill?

What a waste of space.

In full agreement here too. I saw the appalling display on television last night, and wondered not just what Galloway thought he was doing not turning up to vote against the Bill, but who within his constituency of Bethnal Green & Bow had asked their elected representative to go there.

 

[Hanoipete]

i think he's spot on. the only language people like blair understands is violence.

good to see the usual `leftys` who are straight out proving how they are more `left` than someone else on the `left`. its a specialised kind of piety that one.

 

[Kaka Tim]

Wahtever you think of GG (I dont think a great deal) hes absolutely right.

Unfortuneately the jihadis dont target those actually responsible for mass murder, but instead massacre ordinary working class people on tube trains and in night clubs.

Al Q - bush - blair; peas in the same bloody pod as far as Im concerned.

 

[X-77]

Wahtever you think of GG (I dont think a great deal) hes absolutely right.

Unfortuneately the jihadis dont target those actually responsible for mass murder

how easy do you think it would be, realistically, to get up close and personal with Tony Blair or Dubya if you were a suicide bomber?

 

[X-77]

from the beeb:

But Mr Galloway said he would not support an attack and would tell the authorities if he knew of any plot.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5020222.stm

not quite so controversial as some of the media would have us believe after all...

 

[liampreston]

i think he's spot on. the only language people like blair understands is violence.

good to see the usual `leftys` who are straight out proving how they are more `left` than someone else on the `left`. its a specialised kind of piety that one.

I am not preening or showing off - I am acting, as Galloway appears to be doing - out of my natural and genuine belief. I don't even think of myself as being as far left as some on this forum.

 

[articul8]

Galloway's remarks are a stupid, fatuous piece of craven attention seeking from a stupid, fatuous craven attention seeker.

 

[X-77]

Galloway's remarks are a stupid, fatuous piece of craven attention seeking from a stupid, fatuous craven attention seeker.

well it's not like he just got up on some platform and made some random announcement for the hell of it - he was asked the question in a magazine interview and the media have predictably jumped all over it. Still, don't want to miss a chance to bad mouth Galloway, eh?

 

[Kaka Tim]

Galloway's remarks are a stupid, fatuous piece of craven attention seeking from a stupid, fatuous craven attention seeker.

I'll give you attention seeking - but in what way is he wrong?

I dont remember anyone throwing their hands up in horror at repeated attempts by the US air force to assassinate Saddam Hussien, or the IDF's and US armys regular use of targeted strikes against individuals in Palastine. Iraq and Afghanistan.

Or is it only OK to murder brown skinned terrorists and not white skinned terrorists in suits?

Seems theres quite a few people here who have no problem with murder, as long as its our boys doing the killing.

 

[Fez909]

I agree with Golloway. It'd just be another act of the war. That's the risk you take when you start a war.

I didn't see anybody in the press frothing over the repeated targetting of Saddam Hussain whenever the coalition got wind of where he was meant to be. How many times did we hear, "...but Saddam was believed to have fled minutes before"? "Minutes before" the whole place was blown to shit, and damn any innocents who happen to be around (unlike the situation posed to GG).

Why would the UK expect anything less in retaliation from the Iraqis?

 

[X-77]

Seems theres quite a few people here who have no problem with murder, as long as its our boys doing the killing.

it's racism, pure and simple. Iraqi lives mean fuck all to some cretins on this site.

 

[Fez909]

*read's Fez's mind. Posts it before he can.*

 

[chupucabras]

While I agree that if someone were to assassinate Blair, it would morally be no worse (probably even 'less worse') than Blair's part in the Iraq war, I don't think it was a very sensible thing for Galloway to say... I mean, he must have realised that the media would completely overreact, and to me that makes the whole thing seem a bit counter productive.

That quote from Sir Menzies Campbell was a classic though:

"No politician, ever, by act, word, or deed either expressly or by implication, should give any support to the notion that violence might be justified."

Which is exactly what Galloway is criticising Blair for... he's just chosen a way to do it that seems at best misguided.

Dan

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Galloway needs to get himself some training in dealing with the media. He fell for a leading question and answered it as a hypothetical situation much as you might speak in a private meeting among trusted friends. That he responded to a follow up question with an expression of surprise saying "This is a moral maze" (as reported on BBC site) shows that he was ticking over in neutral. He should be much more careful, his opponents are not only in Parliament but in the media itself.

 

[audiotech]

Most of what Galloway's say's is going to be distorted and twisted to suit the establishments agenda. They'll make things up as well.

 

[articul8]

Most of what Galloway's say's is going to be distorted and twisted to suit the establishments agenda. They'll make things up as well.

But GG gives them such an easy ride with this stuff.

If he's not intending to justify or promote an actual attempt on Blair's life (and of course I accept that he's not), what is the point of declaring some abstract moral equivalence?

Just meaningless provocation to get his name plastered across the papers.

 

[Kaka Tim]

If he's not intending to justify or promote an actual attempt on Blair's life (and of course I accept that he's not), what is the point of declaring some abstract moral equivalence?

.

er .. to make the point that Blair and co are just as much murdering scum as the peope they regularly froth at the mouth about.

good point well made by the perma-tanned bloke representing Bethnal Green IMHO. We need more people telling it like it is. Not craven treading on eggshells becasue the big bad media are going to make a song and dance.

 

[articul8]

Actually Galloway's interview does raise some useful criticism of suicide bombing as a tactic (and in saying he would shop such an individual to the authorities he has gone much further than his friends in the SWP who refuse to 'condemn' individual acts of terror).

But far from 'making the point' about Blair's actions, talk of his assasination being 'morally justified' - whilst it might delight the rrrrr-revolutionary ultra left - would only push the majority of people into supporting their 'own' side.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

So Galloway is attacked for saying that someone might claim it was justified to assassinate Blair because of his actions in Iraq, while pointing out that personally he would be opposed to such an assassination?

Meanwhile Galloway is visiting Castro

... a head of state who has actually been the target of a range of assassination attempts by the Government of USA according to definitive official documents:

This document, "CIA Inspector General's Report on Plots to Assassinate Fidel Castro," was approved for release in 1993 under the CIA Historical Review Program. The report describes the various capers the CIA engaged in during their attempts to "eliminate" Fidel Castro. From shellfish toxin to exploding conch shell, almost every spy-vs.-spy gag imaginable was considered by the CIA.
http://www.parascope.com/mx/articles/castroreport.htm

... while Blair visits his partner in crime, George W Bush ... head of the state responsible for that attempt to assassinate another head of state:

Bush and Blair's brotherly bond
By John Pienaar
Chief political correspondent for BBC Radio Five Live, in Washington

The empathy between the two men was evident

There was a moment, as George Bush watched Tony Blair fielding questions on Iraq, when the president's eyes actually seemed to be shining with affection and respect.

Of course, it may have been a trick of the harsh television lights. But the sense of empathy between the two leaders was almost tangible - more striking than at any of their previous meetings in Washington, London or anywhere else.

It was there in the spectacle of the president and the prime minister almost competing to assert their faith in their Iraq policy - and the need to maintain the coalition presence until Iraqi forces were capable of policing their own country.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5018662.stm

But Ming Campbell condemns Galloway, not Blair ...

"No politician, ever, by act, word, or deed either expressly or by implication, should give any support to the notion that violence might be justified."

It's a funny old world ...

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Did this prick really say this! Good grief - I bet it's uncritically quoted in the papers.

Who Ming or L+L?