George Galloway faces prosecution in US for perjury

[TAE]

TheIndependent:
Mr Coleman maintains that his evidence is based on bank records, as well as interviews with Tariq Aziz, the former foreign minister and deputy prime minister under Saddam, and with the former vice-president Taha Yasin Ramadan.

Leaving the 'bank records' aside for a moment, are those US senators seriously saying that the words of former top members of Saddam's regime are more trustworthy than those of a serving Member of Parliament?

 

[Pickman's model]

Leaving the 'bank records' aside for a moment, are those US senators seriously saying that the words of former top members of Saddam's regime are more trustworthy than those of a serving Member of Parliament?

why should a "serving member of parliament" be considered trustworthy?

 

[cogg]

why should a "serving member of parliament" be considered trustworthy?

Especially with Galloway's record of praising dictators and then lying about it afterwards.

 

[laptop]

it seems likely to me that the whole thing is part an attempt to put spin on the concept "perjury" and that the Orange One is a mere pawn in this exercise.

George - I'll bet you think this song is about you
Don't you? Don't you?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

The contortions some people will perform to convince themselves that GG ain't a part of the left. Amazing! Why would the US right and the pro-war media here be so obsessed with him if it were not for the fact that he very clearly is one of the most public faces of the anti-war camp.

As for his previous persona. I know for a fact that he was highly regarded by anti-imperialists in Ireland thanks to the support he gave to troops out activity. My first memory of him (a decade or so before Respect was even dreamed of and at a time when as a young cliffite my instincts were to distrust labour lefts) was hearing him speak at a demo outside the brit embassy in Dublin. Seem to remember his speech culminated in the burning of the butchers apron by a group of young republicans. Safe to say he's been consistent on these types of issues.

 

[Sorry.]

In the real world, Galloway is nowhere near any sort of 'leftie' in the way that the term is generally understood. In the years before the SWP started inviting him to speak at their events, no-one took him remotely seriously, and hardly anyone does now expect the usual suspects,

Last I checked, not being a proper leftie wasn't a good reason for "proper lefties" to support him being smeared by the US Senate because of his anti-war profile.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

By many accounts he's not a particularly attractive person close up... but what really opened my eyes was his Senate Committee hearing - it was probably one of the most inspiring things I have ever seen.

Surely nobody here is entertaining this latest round of allegations? This lot in Washington wouldn't know what truth if it bit them on the arse... I automatically assume they are lying...

 

[Pickman's model]

The contortions some people will perform to convince themselves that GG ain't a part of the left. Amazing! Why would the US right and the pro-war media here be so obsessed with him if it were not for the fact that he very clearly is one of the most public faces of the anti-war camp.

er...

what makes you think that the anti-war movement is exclusively left-wing? are you really so fucking stupid as to believe that being anti-war is always a sign of being progressive? there are anti-war bnp members and tories - but then they are (presumably) left-wing to you.

 

[TAE]

why should a "serving member of parliament" be considered trustworthy?

Being an MP in itself does not make a person trustworthy.

I suggest that if I heard evidence from (a) someone who was recently freely elected by a bunch of voters to serve in parliament and evidence from (b) someone who was relatively recently a member of a totalitarian regime, then all else being equal, I would find it more likely that the member of parliament is telling the truth.

Is it not kind of ironic that US senators should take the word of a member of Saddam's regime over the word of a member of the parliament of their closest allie?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

what makes you think that the anti-war movement is exclusively left-wing? are you really so fucking stupid as to believe that being anti-war is always a sign of being progressive? there are anti-war bnp members and tories - but then they are (presumably) left-wing to you.

You are an embarassment to anarchism. Not so say common sense. The arguments of the tories and nazis opposed to the war are racist and isolationist. Like the rest of the left GG's arguments are anti-racist, anti-imperialist and anti-corporate. Can your anti-Respect bile make you that blind to the facts? Can it make you hope that the Senate destroys a notable anti-imperialist purely because of his anti-imperialist profile? Apparently so:

one would hope they'd learnt their lesson after the last time and actually cobbled together something reasonably convincing that he couldn't squirm out of

There are sensible anarchists on here who must cringe when you get going.

 

[Pickman's model]

Being an MP in itself does not make a person trustworthy.

I suggest that if I heard evidence from (a) someone who was recently freely elected by a bunch of voters to serve in a stable democracy and evidence from (b) someone who was relatively recently a member of a totalitarian regime, then all else being equal, I would find it more likely that the member of parliament is telling the truth.

Is it not kind of ironic that US senators should take the word of a member of Saddam's regime over the word of a member of the parliament of their closest allie?

but george galloway thinks tariq aziz is such a top bloike he must be trustworthy. in't it?

 

[TAE]

We're talking about what the senators think.

 

[Pickman's model]

You are an embarassment to anarchism. Not so say common sense. The arguments of the tories and nazis opposed to the war are racist and isolationist. Like the rest of the left GG's arguments are anti-racist, anti-imperialist and anti-corporate. Can your anti-Respect bile make you that blind to the facts? Can it make you hope that the Senate destroys a notable anti-imperialist purely because of his anti-imperialist profile? Apparently so:There are sensible anarchists on here who must cringe when you get going.

if the senate manages to destroy george galloway, i suspect it will be more because they can prove their allegations than anything else. should they be able to substantiate their claims, galloway will be ruined - and rightly so. unless you think that taking money from a dictator is something perfectly acceptable, which is the message i'm getting from you.

it's interesting that you can see a hierarchy of anti-war sentiment. do you apply the same criteria when looking at people opposing the us presence in iraq? put simply - do you support the resistance - all the resistance - to the yankee imperialists in iraq?

 

[cockneyrebel]

Agree with what BB and butchers have said on this thread.

The history of the CIA shows the USA have made stuff up again and again to take people down.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

if the senate manages to destroy george galloway, i suspect it will be more because they can prove their allegations than anything else. should they be able to substantiate their claims, galloway will be ruined - and rightly so. unless you think that taking money from a dictator is something perfectly acceptable, which is the message i'm getting from you.

So you side with the US Senate then? This is the message I'm getting from you.

 

[Pickman's model]

Agree with what BB and butchers have said on this thread.

good.

 

[Pickman's model]

So you side with the US Senate then? This is the message I'm getting from you.

if i'm wrong i'll send galloway a nice card saying so. but i feel that after the humiliation the senate committee received they would be ill-advised to proceed with any further proceedings against galloway unless they have some killer facts. if it turns out that they are wrong, they'll look fucking foolish. if they're right, i hope that people like bolshiebhoy reconsider their support of galloway - unless taking funds from genocidal dictators goes down well in the putrid company they keep.

 

[Epicurus]

I hold no brief for Galloway but I think I’ll wait before I pass judgement as I distrust both sides equally.

My understanding of the story is that Galloway has said “I’ll go back again and prove my innocents”, the money that is meant to have come from the oil for food programme he says is money paid to his wife for research into the connection between Uranium dust and cancer; so it should be easy to prove.

Why if the yanks are so sure is there no firm evidence produced, it not as if they are unable to have what they like published the yanks have many friends amongst the press and have planted stories in the past that have been shown to be untrue.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

but george galloway thinks tariq aziz is such a top bloike he must be trustworthy. in't it?

This is a slightly skew-wiff rendering of Galloway's opinion, though not unusually so by Model standards.

if i'm wrong i'll send galloway a nice card saying so.

I am inclined to speculate as to the nature of the proposed card.

 

[Pickman's model]

This is a slightly skew-wiff rendering of Galloway's opinion, though not unusually so by Model standards.

On Al-Jazeera, Mr Galloway backed an international petition calling for Aziz's release.

"Mr Tariq Aziz and thousands of political prisoners are still held illegally as hostages by the occupation authorities," he said. "He is viewed with high esteem worldwide by ... international figures who have valued his counsel, met him, discussed and negotiated with him."

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/17987811?source=Evening Standard

and, of course, some international figures have liked him enough to spend xmas with him...

I am inclined to speculate as to the nature of the proposed card.

speculate away!

 

[Pickman's model]

it's quite crafty for the senate committee to wait till social worker's - most likely - gone to press before releasing this story to the world's press.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

if i'm wrong i'll send galloway a nice card saying so. but i feel that after the humiliation the senate committee received they would be ill-advised to proceed with any further proceedings against galloway unless they have some killer facts. if it turns out that they are wrong, they'll look fucking foolish. if they're right, i hope that people like bolshiebhoy reconsider their support of galloway - unless taking funds from genocidal dictators goes down well in the putrid company they keep.

One would have thought that they would have thought that the first time, only they didn't, and they looked fucking foolish.

I expect that they are hoping that he will simply avoid the country, letting them say what they like about him and thus destroying what credibility he has - and damaging the anti-war movement - in the States (it's not like they care what anyone thinks in other countries).

 

[butchersapron]

I expect that they are hoping that he will simply avoid the country, letting them say what they like about him and thus destroying what credibility he has - and damaging the anti-war movement - in the States (it's not like they care what anyone thinks in other countries).

That's precisely it - they're looking to convict him but trying to scare him away from coming 'to court' to disprove their allegations - it's a very old trick, one that the powerful have often used down the years...

 

[bolshiebhoy]

it's quite crafty for the senate committee to wait till social worker's - most likely - gone to press before releasing this story to the world's press.

Your admiration for the senate just grows and grows. Though I think you might be over-estimating the importance of SW.

 

[Pickman's model]

it seems that the senate will proceed against gg, according to the bbc news.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Maybe their egos were bruised after the first arse kicking he gave them, so they want to try and even the score.....

 

[X-77]

The 2000th US soldier will be killed anytime now as a result of a pointless, criminal invasion, what better day to pick to elevate the USG's favourite 'baddie' Galloway to the top of the news, eh?

Oct 25, 2005 — BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Two U.S. Marines were killed in Iraq when their vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb, the military said on Tuesday, pushing the total U.S. military death toll since the 2003 invasion to 1,999.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1247686

 

[X-77]

toll of US soldiers killed has now climbed over 2000, the very same day as Galloway is accused again:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051025/ts_afp/iraq_051025110145

Just reading the DU thread on this subject - entertaining reading as always. They are all sticking up for him and slagging Coleman....apart from this funny guy anyway:

Spooked-up Galloway to be distraction?
Galloway's 'political adviser', Asad Rehman, did 10 years with the MI6 front 'Amnesty International'.

His fellow-founder of 'Respect', Yvonne Ridley, has a history of cooperation with spook disinformationist Gordon Thomas. She also got caught illegally crossing a border in Afghanistan. Held captive by the Taliban, so they say...and then freed.

Who do you think Galloway was reporting to when he got back from Baghdad? And what would be the point of going, if he wasn't reporting to anyone?

He's about as spooked-up as it's possible to be.

It may seem 'normal' for a British politician to get involved in US political business. It isn't. Tell me one other example of a Brit politician who has done so.

Galloway doesn't have to answer questions in any American investigation or hearings.

He is all about image.

I believe he has been given the task of playing a DISTRACTION role when the Fitzgerald indictments come...

If I'm right, we'll be hearing a lot more of him in the next few days.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/
discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2179848#2179862

 

[123bpm]

MI6 front 'Amnesty International'.

The funniest 4 words I have read in a long time.

 

[Fullyplumped]

Denis MacShane has called for a joint committee of the Commons and the US Congress to investigate the claims against George Galloway.

Speaking on the floor of the Commons, Mr MacShane said he could not comment on the allegations that were published by the Senate sub-committee on Monday. He said Mr Galloway "employs very expensive libel lawyers to stop any press investigation into his role as Lord Haw-Haw for one of the worst tyrants in the world's history, responsible for killing more Muslims than anybody else in the history of that religion. Still, we do need a joint Congress and Commons committee of inquiry to settle the truth once and for all. "Because if any of the allegations of financial receipt are true, it is not just the honourable member's reputation that is at stake. It's the reputation of this House, if it does not deal with it."

Mr Galloway was not in the Commons to hear himself compared to Lord Haw-Haw, the nickname given to the infamous Nazi propagandist and convicted traitor William Joyce who was hanged in 1946.​

They're taking this awfully seriously, aren't they?