I don't like George Galloway but ...

[JWH]

What you've posted there is a list of US government officials who used to work for big business but now work for the government, and ex-President George Bush who now owns a bit of Carlyle Group, which owns a bit of Qinetic (and other military-industrial enterprises), which has benefitted from the Iraq occupation.

So let's hear about these "leading government officials" that have personally benefitted - in cash, not conceptually or politically - in the same or similar way that Galloway is supposed to have done. You said there were loads, right?

I'm quite prepared to believe that Bush + other US govt officials have made money off the sanctions and war at the same time as Galloway - I'd just like to see proof. (Or, in fact, any detailed allegations beyond "yeah, but they must have " ).

LOL: you prune! Look at the date on that article - it was published 3 weeks before the US/UK invasion of Iraq even began!

 

[X-77]

LOL: you prune! Look at the date on that article - it was published 3 weeks before the US/UK invasion of Iraq even began!

which makes it even more valid and insightful as these are the exact same companies that went on to get the lucrative contracts once the invasion was over.

So do you honestly believe certain govt figures have not benefitted financially then despite their close ties with these companies as has been mentioned on this thread - surely you can read between the (pretty obvious) lines?

 

[STFC]

Still looking for more STFC?

Yep. You haven't named any yet.

This is what you said

 

[JWH]

which makes it even more valid and insightful as these are the exact same companies that went on to get the lucrative contracts once the invasion was over.

So do you honestly believe certain govt figures have not benefitted financially then despite their close ties with these companies as has been mentioned on this thread - surely you can read between the (pretty obvious) lines?

X-77: what's so difficult about this? Let's hear some concrete accusations, names, suggestions about these "leading govt officials in america [who] made [money] from the invasion and before it." I've already said that I'm perfectly willing to believe that they made money corruptly from the sanctions, invasion and occupation. Let's see some evidence - or even just some wild scurrilous accusations to pass the time (or links to them - this is a UK website under UK defamation law). Surely that isn't too difficult?

edit: cos missing words

 

[lostexpectation]

according too who

in several interviews later in the week galloway said that at the same time reports from Coleman and the UN that Georgie had taken money/oil from Saddams regime based on Tariq Aziz testimony, Mr Aziz lawyers maade statements the Tariq Aziz never said anything a bout Galloway

"Mr Galloway was accused of pocketing money in two separate reports this week, both citing former Iraqi deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz as a source.

US Republican Senator Norm Coleman used interviews with Aziz as evidence that Saddam's regime granted 23 million barrels of oil to Mr Galloway and his Mariam Appeal fund.

But French lawyers representing Aziz told Mr Galloway in Paris yesterday that Aziz never made a statement incriminating him."

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/world/Full_Story/did-sgj8W0O-6Ao2c.asp

 

[Japey]

Surely he gets it from his pad in Portugal?

Edit: he's like a leftie Kilroy, isn't he?

They're both labourites who proved to be too rebellious for the party. Neither can be easily categorised as left or right - they both prefer to follow their own agendas, but have very poor judgement as to what that should be.

There's an good article about galloway here http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1602423,00.html - a socialist who loves splashing out; he frequently uses 'trot' as an insult and yet gets most of his activists from a trotskyist party; a catholic who prefers to target muslims; a "freedom fighter" with a weakness for dictators...

 

[X-77]

X-77: what's so difficult about this? Let's hear some concrete accusations, names, suggestions about these "leading govt officials in america [who] made [money] from the invasion and before it."

sorry, whose quote is this?

Edit to say: not that I am doubting it but I don't think I said it?

 

[JWH]

Diego said it, you came in to back him up.

 

[diego]

Yep. You haven't named any yet.

This is what you said

Just to keep you happy,

most of the people I had in mind are on this link originally posted by X-77,


http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2005/stories/20030314006302400.htm

hope this satisfies. BTW I don't suppose you could name any could you?

 

[JWH]

Diego - you can't quote an article that was written before the invasion to demonstrate something that was supposed to happen during/after the invasion (unless it was written by Mystic Meg).

 

[phildwyer]

I think he's brilliant. Any effective critic of Blair and his war is OK by me. What's to dislike about him?

 

[JWH]

In what way is he an effective critic of Blair? Aren't the Hussein links and apologism fairly reprehensible?

 

[nino_savatte]

I think he's brilliant. Any effective critic of Blair and his war is OK by me. What's to dislike about him?

He's slippery as an eel and he spends most of his time away from his constituents. Apart from that (as I said earlier) he may be a cunt but he's our cunt.

 

[Streathamite]

I think he's brilliant. Any effective critic of Blair and his war is OK by me. What's to dislike about him?

his new party is the ultimate in opportunism, he's a pro-lifer, and has many other dodgy aspects.
plus;"I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability"

 

[oisleep]

Apart from that (as I said earlier) he may be a cunt but he's our cunt.

in that case i hope we soon develop a nasty case of thrush

 

[nino_savatte]

in that case i hope we soon develop a nasty case of thrush

 

[flimsier]

"I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability"

If I remember rightly, you accepted that this was out of context. It has never been shown, afaik, in it's full context. Yet you bring it up about a year later.

 

[oisleep]

any time i address a national people, i always start by calling them sir, it's the collective noun for a people, everyone in respect knows that

 

[butchersapron]

So why hasn't the exonerating footage from before and after that clip ever been shown by GG and his supporters either? If it so clearly removes all doubt? You're doing exactly what you're claiming that RJ is doing, but basing it on the word of GG himself. Who of course has no personal interest in giving that impression does he?

 

[Streathamite]

If I remember rightly, you accepted that this was out of context. It has never been shown, afaik, in it's full context. Yet you bring it up about a year later.

ummm...I didn't, not as you put it. it's a long way back, but IIRC I said 'that may be correct', wouldn't rule it out etc. Like BA said - let's see the clip to settle it. We'd need that becase GG is a slippery little fucker

 

[butchersapron]

ummm...I didn't, not as you put it. it's a long way back, but IIRC I said 'that may be correct', wouldn't rule it out etc. Like BA said - let's see the clip to settle it. We'd need that becase GG is a slippery little fucker

You'd think that if it was so clear from the rest of the footage he'd have made some effort to get hold of and then show it over the last 10 or so years, i mean, this would effectively remove the single largest political weapon used against him. And given that GG himself used to film and hold the rights to his and others meeting with Saddam (see the half million he made from Tony Benn's interview with same) i would have thought he was in a uniquely good position to do this.

 

[Streathamite]

(see the half million he made from Tony Benn's interview with same)

blimey! didn't know that.
agree with whole of rest you said. Some candid friend must have said "george, your assertions don't cut it, mate, you come across as too, well, dodgy, (we're talking used-car-salesman here) you NEED proof" -and given as you say, he films so much (now that I DO agree with, as a sensible stratagem), well....hmm...
to flimsier ; c'mon flim, I've said I'm open-minded on this. I agree galloway has enough of a record of winning these sorta battles - so, umm....?

 

[flimsier]

So why hasn't the exonerating footage from before and after that clip ever been shown by GG and his supporters either? If it so clearly removes all doubt? You're doing exactly what you're claiming that RJ is doing, but basing it on the word of GG himself. Who of course has no personal interest in giving that impression does he?

I don't believe I am. The clip is shown out of context was the reply from GG. I don't presume he owns the tape footage (though I don't know and it's not a relevant point) but if you're accusing someone of sucking up to a dictator, the burden of proof is not with the person you're accusing, surely.

Besides, Jezza iirc has said that he agrees that it seemed out of context, I think in replying to belboid.

 

[flimsier]

Oh, there's already been a reply to most of my points. I typed it and was then called away to a meeting. Got back and hit 'post' and got superceded, or whatever.

The point stands though. It's a weapon they use using their tapes. I don't think it's actually a very useful weapon any longer. I think the last time this was discussed someone said that Galloway admitted he hadn't been very clever in his choice of words, but no-one has ever contradicted his explanation. Just kept resurrecting the original charge, a bit like Jezza did here.

 

[oisleep]

so, was it taking out of context or had he just not been very clever, can't be both surely?

 

[flimsier]

so, was it taking out of context or had he just not been very clever, can't be both surely?

Why not?

 

[oisleep]

well if the claim from GG is that it was taken out of context, then the implication is that he had meant to say everything he had said, just the context it was shown in made it out to be something different, if he had just not been very clever in what he'd said, and this is his admission, then the context argument is redundant

 

[flimsier]

I don't accept any of your conclusions of a quote being taken out of context.

I believe it was out of context. It certainly wasn't a very clever thing to say whether it was or wasn't taken out of context - as illustrated by the way it's been used by his opponents over the years.

 

[Streathamite]

Besides, Jezza iirc has said that he agrees that it seemed out of context, I think in replying to belboid.

No I did NOT; I said, in effect (and I agree that both our memories are fallible to errors, given a gap of 1yr+ between then and now), that I wouldn't put it past his enemies/the meejah, that it "may be the case", that I was/am open to presuasion/convincing, given proof. c'mon, you're doing to me what you're saying I did to The 'Tached One! (as BA said) not on....

y'also said;

if you're accusing someone of sucking up to a dictator, the burden of proof is not with the person you're accusing, surely.

agreed if this was a court of law sitch, but it's not. You'd think common sense would tell GG that it's overwhelmingly in his interest to clean his slate, on this one...

 

[oisleep]

I believe it was out of context.

fine, but surely it makes no difference as you then say....

It certainly wasn't a very clever thing to say whether it was or wasn't taken out of context