Galloway unloads with both barrels at US senators

[Hurin_Rules]

It's all over the American news. I'm just getting up to speed on this guy, but his testimony was fascinating:


British lawmaker blasts U.S. on Iraq allegations
'Mother of all smokescreens,' he says of claims he got oil vouchers
GALLOWAY
Kevin Wolf / AP

MSNBC News Services
Updated: 12:09 p.m. ET May 17, 2005

WASHINGTON - Ripping into the Bush administration and a senator who called a hearing on the Iraq oil-for-food scandal, British lawmaker George Galloway rejected charges he profited from the U.N.-sanctioned program and called the allegations "the mother of all smokescreens."

“I am not now, nor have I ever been, an oil trader, and neither has anyone on my behalf,” he told the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations as he began refuting the committee’s accusations that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein gave him credits to export Iraqi oil.

“I have never seen a barrel of oil, owned one, bought one, sold one, and neither has anybody on my behalf,” Galloway said, claiming that the documents the Senate subcommittee relied on had been forged and were proven as such in Britain.

Senator called 'cavalier'
Addressing the Republican chairman of the committee, Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota, he added: “Now I know that standards have slipped over the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer, you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice.”

Galloway was a witness before the committee that is examining how Saddam used oil to reward politicians, particularly from Russia, France and Britain, under the United Nations oil-for-food program.

He called the Bush administration's reasons for going to war in Iraq "a pack of lies" and said investigators should instead focus on U.S. companies that dealt with Saddam. "The real sanctions busters were your own companies," he told senators.

Galloway, a maverick kicked out of the British Labour Party for his fervent opposition to the Iraq war and for personal attacks on Prime Minister Tony Blair, has dismissed allegations by the committee that he benefited from the program.

The committee last week released documents it said showed Saddam gave Galloway the rights to export 20 million barrels of oil under the defunct humanitarian program.

'Republican lynch mob'
Pursued by a crowd of British journalists, Galloway arrived at the hearing just minutes before it began reviewing testimony.

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

He earlier told Reuters that he had "no expectation of justice from a group of Christian fundamentalist and Zionist activists under the chairmanship of a neocon (President) George Bush who is pro-war.”

“I come not as the accused but as the accuser,” he added.

“It’s Mr. Coleman who’s been all over the news and he’s a lick-spittle, crazed neocon who is engaged in a witch hunt against all those he perceives to have betrayed the United States in their plan to invade and occupy Iraq,” Galloway told Associated Press Television News.

“I’m not going there to change the minds of the committee, but to appeal to public opinion and to show just how absurd this report is,” he said. “Justice George Bush style ... is what I expect from the rightwing hawks in Washington.”

Former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua, now a French senator, also was named in the Senate report, which said he got vouchers for 11 million barrels. Pasqua, who also angrily denied the allegations, will not be at the hearing.

The U.N. oil-for-food program, which began in late 1996 and ended in 2003, was aimed at easing the impact of sanctions imposed after Saddam’s troops invaded Kuwait in 1990.

Baghdad was allowed to sell oil to buy basic goods and could negotiate its own contracts, but the program has been dogged by allegations of massive fraud and charges Saddam used it to buy influence in the West.

Russian allegations
Coleman said Tuesday’s hearing would also give details about the massive volume of Iraqi oil allocations to Russia’s presidential council, which advises President Vladimir Putin.

A Senate report released Monday said Saddam’s government provided Putin’s former chief of staff, Alexander Voloshin, and the council with oil rights worth nearly $3 million in exchange for support to lift U.N. sanctions against Iraq imposed in August 1990 after Baghdad’s troops invaded Kuwait.

Senate investigators said there was no evidence that Putin knew of the payments.

The committee also said 75 million barrels of oil were allocated to Vladimir Zhirinovsky, an ultranationalist Russian parliamentarian who made frequent visits to Iraq, or his political party.

U.S. looked other way?
In both cases, the Houston-based firm Bayoil Inc. or its subsidiaries helped arrange transport and contracts to sell the oil in the United States and elsewhere, according to the report, which was released by the minority Democrats on Coleman’s subcommittee.

The new document studied two issues: Bayoil’s involvement in oil-for-food and a single instance that saw Saddam’s regime smuggle more than 7 million barrels of oil out of the Iraqi port of Khor al-Amaya, apparently with U.S. knowledge, in the weeks before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

Democrats on the committee said the report suggested that Washington looked the other way as Bayoil bought Iraqi crude and sold it to American refineries.

“We’ve got to look in the mirror at ourselves as well as point fingers at others,” Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., told reporters.

The report found that Bayoil imported some 200 million barrels over two years starting in September 2000 and sold it to U.S. oil companies. That was at a time when Saddam was trying to tinker with the price of oil so that when he sold it, companies could be compelled to pay him kickbacks.

The report claimed that Bayoil paid “directly or indirectly” some $37 million in kickbacks to Saddam even at a time that the United States and other members of the council had realized what Saddam was doing and began ordering price hikes to quash the kickbacks scheme.

Bayoil then sold the crude to U.S. companies, though there is no evidence the companies knew about the kickbacks, the report said.

Bayoil USA owner David Chalmers’ lawyer could not immediately be located for comment late Monday. The report said Bayoil officials had refused to cooperate with the investigation. But Chalmers himself has denied wrongdoing in court.

U.S. office cited
The committee singled out the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control, which the United Nations repeatedly warned about Bayoil’s scheme. It cited an apparent misunderstanding in which U.S. authorities assumed the United Nations would monitor individual companies, while at the United Nations, oil-for-food officials thought that was the responsibility of national governments.

The report’s focus on the single instance of oil smuggling, through Khor al-Amaya, was meant to illustrate how Saddam sold oil outside oil-for-food.

The committee cited an October report by U.S. arms inspector Charles Duelfer saying that while Saddam pocketed more than $225 million illegally under oil-for-food, he made some $8 billion in illegal oil sales outside the program.

Many of the allegations made by Coleman’s subcommittee are not new. In April, for example, Chalmers was indicted in U.S. District Court for allegedly funneling kickbacks to Saddam. Chalmers has denied any wrongdoing.

But rarely had the allegations been spelled out with so much detail or scope. Coleman’s investigators have interviewed former top Iraqi officials and businessmen, who provided a behind-the-scenes look at how Saddam’s grand scheme worked.
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7883488/page/2/

P.S. I know there's a thread on oil-for-food; lets try to keep this about Galloway and his testimony and performance.

[Duke Malcolm]

God save Gorgeous George. He was born here, you know. Went to my school. These silly 'mericans... George didnae dae a thing.

[Proletariat]

Saddam's bulldog really light them up. Only got to hear bits and pieces in the clinic, but sounded like a doozy.

Did anyone catch the rejoinder(s)?

[Duke Malcolm]

Saddam's bulldog really light them up. Only got to hear bits and pieces in the clinic, but sounded like a doozy.

Did anyone catch the rejoinder(s)?

Doozy? Gorgeous George isna doozy. A little glaikit, but he isna doozy. Especially since he didn't sell any oil

[Proletariat]

Doozy? Gorgeous George isna doozy.

Erm, it's an American (apparently) expression meaning he did a 'number' on them.
Great speaker, even though I think he's a scumbag.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

“I am not now, nor have I ever been, an oil trader, and neither has anyone on my behalf,”


The committee last week released documents it said showed Saddam gave Galloway the rights to export 20 million barrels of oil under the defunct humanitarian program.

I beleive this is how the scam works is it not? The Russians are said to have recieved these type of rights yet no oil was ever shipped there either.

[Adrian II]

I loved the whole fourty-five minutes of it. Let's be fair, Galloway gave those schoolboys a whupping, very impressive. Why did Labour ever let him go? If only Tony had had half the brain, wit and guts of this gentleman.
:bow:

[Adrian II]

I beleive this is how the scam works is it not?LOL! That's right, and after today that whole Committee looks like a scam to me.

[Duke Malcolm]

Erm, it's an American (apparently) expression meaning he did a 'number' on them.
Great speaker, even though I think he's a scumbag.

Sorry, I thought it was dozy, as in stupid, and that. And he certainly ain't a scumbag, he's my comrade Gorgeous George (Gorgeous being his title, not how he looks, cause to me he seems a bit hackit). Vive le George! He didn't do it!

[Proletariat]

Sorry, I thought it was dozy, as in stupid, and that. And he certainly ain't a scumbag, he's my comrade Gorgeous George (Gorgeous being his title, not how he looks, cause to me he seems a bit hackit). Vive le George! He didn't do it!

Your turn to help me. 'Hackit', you say?

[Ser Clegane]

The Russians are said to have recieved these type of rights yet no oil was ever shipped there either.

I guess that's why he talked about trading.

Trading of oil does not require him to be involved in any shipping.

[Duke Malcolm]

Your turn to help me. 'Hackit', you say?

Scots/Doric word - Ugly, not nice looking, repulsive, et cetera

[Hurin_Rules]

Those articles didn't even do full justice to his testimony. They showed some clips on CNN. He turned the tables by saying he told them that Iraq had no WMDs and no links to al qaeda, that the case for war was lies, etc. etc. He was a very striking speaker.

[Adrian II]

Sorry, I thought it was dozy, as in stupid, and that. And he certainly ain't a scumbag, he's my comrade Gorgeous George (Gorgeous being his title, not how he looks, cause to me he seems a bit hackit). Vive le George! He didn't do it!In his own words: he did better than that. LOL. He punched a hole the size of a oil-rig in that Committee. If this is the best they can do, forged documents 'n all, I'll be looking at their 'evidence' from a whole different angle from now on.

[Proletariat]

Why would his testimony change the way you look at their evidence? Did he prove his claims? Do you know now for a fact that these documents are fake because he said so?

Not quite sure why this is an 'eye opener' for someone with your position on Iraq.

[English assassin]

He's as bent as a nine bob note, obviously, but you have to get up VERY early in the morning to have a chance against Gorgeous in full rhetorical flow.

Apart from a nifty line in oratory, and the fact that he is by no stretch of the imagination a fool, he also has the advantage that he's willing to deny absolutely everything. He won a big libel action over here recently when a paper published the fact that documents had been found in Baghdad detailing payments made to him by the regime. The fact that the documents were found was not denied, nor did Gorgeous claim that the paper had made them up, but somehow he still won.


Why did Labour ever let him go?

Because he's a nutter and a crook. Oh, hang on, I see your point.

[Duke Malcolm]

He won because they were proven to have been forged

[Adrian II]

Not quite sure why this is an 'eye opener' for someone with your position on Iraq.I tend to follow U.S. Congressional investigations, but after today I'm going to take a new look at some issues, particularly oil-for-food. I'd be interested to know where exactly this Committee gets its information; they're pretty secretive about that. Would it be from the same crooks of the INC who provided Powell with the fake material for his UN Security Council briefing on Iraq?

[Duke Malcolm]

Just saw his great oration on the BBC. It was marvellous.

[BDC]

He's an idiot, but you need people like him. It's a good job he got in.

I think he could have used a bit more discresion when dealing with murdering dictators though.

[Adrian II]

Because he's a nutter and a crook. Oh, hang on, I see your point.Well, today the nut was on the other tree. Did you hear what they 'had' on him? This man was all over Iraq and the Middle East for twelve years, and all they had was one document of unsubstantiated authenticity in which one of his Iraqi associates apparently mentioned his name to someone else. You would have thought Galloway's name would be all over the Oil Ministry's files. You would have thought the painstaking audit of his Mariam Foundation would have turned up pointers to possible shady deals. And then it got worse: he was accused of taking oil-for-food kick backs before there was an oil-for-food programme. Hello!...

[ShadesWolf]

I must admit he held no punches back.

He was very impressive. :furious3:

[Don Corleone]

Well, today the nut was on the other tree. Did you hear what they 'had' on him? This man was all over Iraq and the Middle East for twelve years, and all they had was one document of unsubstantiated authenticity in which one of his Iraqi associates apparently mentioned his name to someone else. You would have thought Galloway's name would be all over the Oil Ministry's files. You would have thought the painstaking audit of his Mariam Foundation would have turned up pointers to possible shady deals. And then it got worse: he was accused of taking oil-for-food kick backs before there was an oil-for-food programme. Hello!...

Well, no matter how great or poor an orator the man is, this is all I'm really intersted in. Please say it isn't so. The entire body of evidence against the guy was a document of one Iraqi mentioning his name as a beneficiary of the 'Oil-for-Food' program? Then why on Earth would the members of the committe called him to testify? Didn't it occur to them that accusing somebody, with pretty shoddy evidence, was bound to blow up in their faces? Good grief Charlie Brown.

But Adrian, not for nothing, I thought you had not problem with running with unsubstantiated sources.

[Adrian II]

But Adrian, not for nothing, I thought you had not problem with running with unsubstantiated sources.Can you back that up, you big schoolboy?
~:grouphug:

[Don Corleone]

YOU posted that in an another thread, claiming Newsweek did the right thing by turning into a rumor mill, sweetcheeks. :kiss2:

[Adrian II]

I must admit he held no punches back.

He was very impressive. :furious3:Psst.. I know Galloway's a nutter, but he's neither a crook nor a liar and today he did one terrific job.

[Adrian II]

YOU posted that in an another thread, claiming Newsweek did the right thing by turning into a rumor mill, sweetcheeks. :kiss2:They were going on two independent sources, honeybuns. :kiss:

[Don Corleone]

And before you and I start going at it, please note, while I did make a dig at you in the final line, the point of my post was I can't believe this Senate subcommitte would be so stupid. If this is what they lead off with, in the big PR game of 'let's get the UN over Oil for Food', they're in a lot of trouble. Even if they have better material in their lineup, by the time they get to it, nobody will be listening. "Aaah, right, the smoking gun, it was Volker and Annan, in the Conservatory, with the Wrench". Nobody will believe a word of it, unless they somehow get some people to start confessing.

I'm no DA, but I'd imagine that the first impression of the case is pretty important, and to set the tone as the guy who has all the answers, you start with your strongest material first. If this is it, they ought to call of these hearings now.

[Don Corleone]

They were going on two independent sources, honeybuns. :kiss:

No darling :mad:, in their retraction notice, they said there 'one' source claimed he couldn't remember where he actually saw the document at first.

[Adrian II]

I'm no DA, but I'd imagine that the first impression of the case is pretty important, and to set the tone as the guy who has all the answers, you start with your strongest material first. If this is it, they ought to call of these hearings now.I noticed that, and I love you, Don. I mean I love your kind of America, more than you're probably ready to believe. But I digress, you callous Neocon bastard.
~:cheers:

[Tribesman]

The entire body of evidence against the guy was a document of one Iraqi mentioning his name as a beneficiary of the 'Oil-for-Food' program?
Would that be the document that the Christian Science Monitor published , before retracting it when it checked and found it was fake , or the one that the Telegraph published and were sued for because it was fake , or is it a new fake ~D ~D ~D
Then why on Earth would the members of the committe called him to testify?
They didn't , and obviously for good reason , the published their findings without even asking him anything (or checking the accuracy of their already disproven evidence) , even yesterday they were still moaning about Galloway "avoiding" the hearings after he had already landed in the States to appear at his own request . What a bunch of halfwits :dizzy2:

[Hurin_Rules]

Some excerpts from his testimony:

--“I gave my heart and soul to stop you from committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq,” Galloway said. “And I told the world that the case for war was a pack of lies.”

--“I am not now nor have I ever been an oil trader and neither has anyone on my behalf,” Galloway said. “I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and American governments and businessmen were selling him guns and gas.”

And from Democratic senator Carl Levin:

--“On the one hand, the United States was at the U.N. trying to stop Iraq from imposing illegal surcharges on oil-for-food contacts,” Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said at the start of the hearing. “On the other hand, the U.S. ignored red flags that some U.S. companies might be paying those same illegal surcharges.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7883488/

[JAG]

I think many people over here were looking very forward to today and his testimony, because we knew he would give them a kicking, and boy he did.

I have never been totally sure of Galloway, sometiems he comes out with thigns which are bang on and I can totally relate and agree with, but other times completely the opposite.

But blimey, it was fun watching him kick the Senator around. ~D He probably is one of the best speakers there is, I think he showed that as well.

[Templar Knight]

good old George ~:cheers:

[The_Doctor]

It was great.

I believe that Blair has set-up the whole thing to try to get rid of Galloway. He his party has one seat, so he will be in parliament making Blair's life hell. I think Blair went to Bush and asked him to get Galloway in this report.

It makes sense when you think about it.

[The_Doctor]

I can't wait until the Conservative club start posting.

[Don Corleone]

Well, Foxnews is presenting a slightly different side to all of this. They're claiming that during the committee hearing multiple documents were produced and that multiple witnesses named Galloway as one of the primary recipients of vouchers. According to them, Galloway would not call the documents forgeries when speaking under oath. A different view (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,156803,00.html)
For the record, Fox is reporting that the committe has named American comanies as being complicit in the misdealings, specifically Bayoil. So those of you worried that America's role would be swept under the rug can relax.

All of that being said, nobody else from the Right (National Review, MyWay News, Drudgereport) have much to say on the matter, which you would think they might. It'll be interesting to see what the Wall Street Journal has to say on it later on today.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Well, Foxnews is presenting a slightly different side to all of this. They're claiming that during the committee hearing multiple documents were produced and that multiple witnesses named Galloway as one of the primary recipients of vouchers. According to them, Galloway would not call the documents forgeries when speaking under oath. A different view (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,156803,00.html)
For the record, Fox is reporting that the committe has named American comanies as being complicit in the misdealings, specifically Bayoil. So those of you worried that America's role would be swept under the rug can relax.

All of that being said, nobody else from the Right (National Review, MyWay News, Drudgereport) have much to say on the matter, which you would think they might. It'll be interesting to see what the Wall Street Journal has to say on it later on today.

somebody is lying

[PanzerJaeger]

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

So he hates Israel.. thats not surprising..

Rally leftists! This is all a Zionist conspiracy!

What a leftist nutjob.. and it sounds like a corrupt one at that. This isnt ancient Rome, oration only goes so far.

[ICantSpellDawg]

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

So he hates Israel.. thats not surprising..

Rally leftists! This is all a Zionist conspiracy!

What a leftist nutjob.. and it sounds like a corrupt one at that. This isnt ancient Rome, oration only goes so far.


he is a very good orator
but so was hitler
and so was billy madison in billy madison

speaking does only go so far


we will see how this goes

[Adrian II]

According to them, Galloway would not call the documents forgeries when speaking under oath.Well, they forgot so say why. Galloway was given a Xerox of a document 24 hrs before the hearing which showed only a 'grey blur'. He simply said he couldn't state whether the document was a forgery or not, but he did state that if the English translation accompanying it was correct, the information in the document was fake.

[Don Corleone]

Look, guys, we're the first ones to get bent out of shape with Hitler comparisons. Fair's fair, let's not go there. Call him a snake oil salesman if you want to accuse him of being a demogogue.

And I stand corrected, MyWay news does have a story about it: MyWay News version (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050517/D8A54SDG0.html) They too claim that the committe has released multiple documents naming Galloway (among others) as a beneficiary of the vouchers.

Now, I know some of you have claimed these documents have been proven to be forgeries. Could you offer a link or two to evidence proving that the US Senate is introducing forged documents as certified evidence?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Look, guys, we're the first ones to get bent out of shape with Hitler comparisons. Fair's fair, let's not go there. Call him a snake oil salesman if you want to accuse him of being a demogogue.

And I stand corrected, MyWay news does have a story about it: MyWay News version (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050517/D8A54SDG0.html) They too claim that the committe has released multiple documents naming Galloway (among others) as a beneficiary of the vouchers.

Now, I know some of you have claimed these documents have been proven to be forgeries. Could you offer a link or two to evidence proving that the US Senate is introducing forged documents as certified evidence?


i didnt claim that he was like hitler anymore than i claimed that he was like billy madison. i figured id get crap for that
if he is right then i respect him for his tenacity
if he is wrong then he is the most dangerous type of crook - one that is capable of bending and breaking truth

i was saying that just because someone is good at speaking doesnt mean a damn thing about the "goodness" or "badness" of character - and you cant jump to support them based on that alone without knowing the facts

just as i wont condemn him
hell - i took the time to watch the thing




ive just recently finished watching the 40 or so minute committee hearing and, while i was impressed with Galloway's opening statement his follow up was less impressive and smelled of avoidance of the issue

i liked the bit about the forgery and i think that the guy is great on his feet, but i also believe that the Senate committee was being extremely fair in allowing him to speak while he wouldnt answer simple questions that were repeated numerous times

ah well
who knows at this point

i am interested as to whether or not there were various sources other than the ONE that galloway says was used

[The_Doctor]

What would happen to him if he had done it?

[ICantSpellDawg]

What would happen to him if he had done it?


anal electrocution

so your damn-well right hes denying it

[Duke Malcolm]

Gorgeous George isna denying anything. I shall stand til death by my comrade, his words are likened to the most holy words of the late Pope, his blood as pure as fresh water from the Blackwater reservoir (purest in all Scotland). God save Gorgeous George.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Gorgeous George isna denying anything. I shall stand til death by my comrade, his words are likened to the most holy words of the late Pope, his blood as pure as fresh water from the Blackwater reservoir (purest in all Scotland). God save Gorgeous George.


right

[Goofball]

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

So he hates Israel.. thats not surprising..

Rally leftists! This is all a Zionist conspiracy!

Hmmm...

What the hell am I supposed to do now? Being a leftist Zionist is a lonely job...

~:mecry:

[JAG]

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

So he hates Israel.. thats not surprising..

Rally leftists! This is all a Zionist conspiracy!

What a leftist nutjob.. and it sounds like a corrupt one at that. This isnt ancient Rome, oration only goes so far.

You clearly have no idea about the situation, lol.

Your neo con mates in Senate got taken down by an MP from over here, a socialist one at that, just take it. ~D

[ICantSpellDawg]

You clearly have no idea about the situation, lol.

Your neo con mates in Senate got taken down by an MP from over here, a socialist one at that, just take it. ~D


i wish that my world view was as simple and unwavering as yours seems to be

[Don Corleone]

You all are clearly forgetting the time that Jag proclaimed that on any matter of importance, he would never admit he was wrong, because he never would be. You gotta respect unflinching resolve like that. Here's hoping he's never driving a speeding car down a dead end and considers his sense of direction an 'important issue'. ~:cheers:

[Duke Malcolm]

Your neo con mates in Senate got taken down by an MP from over here, a socialist one at that, just take it. ~D

A Dundonian socialist MP.

[Duke Malcolm]

right

It is emphasising that he is an honest man. Honest Gorgeous George. Like Honest Abe, but Dundonian and better looking.

[ICantSpellDawg]

what are you talking about?

[Duke Malcolm]

Not much, just that George is an honest man.

[Don Corleone]

Now, Malcom, I understand he's your boy and all that, but he is a politician. You'll never hear me saying 'he's (or she's) an honest man(woman)', regardless of how much I favor their policies. Face facts, for politicians lying is what scratching your head is for you or me. Something you would probably deny because you didn't recognize you were doing it at the time but that happens almost constantly.

[kiwitt]

I like where he said he has met Saddam the same amount of times as Rumsfield, but the difference was Rumsfield was "selling arms"

[LittleGrizzly]

good ol' george, give them hell.

[Duke Malcolm]

I know that he is from Scotland, Dundee, and my very own school, and I wouldn't be too surprised if he is from the sacred West End, but I believe, nay, know that he did not get those vouchers, or oil money. While I am mildly conservative myself, I believe that the USA is wrong. When the Daily Mail made those allegations (remarkably similar to those of the US Senate sub-committee, and I know which I would believe more) and the documents turned out to be false, I knew he didn't do it. I stand by my comrade not only because he is that, but because he has fought these allegations before, and has come through.
I know that politicians lie, but his whole shebang is politicians against politicians, and the USA outnumbers the Mother Country 13 to 1 (I think), so there I would favour the lesser number of politicians, because surely there is less lying. Then I would favour my comrade. Stand by your own, you know.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Not much, just that George is an honest man.

Wow a Brit saying that Bush is an honest man ~D Look I wouldnt even say that about Bush. Clearly you guys have far more respect for politicians over there.

[Leet Eriksson]

Galloway had a good point... the iraqi official who supplied the info to the senate was.. Ahmed Chalabi?

When was this crook ever reliable?

[LittleGrizzly]

When was this crook ever reliable?

people are reliable when they're telling you what you want to hear.

[Tribesman]

Now, Malcom, I understand he's your boy and all that, but he is a politician.
Spot on Don . ~:cheers:
So we have a politician who is by nature a liar , telling other politicians who are also liars that they are liars while they tell him that he is a liar and we have good old Chalabi who is well known for being an agreeable liar telling lies that some poeple want to hear to fit in with his and their earlier lies .
Politicians , what can you do with them ?

[PanzerJaeger]

You clearly have no idea about the situation, lol.

Your neo con mates in Senate got taken down by an MP from over here, a socialist one at that, just take it.

Exactly what dont i get Jag? I copied exactly what he said and that wasnt the only time he mentioned Zionism.


Excuse me if i dont take anything seriously said by a man who injects Zionist conspiracies into his arguments. Its obvious where he stands.

As for him taking down the Senate - i dont know what news youre watching but he is being portrayed as avoiding questions and grandstanding even on CNN over here. I think the Senate will survive. ~D

[Don Corleone]

I think both of you need to understand that there's a serious difference in debating tactics between the UK parliment and the US Senate. There's a reason you have the Prime Minister in for Q&A and we only have a State of the Union once a year. As I see it, both sides could, and by their own definitons should, claim victory.

[LittleGrizzly]

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

Excuse me if i dont take anything seriously said by a man who injects Zionist conspiracies into his arguments.

he was calling this commitee pro-israel, point out how he is injecting a zionist conspiracy into it ?

[ICantSpellDawg]

“This group of neocons (neoconservatives) is involved in the mother of all smokescreens,” he said of the committee. “I want to turn the tables on this neocon, pro-Israel, pro-war, Republican lynch mob.”

Excuse me if i dont take anything seriously said by a man who injects Zionist conspiracies into his arguments.

he was calling this commitee pro-israel, point out how he is injecting a zionist conspiracy into it ?


i agree - never was there a mention of zionism

funny how the 2 inquisitive senators were Jews
~:smoking:

im an a**hole?

[PanzerJaeger]

he was calling this commitee pro-israel, point out how he is injecting a zionist conspiracy into it ?

What point is there in bringing Israel into the discussion unless he was eluding at something?

i agree - never was there a mention of zionism

Excuse me he held his tongue in the actual commitee meeting.


He earlier told Reuters that he had "no expectation of justice from a group of Christian fundamentalist and Zionist activists under the chairmanship of a neocon (President) George Bush who is pro-war.”

I also heard on the news that this guy has been pushing the tired theory about Israel's involvement in the Iraq war.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Hey if anyone wants to see the testimony I found the video of it.

LINK (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4556113.stm)

[LittleGrizzly]

What point is there in bringing Israel into the discussion unless he was eluding at something?

so he mentioned israel in something which you feel they have nothing to do with, this to you is his clever way at hinting at a conspiracy involving the israeli's, which is why you won't take anything he says seriously ?

why'd he mention them ? hmm im not sure he seemed to be on a bit of a roll landing them with what he see as bad labels, and israel i think played some part in the Iraq war, i remember one of the concerns was Iraqi WMD could reach israel, that and the fact saddam would pay suicide bombers familys.

[Adrian II]

So we have a politician who is by nature a liar (..)Pray, tell me where and when Galloway lied. You may not agree with his views, even though they come very close to yours on quite a few issues, but that doesn't mean he's a crook or a liar.
~:handball:

[PanzerJaeger]

so he mentioned israel in something which you feel they have nothing to do with, this to you is his clever way at hinting at a conspiracy involving the israeli's, which is why you won't take anything he says seriously ?

Yes that and the follow up ive heard on the news about him and his "views".

Pray, tell me where and when Galloway lied. You may not agree with his views, even though they come very close to yours on quite a few issues, but that doesn't mean he's a crook or a liar.

Nah hes only best buds and business partners with a crook... nothing going on there.. ~;)

[Byzantine Prince]

Um may I remind everyone that 100,000 people have died during this war. 1,600 Americans. Is that worth the price of oil. Because really, there was no terrorism going on there.

Also may I remind everyone the sanctions imposed by the US and other came at a cost of 1,000,000 people's lives?

Do these people mean nothing. Why is it that the US feels free to go around murdering more people then the dictators they are trying to overthrow?

[Productivity]

Um may I remind everyone that 100,000 people have died during this war. 1,600 Americans. Is that worth the price of oil. Because really, there was no terrorism going on there.

Also may I remind everyone the sanctions imposed by the US and other came at a cost of 1,000,000 people's lives?

Do these people mean nothing. Why is it that the US feels free to go around murdering more people then the dictators they are trying to overthrow?

Given the views you have reguarly expressed here, I'm not sure you are in any position to be lecturing on the value of a life.

[LittleGrizzly]

Yes that and the follow up ive heard on the news about him and his "views".

well im glad its not solely based on that, what have you heard about his views which is enough to declare him anti-jewish ?

[Idaho]

Prediction. Rightwing american politicians get a drubbing and are made to look stupid. Cue flurries of backroom activity amongst the usual rightwing hacks to come up with one of their bore-a-thon point-by-point refutation articles, pasted here as the final word on the matter by Gawain (unable to think of any decent response himself).

I don't like Galloway - but someone speaking out of turn in the staid, controlled, set-piece environment of the US Senate is always welcome.

[Redleg]

Prediction. Rightwing american politicians get a drubbing and are made to look stupid. Cue flurries of backroom activity amongst the usual rightwing hacks to come up with one of their bore-a-thon point-by-point refutation articles, pasted here as the final word on the matter by Gawain (unable to think of any decent response himself).

I don't like Galloway - but someone speaking out of turn in the staid, controlled, set-piece environment of the US Senate is always welcome.

LOL - you will be incorrect - since this rightwing hack likes what Galloway did to the Senate - maybe it will force the Senate to get more of their facts straight and be more precise in their hearing procedures from now on.

But you do have to love the way Galloway avoided answering the more damning questions that were asked of him.

However I see your nomal leftist vemon is in your post -

[Tribesman]

Pray, tell me where and when Galloway lied.
Adrian , he is a politician , it is part of the job description .

[Duke Malcolm]

But the senators of the sub-committee are also politicians, so is it not also possible that they were lying?

[Adrian II]

Pray, tell me where and when Galloway lied.
Adrian , he is a politician , it is part of the job description .So, tell me where and when he lied.

[TonkaToys]

Apparently there may be some fresh evidence...

BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4557931.stm)

I reserve judgement as nothing I have seen shows him to be guilty, yet.

[Duke Malcolm]

That's not fresh evidence, its just because the sub-committe claims he was using the charity to get money.

[Adrian II]

Apparently there may be some fresh evidence...

BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4557931.stm)LOL! He's just going to ask for the U.S. evidence that turned out not to be evidence at all. You know what I'd like to see? I'd like to see an investigation into the forgery factory operating out of Iraq. You know, the one that churns out these 'documents' from the 1990's on which the ink, upon chemical analysis, turns out to be only a couple months old. Now that would be worth looking into.

[LittleGrizzly]

He's just going to ask for the U.S. evidence that turned out not to be evidence at all. You know what I'd like to see? I'd like to see an investigation into the forgery factory operating out of Iraq. You know, the one that churns out these 'documents' from the 1990's on which the ink, upon chemical analysis, turns out to be only a couple months old. Now that would be worth looking into.

you'll have to wait a bit for that theres still chirac to go, a few russian politicians for good measure as well...

[Adrian II]

You'll have to wait a bit for that theres still chirac to go, a few russian politicians for good measure as well...You'll think they'll turn up for a kangaroo court?

[Meneldil]

I don't think Cirac has anything to do with that. The french guy who is supposedly guilty is Charles Pasqua, and he's indeed a corrupted a**hole. I sure he likely did the things he's being sued for, but time will tell.

[LittleGrizzly]

You'll think they'll turn up for a kangaroo court?

ok good point thier not quite as desperate as galloway to shout as US politicians....at least not publicly

I don't think Cirac has anything to do with that.

there was a slight dose of sarcasm

[Meneldil]

there was a slight dose of sarcasm


Ooooooohhhh, sorry.

But still, Charles Pasqua is an ass. He got elected to the french senate so all the things he was sued for would be cancelled.

[LittleGrizzly]

Ooooooohhhh, sorry.

np hard to tell sarcasm

[monkian]

Ooooooohhhh, sorry.

np hard to tell sarcasm

Yeah, it's reaaaallly difficult...

[LittleGrizzly]

Yeah, it's reaaaallly difficult...

i sense sarcasm...

[monkian]

Yeah, it's reaaaallly difficult...

i sense sarcasm...

~;)

[Idaho]

However I see your nomal leftist vemon is in your post -

You'd miss it if I left it out :bow:

[Krypta]

I just got to actually see the whole Galloway testimony...That guy is like the Scottish Pacino, "...YOU'RE out of order! THE WHOLE TRIAL is out of order!"
Hoo ah , Hoo aah ! ~D ~D

[Adrian II]

I just got to actually see the whole Galloway testimony...That guy is like the Scottish Pacino, "...YOU'RE out of order! THE WHOLE TRIAL is out of order!"
Hoo ah , Hoo aah ! ~D ~DNot at all. Americans seem out of their depth because his appearance was so out of step with Senate traditions. Here's a piece that looks at the culture clash that took place that day.


The Independent
19 May 2005

Galloway: The man who took on America

How did one maverick MP manage to outgun a committee of senior US politicians so successfully? And did he make any lasting impact? Rupert Cornwell reports from Washington

It may not have been the "mother of all smokescreens" - as George Galloway memorably described the congressional investigation into the Iraq oil-for-food scandal - but his appearance certainly underlined the mother of all culture gaps between the parliamentary traditions of Britain and America.

We tend to see politics as a public bloodsport. In the US politics is as brutal as anywhere. But the violence usually takes place off-stage, in the lobbying process, in the money game, in the ruthless manipulation of scandal. True, every four years there are presidential election candidates' "debates". But - with the exception of Bill Clinton - every recent American president would have been slaughtered weekly if he had to face Prime Minister's Questions. On the public stage, US politicians are not accustomed to serious challenge.

Take Norm Coleman. He is a smooth, upwardly mobile Republican senator who is making a name for himself at the helm of the Permanent Sub-Committee for Investigations, not least because of his call for Kofi Annan to step down as United Nations secretary general over the scandal. As Mr Coleman knows, no American politician ever lost a vote by bashing the UN.

A telegenic former big city mayor, he looks younger than his 55 years. Every senator, it is said, looks in the mirror and sees a future president. And who knows, maybe a White House run is in Mr Coleman's future. But on Tuesday, to UK and US observers alike, he looked way out of his depth, manifestly unprepared for what was coming when Mr Galloway began to testify.

Perhaps he believed that a smooth ride would be ensured by the traditional deference accorded the Senate (which is fond of referring to itself, with barely a trace of irony, as "the world's greatest deliberative body"). In fact, proceedings only served to underline the average senator or congressman's ignorance of the world beyond America, be it the underlying realities of the Middle East, or the polemical ways of British public life.

"If in fact he lied to this committee, there will have to be consequences," said Mr Coleman after the encounter, in the manner of a petulant schoolboy outgunned in an argument, but who gamely insists on having the last word, however feeble, in an attempt to retrieve his dignity.

And like the hapless junior senator from Minnesota, the US media too did not know quite what had hit it. For all its imperfections, Congress - in particular the Senate part of it - commands a rigid respect. Coverage of it tends to be strait-laced and humourless. Into this primly arranged china shop crashed George Galloway, to deliver a public broadside against US policy in Iraq, and the US system, unmatched since Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.

In Britain, the prospect of such a confrontation would have sketch-writers and columnists salivating days in advance. But that is not the American way. Honourable exception should be made for the New York Post, Murdoch-owned and the nearest thing in the US to a Fleet Street tabloid. "Brit Fries Senators in Oil" was the headline on a news story that noted the "stunning audacity" of Mr Galloway's performance, how he had caught Mr Coleman and his colleagues "flatfooted" (only one of whom was left when the chairman brought the embarrassment to an end).

A brief perusal of the US press suggests that the Post's Andrea Peyser was also the only columnist to weigh in. As might be expected, she excoriated Mr Galloway as a thug and a bully, "a lefty lackey for butchers". Mr Coleman and his subcommittee had let the side down, she wrote. "Our Senators did not pipe up. Rather, they assumed the look of frightened little boys, caught with their pants around their ankles, nervously awaiting punishment." She concluded: "It's time to take the gloves off, senators. Kick this viper where it hurts."

But anyone expecting such colour in the more august broadsheets will have been severely disappointed. The Washington Post and The New York Times devoted only inside-page coverage. The Times noted that Mr Coleman, despite being a former prosecutor, seemed "flummoxed" by Mr Galloway's "aggressive posture and tone". Both singled out the MP's debating skill. It is a skill on which, alas, American politics place little premium.

Much the same went for television coverage. CNN's presenters smiled gamely as they ran clips of the juiciest Galloway invective. Plainly though, they too were bemused. This sort of thing does not occur in the US Congress - and that of course was his achievement, to turn the usual rules of such hearings on their head.

Normally, the committee members dominate proceedings, armed with investigative material furnished by their handsomely financed staff, and expect respect bordering on veneration from those they summon. When the matter at hand is as contentious as the Iraqi oil-for-food scandal, most witnesses appear with a phalanx of lawyers, advising them when to "take the Fifth" and thus avoid potentially incriminating testimony.

Not so George Galloway. Not a lawyer was in sight, and even if one had been whispering in his ear, he almost certainly would not have listened. Instead, he took the battle to his accusers. Mr Coleman looked as if he had not been spoken to like that since his father caught him cheating on high school homework.

Yesterday, 12 hours after Mr Galloway left town, the legislative cultural gap was again in evidence as normal business resumed on the Senate floor. The topic could not have been more important or more venomous - a row over judicial filibusters that threatens to overturn 200 years of tradition, and bring the chamber's business to a virtual halt.

But Bill Frist and Harry Reid, the Senate majority and minority leaders, droned on as if they were introducing an amendment on the Highway Financing Bill. As usual, the cameras remained fixed on the speaker. By convention, panning shots are banned, for the simple reason that these important gentlemen would be seen delivering their Philippics to rows of empty benches. But then again, that is how America likes its formal politics; sedate, dignified, eschewing the sort of personal attack delivered by Mr Galloway.

Long, long ago, in the 1950 World Cup in Uruguay, the unfancied US scored a 1-0 victory over an all-conquering England football team. The performance on Capitol Hill of Mr Galloway (although he is anything but a Sassenach) might be seen as some belated revenge for that humiliation.

But, if truth be told, the political shock was little more noticed here - and is likely to have as little enduring impact - than that never-to-be forgotten sporting upset half a century ago.

[TonkaToys]

A brief perusal of the US press suggests that the Post's Andrea Peyser was also the only columnist to weigh in. As might be expected, she excoriated Mr Galloway as a thug and a bully, "a lefty lackey for butchers". Mr Coleman and his subcommittee had let the side down, she wrote. "Our Senators did not pipe up. Rather, they assumed the look of frightened little boys, caught with their pants around their ankles, nervously awaiting punishment." She concluded: "It's time to take the gloves off, senators. Kick this viper where it hurts."

Heh that made me laugh.

[Krypta]

Not at all. Americans seem out of their depth because his appearance was so out of step with Senate traditions. Here's a piece that looks at the culture clash that took place that day.

I think you missed what I was trying to convey. I thought that the Galloway testimony was very good as it reminded me of the type of speeches Al Pacino is known for making, in particular "Scent of a Woman" or "And Justice for All". If you haven't seen them you wont understand the Scottish Pacino analogy. ~:)

[ICantSpellDawg]

i am honsetly not sure which type of official tact i prefer

the emotionally charged "oneupmanship" is good when people know what is going on, but on public access hearings, the facts in a calm manner might be better

fiery debate is good for some things. bleh non-emotional fact reporting good for others

[Tribesman]

So, tell me where and when he lied.
Adrian , int he senate hearing I am not aware if he lied or not , but he has previously on several occasions , particalarly when he says he doesn't support dictatorships as a form of government and didn't speak in favour of the military coup in Pakistan .
Edit , he did lie at the senate hearing , he said he had never seen a barrel of oil ... even in normal life , without coming from an oil producing country as he does or visiting oil producing counties as he has , how on earth can he never have seen a barrel of oil . Maybe he should have been clearer and said that he had never seen a barrel of illegal sanctions busting corrupt oil ~;)

[Duke Malcolm]

George supportes dictatorships? Which, might I ask?

[Adrian II]

I think you missed what I was trying to convey. I thought that the Galloway testimony was very good as it reminded me of the type of speeches Al Pacino is known for making, in particular "Scent of a Woman" or "And Justice for All". If you haven't seen them you wont understand the Scottish Pacino analogy. ~:)I haven't, and I'm sorry for mixing up my Pacino's, Krypta. :bow:
I have a recollection though of Pacino or De Niro or some other actor playing a gangster who testifies before a subcommittee, surrounded by pot-bellied elder consiglieri and shouting the most vulgar abuse at everyone in the room. What movie would that be?

[LittleGrizzly]

he said he had never seen a barrel of oil

are you sure he didn't say he's never sold a barrel of oil

[Krypta]

Hmmmm...dunno which one that might be, perhaps one of DeNiro's? "And Justice for All ", is the classic where Pacino is a lawyer for a corrupt judge, and goes off on a tear saying,

"YOU'RE out of order! YOU'RE out of order! THE WHOLE TRIAL is out of order! THEY'RE out of order!".
Been awhile since I've seen it though. The other speech that came to mind was from "Scent of a Woman" in which a blind Pacino lectures Mr. Trask,

"Out of order, I'll show you out of order! You don't know what out of order is Mr. Trask! I'd show you but I'm too old, I'm too tired, and I'm too f###in' blind. If I were the man I was five years ago I'd take a flame-thrower to this place. Out of order, who the hell do you think you're talking to? I've been around you know? There was a time I could see. And I have seen, boys like these, younger than these, their arms torn out, their legs ripped off. But there isn't nothin' like the sight of an amputated spirit, there is no prosthetic for that. You think you're merely sending this splendid foot-soldier back home to Oregon with his tail between his legs but I say that you are executing his soul. And why? Because he's not a Baird man. Baird men, you hurt this boy, you're going to be Baird Bums, the lot of ya. And Harry, Jimmy, Trent, wherever you are out there, f### you too."
I don't know why the Galloway testimony reminded me of that, it just did. You must say though, it couldn't have been scripted any better. Hoo ah ~D.

[Xiahou]

The Senate Committee members were pretty much made fools of, I'd say. Galloway didn't prove his case or do much else other than make an ass of himself- but he did dominate the precedings. It's sad to me that the Senators seem to have been so easily caught off guard by his 'performance'. They should've been much better prepared for his behavior- it's not like he's never done so before. If they couldn't handle it they shouldn't have bothered having him testify because clearly nothing productive has come from it.

[Duke Malcolm]

Except that Gorgeous George has had his say to stand up to these false claims.

[Xiahou]

Except that Gorgeous George has had his say to stand up to these false claims.
Wow. :help:

[Tribesman]

are you sure he didn't say he's never sold a barrel of oil
Here you go Grizz ~:cheers:
"I have never seen a barrel of oil, owned one, bought one, sold one, and neither has anybody on my behalf," he said.

Malcolm George supportes dictatorships? Which, might I ask?
Well he has described himself as a Stalinist , now forgive me if I am wrong but wasn't Stalin a dictator . He also wrote two newspaper articles about the military takeover in Pakistan praising the military dictatorship and wondering why the men in khaki took so long to rise up against their corrupt capitalist government . If I remember correctly he also said that developing countries can benefit from dictatorships as they cannot handle democracy . He later denied that he had ever praised Musharraf or the coup . I will see if I can find the original articles .

[Duke Malcolm]

Wow. :help:

I know, :help: , George didn't do it, but the Senate thinks he did...

As for Tribesman, thank you, I did not know that.

[Adrian II]

I'm sure he said he never 'soiled' a barrel of oil... ~:cool:

Anyway, Tribesman, as I said I think he's a nutter. But he's not a crook or a liar, at least not a liar in this case. I hope you find those quotes or clippings containing his more outrageous views. I couldn't find anything of the kind but I suppose you know where to look for the goodies.

I can imagine though that he said things to the effect that miltary rule in Pakistan is to be preferred over the money-grabbers and islamists who were in charge before Musharraf, a position shared, not surprisingly, by the present U.S. administration and practically the entire world. As for Iraq, I think he would have prefered a secular Saddam in power killing islamists instead of islamists in power killing secularists, a position others will quite possibly come to appreciate as well as time goes by.