[Calgary123]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-brkmfrxrQY&eurl=


He wipes the floor with the Sky News Anchor... He cuts straight to the core, and doesn't pull any punches.

It's almost funny listening to her, as she struggles to maintain her composure and stay on topic with her ready made script that she is reading from.

Our country could use a few Georges...

[ridenrain]

$1:

The British parliamentarian George Galloway has been accused by Volcker's committee and the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of profiting through the allocation of over 18 million barrels of oil made in his name or that of his associates.

Yup. One hell of a guy...

[Zipperfish]

$1:

The British parliamentarian George Galloway has been accused by Volcker's committee and the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of profiting through the allocation of over 18 million barrels of oil made in his name or that of his associates.

Yes, and when he was called to account for that in front of the US Senate he absolutely wiped the floor with them with an oratorical tour de force. Politics in Scotland is a blood sport -- a lesson the US Senate won't soon forget.

I don't particularly agree with his viewpoints -- a little black and white for my liking -- but I'd make sure I had my ducks lined up before I took him on.

I'd like to see him up against Ann Coulter - -that would be worth an admission price!

[Calgary123]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

$1:

The British parliamentarian George Galloway has been accused by Volcker's committee and the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of profiting through the allocation of over 18 million barrels of oil made in his name or that of his associates.

Yes, and when he was called to account for that in front of the US Senate he absolutely wiped the floor with them with an oratorical tour de force. Politics in Scotland is a blood sport -- a lesson the US Senate won't soon forget.

I don't particularly agree with his viewpoints -- a little black and white for my liking -- but I'd make sure I had my ducks lined up before I took him on.

I'd like to see him up against Ann Coulter - -that would be worth an admission price!

$1:

Yes, and when he was called to account for that in front of the US Senate he absolutely wiped the floor with them with an oratorical tour de force. Politics in Scotland is a blood sport -- a lesson the US Senate won't soon forget.

Here is a clip of him in front of the US senate... That was worthy of a standing ovation. This guy isn't an idiot... and he's not going to go down without swinging.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrdFFCnYtbk

He would chew her up (Ann Coulter) and spit her out... like the piece of garbage she really is.

[BartSimpson]

Calgary123 Calgary123:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-brkmfrxrQY&eurl=


He wipes the floor with the Sky News Anchor... He cuts straight to the core, and doesn't pull any punches.

It's almost funny listening to her, as she struggles to maintain her composure and stay on topic with her ready made script that she is reading from.

Our country could use a few Georges...

I do not agree with the man's general premise but I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

[Calgary123]

OK Ridenrain, Try doing some research before chiming in with your BS.

Here is the entire testimony.... This charge was originally attempted last year, but was proven to be based on forged documents (par for the course with the Bush regime), and Galloway was even able to recieve libel damages from a paper (the Christian Science Monitor) which aired the charges earlier.

Typical of the American government. Lying and deception is their specialty.


http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... le8869.htm

And here is the news report to follow up on

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4566448


Galloway Oil Claims 'Based on Forgery'

Rebel MP George Galloway’s Respect Party claimed today that evidence that he profited from Saddam Hussein’s regime was forged. Ahead of Mr Galloway’s appearance in front of a committee of US senators in Washington, his party said the committee was relying on a counterfeit document created in Baghdad. It said Mr Galloway’s name had been pasted on to a list of people and companies alleged to have made money out of the Oil For Food programme.

His name appeared in a different typeface to other words on the same line, the print was lighter in colour and Respect suggested it had been stuck on and then the page re-photocopied.

His name also appeared at a slight angle and Respect said that would be impossible on the computerised document unless it had been artificially added.

Mr Galloway’s party said there was a clear link between the list in the Senate Committee’s report and one which appeared in a Baghdad newspaper in January last year.

Respect highlighted the claims of Sajad Ahmad Ali, who has previously claimed to have been involved in forging that list.

Mr Ali said: “We forged this list of names and titles of people who got money from the Ministry of Information, the palace and the Oil For Food.

“We worked for 10 days and then we steamed the papers a bit then dried them out so that they would look old.

“I beg anyone who reads his name in these papers to ask for the original version and check the date of the writing with carbon dating.”

A spokesman for Respect said: “We know forgeries were being produced and one is being used in evidence.

“We don’t have to prove an international conspiracy nor are we alleging one but we are saying that there is a forgery here.

“This is the only documentary evidence. The question to the committee should be what steps did they take to verify this document?

“The actual first document, we don’t know where it is, they don’t know where it is and all they have is a photocopy handed over by an unnamed source.”

The UN-backed Oil For Food scheme enabled Saddam Hussein to export oil to pay for essential humanitarian goo help the Iraqi people cope with sanctions imposed in 1991. Theell its oil for cash.

Saddam sold the vouchers at below market prices to favoured parties who were able to sell them on at a profit.

The US Senate Committee accused Mr Galloway of receiving vouchers for millions of barrels of oil but he has described the allegations as “absurd” and asked to appear before them promising to “give them both barrels” in what is expected to be a dramatic highly-charged exchange.

[Calgary123]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Calgary123 Calgary123:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-brkmfrxrQY&eurl=


He wipes the floor with the Sky News Anchor... He cuts straight to the core, and doesn't pull any punches.

It's almost funny listening to her, as she struggles to maintain her composure and stay on topic with her ready made script that she is reading from.

Our country could use a few Georges...

I do not agree with the man's general premise but I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

$1:

I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

No doubt Bart...

$1:

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

[/quote]

I would have to agree with you there too...

For the record, I happen to agree with his perspective as well... I know that we'll never see eye to eye here though

[Bodah]

The dude seems to know his history, which has peaked my curiosity on it.
If his version of history is correct the worm may have turned for me on this one.

[BartSimpson]

Calgary123 Calgary123:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Calgary123 Calgary123:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-brkmfrxrQY&eurl=


He wipes the floor with the Sky News Anchor... He cuts straight to the core, and doesn't pull any punches.

It's almost funny listening to her, as she struggles to maintain her composure and stay on topic with her ready made script that she is reading from.

Our country could use a few Georges...

I do not agree with the man's general premise but I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

$1:

I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

No doubt Bart...

$1:

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

I would have to agree with you there too...

For the record, I happen to agree with his perspective as well... I know that we'll never see eye to eye here though

If we all agreed on everything the world would be a very boring place so vive la difference!

What matters is that we are not so biased, as Zip points out, that we are deceiving ourselves into believing our biases instead of the self-evident truths in the world.

I disagree with the anti-war movement because when they opposed the war initially it was simply because they oppose war, not because they believed there were no WMDs. Now that no nukes have been found they say it was all a buch of lies - yet those lies were promulgated by mostly liberal governments such as the Clinton Adminstration, the Blair government, the UN, and even the Chretien government supported much of the UN WMD statements.

Bush errantly acted on other people's information and, no doubt, his own biases clouded his judgment.

I think it is disingenous for liberals, collectively, to whine about the lies surrounding the WMD issue when it was liberals who started the lies to begin with.

[ridenrain]

I knew he was cleared of charges but that does not equal innocent. I just thought I'd start you off on a bit of anti american yapping.

[Calgary123]

ridenrain ridenrain:

I knew he was cleared of charges but that does not equal innocent. I just thought I'd start you off on a bit of anti american yapping.

$1:

I knew he was cleared of charges but that does not equal innocent.

Well... If I were a betting man, I'd bet that if there was even one small shred of evidence that could have been used to smear his name (like they tried) and convict him of something... they would have. He's been quite outspoken with his opinions, and he is a guy that a lot of people look up to in the Ant-war community.

$1:

I just thought I'd start you off on a bit of anti american yapping.

[/quote]

Me? Anti-American???

Well alright... maybe a little. But let me be clear. I harbor the bulk of my resentment to the Bush administration... not the american people who are being spoon-fed propoganda on a daily basis.

I happen to know quite a few Americans who I'm quite fond of, and am not the type of person who stereotypes... No, I don't think all Americans have a gun collection, live in trailer parks, and worship GWB.

[BartSimpson]

Calgary123 Calgary123:

I harbor the bulk of my resentment to the Bush administration... not the american people who are being spoon-fed propoganda on a daily basis.

You make the assumption that we are being spoon-fed propaganda and that you are not being spoon-fed propaganda.

What if we both are?

[Calgary123]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Calgary123 Calgary123:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Calgary123 Calgary123:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-brkmfrxrQY&eurl=


He wipes the floor with the Sky News Anchor... He cuts straight to the core, and doesn't pull any punches.

It's almost funny listening to her, as she struggles to maintain her composure and stay on topic with her ready made script that she is reading from.

Our country could use a few Georges...

I do not agree with the man's general premise but I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

$1:

I sure as hell do agree that he's one hell of a great debater!

No doubt Bart...

$1:

True enough that the world needs many more statesmen (not a term I use all too often) like this fellow who know how to express themselves clearly, adroitly, and without the usual non-committal prevarication we've all come to expect from politicians.

I would have to agree with you there too...

For the record, I happen to agree with his perspective as well... I know that we'll never see eye to eye here though

If we all agreed on everything the world would be a very boring place so vive la difference!

What matters is that we are not so biased, as Zip points out, that we are deceiving ourselves into believing our biases instead of the self-evident truths in the world.

I disagree with the anti-war movement because when they opposed the war initially it was simply because they oppose war, not because they believed there were no WMDs. Now that no nukes have been found they say it was all a buch of lies - yet those lies were promulgated by mostly liberal governments such as the Clinton Adminstration, the Blair government, the UN, and even the Chretien government supported much of the UN WMD statements.

Bush errantly acted on other people's information and, no doubt, his own biases clouded his judgment.

I think it is disingenous for liberals, collectively, to whine about the lies surrounding the WMD issue when it was liberals who started the lies to begin with.

$1:

If we all agreed on everything the world would be a very boring place so vive la difference!

I hear ya!

$1:

What matters is that we are not so biased, as Zip points out, that we are deceiving ourselves into believing our biases instead of the self-evident truths in the world.

I would have to agree...

$1:

I disagree with the anti-war movement because when they opposed the war initially it was simply because they oppose war, not because they believed there were no WMDs. Now that no nukes have been found they say it was all a buch of lies - yet those lies were promulgated by mostly liberal governments such as the Clinton Adminstration, the Blair government, the UN, and even the Chretien government supported much of the UN WMD statements.

Bush errantly acted on other people's information and, no doubt, his own biases clouded his judgment.

I see your point relative to the war movement... don't get me wrong. I'm not a peace nut either, and I do feel that there are going to be times when war is necessary, in order to protect the lives of innocent people.

But I'm not sure if I am following you relative to these lies coming from Liberals and therefore exhonerating Bush, for being naive and "out of the loop". I find that hard to believe considering the top levels of his administration were involved in this from the beginning. While I am quite sure that there are renegades (Cheney) within his administration that are acting out of their own self interest, I have to think that he must be accountable for his involvement in misleading the American people.

At any rate, allow me to apologize for getting rather nasty with my comments relative to some of your posts over the last week or so. Some of your thoughts on the Israeli/Lebanon conflict got under my skin, and I typically don't get quite that emotional. I'm sure deep down, you're a good guy.

[Zipperfish]

My problem with Galloway is that he ascribes evil intent to those that disagree with him. It's the old "If you disagree with me then you support blowing children to smithereens" argument. It doesn't wash. I myself am generally anti-war -- your typical liberal, secular humanist, really. But I know that those who often support war don't do it because they wish they could see images of children in bodybags on the evening news every night. On the contrary -- I assume that none of us wants to see that. If you have children then it is almost physically painful to see a small child in pain, or to see parents weeping over an infant.

So if your whole argument is that people who don't agree with you are bad human beings, you'll never get anywhere.

[Zipperfish]

$1:

I'm sure deep down, you're a good guy.

Deep down, most of us are good guys, and therein lies the eternal hope of humankind.