• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

George Galloway now testifying to Senate committee


pluralist

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
180
On Skynews, for those interested.
 

pluralist

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
180
I dunno what testimony you're watching dude.

Hang the neocons more like!
 

hpp

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
10
Would you be troubled if the contributions for the Mariam Appeal came from kickbacks from Saddam?

Asked four times now.

And he can't say no.

Hang him.
 

pluralist

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
180
hpp said:
Would you be troubled if the contributions for the Mariam Appeal came from kickbacks from Saddam?

Asked four times now.

And he can't say no.

Hang him.
When the neo-cons say "The end justifies the means" you are happy to go along with them.

When someone opposed to their agenda says it, you will condemn them and call for their hanging.

Talk about double standards.
 

hpp

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
10
Eh?

I don't recall saying any of those things!

I think he should be hung for being in the pay of a foreign tyrant with whom his country is militarily engaged. Not complicated really.
 

pluralist

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
180
hpp said:
Eh?
I don't recall saying any of those things!
Sorry, I must have confused you with another PD'er. Your party has an interesting postion as regards the illegal invasion of Iraq. Interesting in the sense that I've never been able to figure out precisely what it was or is.
 

hpp

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
10
I didn't know that, or the government for that matter, had one!
 

ryano

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
173
I think he should be hung for being in the pay of a foreign tyrant with whom his country is militarily engaged. Not complicated really.
Do you think it might be useful for such a charge to be proved before we raise the gallows, or would that simply be a waste of time?
 

pluralist

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
180
I think it is clear to any objective person watching the footage that Galloway really stuck it to those Senators, as he promised.

They really had little or nothing on him and their barefaced hypocrisy was exposed.

At times it looked like they were the ones on trial.
 

blue33

Active member
Joined
Dec 4, 2003
Messages
110
borderlinegenius said:
hpp said:
I didn't know that, or the government for that matter, had one!
Of course they had a position. They fully supported it. They even participated in it.
The government participated in the invasion of Iraq?

Strange, i can't remember John O'Donoghue layig siege to Basra, driving out the republican guard, and hoisting the tri-colour over the city. I'm sure that would have made TV3 news.
 

joemomma

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
476
Strange, i can't remember John O'Donoghue layig siege to Basra, driving out the republican guard, and hoisting the tri-colour over the city. I'm sure that would have made TV3 news.
Yes, well if you're going to be like that, then George Bush didn't participate either.
 

green

Active member
Joined
Apr 21, 2003
Messages
136
Website
www.younggreens.ie
"I met Saddam twice. By no stretch of the English language can that be interpreted to say that I met him 'many' times. That is the same number of times Donald Rumsfeld met him".
:D
Brilliant!
 

Rocky

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
8,550
joemomma said:
Strange, i can't remember John O'Donoghue layig siege to Basra, driving out the republican guard, and hoisting the tri-colour over the city. I'm sure that would have made TV3 news.
Yes, well if you're going to be like that, then George Bush didn't participate either.
Ok then. I don't remember seeing any Irish troops in Iraq on the news. or elsewhere.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2003
Messages
85
Have just finished watching the whole thing on BBC online, found Galloways debunking of the vast amount of evidence very impressive. The only thing they really had on him was that kiss-ass speech to Saddam.

(I suppose certain coffins have to be carried and certan routes have to be walked to secure peace.)

The whole stuff about his charity geting money from an Iraqi business man was flimsy at best. It was obvious however that Galloway was playing to the gallery back home. I am still none the wiser as to what exactly he did wrong.
 

geraghd

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
474
I think it is clear to any objective person watching the footage that Galloway really stuck it to those Senators, as he promised.
he certainly did. however (im being objective on this, I dont know what the charges exactly are or how substantiated they are) but he came off as a bit of a laughing stock in fairness. He dodged loads of direct questions, when asked a simple one he gave a sermon for the benefit of his organisation and voters back home and showed little respect for the committee. The senators came across as very professional, diligent, well briefed and fair & honest.
Though have to admit, both parties held up well and made for some entertaining tv!
 

pluralist

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
180
geraghd said:
I think it is clear to any objective person watching the footage that Galloway really stuck it to those Senators, as he promised.
he certainly did. however (im being objective on this, I dont know what the charges exactly are or how substantiated they are) but he came off as a bit of a laughing stock in fairness. He dodged loads of direct questions, when asked a simple one he gave a sermon for the benefit of his organisation and voters back home and showed little respect for the committee. The senators came across as very professional, diligent, well briefed and fair & honest.
Though have to admit, both parties held up well and made for some entertaining tv!
The fact of the matter is, that whatever your judgement on the performance of the senators in the course of the actual hearing (and I disagree with your assessment, I thought they came across as weak, particularly the younger guy, admittedly Levin was a little better), they publicised specific allegations against Galloway IN ADVANCE of the hearing and stated them as fact. Now that is fundamentally wrong and unfair and a weaker man than Galloway could have capitulated and been intimidated.

My main conclusion is, the only way to stand up to a bully is to give them a taste of his own medicine, which is what Galloway did.

In terms of playing to the public gallery, yes of course Galloway did that, but who started?

I'm hearing that the spin from the senators now is, "no big deal, we have bigger fish to fry".
 
Top