Tuesday, October 25, 2005

George Galloway Update

By Guy Stewart

Features Editor

A prominent figure in the anti-war movement, George Galloway has become something of a celebrity in the States since his appearance in front of the Senate Committee last May. Having just returned, he announced to a packed hall on campus that things were 'looking very fine' for the anti-war lobby in the US - a group whose numbers are on the rise.

In a speech delivered last Monday Galloway poked fun and poured scorn on Tony Blair and his 'cronies'; accusing them of having abandoned Britain's working class and calling for them to be held accountable for an illegal war.

Despite rapturous applause and words of encouragement from the floor, not all who attended were convinced by the MP. One contributor jumped up and waved papers that he claimed were evidence of Galloway ’s financial involvement with the Baath regime. “You are a lapdog sir!” he cried, much to the amusement of the many, vocal Respect members in attendence.

In recent years, Galloway 's reputation has been mired by accusations that he profited from the Baath regime in Iraq . As a prominent anti-war campaigner, the story - first printed in the Daily Telegraph - proved particularly damaging. He has since won a libel case against the paper.

“I have met Saddam Hussein on two occasions,” Galloway told the US senate - “the same number as Donald Rumsfeld. The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met to sell him guns and maps. I met him to bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war.”

Galloway was opposed to the sanctions imposed on Iraq in the early nineties; sanctions that he says killed six million Iraqis, “most of whom were children.”

The MP has also played down footage of himself congratulating Saddam Hussein for his “indefatigability”; an incident that he puts down to, “letting [his] emotions run away’ after spending the previous day on an 'emotionally charged tour” of the occupied territories - “Saddam often voiced his support for the plight of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.”

But critics have also accused the fiery Scot of 'glossing over' Hussein's attacks on the Kurds, Democrats and Marsh Arabs in 1991, by describing it as “a civil war with massive violence on both sides.” His references to the Shi'ites killed in the 1980's as “a fifth column” who “actively undermined the Iraqi war efforts in the interests of their country's enemy,” have also fuelled the speculation.

Galloway will undoubtedly find it hard to shake the accusations despite his impressive performance in front of the US senate and a growing number of supporters on both sides of the Atlantic

Here is my reply that was published yesterday;

Dear Editor,

I would like you clarify certain aspects of the unattributed comments that I was alleged to have made to George Galloway MP during his visit to the University on October 3rd. While it is true that I fiercely attacked Mr. Galloway, his policies and his record, I did not claim that Mr. Galloway enjoyed a financial relationship with Iraq’s then-Baath regime, nor did I claim evidence of this. I did accuse Mr. Galloway of accepting hospitality from Saddam Hussein and in particular, Tariq Aziz, Saddam’s Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, while countless number of ordinary Iraqis were being imprisoned, tortured and killed. If I had accused Mr. Galloway of enjoying a financial relationship with the Baathists at the meeting, I am sure that Mr. Galloway would have begun civil proceedings against me the following day.

The papers that I did bring with me to the meeting were proof that Mr. Galloway supported the military coup in Pakistan that deposed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif after a BBC Newsnight investigation proved that Mr. Galloway’s publishing house Asian Voice had secured a payment of £135,000 from Mr. Sharif’s government for which Mr. Galloway insisted was for advertising. I brought up this matter to demonstrate Mr. Galloway’s greed, hypocrisy and untrustworthiness to hold public office, for which I was applauded by the majority of those in attendance at the meeting.

I recommend that you read you Google News for the latest on Galloway, particular his recent remarks about Jews at World War 4 Report. It all serves to underline my opinion of this vile cretin.


Manfarang said...

During the 1980s Saddam Hussein was 'our man', supported by the Western governments.At the Baghdad Arms Fair held after the end of the Iran-Iraq war the British had a stand.

C4' said...

Saddam was never "my man" nor was he supported by the present government (despite all its faults). By your logic, Churchill, Atlee and their cabinets are just as guilty as the Chamberlain government for the policy of appeasement.

Manfarang said...

I didn't say he was supported by the present government.He was of course supported by the American and British governments during the 1980s.Why isn't Saddam on trial for war crimes?Answer it would shine the light on the support that was given to him.
I doubt whether you had ever heard of him during the 1980s.

C4' said...

Nations and corporations are not responsible for their actions; it is the individuals that decide policy and administer them that are liable.

Manfarang said...

So the Germans and Japanese have no responsibility for their actions before and during the second world war!Wasn't a German corporation recently forced to pay compensation to its WW2 slave labourers?