Nobody says it better than...

[Yonivore]

...Christopher Hitchens (http://slate.msn.com/id/2128742/)


For George Galloway. . .the war would seem to be over. The evidence presented suggests that he lied in court when he sued the Daily Telegraph in London over similar allegations (and collected money for that, too). It suggests that he lied to the Senate under oath. And it suggests that he made a deceptive statement in the register of interests held by members of the British House of Commons. All in all, a bad week for him, especially coming as it does on the heels of the U.N. report on the murder of Rafik Hariri, which appears to pin the convict's badge on senior members of the Assad despotism in Damascus, Galloway's default patron after he lost his main ally in Baghdad.

Yet this is the man who received wall-to-wall good press for insulting the Senate subcommittee in May, and who was later the subject of a fawning puff piece in the New York Times, and who was lionized by the anti-war movement when he came on a mendacious and demagogic tour of the country last month. I wonder if any of those who furnished him a platform will now have the grace to admit that they were hosting a man who is not just a pimp for fascism but one of its prostitutes as well.

I was listening to Air America yesterday evening on my way home from work and was amused to hear Jeanene Garafolo (sp?) showing her ignorance on this topic. Apparently, she believes Coleman was so pissed about having his ass handed to him by Galloway, back in May, that he drummed these charges up.

Unfortunately, for Galloway and Ms. Garafolo, the evidence is pretty airtight -- including bank records and testimony from those involved.

[mouse]

Thanks for the info. what other shows you tune into?

as for TV , how do your feel about FOX?

[Yonivore]

Thanks for the info. what other shows you tune into?

as for TV , how do your feel about FOX?
Off the meds, mouse? Out of dope? What?

[Ocotillo]

ex-liberal Hitchens, eh. Guess all that alcohol finally got most of his brain cells.

[Yonivore]

ex-liberal Hitchens, eh. Guess all that alcohol finally got most of his brain cells.
So, you think Galloway is innocent?

[Dan Rather]

Off the meds, mouse? Out of dope? What?

I think those are two legit questions. why don't you remove that stick in your ass and answer them?

[gtownspur]

Cuz its mouse and that question was a sarcastic one intended at trying to pin yoni as a FOx News conservative junkie who cant be held as legit.

[Yonivore]

Cuz its mouse and that question was a sarcastic one intended at trying to pin yoni as a FOx News conservative junkie who cant be held as legit.
Except I don't watch Fox and I'm a Libertarian.

[Ocotillo]

I have no idea if Galloway is innocent or guilty. I enjoyed watching him chew up Norm Coleman and spit him out.

Hitchens has a personal grudge with this guy. He may be a crook, I don't really know, I just happen to agree with him that the war in Iraq is wrong. Maybe our reasons for that opinion differ. If Hitler said the sky is blue, I wouldn't start saying the sky is green because some evil person said it was blue.

[Yonivore]

I have no idea if Galloway is innocent or guilty. I enjoyed watching him chew up Norm Coleman and spit him out.

Hitchens has a personal grudge with this guy. He may be a crook, I don't really know, I just happen to agree with him that the war in Iraq is wrong. Maybe our reasons for that opinion differ. If Hitler said the sky is blue, I wouldn't start saying the sky is green because some evil person said it was blue.
I think you viewed the Galloway/Coleman exchange through the wrong glasses.

The Senate committee wasn't interested in a rhetorical exchange and didn't come to play that game with Galloway.

Back in May, while newspapers were waxing delirious over the rhetorical drubbing that George Galloway was apparently administering to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, I noticed something peculiar about the apparent passivity of the Senators towards Galloway's barbs. What you saw as a Galloway smack-down, I saw completely differently.

The really striking thing about the Galloway's testimony as transcribed by the Information Clearing House is how the Senators and the Member of Parliament for Bethnal Green and Bow were pursuing a non-collision course. Galloway had come to score press and public relations points at which, by all accounts, he was successful at doing. But Senator Coleman and Levin seemed totally uninterested in responding to Galloway's sharp political jibes. It was almost as if the Senators were deaf to his political posturing. Instead, they focused exclusively and repeatedly on two things: Galloway's relationship with Fawaz Zureikat and Tariq Aziz. Zureikat was a board member of Galloway's Mariam foundation who is also implicated in the Oil For Food deals. Tariq Aziz was Saddam's vice president.

During his testimony Senator Coleman asked this seemingly innocuous question of Galloway about his relationship with Fawaz Zureikat.


SEN. COLEMAN: If I can get back to Mr. Zureikat one more time. Do you recall a time when he specifically -- when you had a conversation with him about oil dealings in Iraq?

GALLOWAY: I have already answered that question. I can assure you, Mr. Zureikat never gave me a penny from an oil deal, from a cake deal, from a bread deal, or from any deal. He donated money to our campaign, which we publicly brandished on all of our literature, along with the other donors to the campaign.

SEN. COLEMAN: Again, Mr. Galloway, a simple question. I'm looking for either a yes or no. Did you ever have a conversation with Mr. Zureikat where he informed you that he had oil dealings with Iraq, yes or no?

GALLOWAY: Not before this Daily Telegraph report, no. ...

SEN. CARL LEVIN (D): Thank you, Mr. Galloway.

Later, it was the turn of Senator Levin to ask these mild-mannered questions of the firebrand from Bethnal Green and Bow about his dealings with Tariq Aziz. He was shortly followed by Senator Coleman who asked the same question but with different emphasis.


SEN. LEVIN: ... I wanted just to ask you about Tariq Aziz.

GALLOWAY: Yeah.

SEN. LEVIN: Tariq Aziz. You've indicated you, you--who you didn't talk to and who you did talk to. Did you have conversations with Tariq Aziz about the award of oil allocations? That's my question.

GALLOWAY: Never.

SEN. LEVIN: Thank you. I'm done. Thank you.

SEN. COLEMAN: Just one follow-up on the Tariq Aziz question. How often did you uh ... Can you describe the relation with Tariq Aziz?

GALLOWAY: Friendly.

SEN. COLEMAN: How often did you meet him?

GALLOWAY: Many times.

SEN. COLEMAN: Can you give an estimate of that?

GALLOWAY: No. Many times.

SEN. COLEMAN: Is it more than five?

GALLOWAY: Yes, sir.

SEN. COLEMAN: More than ten?

GALLOWAY: Yes.

SEN. COLEMAN: Fifteen? Around fifteen?

GALLOWAY: Well, we're getting nearer, but I haven't counted. But many times. I'm saying to you "Many times," and I'm saying to you that I was friendly with him.

SEN. COLEMAN: And you describe him as "a very dear friend"?

GALLOWAY: I think you've quoted me as saying "a dear, dear friend." I don't often use the double adjective, but--

SEN. COLEMAN: --I was looking into your heart on that.--

GALLOWAY: --but "friend" I have no problem with. Senator, just before you go on--I do hope that you'll avail yourself of this dossier that I have produced. And I am really speaking through you to Senator Levin. This is what I have said about Saddam Hussein.

SEN. COLEMAN: Well, we'll enter that into the record without objection. I have no further questions of the witness. You're excused, Mr. Galloway.

GALLOWAY: Thank you very much.

In May I thought that the tone and manner of Galloway's examination suggested that the Senators were trying to establish a specific point for the record, in the hopes of using Galloway's testimony against him later.

In the exchange above it is abundantly clear that both Coleman and Levin simply wanted to enter Galloway's denial of having discussed Oil for Food business with Tariq Aziz in the record. Levin immediately ends his questioning after eliciting Galloway's "Never". Coleman is content to merely establish that Aziz and Galloway were "friends" who had met "many times" before saying "I have no further questions of the witness".

The London Times reports that "The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations will refer the Respect Party MP for possible prosecution after concluding that he gave 'false and misleading' testimony at his appearance before the panel in May." In particular, the Senate alleges they have found a paper trail showing payments leading from Fawaz Zureikat to George Galloway's wife. The Washington Times further reports that "Mr. Galloway personally asked for and received from Mr. Aziz and others eight allocations from 1999 to 2003 for the rights to 23 million barrels of oil." In any trial over perjury, Galloway's response to the Senator's questions in May will loom large. Galloway is laughing the whole thing off. The BBC reports:


But Mr Galloway told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The specific allegation against me is that I lied under oath in front of a senate committee.

"In this case the remedy is clear - they must charge me with perjury and I am ready to fly to the US today, if necessary, to face such a charge because it is simply false."

The Bethnal Green and Bow MP also launched an attack on the senate investigators.


"They have been cavalier with any idea of process and justice so far, but I am still willing to go to the US and I am still willing to face any charge of perjury before the senate committee," he said.

It was Galloway's contempt for the intelligence and capability of his Senatorial pursuers that may have gotten him into this perjury mess in the first place. It wasn't enough to remain silent on his relationship with with Zureikat. Playing to his gallery, Galloway boomed, "I can assure you, Mr. Zureikat never gave me a penny from an oil deal, from a cake deal, from a bread deal, or from any deal." Nice touch about the cake and the bread. Perhaps he couldn't imagine, at the time, why these yokels were asking him simple questions that were beneath his level of rhetorical ability. Even today Galloway may think so little of his adversaries that he was willing to boast on BBC Radio that "I am ready to fly to the US today, if necessary, to face such a charge because it is simply false."

He is as smart today as he was then.

[gtownspur]

define libertarian.

[AFE7FATMAN]

i Know this is not the real Yoni, but is this the real Ocotillo, from the OLD WOAI FORM,







Sandy's Friend :lol

I am the Original AFE7FATMAN- Check with Manny-Irsh Lass, Cherry Steele,
Becky Whetstone, or her former Husband, i.e. #3, i believe.