Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

I was promised a recession.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

Take your GOP plan out of the witness protection program.

The willow is too close to the house.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

Ah, the different things are different argument.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

Joe Lieberman disappointingly reemerged to remind us that he’s still alive.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Trump’s legal defense is going to be a dumpster fire inside a clown car on a derailing train.

I’m sure you banged some questionable people yourself.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

Peak wingnut was a lie.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

DeSantis transforms Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

You are here: Home / Georgeous George

Reader Interactions

88Comments

  2. 2.

    p.lukasiak

    must be a slow news day for Cindy Sheehan and Ward Churchill, because John is getting snarky about a Brit who tells the truth even though he’s not Jesus Fucking Christ himself, and thus open to criticism….

  5. 5.

    Pb

    Krista,

    You’re right, that does look like Janice (“That’s a *man*, baby!”) Dickinson… scary. So that photo is from UK Big Brother? It’s hilarious. I’d bet that not only would Norm Coleman not be caught dead on a show like that, but that no one would ever ask him on in the first place. :)

  6. 6.

    Davebo

    Coleman, a former district attorney, told Galloway before his sworn testimony that “senior Iraqi officials have confirmed that you, in fact, received oil allocations and that the documents that identify you as an allocation recipient are valid.”

    So John, hows that working out fo Norm?

    Have we gotten to subpeonas yet? Or anything? Other than Coleman swearing he has the goods on Galloway, Galloway telling Coleman great, put up or shut up, and finally, Coleman scurrying into the corner and refusing to discuss his evidence?

  7. 7.

    srv

    I think I’ve found a rational reason for John’s behavior (h/t the link at the bottom):

    Return of the Puppet Masters

    See, it’s the cats. They’re giving all you cat lovers brain parasites, and making you do strange things.

    As another aside, those of you who enjoy Paul Graham and his awesome essays might want to checkout one of the successes of micro-VC startups program:

    reddit.com

  8. 8.

    Pooh

    Sen. Norm was the commencement speaker at my LS graduation. Blahbiddy blah blah…(of course, the rumor around Dec. of that year was that we’d have Karl Rove. THAT would have been fantastic.)

  11. 11.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    John I fail to see how you somehow think this is proof that Galloway lied.

    Now, I can see you making this post if the DoJ charges him with something, but I wouldn’t hold your breath.

    Galloway still handed Norm Coleman (the guy who used Paul Wellstone’s death as a political tool) his ass.

  12. 12.

    Kav

    As a Brit and in opposition to the war I can state that I cannot stand Galloway. The man is a two faced demagogue. At this time he should be representing his constituents in parliament not advancing his profile in the ‘Big Brother House’.

    Admittedly the evidence against Galloway was not airtight and that was why I was so mad at the US senate for dragging him in front of them – he had already defended himself over the same evidence in a UK court. He may well not have oil soaked hands but he is not a man that the anti-war movement should want to get involved with. In my opinion in his history in politics it has been quite clear that Galloway’s only interest is in advancing himself. His constituents are realizing this now.

    At the risk of link whoring, I talked about Galloway when Fonda was going to tour with him. It is a message for everyone in the anti-war movement.

  14. 14.

    Steve

    Let’s put it this way. I wouldn’t personally believe one word out of Norm Coleman’s mouth. But Carl Levin, the ranking Democrat on the committee – a good, old-school liberal who takes his job very seriously – was also all over Galloway during the hearing, and seems to be 100% on board with the charges that have since been levied.

    Doesn’t prove anything, but no way would Levin participate in this if it was just a political stunt.

  16. 16.

    Otto Man

    I used to have all sorts of complaints and criticisms of the Iraq debacle, but now that I’ve seen George Galloway in a leotard, they’ve all just faded away.

  18. 18.

    Al Maviva

    I am actually a big fan of Gorgeous Georgie, since he at least has the nerve to openly take sides with Islamic radicals against the U.S. and Great Britain. So many on the hard left like to hem and haw and qualify their support for whatever the latest anti-western cause comes along as if their beliefs were something to be ashamed of… it’s refreshing to see a guy like George who, at least when he’s not in front of the U.S. Senate, openly embraces West-hatred. His Al Jazeera appearance, for instance, was quite invigorating.

  19. 19.

    Otto Man

    I am actually a big fan of George Bush, since he at least has the nerve to openly take sides with Islamic radicals against the U.S. Constitution. So many on the hard right like to hem and haw and qualify their support for whatever the latest unconstitutional cause comes along as if their beliefs were something to be ashamed of…. It’s refreshing to see a guy like George who, at least when he’s not lying to voters, openly embraces Constitution-hatred. His belief that the president is above the law, for instance, was quite invigorating.

  20. 20.

    The Other Steve

    If by ‘showed’ you mean lied his ass off in his Senate testimony.

    Shorter John Cole… But but but George lied!

    :-)

    I don’t like Galloway, but he’s had numerous accusations made against him over the years that have all come from forged documents. I get the impression Chalabi or someone doesn’t like him. Although I honestly don’t understand why they are so afraid of him, as he’s rather on the fringe of politics.

  22. 22.

    Paddy O'Shea

    Two things about Gorgeous George that upsets your average repressed Lush Bimbaugh blog potato:

    1) He routinely demolishes half-wit conservatives.

    2) He obviously doesn’t give a shit about what you think of him.

  24. 24.

    carpeicthus

    Look, Galloway *is*, in my book, a piece of shit. But I actually followed your link expecting to find a horde of people supporting him, as you implied, and it’s not there. That doesn’t mean people can’t ask for clear evidence regarding a specific charge against him. To the very few people who do ascribe good qualities to him, usually because they don’t know much about him and have bigger fish to fry (like Paddy, above): you’re terribly wrong. The guy is truly a loon (and hardly a rote leftist).

  25. 25.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    I am actually a big fan of Gorgeous Georgie, since he at least has the nerve to openly take sides with Islamic radicals against the U.S. and Great Britain.

    Hey talking out of your ass sure is fun isn’t it, Al?

    Stop making up bullshit and people may take you seriously.

  29. 29.

    srv

    Richard,

    And they probably sit around admiring their Ward Churchill posters.

    There must be 4 or 5 SF regulars on BJ, more if you include Bob. Maybe we could start a DougJ fan club at the Toronado.

    Hey, does DougJ have an official fan club yet?

  30. 30.

    Richard Bottoms

    And they probably sit around admiring their Ward Churchill posters.

    Who is Ward Churchill?

    I’m guessing he’s some out there lefty I’m supposed to care about because Sean Hannity says so.

  31. 31.

    Ancient Purple

    I’m guessing he’s some out there lefty I’m supposed to care about because Sean Hannity says so.

    Pretty much.

  32. 32.

    W.B. Reeves

    I am actually a big fan of Gorgeous Georgie, since he at least has the nerve to openly take sides with Islamic radicals against the U.S. and Great Britain. So many on the hard left like to hem and haw and qualify their support for whatever the latest anti-western cause comes along as if their beliefs were something to be ashamed of… it’s refreshing to see a guy like George who, at least when he’s not in front of the U.S. Senate, openly embraces West-hatred. His Al Jazeera appearance, for instance, was quite invigorating.
    January 23rd, 2006 at 10:26 pm

    This little bit of fiction ought to sober up anyone intoxicated by Al’s recent eloquence elsewhere regarding morality. It certainly did the trick for me.

  33. 33.

    jg

    He said the people in the WTC deserved to die. ‘Little Eichmans’ or something like that. He a jackass but because dems didn’t agree he should be public burned and then drawn and quartered he became the left’s spokesman in the eyes of the right.

  35. 35.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    Churchill’s comments about the WTC didn’t actually bother me. What he actually said was that the power players–the business execs and such, not the regular people just getting by–in the WTC reaped what they have sewn. He called them, little Eichmans.

    Those comments didn’t really bother me, but they outraged the right. They thought he should be fired from his job as a professor for saying those words, which is childish and stupid.

    Now, later down the line Ward Churchill ended up indirectly saying people who are against the Iraq War should support troops who frag their officers as a protest. I think that is where he lost his support. I know that is where he lost mine.

    Once I saw that he said that type of shit I realized the man was a hypocritical asshole. Fragging for Peace? Yea, great idea, moron.

  36. 36.

    Richard Bottoms

    Churchill’s comments about the WTC didn’t actually bother me. What he actually said was that the power players—the business execs and such, not the regular people just getting by—in the WTC reaped what they have sewn. He called them, little Eichmans.

    Pretty terrible.

    BTW, what television network does Ward run, because I’d hate to think could go on the air and call for the assasination of a world leader. Who knows who that might influence.

    Oh wait.

    Well at least we’re lucky he doesn’t run a major university that has a policy of segregation of blacks & whites when came to dating. Cause a presidential candidate might kick off his campaign there and who knows what signal that might send.

    Oh wait.

    God, he could even go so far as to head up a cult that makes enough money to start a major newspaper that is influential with politicans while performing mass marriage ceremonies of his zombie followers.

    Oh wait.

    So who is Ward Churchill again?

  37. 37.

    scs

    As someone who used to work in a building right next to the World Trade Center, I can tell you, that building was not filled with just business exec/power players. Even in those large financial corporations, most of the employees are staff: secretaries, admin assistants, temps, mail staff. As an educated guess, probably only less than 20% of the people at those companies were any sort of power players. And even most of the “power players” were a lot of former finance grad students, just doing boring numbers jobs- hardly any geopolitical players. So then, are you saying, it’s not so bad to kill 2000 regular people to get the 500 so-called power players in the building? Please explain.

  38. 38.

    Richard Bottoms

    So then, are you saying, it’s not so bad to kill 2000 regular people to get the 500 so-called power players in the building? Please explain.

    I’m saying what does the guy who said it have to do with me?

    Does he own some media comglomerate that can spread his message to a million viewers a day (Pat Robertson). Can he say he hates the 9/11 victims and then land a job on MSNBC (Glenn Beck).

    Did he command a radio station in the #1 market in the country from which he called Martin Luthr King a scumbag only to have a cigar smoking, (now) formerly fat talk host defend him?

    If so, then I’ll give a shit.

    Other wise I’ll leave it to his employers and the people in whatever the fuck community he lives in to take care of it.

  39. 39.

    scs

    Well my comment was directed more to Disenfranchised. I do agree that it should be up to his employers to take care of it.

  40. 40.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    So then, are you saying, it’s not so bad to kill 2000 regular people to get the 500 so-called power players in the building? Please explain.

    You sure are assuming a lot, scs.

    I never said I agreed with any of Churchill’s comments. I merely said I didn’t think his comments were outrageous. If you actually listen to his speech he does a fairly good job of defending his position.

    However, to validate my position that his comments weren’t outrageous, the people who wanted him to be fired actually felt the need to misconstrue what he said in order to generate the outrage. They said Churchill called all the people that died in the WTC little Eichmans. I watched his speech and he most certainly did not. Now why would they do this? The fact that his detractors felt the need to make it seem as if he labelled all the vitcims Eichmans, leads me to believe that even they knew his original comments wouldn’t have caused such attention.

  41. 41.

    scs

    What he actually said was that the power players—the business execs and such, not the regular people just getting by—in the WTC reaped what they have sewn. He called them, little Eichmans.

    Was this the quote more or less? What power players in the WTC? Like I said, there were few if any in there. It’s not the White House. Most of the real power players at those companies don’t even spend time there, they spend most of their time at their vacation homes in Florida or New Mexico, conference calling.

  42. 42.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    Oh and btw, I’m fairly certain that Churchill made these remarks outside of class, at some kind of event.

    Now, if he was making these type of comments in class, I could then understand the outrage and the calls for him to be fired. But as I said, his comments were not to a class.

  43. 43.

    W.B. Reeves

    For the record, I read Churchill’s “Roosting Chickens” essay. As I recall, it didn’t contain any distinction between “power players” and other victims. Churchill later tried to claim that he had intended the distinction and/or that it was implicit in the original language. However, this was only after O’Reily had stirred up the controversy. The fact remains that the distinction appears nowhere in the original,implicitly or otherwise.

    BTW, did you know that Churchill was an outspoken supporter of the Contras in Nicaragua back in the eighties and that he use to write for Soldier of Fortune Magazine? No? Gosh, I thought everyone knew who Ward Churchill was.

  44. 44.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    Hmm, maybe I feel for his spin then. Your saying that his original comments were only in the form of a written essay?

    Perhaps I saw the conference in which he defended himself and he merely made up the power player distinction.

    If the essay isn’t too long, I’ll check it out for myself.

  48. 48.

    HH

    “what television network does Ward run”

    Are you seriously suggesting that this is the reason one should be criticized or not?

  49. 49.

    srv

    See, Richard, he gets alot of attention, even now. Sorry I followed p.luks chirp.

    BTW, did you know that Churchill was an outspoken supporter of the Contras in Nicaragua back in the eighties and that he use to write for Soldier of Fortune Magazine? No? Gosh, I thought everyone knew who Ward Churchill was.

    Good thing we had Elliot Abrams and all those death squads to keep the native-folk in check. Like those folks who wear the Che shirt with slash – objectively pro-Pinochet.

  50. 50.

    ken mehlman RNC

    Back to the subject at hand: Galloway is scum. How dare he put on a tightsuit and wallow around with a tatoo’ed and delicious jezebel.
    His claims of lies, corruption and fraternish infestation of Parliment should definitely be smashed by this new lifestyle and wardrobe decision. Who is this guy? Has he never heard of a codpiece? Does he need one?
    When will this vacillitator rally behind the banner of freedom? When will he see the full power of the Mandate, via the US Electorate?
    JC.. great “communications” work. Frontier…soon to be a pioneer.

  51. 51.

    W.B. Reeves

    DV,

    Yes, the origin of the controversy was an article that Churchill wrote in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. It attacted little notice until O’Reily dredged it up much later.
    I have an essay at my blog that I wrote at the time. It might provide you with some pertinent details:

  55. 55.

    Richard Bottoms

    Are you seriously suggesting that this is the reason one should be criticized or not?

    No.

    I am seriously suggesting that there is a vast differnece between how much bandwidth I allocate to caring who Ward Chruchill is or what he does compared to a nut who has millions of dollars at his disposal, and a worldwide tekevision audience waiting for the Rapture when all those bothersome Christ-killers will get theirs.

    This particular nut has the president’s ear. How many divisions does Ward have?

    Ward Churchill is insignificant. His comments, however disgusting of importance pretty much only to the university he teaches at and the students/faculty involved.

    I don’t give a damn about him because he is the latest in a long line of crackpots the right trots out demanding I stop everything I’m doing, trying to keep them from ruining the country themselves, so I can catch a plane to broke dick Idaho to tell Ward to knock it off.

    Fuck him. I have better things to do.

  56. 56.

    Richard Bottoms

    If by ‘showed’ you mean lied his ass off in his Senate testimony.

    As for Mr. Galloway, he did exactly one thing that made a difference. He told the pompus assholes who called him before the glaring light to produce whatever evidence they had that he had done soemthing wrong.

    He also told them to go fuck themselves.

    If it had been John Gotti, I am sure there still would have been a similar appreciation for the sheer balls it took to do it. Sort of like Spock & Kirk admiring Khan while deplroing his actions.

    Mr. Galloway is similarly irrelevant to my life and worthy only of comment because his appearance on this silly show servers to point out the following:

    Rupert Murdoch supporter of all things Republican rakes in millions producing one degrading television show after another while at the same time propping up the Family Values crowd over at Faux News.

    I’m supposed to get al exercised about some stupid show that is making Murdoch or someone like him incrementally richer?

    Who cares.

  57. 57.

    moflicky

    the guy who used Paul Wellstone’s death as a political tool

    heh. who DIDN’T use Wellstone’s death as a political tool? His funeral looked more like the Democratic National Convention. The only thing missing was the balloon drop.

    1) He routinely demolishes half-wit conservatives.

    You didn’t bother listening to his debate with Hitchens did you?

  59. 59.

    Al Maviva

    Disenfranchised voter – nothing personal, but go fuck yourself you completely ignorant one-note dickhead. I’m tired of clueless fuckwits like you calling me a liar. Go check out Galloway’s Al Jazeera appearance then get back to me. Go look into the names and affiliations of the revolutionary islamacist assholes he’s taken into his “Respect” coalition. His Islamacist buddies are openly advocating blood-soaked Islamic revolution in Britain, and he is embracing them. He’s a turd, the Lord Haw Haw of the age, except Lord Haw Haw didn’t hold elected office as far as I know. Yeah, you can maybe point out that one splinter group has had a problem with Galloway for being insufficiently supportive, I guess Galloway hasn’t personally beheaded anybody on live television so they consider him a bit of a nancy boy. But that’s a pretty lame distinction – a politician is generally judged based on the causes he advocates. DV, get over your brain-blinding adherence to left wing dogma. Just because some corrupt left wing bag of tripe somewhere in the world is criticized, doesn’t mean that you are honor bound to defend him and his causes. Go back to Greenwald and get a better talking point. I know, I know, as a left wing constitution-lover, you’ll tell me that “I may disagree with violent radical muslims, but I’ll defend to the death their right to kill me.”

  60. 60.

    Pb

    Al Maviva,

    Don’t hold back, tell us how you really feel…

    I too am tired of “clueless fuckwits”, and I might agree that “a politician is generally judged based on the causes he advocates”–so let’s go to the videotape (as it were):

    The core of Coleman’s charges is that Jordanian businessman and Galloway friend Fawaz Zureikat made money from illegal Iraqi oil kickbacks arranged by Galloway and gave this money to the Galloway-founded Mariam Appeal, a fund that provided medical treatment to an Iraqi girl (Mariam) and campaigned against sanctions on Iraq. Galloway acknowledges Zureikat’s contributions but states he (Galloway) never arranged nor solicited any kickbacks or “oil allocations” and in any case he didn’t personally enrich himself from any of it.

    Er. Ok.

    Update: apparently unsatisfied with the hearing, Senator Coleman went back months later [5] and added that Galloway’s then wife, an officer of Mariam’s Appeal, actually got $150,000 of oil kickbacks (she denies it [6]) and further that former Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz verified Galloway’s kickback solicitations. But Aziz, imprisoned in a secret location without charges since early 2003, does not appear to have stated that Galloway specifically asked for oil allocations, only that he asked for money for the Appeal. Aziz does appear to state that funding from the oil allegedly allocated to Zureikat and others was intended to benefit Galloway and the Appeal. Galloway continues to deny wrongdoing and invites Senator Coleman to pursue perjury charges.

    Woo, if this Norm guy doesn’t come up with some proof sooner or later (sooner?) he’s gonna look pretty stupid.

    Coleman became the lead Senate Republican defender of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and the allegations of him illegally leaking the name of a covert CIA operative. Karl Rove reportedly convinced Coleman to seek a Senate seat in 2002 instead of running again for governor. In December 2005 he voted for a budget bill that cut funding from a number of programs, but kept funding for sugar beet farmers in Minnesota after Rove arraged the change. Coleman told Congress Daily that he wouldn’t vote for a bill that cut sugarbeet funding but “Karl Rove called me and asked what I wanted. A few hours later it was out of the bill.” [8]

    Never mind, I think I see where Norm is coming from here…

  61. 61.

    Paddy O'Shea

    Pinocchio Mo, lying again. Though not about implying that Hitchens is a conservative half-wit.

    That one I’ll give you.

  62. 62.

    W.B. Reeves

    Go check out Galloway’s Al Jazeera appearance then get back to me. Go look into the names and affiliations of the revolutionary islamacist assholes he’s taken into his “Respect” coalition. His Islamacist buddies are openly advocating blood-soaked Islamic revolution in Britain, and he is embracing them.

    I have a better idea Al. Since you are the one making the accusations and are presumably in possession of the facts, why don’t you present your proofs?

  63. 63.

    Paddy O'Shea

    It is so refreshing to see how quickly the little barking dogs of the totalitarian right adapt to new talking points!

    Al Maviva regurgitates: … as a left wing Constitution lover, you’ll tell me that I may disagree with violent radical muslims but I’ll defend to the death their right to kill me.

    See how effortlessly they lie? The issue, of course, is the spying by this administration upon millions of innocent Americans, all the while using “violent radical muslims” as their excuse for having done so. That Bush and his handlers have broken the law and violated the privacy of free American citizens is of no concern to them. All they care about is whether or not their faux cowboy comes away with a political advantage.

    I have never been able to figure out why so-called “conservatives” are so strongly indignant about those who would question Bush’s and the effectiveness of his self-styled War On Terror. I mean, it’s not like he’s done a very good job fighting the Muslim Menace.

    Look at it this way, hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent, we’ve suffered 10s of thousands of military casualties, and what is the result? Over 4 years later Osama bin Laden is still at large and his al Qaeda organization is still killing Americans. That and we’re mired in an Asian land war that will continue to drain our military and treasury for at least another decade.

    Isn’t it time we got some people in there that know what they’re doing? This clueless dress-up cowboy has had more than his opportunity to get something done. And he’s failed miserably.

  64. 64.

    Al Maviva

    George Galloway urging jihad in Jerusalem and Iraq on Syrian TV, July 31, 2005:

    The real question is, after the evidence of Sykes-Picot 1, are you ready to accept Sykes-Picot 2? What does Sykes-Picot mean to the Arab world? Nothing except division, disunity, weakness, and failure. Two of your beautiful daughters are in the hands of foreigners – Jerusalem and Baghdad. The foreigners are doing to your daughters as they will. The daughters are crying for help, and the Arab world is silent. And some of them are collaborating with the rape of these two beautiful Arab daughters. Why? Because they are too weak and too corrupt to do anything about it. So this is what Sykes-Picot will do to the Arabs. Are you ready to have another hundred years like the hundred years you just had?

    […]

    Galloway (on Al-Jazeera TV, July 31, 2005), cheering on the insurgents:

    This started out as a wish to terrorize the world with American power, or as Sharon would say: “Terrrrrrorize” the world with American power. But in fact it ended demonstrating the exact opposite. They can control the skies, but only if they don’t come within range of an RPG, but they can’t control one single street in any part of occupied Iraq. Not one street. Not one street anywhere. These poor Iraqis – ragged people, with their sandals, with their Kalashnikovs, with the lightest and most basic of weapons – are writing the names of their cities and towns in the stars, with 145 military operations every day, which has made the country ungovernable by the people who occupy it. We don’t know who they are, we don’t know their names, we never saw their faces, they don’t put up photographs of their martyrs, we don’t know the names of their leaders. I’m sure, for all the times I spent in Iraq, that I never met any of them before. They are not the comfortable in the former regime, they are not the leaders, with maybe one exception: Izzat Ibrahim Al-Durri. They are the base of this society. They are the young men and the young women who decided, whatever their feelings about the former regime – some are with, some are against. But they decided, when the foreign invaders came, to defend their country, to defend their honor, to defend their families, their religion, their way of life from a military superpower, which landed amongst them. And they are winning the war. America is losing the war in Iraq, and even the Americans now admit it. Even the puppet ministers and regime in Baghdad know it. The former puppet minister (Iyad) Allawi admitted it three times in the last month. America is losing the war in Iraq. And this will not change. The resistance is getting stronger every day, and the will to remain as an occupier by Britain and America is getting weaker everyday. Therefore, it can be said, truly said, that the Iraqi resistance is not just defending Iraq. They are defending all the Arabs, and they are defending all the people of the world from American hegemony.

    And

    It’s not the Muslims who are the terrorists. The biggest terrorists are Bush, and Blair, and Berlusconi, and Aznar, but it is definitely not a clash of civilizations. George Bush doesn’t have any civilization, he doesn’t represent any civilization. We believe in the Prophets, peace be upon them. He believes in the profits, and how to get a piece of them. That’s his god. That’s his god. George Bush worships money. That’s his god – Mammon.

    Galloway (on ANB TV, July 28, 2005), encouraging the Jihadis:

    Most of the children, most of the schools, most of the buses, were bombed by the United States. Let’s keep this clearly in perspective: Most of the children who died in Iraq were killed by George Bush, not by Zarqawi. Most of the schools that were wrecked, buses that were bombed, hospitals that were destroyed, lives that were taken, were taken by George Bush, not by Zarqawi. Number two: Most of the resistance in Iraq is not Zarqawi, It’s not foreign, whatever “foreign” means when Iraq is occupied by 250,000 foreign armies. Most of their resistance are Iraqis resisting the foreign occupation of their country. Most of the operations which they carry out are against the occupying forces and their collaborators, and this is normal in every liberation struggle.

    In a speech at Damascus University, propping up Assad, the corrupt dictator who has been recognized by the UN as behind the assassination of pro-democracy leaders and journalists in Lebanon:

    For me he is the last Arab ruler, and Syria is the last Arab country. It is the fortress of the remaining dignity of the Arabs, and that’s why I’m proud to be here and addressing you this evening.

    and about Hezbollah and those pro-democracy demonstrators in Lebanon:

    The reason why Syria is being threatened is not because of anything bad which she did, but because of the good which she is doing. That’s the reason why Syria is being threatened – because she will not betray the Palestinian resistance, because she will not betray the Lebanese resistance, Hizbullah, because she will not sign a shameful surrender-peace with General Sharon, and above all – more than any of these others – because Syria will not allow her country to be used as a military base for America to crush the resistance in Iraq. These are the reasons why Syria is being targeted by these imperial powers.

    Now I warned in July that Lebanon was being sharpened as a knife to be used in the back of Syria, and I warned the Lebanese people that those who care nothing for Lebanon are preparing to use you and your government to weaken the last Arab power. And I turned out to be right. This knife has been sharpened and now they are using it.

    And encouraging a monolithic pan-Arab state under sharia law:

    What your lives would be if from the Atlantic to the Gulf we had one Arab union – all this land, 300 million people, all this oil and gas and water, occupied by a people who speak the same language, follow the same religions, listen to the same Um Kulthum… The Arabs would be a superpower in the world if they had this unity, instead of the shameful situation in which the Arabs find themselves today.

    Referring to the United States and Britain in the same speech:

    So I say to you, citizens of the last Arab country, this is a time for courage, for unity, for wisdom, for determination, to face these enemies with the dignity your president has shown, and I believe, God willing, we will prevail and triumph, fwa-salam aleikum.

    Is that enough of the stomping on Galloway’s clay feet, WB, or do you want some more? The trick obviously isn’t in finding evidence of Galloway’s anti-western sedition or his giving aid and comfort to the jihadis. It’s in sorting through the vast piles of his propagandizing and urging jihad to try to deliver the most trenchant bits. There’s just too much of it, really.

  65. 65.

    Pb

    Paddy O’Shea,

    You forget: true conservatives don’t believe in a constitutional right to privacy–at least, not for liberals. Then again, they probably don’t know about the fourth amendment either, or if they do, they think that executive power trumps it. Or perhaps they don’t think at all and just “trust in the President”, because anything else would be treason…

  66. 66.

    Pb

    You know Al,

    I can’t bring myself to disagree with most of that, because most of it is just George Galloway telling it like it is, and almost none of it is as extreme as your characterizations of it. I guess the true test would be, if an Arab power had invaded the United States under false pretenses, would George Galloway be saying the same sorts of things to the American people? And, while we’re at it, what would the leaders and the pundits in America be saying…

  67. 67.

    The Other Steve

    Is that enough of the stomping on Galloway’s clay feet, WB, or do you want some more?

    But seriously… What does all this have to do with the charges against him?

    That’s the part I want evidence for. I already know he is a blowhard.

  68. 68.

    Lines

    I’ve never heard Al Vulva mischaracterize something before, please tell me it isn’t true.

    Oh wait, you mean George Galloway has Muslim constituents, that he’s elected by the largest population of Muslims in Britain?

    He’s nuts, he’s interesting, and it seems that he’s having a lot of fun making Republicans upset. I’d say that he’s like a class clown, a lot of fun to laugh at/with but its not someone you want to be associated with.

  69. 69.

    W.B. Reeves

    Is that enough of the stomping on Galloway’s clay feet, WB, or do you want some more? The trick obviously isn’t in finding evidence of Galloway’s anti-western sedition or his giving aid and comfort to the jihadis. It’s in sorting through the vast piles of his propagandizing and urging jihad to try to deliver the most trenchant bits. There’s just too much of it, really.

    First off, thanks for backing up your argument. I think your citations prove a few things:

    1. Galloway is a vociferous and acerbic critic of U.S. power.

    2. He is a vocal supporter of pan-Arabism as a counter to the power of the U.S. and the European nations.

    3. He approves and celebrates armed resistance to the occupation of Iraq.

    Now let’s look at your original claim:

    Go check out Galloway’s Al Jazeera appearance then get back to me. Go look into the names and affiliations of the revolutionary islamacist assholes he’s taken into his “Respect” coalition. His Islamacist buddies are openly advocating blood-soaked Islamic revolution in Britain, and he is embracing them.

    Not to put too fine a point on it but I see nothing in the above citations addressing the composition of the “Respect” coalition or advocacy of a “blood soaked Islamic revolution in Britain.” Those were the two substantive claims you made.

    Likewise, despite your characterizations, the terms “Jihad” or “Jihadist” do not appear there. If you are equating the entire Iraqi resistance with Jihadists, then we have a difference as to what the meaning of that word is.

    If you want to change the subject to whether or not Galloway qualifies as a tosser, fine. Just don’t presume that you’ve answered the initial question when you do.

    As for Galloway’s feet of clay, that seems to be a chronic defect of politicians, which is why it is unwise to idolize them. This is a lesson that the Left has apparently learned. The Right appears still addicted to such hero worship.

  70. 70.

    Kimmitt

    I have never been able to figure out why so-called “conservatives” are so strongly indignant about those who would question Bush’s and the effectiveness of his self-styled War On Terror. I mean, it’s not like he’s done a very good job fighting the Muslim Menace.

    It took me a bit, but I did finally figure it out — they just really really hate left-of-center Americans and will do absolutely anything to gain political advantage over them. This was made clear to me when the President of the United States used “Massachusetts” as an epithet during the Presidential debates — and when Vice President Cheney did the same thing during his debate. They don’t think that we’re all one country, so the idea of the national good isn’t fully part of their vocabulary.

  71. 71.

    Bob In Pacifica

    So Galloway makes an ass of himself on tv. Maybe he’s looking for WMDs under his desk.

    You keep saying the Galloway lied, Cole. Prove it. Prove it and send it to the Department of Justice. They can’t seem to get a case going.

    From what I’ve heard reported, there are Bush supporters in Texas who pled guilty in the oil-for-food scam and Galloway hasn’t been served with anything from DOJ.

    Having said that, I am always suspicious of anyone who would associate with Jane Fonda. Common sense precludes public appearances with her. Her career has all the markings of an intelligence asset. Better to dress like a clown.

  72. 72.

    Lines

    Better to dress like a clown.

    Or act like on, in the case of Galloway.

    Look, John and all the rest that think Galloway somehow is a Democrat, you’re just doing the “Morphine Post” on this. You do it so you get that instant high that you know is going to come from watching all the “lefties” you slimed run around and shout at you from afar.

    From Sheehan To Galloway and back again, your mischaracterization of the applause Galloway got for slamming Norm Coleman with a 250lb flabby bicept is pathetic and the schtick is getting old. It also doesn’t help us have constructive discussions with you later.

    Oh, and Michael Moore is fat.

  73. 73.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    If you are equating the entire Iraqi resistance with Jihadists, then we have a difference as to what the meaning of that word is.

    Al is equating the two, and that is why his comment is bullshit. Al clearly thinks that anyone participating in the Iraq resistance is a terrorist.

    Now, Galloway does support the right of the Iraqi’s to resist an occupation in their country, but that is not the same as saying he supports jihadists.

    That is why what you said was bullshit Al. While some of the resistance in Iraq does consists of terrorists, the vast majority are Iraqi Insurgents who are fighting what they view is an illegal occupation.

    Galloway just happens to agree with them. To characterize that as “supporting Islamist Radicals” is not only false it is blantantly dishonest.

  74. 74.

    Al Maviva

    He told the Al Jazeera audience that the presence of Israelis in Jerusalem and the presence of the U.S. in Iraq was the rape of their prettiest daughters. My understanding of rape in Arab culture, which is often described as an honor/shame society, is that rape is a crime of honor, and the proper response is honor killing. In other words, when he went on about how the daughters were crying out, and nobody was coming to their aid, was a call shaming the Arab world, asking it to make war on the U.S. This isn’t a politico’s reasoned discussion of dissent. It’s a call for war and murder that I’m sure was heard pretty clearly in the Arab honor/shame based society that pays attention to Al Jazeera. How do you take this to be anything other than an open call to make war on the U.S., and Israel? C’mon, I thought you lefties were culturally sensitive. Isn’t a claim that the US is raping Islam a call for an honor killing? You on the left are always crowing about how Bush keeps making culturally ignorant mistakes. Um, how ’bout noticing when one of your own uses recognizable culture-specific semiotics to urge on the people who are at war with us, and to encourage those not at war to join in?

    And Disenfranchised Voter, I guess you didn’t hear it the first time. I’ll repeat myself: fuck you. A disagreement with how I view the facts on Galloway – a pretty reasonable reading of Galloway if you could be bothered to look at his own words and try to understand the significance of those words in a culture other than the grad student lounge – isn’t grounds for calling me a liar. Come up with a better talking point than saying I’m lying about something as your opening gambit in an argument. It’s a stalinist debate tactic to ignore the arguments, and just attack the speaker. Other tyrants have advocated similar tactics, but given your politics that seems most appropriate, and besides, I’m sure you’ll take any comparison to Stalin as a favorable thing. I’d be respectful if you said I was wrong, or that I misunderstand what Galloway said, or that I’m the running dog lackey of capitalist imperialist pigs. But you didn’t, you started your argument by throwing shit. Jeezus, you can’t even be bothered to come up with a good insult or a slur specific to me, just generic insults. I guess the left just isn’t drawing the talent these days that it used to. Slide, could you at least throw this guy some decent insults? You have two or three that you use over and over again. Anything would be better than the only arrow he has in the quiver, which appears to be the grade school retort, “Liar, liar, pants on fire.” I suspect that DV uses that everywhere, even as an answer on his algebra tests. Honestly, what does one say in retort when that’s the argument? “I know you are but what am I?” Pathetic.

  75. 75.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    You on the left are always crowing about how Bush keeps making culturally ignorant mistakes. Um, how ‘bout noticing when one of your own uses recognizable culture-specific semiotics to urge on the people who are at war with us, and to encourage those not at war to join in?

    One of our own?

    LOL! I never said I agreed with Galloway, just that your charaturizing of him as a supporter of Islamic Radicials is nothing but bullshit rhetoric–and it is. I don’t need to defend the “cultural insensitivity” of his comments. I only attacked your claim that he is a supporter of terrorists.

    There are two choices, either you really believe what you said about Galloway and thus are delusional or two, don’t believe it and are just a liar. Take your pick. I thought I was being fair. I guess you prefer delusional?

    By your last post I think it is fair to say that you view someone who supports the right of Iraqi Insurgents to resist an occupation as “supporting Islamic Radicals”.

    The thing I find really hilarious is how pissed off you are.

    I mean it’s not like to haven’t tried to misled us before about something. Or are you forgetting the whole Bush’s NSA program is legal shit you tried to pass off.

  77. 77.

    W.B. Reeves

    I’m still waiting to find out about Jihadis in the Respect coalition and Galloway’s support for bloody Islamic revolution in Britain. Those two claims seem to have gone down the memory hole.

  78. 78.

    Kazinski

    What Galloway has that makes him so effective when he debates the wingnuts is that he has no compunction about looking straight into the camera and lying. Full on blatent lies. People just don’t expect that in debates, we are usually on our toes for shaded truth or skewed facts, but Galloway’s big lie technique is just so unexpected it is genius. I guess it is so effective because commited marxists like Galloway are so rare in the political arena these days, but when you have a bigger truth on your side lying about the little things becomes a duty.

  79. 79.

    W.B. Reeves

    What Galloway has that makes him so effective when he debates the wingnuts is that he has no compunction about looking straight into the camera and lying. Full on blatent lies.

    How about sharing some of the juicier examples with us?

  80. 80.

    Al Maviva

    >>>charaturizing of him as a supporter of Islamic Radicials is nothing but bullshit rhetoric

    He made a full on call for jihad with the “rape of jerusalem and Iraq” statement. Jerusalem is one of the holiest sites in Islam, and Iraq (especially Southern Iraq to Shiites) is as well. Iraq also occupies a special place in Arab culture as the administrative seat of the caliphates and the Ottoman Empire, as well as the proud historic economic center of the Arab world. That would be like telling a group of Catholics that somebody was raping Rome, and telling them “shame on you for not hearing Rome’s cries.” If that is not urging and encouraging jihad, making common cause with AQ and the other Islamic radicals, I can’t imagine what you would classify as doing so. I guess it doesn’t count until he’s actually blowing himself up – as if we could be so lucky?

  81. 81.

    Mac Buckets

    This thread is a conservative’s wet dream. The old familiar wacko libs defending George al-Galloway and Ward Churchill? File this thread under “Why liberals can’t win elections in the USA.”

  83. 83.

    Kazinski

    WB Reeves:
    Here you go:
    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006214.php

    I’d say specifically denying any connection to Oil-for-food to a senate panel, when there is documentary evidence proving that the money has gone into accounts you control is blatent lying.

    On another subject, what has gotten Ward Churchill’s tit in a wringer is that he commited plagerism and threatened the victim. It was his outrageous statements that got him noticed and started the investigation. They already gave him a pass for lying about being an Indian in order to get his Native American Studies gig at UC. Something about “self identification” being more important than DNA. His lies about being a Viet Nam Vetran was just ignored, since they weren’t material to anything.

  84. 84.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    This thread is a conservative’s wet dream. The old familiar wacko libs defending George al-Galloway and Ward Churchill? File this thread under “Why liberals can’t win elections in the USA.”

    You’re right…Conservatives don’t think people should have the right to free speech.

    Noone in here said they agreed with Galloway’s words or Churchill’s words for that matter. I was defending Churchill’s right to speak his mind outside of his class and not be fired for it.

    I believe in free speech, and you think people should be fired for writing essays that anger you.

  87. 87.

    Kazinski

    I don’t think Churchill should be fired for his views, and Colorado has specifically said that he WILL NOT be fired for his views. He is under investigation for, and will likely be fired for plagerism and academic fraud. Both very serious and fireable offenses at a University. Should he get a pass, on those very real transgressions because they only came to light because he made an ass out of himself?

Comments are closed.