Galloway / Hitchens Debate [Archive]

Eg.

17-09-2005, 07:26 PM

We invaded Iraq violently and illegally, we commit atrocoties, weve killed thousands of civillians, US forces leveled the city of falujah, and masacared its civillian population.

The people have a right to resist, we are an occupying force we should withdraw and let the Iraqis be free.

Democracy cannot happen under an occupation.

Yeah, cause Japan, Germany, and god, who else did we control for along time. but anyway, yeah, those nations are despotic hell holes that NEVER have any semblence of a democracy

Solaris

17-09-2005, 09:07 PM

We didnt invade japan.

Its surrenderd.

little.rebel

17-09-2005, 10:05 PM

George galloway is good at argueing his case in political fights (although his use of words and political statements accusing imperialism does eventually bore me), and he does expose the usual idiot polititians little lies that they tell so frequently.
But he himself has become an insane mental raving nutcase who rides on a wave of populatiry from a bunch of pro taliban arab imigrants, his cause if it did succeed with all his efforts ammounting to what? A shithole of a country run by tratorous and pro islam crackpots. And he is just one of them, there are lots more and one way or another they need to go before they cause anymore harm.

If only he had used such newly discovered talents to actually realise and work for a positive purpose, like helping sorting out in a decent way, the mess that this county has become and helping argue the man in the streets corner.

But then agin he is an idiot and a fool and a dumbass.

Solaris

17-09-2005, 10:24 PM

Why. Arab immigrants wtf is that. Pro taliban, PRO TALIBAN? The USA government funded the taliban, THEY ARE PRO TALIBAN, george galloway has always expressed his hatred at the bathist and taliban regimes, the thing is he was doing so while our governments were selling them weapons.

A shithole of a country run by tratorous and pro islam crackpots.

Trautors? Our governments are the trautors lying to the people, and wasting out soldiers LIVES on F****g oil.

If only he had used such newly discovered talents to actually realise and work for a positive purpose, like helping sorting out in a decent way, the mess that this county has become and helping argue the man in the streets corner.
It IS A USEFUL WAY! Owning politicians on International TV is a very effective method, He is on street corners, he holds a session with his consituents every Sunday!

But then agin he is an idiot and a fool and a dumbass.

I beg to differ, hes a great man, and is very inspiring, hes telling the truth, and is a welcome oppersition to the politicians we have in the main stream.

ComradeBadger

17-09-2005, 11:39 PM

Hated the Bathist regime so much he accepted money from them.

WHAT A HERO!

baxter

18-09-2005, 12:47 AM

But then agin he is an idiot and a fool and a dumbass.

I agee totally.

Edit... This moron brings shame only anybody who genuinely opposes the war, his pouting and posing is as shameful as his opinions.
BTW I haven't listened to the discussion, I couldn't be bothered

Solaris

18-09-2005, 12:36 PM

He never took money from the regime, the telegraph said that and he proved them wrong, IN COURT.

Why does he bring shame on us, hes telling the truth about Iraq.

The American government sold weapons too and funded the bathist regime, not Mr. Galloway.

Lemonking

18-09-2005, 02:26 PM

solaris where are the UFOS?

Solaris

18-09-2005, 03:11 PM

solaris where are the UFOS?
Grow up.

Comrade, wheres your evidence that he took money from the bathists? Its just blatent lies.

baxter

18-09-2005, 04:38 PM

"I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability."

I kind of lost the will to listen to this guy after this. I might not support the war but I certainly don't believe in blowing kisses up a tyrants arse.

Not quite sure who he's talking about.

Here's a clue (http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/mirror/apr2003/2/4/00001734-FFF5-1EA4-A51B80BFB6FA0000.jpg)

Solaris

18-09-2005, 04:48 PM

How about this (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/handshake300.jpg)

George Galloway never said that, he was speaking about the Iraqi people.

baxter

18-09-2005, 05:03 PM

Kangy

18-09-2005, 05:04 PM

He met Saddam like a good friend, at a time when the country was considering war with him. Months later, he's been actively encouraging the enemy to kill our own soldiers. I know the war isn't a good thing, but we cannot back out now, nor is that kind of comment ever acceptable. It is treason, and he should be jailed for it.

Solaris

18-09-2005, 08:38 PM

What comment, wanting to back out is treason? Way to go freedom of speech.

That is not a source, george galloway never said that, its lies.

He was there to persuade Sadam to allow the weapons inspecters in, so hopefully war would be averted, and 30,000 civillians would not die. No matter what he said its acceptable when your trying to save that many lives.

Again, Galloway was there to stop war, rumsfeld was there to sell Sadam CHEMICAL WEAPONS!!!!!

Eg.

18-09-2005, 08:41 PM

We didnt invade japan.

Its surrenderd.

we occupied it with a military government, mcauthor, for quite a while

Kangy

18-09-2005, 08:44 PM

What comment, wanting to back out is treason? Way to go freedom of speech.

No, the comments he made that called for Iraqis to fight and kill our troops in Iraq. That source can probably be verified by others, though. I think you seem to be very good at sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "AHAHA, I'M NOT LISTENING TO YOU, LOL!" when someone comes up with something against Galloway, a man who says that the downfall of the Soviet Union is the biggest catastrophe in his life.

baxter

18-09-2005, 08:51 PM

That is not a source, george galloway never said that, its lies.

Yeah sure it is, try this source then.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/otherparties/story/0,9061,1483783,00.html

Talking of lies here's a gem

“As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as [US Secretary of Defence] Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns.” He added, “I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and American governments and businessmen were selling guns and gas.”

Some opponent you was George.

"Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem.”

Solaris

18-09-2005, 08:59 PM

I also make that comment.

I support the Iraqi resistance, and hope the western imperilaslist offensive which began a good while ago is stopped. And is nessacary for a free world.

Look at it this way, if we orderd our troops to go into say Serbia and commit genocide,they were ordered to shoot civillians on site - were talking hypothetically - here, then Im sure you would support the serbian insurgents, or at least I hope you would.

I support the actions the Irish resistence took in 1916 fighting and killing 'our' troops in Irealand, we commited many atrocoties there, and we had no right to do so.

The same situation as hypotheticall described above is whats happening now in Iraq, except on a lesser, scail. Our troops are not shooting civillians, and the British soldiers are generally tryng to minimalise civillian casualties. However in supporting the Americans with there masacare in fallujah and across Iraq of civillians, the people have a right to resist.

The coalition troops, are not targetting civillians, but are not going out of there way to prevent colateral damage.

We are a violent and illgal occupier and we should withdraw, if we dont we become a legitimate target. The people resoncable for this is out government for putting our troops in this position, it makes me very angry how theve thrown away the lives of out people like this, its a truely unforgiveable offense.

What I want most of all is our troops to withdraw, and Im sure Mr. Galloway does to.

Solaris

18-09-2005, 09:02 PM

Yeah sure it is, try this source then.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/otherparties/story/0,9061,1483783,00.html

Talking of lies here's a gem

“As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as [US Secretary of Defence] Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns.” He added, “I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and American governments and businessmen were selling guns and gas.”

Some opponent you was George.

"Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem.”

Baxter the source for that article is the times, not very reliable imo.

The times once called Nelson Mandela a terrorist who should be hanged, its a pile of crap, and Id like a first hand source if you will.

Kangy

18-09-2005, 09:22 PM

I also make that comment.

I support the Iraqi resistance, and hope the western imperilaslist offensive which began a good while ago is stopped. And is nessacary for a free world.

Look at it this way, if we orderd our troops to go into say Serbia and commit genocide,they were ordered to shoot civillians on site - were talking hypothetically - here, then Im sure you would support the serbian insurgents, or at least I hope you would.

I support the actions the Irish resistence took in 1916 fighting and killing 'our' troops in Irealand, we commited many atrocoties there, and we had no right to do so.

They're all completely different situations. Genocide in Serbia is in no way related to Iraq. The key is in the way you described it. Serbia would be genocide. And no, I still wouldn't support the murder of our troops. I'd protest damned hard to get it stopped though, as I'm sure most people in this country would.

Again, the Irish Independance War is completely different. If anything, it's just showing up your complete ignorance.

Solaris

18-09-2005, 09:24 PM

No, the conept is the same.

Our troops are killing the civillians of another country, for our imperilist desires.

If France occupied us would you support us shooting French troops?

baxter

18-09-2005, 09:32 PM

"Your excellency, Mr President, I greet you in the name of the many thousands of people in Britain who stood against the tide and opposed the war and aggression against Iraq and continue to oppose the war by economic means, which is aimed to strangle the life out of the great people of Iraq ... I greet you too in the name of the Palestinian people ... I thought the president would appreciate to know that even today, three years after the war, I still meet families who are calling their newborn sons Saddam. Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem"

So Galloway never actually said this, every Bristish newpaper and news channel got it wrong ?

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=I+salute+your+courage%2C+your+strength+your+indefatigability&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB

Solaris

18-09-2005, 09:48 PM

Not every paper has reported that, give me a proper souce not a google search.

Kangy

18-09-2005, 09:51 PM

No, the conept is the same.

Our troops are killing the civillians of another country, for our imperilist desires.

If France occupied us would you support us shooting French troops?

*sigh*

You obviously know nothing about how Ireland achieved independance, or your view is completely skewered. I won't even bother going there.

And if France occupied us, I think it would be appropriate for us to shoot French troops. Well, unless they were trying to work to fix the problems and get out of there as soon as possible anyway, then I damned well wouldn't.

If France occpied us today, it'd be completely different to us occupying Iraq. For a start, our government hasn't commited genocide, and it isn't ruled by a dictator.

Solaris

18-09-2005, 09:55 PM

Kangy, Im irish, and my great uncle was in the IRA, he blew himself up actually.

Anyway, our troops are a legitimate target to the insurgents.

If a country invaded yours and killed your civillians youd want to resist.

baxter

18-09-2005, 10:00 PM

Not every paper has reported that, give me a proper souce not a google search.

No, This as gone as far as it is going, your point blank refusal to accept anything close to the truth over this guy really has ground any sort of debate with you to an end.
To simply align yourself with this idiot because he goes round spouting antiwar rhetoric is silly.
I object to this war but he does not speak for me nor does he represent me.

Kangy

18-09-2005, 10:26 PM

Kangy, Im irish, and my great uncle was in the IRA, he blew himself up actually.

Interesting. So surely you'll know that unlike the Iraqi government, they specifically declared independance after years of occupation? It's nothing like Iraq, who's government have specifically asked American forces to help them get things sorted out.

I think it's a matter of having some respect and dignity, to be honest. I think the moment you say that you'd rather have a soldier of your own country be killed than the other person who's trying to kill him in a premeditated attack by the other person, you no longer really deserve to be living in that country.

Eg.

18-09-2005, 10:53 PM

you see hes not, hes saying that about america, apparently a nation he has no love for. What hes saying is, "as long as its not my shit, its not good for the world"

SAJ

19-09-2005, 12:27 AM

Talking of lies here's a gem

“As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as [US Secretary of Defence] Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns.” He added, “I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and American governments and businessmen were selling guns and gas.”

Which part of that is a lie exactly?

baxter

19-09-2005, 12:45 AM

This part "I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein "

"Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem

Edit...Incidentally Galloway was so proud of this meeting he lied and denied it

Galloway first denied meeting Saddam Hussein, saying. "I had no opportunity because we were in a group of about fifty people. I didn't actually speak to him face to face." (Daily Record, 21st January). When TV pictures showed the opposite was true Galloway adopted the ‘I-was-speaking-to-the-Iraqi-people explanation

SAJ

19-09-2005, 02:26 AM

This part "I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein "

"Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem

Well I see nothing that constitutes his stated position re:Saddam , as a lie. If you have anything more to add from that quote , please share.

Galloway first denied meeting Saddam Hussein, saying. "I had no opportunity because we were in a group of about fifty people. I didn't actually speak to him face to face." (Daily Record, 21st January). When TV pictures showed the opposite was true Galloway adopted the ‘I-was-speaking-to-the-Iraqi-people explanation

Source please, as its not clear what year you are referring to.
Also , as GG has been to Iraq on many occasions , it wouldnt be beyond most journalists to "switch and bait" the responses and visits. Im not claiming that is what happened, I am however deeply sceptical about journalists and a figure whom it is clearly permissable to fling s*** at.

EDIT: I hope the daily record article was from jan 21 of `04 or earlier. "I did not salute Saddam, I saluted the Iraqi people, Galloway tells libel trial" is the headline from a times article on 16 nov `04 :http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1360810,00.html
A search at the daily record gets no results as far as I can tell.

baxter

19-09-2005, 03:04 AM

I am however deeply sceptical about journalists and a figure whom it is clearly permissable to fling s*** at.

Excuse me but what are you talking about?
He visited Iraq twice, once in 1994 and once in 2002.
In 1994 he betrayed totally the people of Iraq by sympathising and cuddling up to a mass murderer and letting him know what a good egg he was.
The very people that he now proudly boasts he tried to save by sucking up to a homicidal maniac.

I will post this for the last time

"Your excellency, Mr President, I greet you in the name of the many thousands of people in Britain who stood against the tide and opposed the war and aggression against Iraq and continue to oppose the war by economic means, which is aimed to strangle the life out of the great people of Iraq ... I greet you too in the name of the Palestinian people ... I thought the president would appreciate to know that even today, three years after the war, I still meet families who are calling their newborn sons Saddam. Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem"

If you feel that Galloway is unjustly victimised, unfairly treated and is an all round good egg, fine.
Galloway does not represent the antiwar movement; Galloway represents himself, jumping on whatever popular bandwagon is available.

Edit try this link http://www.labourfriendsofiraq.org.uk/archives/000537.html

SAJ

19-09-2005, 03:18 AM

Actually , GG went to Iraq a number of times after the gulf war, the two visits that get mentioned are the two times he met Saddam.
So what I was suggesting was that it would possible to get a quote saying "I didn't actually speak to him face to face." (referring to another trip to iraq).

The man is no Nelson Mandela, but he was vocal and active in campaigning against sanctions on Iraq -which claimed the lives of half a million people- well before Blair was even elected.
At the end of the day , hes just a politicion but as far as bandwagons go, the mans been driving it for over a decade.

baxter

19-09-2005, 03:42 AM

Ok you're right enough and to be frank I wash my hands of this individual. To be honest with you, I have never paid much attention to him, other than recently.
I have dismissed him since his infamous statements.
Time will tell whether he is sincere.
Maybe you are right and he genuinely cares, maybe I am right and he just wishes to promote his own political career.
Either way we should to agree to disagree and see how it pans out

SAJ

19-09-2005, 04:17 AM

Baxter, truly it was not my intention to wind you up in any way.
My interest in this is ; why is it that in thread about Hitchens and Galloway, that there are only posts critical(to put it mildly) of Galloway?
The pattern is unmistakable across the vast majority of mass-media. Hitchens is outspoken and vindictive in his writings to an amazing degree, but because his views and the subjects of his attacks are in accordance with those in power , he is given a free hand(compare and contrast with Galloway).
It seems that permission to smear certain figures is given or withheld ,depending on how their public behaviour agrees or disagrees with the political and corporate elites.
The public(as demonstrated in this thread for example) act on the perceived label of "person-non-grata", with great glee and enthusiasm.

Solaris

19-09-2005, 09:23 AM

Hes opposed Sadam sincethe beggining of his career, hes always voiced his anger at our government selling him weapons. He camppained against the sanctions. Hes always been anti-sadam, the lies your quoting, are just propoganda, and no site youve given me can show any evidence of him saying he salutes Sadam.

Kangy

19-09-2005, 09:42 AM

Solaris, he's linked to several sites now. You're just sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting over everyone else.

baxter

19-09-2005, 12:31 PM

Saj, it's ok you're not winding me. I have posted my reasons for disliking this individual and links to my reasons.

This is the last link I will post (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Galloway#Speech_in_Iraq_in_1994).

The Times of London, January 20, 1994. The headline was "I greet you in the name of thousands of Britons." The Times' source was a transcript of a broadcast on Baghdad radio, recorded by the BBC monitoring service. Galloway spoke in English, followed by a translation into Arabic.

Whether you wish to believe this or as Solaris pounds on, it is simply just propaganda is now simply a matter of opinion.
For the record I oppose this war but my opposition does not sit comfortable with this statement, sorry alleged statement nor this individual.
If he didn't say it, could somebody post a Galloway denial?

Edit.
The point I would like to make is that to give a voice to any form to an antiwar movement, the voice must be that of reason.
If Galloway did salute and suck up to Saddam, then that voice is diminished simply by the virtue that a leading advocate of this movement is seen to have double standards.
For anybody to listen to any form of opposition to the dreadful events in Iraq, the opposition has to come from reason and not blinding faith in this individual.
Galloway is not out of the woods with his dealing inside Iraq and many questions are still being raised about exactly what he did.
If this guy falls the resultant fallout would play straight into the hands of the Prowar lobbyists

Solaris

19-09-2005, 07:47 PM

Question
As an Iraqi I find your words to the man who personifies evil very difficult to fathom: "Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability and I want you to know that we are with you." Would you please clarify to me, the average Iraqi who you claim to fight for yet feels completely alienated, just what inspired you to say these words to the murderous despot?

Answer [george galloway]
I rather doubt your feelings about me are those of the "average Iraqi;" that is not my experience. By the way are you on-line from Iraq?

For the record (for the millionth time)I was adressing the Iraqi people not their President, as you can clearly hear in Arabic.

http://www.islamonline.net/livedialogue/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=QmRN2n

There, I much rather belive him than right wing rubbish.

baxter

19-09-2005, 08:11 PM

Wow now there's a surprise, he's denied it “a million " times.

Caught red handled blowing kisses up a tyrants backside, believe what you want pal.

"Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability and I want you to know that we are with you."
Galloway speaking to Iraq ( via Saddam).

Solaris

19-09-2005, 08:13 PM

Its a blatent lie, to turn the working class against the revolutionarys.

We will ave our time comrades.

Kangy

19-09-2005, 09:11 PM

Solaris, you're hilarious. Considering that this has all been verified, you're still claiming that it's a lie? Galloway is no revolutionary, he's just an exploitative dirt bag who preys on the ignorant.

No Limit

19-09-2005, 10:31 PM

Of course he was, actually here is the full text.

“Sir, I salute your courage, your strength your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem.”

http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/1678/What_s_Left

Like I said "I certainly don't believe in blowing kisses up a tyrants arse" and that includes the picture of Rumsfeld.

seems his words were very specific.

“Your Excellency, … I thought the president would appreciate to know that even today, three years after the war, I still meet families who are calling their newborn sons Saddam.”
Baxter, I respect most of your opinions and I am not an apologist for Galloway but I will have to disagree. Saddam, was not a good guy but you bet your ass I would be blowing kissed up his arse if it meant it could stop Bush going bat-shit crazy and killing hundreds of thousands of people in an unjust war. Everyone knows Saddam was a horrible guy, but when you compare what Saddam did to what Bush did you always side with Saddam in the end.

I just went over the transcript and I think that Galloway went a little over the top in kissing Saddam's ass, but you have to understand, this was at a time when our sanctions were killing thousands upon thousands of Iraqi children on a monthly basis. Again, Saddam did some shit but you compare him to what we were doing to his people he almost looks like a saint. Galloway made this pretty clear:

"It is my belief that we must convey the very clear picture that 1994 has to be the year of the ending of the embargo against Iraq. Otherwise, famine and all the awful consequences, including acts of despair by Iraqis, will be the result. And this is the message we must convey to civilized opinion in Europe."

And finally, this might have been mentioned but he was talking about the people, not Saddam:

"Sir: I salute your peoples courage, your strength, your indefatigability. And I want you to know that we are with you, hatta al-nasr, hatta al-nasr, hatta al-Quds [until victory, until victory, until Jerusalem]."

baxter

20-09-2005, 12:56 AM

OK I can respect your point of view.
This guy does front very well the all caring, upstanding anti war politician and with that in mind I post this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway#John_Malkovich_incident

It's quite a lengthy read and simply chronicles his history, political views etc, but please take the time to read it.

Galloway is the Vice-President of the Stop the War Coalition. He promotes himself as the maverick voice that campaigns endlessly for the victims.
This guy as got rich by his views and there is genuine concern that his bubble will burst and bring into question the credibility of any antiwar movement.
This guy should go, there really does seem to be a lot of mud out there and eventually some of it will stick.
My views on this individual are not driven by some sort of need to destroy him, my views are driven by the fact he really could undermine and damage genuine anti war sentiment.

Solaris

20-09-2005, 05:11 PM

He went to the senate and exposed thoose neo cons on International television, he did the same against hitchens.

He is an excellant asset to the movement.

who

20-10-2005, 01:30 AM

Galloway is the Vice-President of the Stop the War Coalition. He promotes himself as the maverick voice that campaigns endlessly for the victims.
This guy as got rich by his views and there is genuine concern that his bubble will burst and bring into question the credibility of any antiwar movement.
This guy should go, there really does seem to be a lot of mud out there and eventually some of it will stick.
My views on this individual are not driven by some sort of need to destroy him, my views are driven by the fact he really could undermine and damage genuine anti war sentiment.

you may be right, until he makes a mistake tho he is worth having as an antiwar protestor, taking into account that his stance on the iraq war is keeping him out of trouble its best if us anti war protesters allow him to continue until we can politically dump him.

he has talked his way out of massive problems, better an ally than in the shit ;)

gick

20-10-2005, 01:43 PM

I tend to agree with Galloway on quite a few things (mainly in terms of domestic policy) and it was awesome when he wiped the floor with those Senators. However, that does not change the fact that he is undeniably a twat and a self-righteous arsehole.

Solaris

20-10-2005, 05:00 PM

Sigh you agree with him, but you continue to belive these lies portrayed by right wing media.

Can you give me one reason why he is a self rightous ass?
Give me one reason why a man who goes to Washington and puns everyone is not on our side?

You have to accept he is an enemy of the ruling elite, the papers continualy slander him to stop him getting anymore power. Think for yourself.

Ive seen what hes done;

In the late 1970s, Galloway was a founding member of the Campaign Against Repression and for Democratic Rights in Iraq (CARDRI), which campaigned against Saddam Hussein's regime in response to its suppression of the Iraqi Communist Party.
So he did oppose Sadam

alloway opposed the 1991 Gulf War and was critical of the effect the subsequent sanctions had on the people of Iraq. He visited Iraq several times and met senior government figures. His involvement earned him the nickname the "member for Baghdad Central". In 1994, Galloway faced some of his strongest criticism on his return from a Middle-Eastern visit during which he had met Saddam Hussein ostensibly "to try and bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war".
He was there to save lives

Hes a great man.

All anyone can say is that:

Hes Selfrightous
Hes scum
Hes fat ect

These arn't arguments.

Say something with some wait behind it or say nothing.
Slander proves nothing.

Solaris