'Gorgeous' George Galloway to be fed to the lions?

[emad]

Galloway rejects senate perjury claims <br><br>Staff and agencies<br>Tuesday October 25, 2005 <br><br><br>A furious George Galloway today challenged US senators to charge him with perjury over claims that he solicited money from Saddam Hussein's oil-for-food programme and lied about it under oath.<br><br>The US Senate inquiry into the Bethnal Green and Bow MP's alleged involvement in the saga claims to have discovered $150,000 (£85,000) in Iraqi oil money in his estranged wife's bank account.<br><br>Its chairman, the Republican senator Norm Coleman, says this means Mr Galloway lied under oath when giving evidence to the senate permanent sub-committee on investigations on May 17, when he offered a passionate defence against similar claims.<br><br>Today Mr Galloway repeated denials that he had ever received any oil cash, and told Mr Coleman to "put up or shut up" by either bringing a prosecution or dropping the allegations. The Respect MP accused Mr Coleman of orchestrating a "sneak revenge attack" motivated by a desire to avenge his "humiliation" at the hearing in May.<br><br>"I am demanding prosecution, I am begging for prosecution," Mr Galloway told Sky News. "I am saying if I have lied under oath in front of the senate, that's a criminal offence. Charge me and I will head for the airport right now and face them down in court as I faced them down in the senate room.<br><br>"Because I publicly humiliated this lickspittle senator Norman Coleman - one of [George] Bush's righthand men - in the US senate in May, this sneak revenge attack has been launched over the past 24 hours."<br><br>The committee's new report accuses Mr Galloway of personally soliciting and being granted eight oil allocations totalling 23m barrels from the Hussein government between 1999 and 2003.<br><br>It claims his estranged wife, Dr Amineh Abu-Zayyad, received approximately $150,000 in connection with one allocation of oil. It also alleges that at least $446,000 was funnelled to Mr Galloway's Mariam Appeal through several allocations.<br><br>Senator Coleman said: "I directed the sub-committee to continue its investigation into Mr Galloway because his testimony at the May 17, 2005 hearing so clearly conflicted with the evidence. The additional evidence ... clearly demonstrates that the testimony Mr Galloway provided to the sub-committee was false and misleading."<br><br>In its initial report the committee accused the former Labour MP of receiving 20m barrels of oil from Saddam Hussein's regime.<br><br>Dr Abu-Zayyad is quoted in the report specifically denying she received any money. Asked whether she or her husband had benefited from Iraqi oil sales, she replied to the committee in writing yesterday: "I have never solicited or received from Iraq or anyone else any proceeds of any oil deals, either for myself or for my former husband."<br><br>The committee attributes its findings to personal interviews with high-level members of the Hussein regime, anonymous oil traders with personal knowledge of Mr Galloway's involvement and extensive bank records.<br><br>It claims that a Jordanian businessman and friend of Mr Galloway's, Fawaz Zureikat, channelled the money from the UN oil-for-food programme to the MP's former wife and to the Mariam Appeal.<br><br>It also cites testimony from the former Iraqi deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz who has been in jail since the US invasion of Iraq and who allegedly told investigators Mr Galloway had requested oil allocations in the name of Mr Zureikat.<br><br>The report also quotes the former Iraqi oil minister Amer Rashid as confirming Mr Galloway was granted oil allocations.<br><br>The committee then printed alleged documents that it claimed proved the money transfers were made. A senate aide said the information had been turned over to the US Department of Justice, which potentially had the power to press charges of perjury. The information will also be given to the British authorities.<br><br>The Respect MP recently won £150,000 in libel damages after suing the Telegraph over documents published in 2003, in which he was said to have asked for an increased allocation from the oil-for-food programme. The newspaper is currently appealing that ruling.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1600268,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/S...68,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

[emad]

The report includes bank records showing a paper trail from Saddam's ministries to Mrs Galloway. It states that the Iraqis handed several lucrative oil-for-food contracts to the Jordanian businessman Fawaz Zureikat, an old friend of the Galloways. A month later, on Aug 3, 2000, Mr Zureikat allegedly paid $150,000 minus a bank commission of $20 from his Citibank account number 500190207 into Mrs Galloway's account at the Arab Bank in Amman.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/20...">www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...news/20...</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <br> <p></p><i></i>

[eric144]

George was my MP, I assume he has made a lot of money from his Iraqi connections, but I don't think he'd be stupid enough to get caught in something blatant.<br><br>He's a dodgy character which is why the PTB have allowed him so much publicity. Americans don't know anything about him. <p></p><i></i>

[emad]

I think that winning that $150,000 from the UK's Telegraph newspaper which repeated a libel started by the Christian Science Monitor was the first part of a sting. A sweetener to draw him out into the open.<br><br>It made Galloway way too over-confident and he started mouthing off against Poodle and Dumbass in a way that he would ot have dared prior to 2000, when first interviewed by the UK serious fraud cops and the anti-terror police.<br><br>Now he's in it up to his ass.<br><br>He's ben on the CIA's list ever since his first visits to Saddam after the Gulf1 war.<br><br>Expect they know everything about him from his favorite brand of toothpaste to his Premium Bond numbers....<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=emad@rigorousintuition>emad</A> at: 10/25/05 10:12 am<br></i>

[eric144]

"Expect they know everything about him from his favorite brand of toothpaste to his Premium Bond numbers...."<br><br>Yes and his nefarious dealings in Dundee working men's clubs and employment with "War on Want".<br><br>When he got famous, he organised a paid 'concert tour ' of Britain then America. George likes money.<br><br>Another <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>very</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> dodgy character is Michael Smith, revealer of the Downing Street memos. In private he wears a large orange tag in his ear stamped with his MI6 emloyee number.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[michael meiring]

Which reminds me, how is the investigation going into the perpetrators of all those forged documents they tried to pin on this charletan galloway? <br><br>One day we are told that all documents carry a 0.1 millimetre code to identify where printouts come from.<br><br>The intel community sure take a long time to investigate that, one wonders why.<br><br>He seems to be another public figure that picks and chooses his topica while in denial about others, shill, and patsy are two words that spring to mind. <p></p><i></i>

[ARV]

This linked article dissects the GOP hatchet job on Galloway (with pictures)<br> <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php4?article_id=6511">www.socialistworker.co.uk...le_id=6511</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br><br><br>Also, Republicans don't believe that perjury is a crime anymore. Please remember this weeks talking point (courtesy of Kay Baily Hutchison, R. Tx):<br><br>"...if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars." <p></p><i></i>

[wintler]

I'll believe galloway before the GOP till my dying day. <br><br>1. we know the neocons are mean and vindictive, cost no object (e.g. outing plame at the cost of CIA agents lives)<br>2. we know galloway is anti-Blair (neocon pal) and is leading a party that may one day threaten the pepsi/coke duopoly in british politics<br>3. we know financial records are easily altered by those with sufficient 'security clearance'<br><br>Speaking truth to power has always been dangerous, i hope Galloway makes it thru and stays off planes. He'll stay my pinup boy till i see some evidence from non-puppets.<br> <p></p><i></i>

[eric144]

George is a dodgy bastard and that's why they allowed him to testify in front of the world (they didn't have to). MI5 know everything about him including the very obvious fact he would make mincemeat of any US senator in a live debate. He even did the same to Hitchins.<br><br>Sure they set him up, sure he's telling the truth about the war but who the hell cares, it won't change anything. Everybody knows they lied, the war's over now. <br><br>As I said, I would doubt he would be caught doing anything obvious<br><br>He supported Saddam Hussein for a LONG time and still stayed inside the Labour Party. he must know where a lot of bodies are hidden they don't want revealed.<br><br><br>"leading a party that may one day threaten the pepsi/coke duopoly in british politics"<br><br>Not in a million years. George actually threatened to lead a Scottish Labour party breakaway from the English party leading inevitably to independence. My (and a lot of other people's) thoughts were "this is a fascist takeover" . I support independence but not with dodgy George in charge.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=eric144>eric144</A> at: 10/25/05 7:13 pm<br></i>

[michael meiring]

Maybe galloway has the evidence of who printed them last forged documents they pinned on him. A big magnifying glass to read that 0.1 millimetre unique yellow number, and hey presto, reveal that in the next USA kangeroo court live on tv, thats what he needs.<br><br>So let me get this straight, Galloway did business with a CIA installed/backed/funded dictator (SAddam) for years.<br><br>Seems like both parties were doing business with saddam.<br><br>But why do they want to nail him so badly? and in public? especially after the last forged documents scandel?<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[eric144]

"So let me get this straight, Galloway did business with a CIA installed/backed/funded dictator (SAddam) for years."<br><br>Only after the invasion of Kuwait.<br> <p></p><i></i>

[manxkat]

Here Here, wintler <p></p><i></i>

[banned]

At first, when Galloway let the GOP have it in Congress, I was squeeing like a fangirl at a Killers concert, but a Brit on another blog slagged him off, and I did some more reading.<br><br>Not that everything he said wasn't TROO.<br><br>But as noted above, it was odd they let him do it.<br><br>And his being easily discredited addresses that oddity.<br><br>Of course, not being a Brit who followed Galloway for many years, I was also open to the idea that he was being framed.<br><br>What's sad is that the Dumbocrats keep falling for the same damn trick by BushCo--defuse criticism by either making sure the critic is low-credibility so that when someone else says the same thing they get tarred with the low credibility brush, or plant fake evidence that's got elements of the truth, so that no one will believe the REAL truth.<br><br>Friends 'n' neighbors, those outcomes are by no means inevitable. It doesn't really take a genius IQ to say "Look, just because Hitler called Stalin a monster and Hitler was a monster too, Stalin isn't a monster." It's just pointing out assbackwards logic. But Dumbos/liberals simply can't get that message out. Now, part of the problem is that most Murkans aren't big on logic. Never studied it in school, never studied how to construct a logical argument (if you can construct one you can see when someone else's is illogical) and weren't born with very strong analytical abilities to begin with (or maybe teevee farfelled them up.) I'm an INTP on the Jungian personality typology and I was four when I told the old lady next door something she said didn't fit together to make sense, and she said I was rude and sent me home. I told my grandmother what I said and she said I was absolutely right. (When my grandmother died 8 years later and the old lady came to her funeral I snubbed her, I was still so mad about her trying to blame me because she was illogical...maybe I'm a Vulcan <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :lol --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> )<br><br>Anyway, the GOP keeps running this "X said it, X is dodgy, Y said it, Y is dodgy" scam and nobody says "If something is a fact it doesn't matter if someone unreliable says it--if someone in a hospital for the criminally insane says the sun rises in the East that doesn't make it wrong."<br><br>Likewise, the trick of letting out fake evidence then when it's found to be fake claiming the CONTENT is fake too also can be countered, but not by the current "opposition leaders" who are no match for a smart four year old.<br><br>Deliberately, of course, because they're not an opposition at all. As my mom used to say of nice hankies, they're for show, not for blow. <p></p><i></i>

[maggrwaggr]

I'm very familiar with that temperment type. I have a lot of respect for it. <br><br>Yes, most people don't know a good argument, especially a logical one. Most people believe what they want to believe, even if it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Logical or emotional, just SENSE, they don't care. <br><br>As far as Galloway, I really don't care if he's guilty or not, he was right, and they were wrong. He stood up to Norm Coleman and the senate, and everything he said was true, and I honestly don't care if he murdered his entire family, on that day what he said was right on the goddamn money. <br><br>Norm Coleman is such a sleazy piece of trash I am ashamed that I ever lived in Minnesota. I mean seriously would you buy a used waterbed from that guy? Yuck. <p></p><i></i>

[eric144]

"if someone in a hospital for the criminally insane says the sun rises in the East that doesn't make it wrong."<br><br>Exactly, but it also acts like a controlled explosion. The classic example was the Downing Street memo. All they had to do was deny it was true because no American sourced was named, it was pure hearsay. Blair even acknowledged the memo was real (but false) which is extraordinary. It was a damp squib.<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=eric144>eric144</A> at: 10/25/05 8:53 pm<br></i>