Galloway likens Sen. Norm Coleman to Joe McCarthy

[Democratic Hawk]

I watched Galloway yesterday on Charlie Rose and Chris Matthias shows. He was very convincing. He explained the real reason why we are in Iraq.

I'm sick and tired of the world 'liar' being bandied about by critics of the Iraq War at both Bush and Blair. Even worse, it's not even confined to critics! Who can forget the desparately opportunistic attempts of Michael Howard to smear Blair?  I'm not going to bang on about the 'failures' of intelligence but we all know that Saddam engaged in biological and chemical warfare (and yes, I guess they can be defined as weapons of mass destruction) but has it not occurred to any one that Saddam deliberately misled Western intelligence in the vain hope that some invasion of Iraq would be that all-important catalyst for an anti-Western backlash across the Islamic world? Not to mention, chemical and biological weapons falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda et al. A truly nightmarish vision, if ever there was one!

I'm no Bush fan - but even I believe that US and UK military action in Iraq was with the best of intentions

Dave

[minionofmidas]

I watched Galloway yesterday on Charlie Rose and Chris Matthias shows. He was very convincing. He explained the real reason why we are in Iraq.

I'm sick and tired of the world 'liar' being bandied about by critics of the Iraq War at both Bush and Blair. Even worse, it's not even confined to critics! Who can forget the desparately opportunistic attempts of Michael Howard to smear Blair?  I'm not going to bang on about the 'failures' of intelligence but we all know that Saddam engaged in biological and chemical warfare (and yes, I guess they can be defined as weapons of mass destruction) but has it not occurred to any one that Saddam deliberately misled Western intelligence in the vain hope that some invasion of Iraq would be that all-important catalyst for an anti-Western backlash across the Islamic world? Not to mention, chemical and biological weapons falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda et al. A truly nightmarish vision, if ever there was one!

I'm no Bush fan - but even I believe that US and UK military action in Iraq was with the best of intentions

Dave

"Even"? I'm very sure you're part of a small minority the world over.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Ask Shira if she believes in the validity of the phony national guard paper pushed by CBS?

Unfortunately, there are people like Shira who will believe any lie, just so long as it supports their biases.

Another example (all to widespread in the Arab world) is the phony Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

[Shira]

Ask Shira if she believes in the validity of the phony national guard paper pushed by CBS?

The paper itself is fake but the content is more-or-less true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This crap originated in Russia at the beginning of the 20'th century.

The main fact remains: Bush (or at least Cheney) is lying about Iraq

[Democratic Hawk]

Ask Shira if she believes in the validity of the phony national guard paper pushed by CBS?

The paper itself is fake but the content is more-or-less true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This crap originated in Russia at the beginning of the 20'th century.

The main fact remains: Bush (or at least Cheney) is lying about Iraq

Are you saying Bush and Cheney must be lying about Iraq because that paragon of virtue that is [not] George Galloway is telling the 'truth'?

Dave

[Shira]

I watched Galloway yesterday on Charlie Rose and Chris Matthias shows. He was very convincing. He explained the real reason why we are in Iraq.

I'm sick and tired of the world 'liar' being bandied about by critics of the Iraq War at both Bush and Blair. Even worse, it's not even confined to critics! Who can forget the desparately opportunistic attempts of Michael Howard to smear Blair?  I'm not going to bang on about the 'failures' of intelligence but we all know that Saddam engaged in biological and chemical warfare (and yes, I guess they can be defined as weapons of mass destruction) but has it not occurred to any one that Saddam deliberately misled Western intelligence in the vain hope that some invasion of Iraq would be that all-important catalyst for an anti-Western backlash across the Islamic world? Not to mention, chemical and biological weapons falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda et al. A truly nightmarish vision, if ever there was one!

I'm no Bush fan - but even I believe that US and UK military action in Iraq was with the best of intentions

Dave

What is worse:  lying, or naming ‘liar’ the person who lies?

[Shira]

Ask Shira if she believes in the validity of the phony national guard paper pushed by CBS?

The paper itself is fake but the content is more-or-less true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This crap originated in Russia at the beginning of the 20'th century.

The main fact remains: Bush (or at least Cheney) is lying about Iraq

Are you saying Bush and Cheney must be lying about Iraq because that paragon of virtue that is [not] George Galloway is telling the 'truth'?

Dave

Regardless of Galloway: Bush is a liar

[MissCatholic]

Whatever your opinion is of Mr.Galloway he is in all regards a very smart guy.

I listened to his testimony yesterday and he was right to tell Mr.Coleman that you have no problem accepting money from companies that wanted the Iraqi war to happen. He messed up by saying that Levin supported the illegal war - only one lawyer has claimed that it was legal - when infact senator levin did not support the war.

The war was the right thing to do. but it was illegal.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Is it just me or when someone's arguement is just:

LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!LIER!

Or:

ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!

They don't really have much of an arguement?
Mind you that's the whole Iraq thing all over (from the '80's til now). A lot of pathetic arguments from either side.

Can't we all just agree to disagree over this? Or this that too hard?

[Shira]

Can't we all just agree to disagree over this? Or this that too hard?

Too hard. I don't care too much if Saddam lied. I do care when Bush lies.
What I care even more is all these people who are buying all Bush's BS.

[MissCatholic]

Galloway has already stated that once blair goes his next trget is bush. i wouldnt put anything past him.

Galloway believes that the sanctions were wrong and he thinks that bush has the blood of 100,000 people on his hands.

It really wouldnt surprise me if he campaigned agaisnt mr.coleman for his smokescren job.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why should Bush lying be worse than Saddam lying? Why the double standard here?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Galloway has already stated that once blair goes his next trget is bush. i wouldnt put anything past him.

That's funny. Over his political career, Galloway has accomplished, what exactly? Making himself very rich and getting a tan. Oh and making himself just about the most unpopular politician in Britain as far as most people are concerned.

[Blue Rectangle]

Why should Bush lying be worse than Saddam lying? Why the double standard here?

Everyone knows Saddam repeatedly lies, so it's not news and therefore not important.  Bush has credibility and therefore should suffer more if he lies.  It's the same situation and with Clinton: everyone knew he lied and womanized, so no one cared when it was proven.  It's a weird, backwards result of human nature that causes the immoral to have more moral authority than the moral.  We care more about whether someone is a hypocrite than whether they are a good person.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Galloway has already stated that once blair goes his next trget is bush. i wouldnt put anything past him.

Galloway believes that the sanctions were wrong and he thinks that bush has the blood of 100,000 people on his hands.

It really wouldnt surprise me if he campaigned agaisnt mr.coleman for his smokescren job.

I'm sure Coleman hopes that Galloway will support Coleman's opponent (should assure his reelection).

Didn't you figure out that when Carl Levin (good first name at least) ripped Galloway to shreds (Levin is a standard issue liberal Democrat) that there might be something going on?

[MissCatholic]

Well he has been the strongest voice who opposed the iraq war. whether you agree or disagree with that his opinion has facts that cant be denied and in the eyes of God most honest people would say that bushs was illegal but maybe right.

I approved of the invasion of iraq but it was illegal. you cannot dispute the legality of the war. In a court bush would be imprisoned under war crimes- right or wrong - that is a indisputable fact.

[MissCatholic]

Galloway has already stated that once blair goes his next trget is bush. i wouldnt put anything past him.

Galloway believes that the sanctions were wrong and he thinks that bush has the blood of 100,000 people on his hands.

It really wouldnt surprise me if he campaigned agaisnt mr.coleman for his smokescren job.

I'm sure Coleman hopes that Galloway will support Coleman's opponent (should assure his reelection).

Didn't you figure out that when Carl Levin (good first name at least) ripped Galloway to shreds (Levin is a standard issue liberal Democrat) that there might be something going on?

i saw the same interview as you did. You remember mr.colemans remarks about receiving money from donars that supported the invasion. Galloway has no problem going on tv defeding himsefl. the same things that he was acused of by the telegraph he won in a court of law. the big fish dont like him as he has a strong opinion and he wont go away. while people die he wants people prosecuted.

whether it was right or wrong to go to iraq its your personal decision. i believe it was right. but the war was illegal

[??????????]

I approved of the invasion of iraq but it was illegal. you cannot dispute the legality of the war. In a court bush would be imprisoned under war crimes- right or wrong - that is a indisputable fact.

Link that "fact" with some evidence or close your mouth.

[MissCatholic]

"If the Security Council mean to authorize force they will do so using clear words; it's the phrase ‘all necessary means'. Now, the UK and the US thought about including that phrase in resolution 1441 in November, and again in this draft, and they backed off on both occasions, because they know they would not get an authorization passed by the Security Council."

Mr Shiner points out that when resolution 1441 was presented to the Council, both Washington and Downing Street insisted there were no hidden triggers for war in the text. The draft wording of a new resolution being pushed by the US and UK does not indicate any change from this position.

"As this resolution does no more than recall 1441 and the background, and notes that Iraq has had its final opportunity, it's outrageous for the UK and US to try and persuade us all that somehow they have got an authorization of force, when they haven't."

Serious mistake


TALKING ABOUT A RESOLUTION: Lawyers say the new resolution under consideration at the Security Council rests solely on its predecessor, resolution 1441. The latter document is a plainly worded warning to Iraq that the Security Council is "determined to ensure full and immediate compliance by Iraq without conditions or restrictions." It says Iraq has "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" and says "that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq . . . and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment." Finally, the resolution says if Iraq defies the resolution, "it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations."
 
The phrase ‘serious consequences', which appeared in resolution 1441, has been taken by pro-war factions to justify an attack, but according to Mr Shiner it is only a reference to what the Security Council might do in the light of Iraqi defiance.

"What they [the UK and US] are trying, really, is a confidence trick. They hope that by talking about the need for a second resolution, that the public will not ask themselves the question, ‘yes, but what's in the second resolution'. It doesn't matter whether it's the second or the 102nd, the question is have they got an authorization of force, and the answer is clearly not."

[Shira]

Why should Bush lying be worse than Saddam lying? Why the double standard here?

Bush is a president of a Democracy. Saddam was a dictator.

[??????????]

Why should Bush lying be worse than Saddam lying? Why the double standard here?

Bush is a president of a Democracy. Saddam was a dictator.

But to you lefty hate America types he was a "good dictator" because he was "secular".

[Nation]

Why should Bush lying be worse than Saddam lying? Why the double standard here?

Bush is a president of a Democracy. Saddam was a dictator.

But to you lefty hate America types he was a "good dictator" because he was "secular".

States, how many Democrats do you even know that think Saddam was a good dictator?

[??????????]

Why should Bush lying be worse than Saddam lying? Why the double standard here?

Bush is a president of a Democracy. Saddam was a dictator.

But to you lefty hate America types he was a "good dictator" because he was "secular".

States, how many Democrats do you even know that think Saddam was a good dictator?

BRTD, Shira, JFern, etc

[Hitchabrut]

Galloway likens Sen. Norm Coleman to Joe McCarthy

Compliment

[12th Doctor]

The best part of this whole thing was when he directly accused Levin of supporting this "illegal" war.  What a moron!  For once, I was cheering for Levin after he shoot the bastard down, saying both that he didn't support it, and that basically everything Galloway was saying was totally irrelivant to the question of his guilt.  It was a beautiful moment.