 sj |
||
|
||
BS: More Galloway!
|
|
|
Subject: BS: More Galloway! From: Mr Happy Date: 11 Jul 05 - 09:25 PM Our popular 'free' press omitted these 'Thoughts of George Galloway' from it's populist broadcasts-I wonder why? See here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4654447.stm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Mr Happy Date: 11 Jul 05 - 09:31 PM & here: http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=newsukfs&tab=news&q=galloway&go.x=49&go.y=18 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Bunnahabhain Date: 12 Jul 05 - 01:51 PM Because the man is a somewhat objectionable arse, and if the editors of the print and broadcast media are realising this, so much the better. Bunnahabhain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 12 Jul 05 - 03:13 PM He may be objectionable to you, Bunnahabhain, but I would like to hear from this brave politician. I have a right to all the information, not just what you or the media think I should hear. Its just like the discovery that Karl Rove was the Whitehouse insider that leaked the identity of the CIA agent - the mainstream media doesn't report on that - I have to find out from alternate news sources. You may happy to hear only what "THEY" want you to hear but I want to hear it all and then make up my mind. You don't think Tony Blair is going to blame himself do you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: jeffp Date: 12 Jul 05 - 03:29 PM The Washington Post is reporting on Rove, so is the New York Times. Yahoo as well. CNN too. The TV news is showing the reporters asking Scott McClellan question after question and getting nothing but the stone wall. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Big Al Whittle Date: 13 Jul 05 - 12:41 PM does anyone remember that lenny Bruce routine that started "lets get something straight. It was us, the jews that killed christ. we were hoping for a statute of limitations on that one, but it fell through. we found a note in the cellar, it me morty - I did it. well I'm 'fessing up. it was us, not the roman soldiers...." so wise, so witty, so long ago, when will they ever learn? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Emma B Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:51 PM Bunnahabhain (nice name by the way), I've never met George Galloway so I don't feel able to comment quite so freely on his personality; but, he does seem to talk sense in a world that is eager to find "easy" answers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Jul 05 - 02:09 PM Most of what he actually says there seems reasonable enough. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: GUEST,MG Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:51 PM dianavan , Tony Blair will go down in history as a statesman. You may go to hell - McGrath is, apparently, already there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 13 Jul 05 - 06:15 PM I've followed George Galloway's career with interest and have heard him speak at various demos. The thing about him is his courage, he will take on anyone regardless of how powerful they are,if he sees injustice, he will fight it with any means at his disposal. Personally I see George as Blair's Nemesis, no matter how Blair wriggles twists, lies and distorts, George will be right there in his face, saying the words that we all wish we had the opportunity to say. A couple of nights ago on BBC Newsnight, George Galloway "Wiped the floor with "media giant" Gavin Essler who accused him of "crass use of language" in linking the London bombings with Blairs Iraqi policy. When George was obviously getting the better of Essler ,the interview was abruptly halted in the most un-courtious manner. The public should rally behind George Galloway, tjhe only politician to tell it like it is....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Big Al Whittle Date: 13 Jul 05 - 06:32 PM what I was trying to say and obviously not expressing myself very well- is that I don't think any amount of shrill sloganeering and finger pointing is really much to the point at all. Professional politicians are really the last people you can look to for any perspective. all their insights are based on whatever is expeditious - I would advise anyone to be as suspicious of Galloway as you are of Blair. I was a teacher for quite a while. i can remember little kids of eleven or twelve telling me they wanted to kill Salman rushdie at the time of the fatwa's announcement - and I remember thinking even then, there was going to be stormy weather ahead when they'd had a few more years of the guidance they were obviously getting. It was something which wasn't present in the kids I'd taught in the 1970's. Maybe the negative things said about Islam at the time of the Iranian revolution sparked off the reaction. Remember we were a much more racist society in those days, and we can all take some blame for that. And perhaps a little credit for improving ourselves. Either way, all this was in the air long before 9/11, long before Aghanistan and Iraq. Anybody who says otherwise has either very little insight, lives a long way from civilisation, probably needs to score of some political rival and/or just enjoys the confrontation and bickering of politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 13 Jul 05 - 06:46 PM I think your wrong wld. I wouldn't call it "expeditious" to stand and and say the controversial things that George Galloway did in the dragons lair...The US Senate. Or take on the might of the press barons in libel cases. George Galloway has always been a crusading politician ..a sadly diminishing breed. He has never courted popularity or office, although he has the brains and charisma to succeed. Instead he seem to be driven by what many would term a self-destructive seach for truth and justice. In fact, if it wasn't for New Labour,he could easily be mistaken for a Socialist...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: GUEST,Old Laughing Lady Date: 13 Jul 05 - 06:47 PM akenaton "I've followed George Galloway's career with interest and have heard him speak at various demos. The thing about him is his courage, he will take on anyone regardless of how powerful they are,if he sees injustice, he will fight it with any means at his disposal." Is this your first visit to Earth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: GUEST Date: 13 Jul 05 - 06:49 PM I.m a George fan, but I think he's out of order with the Status Quo analogy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Jul 05 - 07:46 PM I see that noone has actually said where it is Galloway has spoken other than the truth in this matter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: GUEST Date: 13 Jul 05 - 07:59 PM I believe he was in London. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:29 PM Yawn.......I see satire is alive and well on Mudcat! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Big Al Whittle Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:32 PM the thing about politicians is - they're devious Ake. How do you know he's not just saying that to get in with what really is a fairly well defined anti-establishment faction in Britain. Blair has his game plan, Galloway has his. Be realistic. the truth is never simple. No politician can really afford to tell you the complete truth. Otherwise they'd be lonely and isolated. and that's one thing none of them can afford to be - so they keep on telling us what we want to hear. I don't think I'm saying anything controversial here. Why do you think they have so many crap policies. look at Thatcher with her National Curriculum (that all teachers knew was a load of crap - to protect kids from Marxist teachers) . Politicians all say things and that they think will please their followers, don't trust any of 'em! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:02 PM wld ...I agree with your thoughts on politicians, I find them generally disgusting , but GG was a maverick when most people were in thrall to the "New Labour Project" and never changed his position although it threatened to end his political career. I also agree that politics can be a bit of a balancing act, but Blair and his accomplices overstepped the mark on Iraq. No matter what they say , a large number of people here and in the country knew they were lying right from the start, and our involvment in the mess that is Iraq today, can be laid directly at Blairs door. I dont think for a moment it was compassion for the people suffering under Saddam which motivated Blair,but rather a desire for "political celebrity" on the coat tails of America. George Galloway has the measure of him, and Blair knows it. Although Blair has been lucky and is a bit of a survivor ,this latest scenario could be the end for him as people begin to link his policies with the reaction of a section of Muslim youth..Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Big Al Whittle Date: 14 Jul 05 - 04:13 AM well I guess time will tell. personally I should have estimated that Blair was the one who wasn't playing to the gallery, but rather doing what he thought was right. What he did, involved walking into a fussilade of shit from newspapers who had helped him get elected. I tell you how I think about it - bottom line. I get these fan e-mails from a 19 year old kid from Missouri and his family - he's serving over there in Iraq with the US forces. In the way that you do, I've got to know his family a little bit through his e-mails. he's taken a shine to one of my songs. personally speaking I wouldn't risk his life for five minutes over the entire bloody continent he's fighting over - but its got nothing to do with what George Galloway says. It has to do with what those Muslim schoolkids in Derby said to me at the time of the Rushdie fatwa - that they were wanted to kill Rushdie. Western democracy isn't going to give these people what they want. God knows what is. But I wouldn't risk decent peoples lives over it. I suspect Galloway would never admit it that Iraq has taken some sort of step forward getting rid of Saddam Hussein - or rather we have given them a chance to take a step forward - but its pretty much a leap into the darkness. It would be a truth Galloway wouldn't be comfortable with. American forces liberating somewhere.....that's not going to play well to his merry band. Galloway, bush, Blair don't know, any more than you or I do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Paul Burke Date: 14 Jul 05 - 04:52 AM "I get these fan e-mails from a 19 year old kid from Missouri and his family - he's serving over there in Iraq with the US forces." WTF has that got to do with it? As much as Al Qaida and 911, just smokescreen. What Yanks can't stand is that their hate-object Galloway was RIGHT, and that the barnstorming politicians they herded after were WRONG. Even his much quoted accolade: "I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability." was (according to him) directed to the whole Iraqi people, who were being bombed by US and UK forces on a daily basis for several years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Big Al Whittle Date: 14 Jul 05 - 07:06 AM I tried to explain - if your anger is laying down a smokescreen for your brain maybe you will have trouble following an argument of insidious intent - but I bet my objections to the war are more genuine and sincere than Galloways. what it has to do with it is that I personally hold no brief for the war. I just don't think a politician who spends his time strutting around and cutting a dash and generally keeping a tedious 'kick Blair up the arse' cabaret on the road is really going to going to add much to the sum of human enlightenment. stuff like that kept Thatcher's lot in power for 18 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: GUEST,Crazyhorse Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:06 AM WLD - the voice of reason |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: George Papavgeris Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:16 AM with you, wld. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Paul Burke Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:26 AM " stuff like that kept Thatcher's lot in power for 18 years." Rubbish. Thatcher's lot are in power now. Blair makes no secret of his admiration, the gap between the immune(*) and the rest of us grows every year. The sum of most New Labourites' ambition is to become one of the immune. (*) Those who lose their job through incompetence, and far from losing their house, pension etc., get given half a million to tide them over till the next job. Those who go to jail for corruption, and come out as media celebrities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:35 AM Tony Blair will be remembered, inter alia, for bringing the Labour party up-to-date and injecting a much needed dose of pragmatism into the left wing of politics. Actually I don't know why I'm bothering with this he won the argument long since. Galloway may get mentioned in a footnote as something Tony wiped off his shoe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Bunnahabhain Date: 14 Jul 05 - 09:12 AM I just do not like the man. He struts and shouts, and not much more. Whatever the situation, his view is: The Goverment is wrong, the West in general is wrong, and Tony Blair should resign/ be arrested. He raises important issues, some well know at the time, some not, and criticises. He does not propose practical solutions to anything. I have never heard him say " Both sides are right and wrong", which we all know is often true in the real world, and most politicians will occasionally admit. Galloway is a sounding gong, signifying nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 14 Jul 05 - 07:56 PM There is no right and wrong in Iraq. As far as we are concerned, the whole enterprise was a criminal disaster and any pragmatist would never have taken the course pursed by Blair. Blair is personally to blame for bringing suicide bombers on to the streets of Britain. A very few years ago, any PM who presided over this bloody shambles, would have been removed from office in disgrace by his own party , now he is feted as a hero by fools and sycophants. I am truly amazed that so many here still seem to support Blair regardless of 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths, many women and children, Iraq itself a hotbed of insurrection and fundamentalism, and now at last our own children finding themselves with no voice, prepared to kill themselves in a futile and mad attempt at revenge...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:34 PM And another thing!!!. When Blair tried to say that Iraq and the London bombings were not linked.....because...9/11 happened before the Iraq war started,and the Beslan atrocity happened to the Russians who didn't support the war, I couldn't believe what I was hearing....Do you supporters of Blair have anything in your heads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:36 PM He treats you as if you were morons ,and you love him for it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Richard Bridge Date: 15 Jul 05 - 12:26 PM Funny, I thought I posted here. Did I get censored? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 15 Jul 05 - 12:31 PM My my, you are getting a bit excited, is this because you've plainly lost the argument. TB has won three elections, if you're so clever why don't you stand and show us morons exactly how it should be done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 15 Jul 05 - 12:53 PM So let me get this straight, if you doesn't agree with with the Ake Nation then you are:
It must be great to be so perfect, so "all knowing", please share more of your wisdom with us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 15 Jul 05 - 08:52 PM Hi Shakey..I don't think you or your friends are any of the above, but obviously Blair thinks us all morons,or he would never have used the Beslan and 9/11 atrocities to try to break the link between his policy in Iraq and the London bombings. The sycophants are his own MPS, who are in general prepared to accept any course of action from him as long as they hold on to their jobs. The Labour Party under Blair has ditched any pretence of a socialist agenda and has become "Thatcherite". I suppose I could stretch a point and agree that you probably are "empty headed" if you think the winning of elections equates to a validation of any governments policy, especially foreign policy..Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 16 Jul 05 - 12:47 PM Firstly you seem to be confusing me with someone who cares what you think. Secondly I suppose Short and the wee ginger scotsman were Ok because they disagreed with Blair and resigned, has it ever crossed your mind that many of the MPs didn't resign because they did agree with him: no I thought not. Finally, if elections are not the final arbiter of policy what is? We have a democracy here in the UK, maybe not flawless but it's workable. A true democracy, IMHO, is when the majority of the minority accept the majority decision - even when they don't like it - that's what being a democrat is all about. As I said earlier, if you want to change things go stand for election, face the real world not the fantasy inhabited by carol and diana. Shakey Now I'm going back to the golf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:09 PM Its interesting that Shakey, Old Laughing Lady and Guest (A Real American) share the same opinion of carol and diana - especially since carol hasn't even posted here. I guess Martin has had to spit his personality so that he could have some support. Who lives in a fantasy world? BTW - I live in a world that is constantly changing and I find that my opinions change, too. I may be getting old but I am not inflexible. I am glad that there are politicians (people with a voice) that question the actions of those in power. We need more like Galloway to keep us thinking instead of following blindly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:16 PM There goes that conspiracy theory again. I have posted once as "guest: Old Laughing Lady", and also in the past as crazyhorse (member). I have no idea who the real american is (I'm British). Did it cross your mind that more than one person may disagree with you. Shakey By the way if you take a good like at the names I have used you may have been able to connect them earlier anyway. I'll give you a clue: Canada |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:34 PM Shakey - I have no problem when people disagree with me. I do have a problem with people that take personal pot shots at me for no apparent reason. Since you continue to post with various anonymous handles, I can only deduce that you are a coward and cannot hold up your end of an argument. You are the one conspiring to confuse. I will no longer respond to anyone who poses as a guest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:45 PM Your powers of deduction are remarkable, I only wish I had your insight. But still you need a little help. Let me help you a little. I had a membership name crazyhorse, after non-use for a long time i couldn't access it. I used a guest (OLL) and then i created a new account namely shakey. Your powers of deduction should enable you to see the connection. I have 26 years of professional computing experience, if i wanted to confuse you, trace you or anything else in this medium i could do it with ease. Shakey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 16 Jul 05 - 02:04 PM Shakey - I really don't care who you are and I am not impressed with your threats. Why you have decided to target me is a mystery. If you disagree with me, kindly state your differences. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 16 Jul 05 - 02:10 PM I'm not threatening anyone, you've accused me of posting using other names (hogan etc) i'm pointed out to you exactly what names i have used and the fact that if i wanted to, which i don't and i would consider wrong, i could post as all sorts of identities. Is everything a conspiracy in your world? But yes I disagree with you, i think you and your kind that give succour to terrorists, which is what you do, are dangerous people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 16 Jul 05 - 02:44 PM Why in the world do you think I give succor to terrorists? I only think that Bush and Blair have used the terrorists as an excuse to invade Iraq. As shown by the recent bombings in London, they should have been doing their homework. You don't solve the problem of terrorism by waging war. What is needed is for the international intelligence agencies to get their acts together. What else are you going to do, invade all undemocratic countries with a large Muslim population? The international community did not agree that invading Iraq was a way to fight terrorism. Obviously, Bush and Blair really have no plan regarding post-war Iraq or how to stem the rise of terrorism that they have created. No, not everything is a conspiracy in my world. I try to look at all of the possibilities and never take the political spin and media hype at face value. There is always more than meets the eye. Thank-you for pointing out that you have used several names on this forum - I find that very confusing. ...and yes, I know that more than one person disagrees with me. I listen to their points of view and sometimes change my mind. Thats why I engage in this forum. I'm still not impressed with your computing skills or your ability to trace me. Maybe you should use your skills to help the CIA find the terrorists - they obviously need it. Tracing me would be a waste of time. I'm not a threat to anybody. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 16 Jul 05 - 03:41 PM I thought you were going to watch the F...ing golf. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 17 Jul 05 - 05:59 AM My word that was clever, but don't use those words when you take your GCSEs. Even though I disagree with them at least dianavan and carolc show passion and a level of thought in their argument. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jul 05 - 07:18 AM Blair was the one who wasn't playing to the gallery, but rather doing what he thought was right.(weelittledrummer) And you could say the same of any of the other bombers, small scale and big scale. Doing what we think is right is important, but it isn't enough in itself. Especially when it turns into thinking that what we do is right because we do it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Bunnahabhain Date: 17 Jul 05 - 07:27 AM Both Bush/Blair, and those whose who seek to explain why it's our fault feed the problem. They both make terrorists out to be something other than common criminals. That in itself makes them more powerful, and more dangerous in the eyes of the public. The Politicians on both sides are playing up the dangers to make their course of action seem more necessary. Is the threat from Islamic terrorists in Britian any greater than from Irish terrorists in the 70's and 80's? No. Let us not over-react |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 18 Jul 05 - 12:05 PM Is the threat from Islamic terrorists in Britian any greater than from Irish terrorists in the 70's and 80's? No. Let us not over-react
The IRA wanted something that we could give them, or at least negotiate about, namely a united Ireland. The fanatics we're facing now want the destruction of western liberalism and hence there is nothing to talk about. They are homophobic, misogynist (God help lesbians) lunatics. If they want to live in the past why don't they follow the example set by the Amish and just get on with it, no, because they know best they want the whole world to follow them. This is why all the talk of Blair's involvement in Iraq causing this is nonsense, sure it's probably pushed the UK up their hit list but the whole of Europe is on that list. If anything we should be proud to be their number one target (OK number two). This country has a strong tradition of tolerence but we should not tolerate intolerence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 18 Jul 05 - 01:47 PM Royal institute of International Affairs state London bombings strongly linked to Blairs Iraq policy!! The war mongers on this thread will not accept any thing but more death and blood.......Fools |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:00 PM That phrase from Shakey "We should be proud to be No2 target" would make the New Labour spin doctors proud. I can just imagine Blair and Straw spouting that garbage!! They dont care how many Londoners are blown to bits, as long as they are off the hook. Is there no end to the disgusting spectacle of this government wriggling lying and distorting the fact....And there are still those who believe them....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:04 PM Saying that the invasion of Iraq isn't responsible for increasing this kind of thing, because there were terrible things happening before that took place is a bit like suggesting that Bloody Sunday didn't help the IRA recruit, and encourage and enable it to extend its activities, on the grounds that there had been IRA Bombings before Bloody Sunday. There is a kind of logic in saying "pulling outr of Iraq woudl reward the bombers and encoyrage them" - but it's got to be set against the clear evidence that the continuing presence of occupying troops actually generates militancy and terrorist activities, both in Iraq and outside it. Basically, if you are stuck in a hole, the first thing to do it stop digging it deeper. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:06 PM akenaton, have you read the report, nope, I thought not. It's a lot less critical of Blair than you make out and it basically says what i posted above - it justs put the Uk in the spotlight - we were targets anyway. Now go and read it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 18 Jul 05 - 03:52 PM Article states... "UK involvment in Iraq could have fueled London terror bombings" "There is no doubt that the Iraq war caused particular difficulties for UK, and that the conflict has boosted Al Qaeda propaganda, recruitment and fundraising" "Britain has suffered as a result of Blair acting as pillion passenger to the US war on terror" "UK troop deployments in Iraq increased the chances of an attack" Plenty more in this vein, suggests Shakey has been reading wrong article. However, Britains UN ambassador in the lead up to the Iraq war,Sir Jeremy Greenstock, has written a book which apparently exposes the subterfuge within the Blair "war cabinet". Perhaps its not too late for an impeachment. Apparently Greenstocks' book is being blocked by the Govt, citing official secrets act ....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 18 Jul 05 - 03:57 PM The difference is I read it before I started blabbing about it, whereas you simply swallowed the headlines. But I am impressed that a) you found it and b) you finished it in one sitting. I hope you didn't neglect your homework to read it. tut tut. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:15 PM Shakey...You have obviously lost the plot and the argument!! What think you of Greenstocks book? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:26 PM You don't learn do you? Read first then comment. Well as the Greenstock book is not out until September, I, unlike you it seems, have no opinion on it. Can I lend you a spade to help dig the hole? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:40 PM Of course we dont know whats written in the book ,but we can speculate can't we? Perhaps if you had tried a bit of speculation before the invasion of Iraq, you might have been able to work out what was likely to be the consequences of that invasion. I knew a chap like you once,who carried about his person a large book of facts......the rest is history...Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:50 PM You obviously didn't need the spade. But c'mon let's not let facts get in the way of a good rant. short pause while I speculate Ok here goes: Speculation 1) You're 15 Speculation 2) You following an on-line course (politics 101) with carolC but you're not her best pupil. Speculation 3) You're simply thick Now of course you may be none of these but I have no facts. Are you getting the picture |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:00 PM Here you go Shakey. From CBC News: "A study co-authored by two of the country's leading think-tanks – the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Economic and Social Research Council – said the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq gave al-Qaeda a fundraising and recruitment boost." But of course, Jack Straw does not agree and he obviously thinks he knows better than the conclusion of legitimate researchers. I wonder where he gets his information? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:03 PM Yes I'm afraid I am , and it looks like I'm trying to converse with someone who has no interest in an exchange of views. I would advise you to keep off the politics, stick to the golf.....much less of a strain on the old blood pressure. Well im off to find some more stimulating company, I'll take my dog for a walk.....Cheers Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:10 PM Welcome dianavan, we got off to a poor start didn't we? Anyway yes I know about the report, I've read it. Look at a few postings above this one. I'm afraid poor young akenaton (is that egyptian) was out of his depth but I'm sure you want let me get away so lightly. Shakey Who likes all things Canadian |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:15 PM The UK and the USA governments were both told by their own experts (as well as by an enormous number of other people oustide the loop) that one predictable consequence of invading Iraq would be to increase the level of terrorism, and to make it easier for the terrorist organisatioins to recruit and to organise. They decided that in spite of that there were good enough reasons to invade Iraq. There's no point in trying to rewrite history. They made a decision, knowing there would be a price. And knowing they would not have to pay it themsleves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 30 Aug 05 - 09:26 PM A couple of quotes from George's new book "Im not the only one". On our relationship with America......"We want a special relationship with the people of America. We just dont want a Lewinsky style relationship; one-sided, unequal, illicit, easily dispensed with by the more powerful partner and requiring the weaker partner to be endlessly on her knees". On Mr Blair......"You only know he's lying when you see his lips move" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: dianavan Date: 30 Aug 05 - 09:54 PM On Canada's relationship with America (The U.S.) we would agree. I can tell you that our relationship with the U.S. is an endless court battle. They are ignoring NAFTA. In other words, free trade is a one way street. Canada supplies and the U.S. consumes at whatever they think is a fair price, regardless of what the courts say. We are their closest neighbor. If we are treated with such disrespect, what can other countries expect? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Wolfgang Date: 31 Aug 05 - 09:11 AM You can't believe in everything (from Guardian) Galloway and Livingstone get criticised in the opinion piece for being inconsistent. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 01 Sep 05 - 11:49 AM Wolfgang..I see no inconsistancy in George's position. He was expressing a personal opinion on everyones right to practice the religion of their choice, while still maintaining that the process of Govt. should be free from religious interference. This reasoning of course dosn't apply to countries like Iran and Iraq, where Islam is perceived as more than simply a religion and more a way of life to most of the population. To be realistic, it will take many decades to separate church and state in these countries. Unless the Americans decide to re-install Saddam!! George is enough of a pragmatist to realise this ,even if others miss the point. George Galloway's reference to the "catastrophic demise of the Soviet Union",was in my opinion intended as a pointer to what was to take its place. There was an interesting piece in the Times last week,detailing the plight of the Gdansk shipyard workers, who with their trade union "Solidarity" were instrumental in the overthrow of the Communist govt. These same workers are now part of the "20% and rising" unemployment figures in Poland, as jobs are hived off by private companies to other countries with cheaper labour costs. Even that hero of Western capitalism, Lech Walenska when interviewed admitted that "perhaps they had been wrong". So you see Wolfgang George is correct in claiming to be "not the only one". George's rhetoric cuts through New Labour's hypocricy like a knife through butter. He may not have all the answers but he has the ability to inspire people to see a future beyond the trough set down by capitalist economics and in times like these we need all the inspiration we can get.....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 01 Sep 05 - 04:44 PM George Galloway's immediate claims that the July bombings in London were linked to Blair's policy in Iraq, appear to be vindicated tonight with the broadcasting of a tape recording from one of the suicide bombers. He blames the Uk voters for re-electing a government who have been "committing atrocities against Muslims"....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: Shakey Date: 01 Sep 05 - 05:50 PM From the Sunday Times: A PROMINENT London-based Saudi dissident, Muhammed al-Massari, is running a website that features a guide to urban warfare for potential terrorists. In a series of video and audio clips, the Beginner's Guide for Mujahed gives detailed advice on physical training, the surveillance of enemy targets and operational tactics. It features footage of an Arab instructor who recommends would-be holy warriors to invest in a knife for self-defence, saying: "Of course, this knife is mainly for stabbing and is not suitable or good for beheadings." Referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Al-Qaeda's leader in Iraq whose followers murdered the British hostage Ken Bigley by slitting his throat, the instructor adds: "As far as beheadings are concerned, we ask our brothers to seek Abu Musab's advice on this issue as he has more experience in this." The BBC has previously reported that al-Massari: helped Osama Bin Laden open a UK office in the mid-Nineties and now claims it is legitimate for Muslims to assassinate the Prime Minister Do I need to tell you who ran the 'Massari Must Stay Campaign' against an attempt to deport him in the 1990's? Well, let's hear it from Massari himself: I can confirm that the "Massari Must Stay" campaign - the campaign against my deportation - was run by Lord Avebury and Mr Galloway from Mr Galloway's office at 7 Millbank. Dr Mohammed Naseem is a leading figure in the Respect Coalition(Galloway's party). He is its single largest donor, providing more than 50% of the funds reported to the Electoral Commission. He was a Respect candidate for Parliament in the general election. The organisation he leads, the Islamic Party of Britain, is today saying that the (London) attacks were a provocation, staged by the police, the Blair government, or the Mossad -- or all of them together. Nice company he keeps, how about you ake? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: More Galloway! From: akenaton Date: 01 Sep 05 - 06:26 PM I'm afraid I'm reduced to conversing with arseholes like you!! |
