Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

British Lawmaker Lashes Out at Senators
AP via Yahoo! ^ | May 17, 2005 | KEN GUGGENHEIM

Posted on 05/17/2005 1:27:30 PM PDT by Brilliant

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-139 next last
To: cooper72
>>the Senate has no power over him even if he did lie. <<

That's what I thought.

51 posted on 05/17/2005 3:04:49 PM PDT by evad (No action to secure borders, No action on judges... NO MONEY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

The money was laundered. They didn't ask him if he knew any person or entity that received funds.

His wife got some as "salary" through the charity. The Senators were second rate interrogators.


52 posted on 05/17/2005 3:06:38 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Brit_Guy

Yes. I believe it is entirely possible that this guy is innocent of taking bribe-oil from Saddam-- which just makes his servitude to Saddam all the more jaw-dropping.

If a Senator in the US were this closely allied to Saddam, it would be nothing short of scandalous-- and said Seantor would certainly not survive re-election.

Curious.


53 posted on 05/17/2005 3:06:56 PM PDT by agooga (The Kyoto Protocol will lower global temperature by .07 degrees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Brit_Guy
>>This really is a PR disaster. I'm stunned the US let him in. <<

I'll agree with that one.

I understand if he commits a crime while on our soil he's subject to our laws but I just wasn't sure how it worked with contempt of congress.

54 posted on 05/17/2005 3:07:09 PM PDT by evad (No action to secure borders, No action on judges... NO MONEY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
The money was laundered. They didn't ask him if he knew any person or entity that received funds. His wife got some as "salary" through the charity. The Senators were second rate interrogators.

It's strange that the UK intelligence services and the US Senate do not have proof but you do. Are you in the CIA? :)

55 posted on 05/17/2005 3:08:56 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: agooga
which just makes his servitude to Saddam all the more jaw-dropping. If a Senator in the US were this closely allied to Saddam

Maybe you are mistaking his friendship to the Arab world to Saddam. He has always called Saddam a brutal dictator.

56 posted on 05/17/2005 3:11:52 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Might there also be some lingering resentment of anyone Celtic against anyone named "Norman"? Or of anyone with "Gal" in his name against anyone with "man" in his name? Twice?


57 posted on 05/17/2005 3:14:24 PM PDT by FreeKeys ("Freedom isn't for wimps." -- Neal Boortz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeKeys
Might there also be some lingering resentment of anyone Celtic against anyone named "Norman"? Or of anyone with "Gal" in his name against anyone with "man" in his name? Twice?

I hope that was a joke!

58 posted on 05/17/2005 3:15:22 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

Are you saying he was not actively working in Saddam's interests?


59 posted on 05/17/2005 3:17:26 PM PDT by agooga (The Kyoto Protocol will lower global temperature by .07 degrees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

"It's strange that the UK intelligence services and the US Senate do not have proof but you do. Are you in the CIA? :)"

It's strange why the US Senators and their staff didn't bother to read Brit news articles about his wife's salary and his expensive Portuguese villa. Many were here on FR. He admitted the "salary." BTW the wife? Yasser Arafat's niece.

The Senators were third rate. If the Jordanian gave him money he would have said it was for a different reasons. Politicians know plenty about these things. I think they weren't prepared for being put on trial themselves via various lib-buzz details.


60 posted on 05/17/2005 3:17:30 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: agooga
Are you saying he was not actively working in Saddam's interests?

Well if you have the proof please tell the Senators and the rest please.

61 posted on 05/17/2005 3:18:39 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom

"Bully for the Brit!
It's about time that somebody stood up to that sanctimonious thug, Norm Coleman, and said, "HAVE YOU NO DECENCY, SIR?""

Yes, I agree! Bully for the people who were making money from the rape and pillaging of the Iraqi people! We should leave poor little Galloway alone, and that goes for his buddy Saddam too!

(sarcasm off)


62 posted on 05/17/2005 3:19:05 PM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

"Galloway certainly has balls, if not brains."

Big brass ones, but what control does the U.S. Senate have over him?


63 posted on 05/17/2005 3:20:35 PM PDT by toddlintown (Your papers please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
It's strange why the US Senators and their staff didn't bother to read Brit news articles about his wife's salary and his expensive Portuguese villa. Many were here on FR. He admitted the "salary." BTW the wife? Yasser Arafat's niece.

Plenty of politicians have big villas. As for his wife, she is NOT Arafats niece. If that is what he was up against no wonder he ran all over the Senators.

64 posted on 05/17/2005 3:20:42 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

"He has always called Saddam a brutal dictator."

then who said this to Saddam?

"Sir, I salute your courage, your strength and your indefatigability"


65 posted on 05/17/2005 3:21:36 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
then who said this to Saddam? "Sir, I salute your courage, your strength and your indefatigability"

If you see the whole video he is talking to the Iraqi people. I knew all this before you did, and I knew Galloway before you did and didn't like him before you had heard of him, but there is much twisting of the truth and half-truths being told - that being one of them.

66 posted on 05/17/2005 3:26:39 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Galloway's appearance was an odd spectacle on Capitol Hill: A legislator from a friendly nation

~snip~

He was expelled from Prime Minister Tony Blair's Labour Party after urging British soldiers not to fight in Iraq.

~snip~

Just wanted to put those two closer together than the article deigned.

Carl Levin was pretty good, too, which doesn't bode well for Galloway. If the evidence was spinnable I've no doubt the dems would take a more sympathetic tack.

The evidence was not touched and it was a mighty entertaining spectacle calculated by the "outraged" Galloway.

67 posted on 05/17/2005 3:27:25 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Betaille
Why didn't the senators get tough with him and make some news?

Here's a link to the part of the hearing where Galloway testified. It begins with Coleman laying out the case.

Believe me news was made and the reporters know it.

Galloway Appearance

68 posted on 05/17/2005 3:30:10 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Everything that communist said in the Senante was a pack of lies. When I saw his speech I became furious!

Didn't we bail out the Brits TWICE? Is this the thanks we get? The Senate should nail him for contempt for sprewing his many many lies.


69 posted on 05/17/2005 3:30:42 PM PDT by DeepRed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

"Plenty of politicians have big villas."

And all should be questioned, no?

"As for his wife, she is NOT Arafats niece."

Ok, what how was she related?

"If that is what he was up against no wonder he ran all over the Senators."

It was a joke. They should have stepped down and appointed some lawyers to interrogate. The inquiry is incompetent. Of course the facial connections he'll deny. If money was transferred it was under another ruse. Gosh, you'd think politicians would know that...

I'll give him credit, he's a master of avoiding answers. He should be a diplomat.


70 posted on 05/17/2005 3:30:45 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom

71 posted on 05/17/2005 3:31:51 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom
It's about time that somebody stood up to that sanctimonious thug, Norm Coleman, and said, "HAVE YOU NO DECENCY, SIR?"

Coleman had plenty of decency. Galloway on the other hand...

Did you see Carl Levin? He wasn't buying what Galloway was selling either.

It doesn't look good for George Galloway.

Check out the link I just posted at #68.

If you dare.

72 posted on 05/17/2005 3:32:40 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

I'm saying that Galloway appears to be (or have been) a tacit ally of Saddam's-- in that he fought to prevent the war, Saddam's ouster and the sanctions against Iraq. There is no proof needed of this in that it is his actual record.

You can call a man a "brutal dictator" and still do nothing to remove him-- and indeed obstruct his removal. What does this make YOU?

I am NOT saying what Galloway did was illegal-- unless it is shown otherwise. I AM saying that I (and most Americans) would find it supremely distasteful.

You seem to be spoiling for a fight.


73 posted on 05/17/2005 3:34:42 PM PDT by agooga (The Kyoto Protocol will lower global temperature by .07 degrees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

A villa in Portugal and Iraqi vouchers are unrelated. Galloway would be a millionaire (this is not a joke) for the amount of money he has made by suing people for libel, including the Iraqi vouchers.

His wife is not related to Arafat in any way.

Finally, Galloway is a top-class politician. If he had milder views he would be a Government minister.


74 posted on 05/17/2005 3:34:49 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: untenured
What is the point (other than fair play) of allowing him to come over here, make a telegenically crackpot opening statement and then face a few relatively inconsequential questions from senators before being dismissed?

He announced he was coming here after the Committee released the documents last week detailing Galloway's and a couple other European politician's ties to the illegal oil for food scam.

It's his strategy. Some think Coleman baited him. Perhaps. And here he was, under oath.

I completely disagree with your characterization of "inconsequential questions" as it ignores the entire first panel and Coleman's impressive opening welcoming Galloway and even Sen. Levin's consequential questioning.

75 posted on 05/17/2005 3:35:35 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cooper72
I watched it and it did actually work. The Committee never laid a finger on him.

Dream on. I really watched it and Galloway is in trouble.

76 posted on 05/17/2005 3:36:38 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

Coleman had excellent charges and evidence... but why does it sound like he's falling asleep and doesn't care about what he's saying? He should have been humiliating this guy.


77 posted on 05/17/2005 3:36:47 PM PDT by Betaille (Harry Potter is a Right-Winger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom
like the sanctimonious little twit Norm Coleman really is.

Having respect for the law translates to sanctimony in your and George Galloway's world.

LOL

78 posted on 05/17/2005 3:38:06 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DeepRed
Didn't we bail out the Brits TWICE? Is this the thanks we get?

Are you for real? Are all Americans like Ward Churchill?

As for bailing people out, Britain declared war on Hitler while America waited for two years for Hitler to declare war on America, and yet we should kiss your ass. Since when did doing right become wrong?

Name another nation other than Britain who has lost more men or spent more resources helping America in the War on Terror from DAY ONE!

79 posted on 05/17/2005 3:40:54 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
I'd think that if these allegations are true, then there must be some evidence of it other than some Iraqi official's testimony.

On what are you basing your commentary?

There is much more than "some Iraqi official's testimony". There is documentation.

In fact one line of questioning that Levin pursued was trying to pin Galloway down on one specific document and asked him if the document was a forgery. Galloway would not say that and said it might be real but the information was false.

I do not think Galloway could be pinned down on perjury as he was more slick than Slick, but I do think his testimony "can and will be used against him".

80 posted on 05/17/2005 3:41:59 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dts32041
What I find funny about this is its one politico calling another politico a liar, is that like a kettle calling a pot black.

Um, no, it's not.

Perhaps you're not aware of the charges Galloway has been facing here.

81 posted on 05/17/2005 3:43:15 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: agooga
You can call a man a "brutal dictator" and still do nothing to remove him-- and indeed obstruct his removal. What does this make YOU?

Me?

I am NOT saying what Galloway did was illegal-- unless it is shown otherwise. I AM saying that I (and most Americans) would find it supremely distasteful.

So does most Britons (and me) who have known and disliked Galloway for many years longer than you.

You seem to be spoiling for a fight.

LOL Grow up please!

82 posted on 05/17/2005 3:43:44 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Betaille
Coleman had excellent charges and evidence... but why does it sound like he's falling asleep and doesn't care about what he's saying?

I didn't see the hearing, but Coleman may have just been letting Galloway have plenty of rope. Tariq Aziz has reportedly been very cooperative with this committee, and his testimony has yet to be heard.

83 posted on 05/17/2005 3:45:04 PM PDT by CFC__VRWC ("Anytime a liberal squeals in outrage, an angel gets its wings!" - gidget7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Betaille

No. His style was excellent.

Galloway was outright baiting him and Coleman didn't bite. And they did get him under oath and on the record on a few matters.

I don't care for this relentless negativity based on nothing.


84 posted on 05/17/2005 3:45:09 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

I suggest he has neither.


85 posted on 05/17/2005 3:45:20 PM PDT by Juan Medén
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Dream on. I really watched it and Galloway is in trouble.

I watched it too and Galloway is in no trouble at all. In fact there is nothing the Senators can do now.

86 posted on 05/17/2005 3:45:41 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

I watched it for a while. He certainly opened a giant can of whupass on that committee.


87 posted on 05/17/2005 3:46:02 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

The British are just pissed we kicked their ass...twice!

What a bunch of girliemen. We had to save them in WWII as well.


88 posted on 05/17/2005 3:46:15 PM PDT by shellshocked (They're undocumented Border Patrol agents, not vigilantes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cooper72
I hope that was a joke!

Me too. Too lame, I know.

89 posted on 05/17/2005 3:46:33 PM PDT by FreeKeys ("Just because someone hates America doesn't mean he has to have reasons." -- Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: cooper72
They don't have any proof. That is why Galloway is there, and why no-one produced any

And you say you watched?

If they had proof they would show it.

Clearly you're settling for parroting George Galloway's lines (and lies).

90 posted on 05/17/2005 3:46:51 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

"I don't care for this relentless negativity based on nothing."

I just feel that the committee was very hands-off considering how insulting this guy was and how overwhelming the Senators evidence is.


91 posted on 05/17/2005 3:47:25 PM PDT by Betaille (Harry Potter is a Right-Winger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
It's pretty amazing to me that they'd make the allegation

You know what's amazing? Someone not knowing what they're talking about yet making comments based on misinformation.

By design or ignorance is the only question.

92 posted on 05/17/2005 3:48:44 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
It may not be stupid if he's innocent

Hmmmmm, I'm leaning toward "by design" at this point.

93 posted on 05/17/2005 3:49:27 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

What proof did they have? Any even slightly objective person could see they never touched him.

I repeat again, I don't like Galloway, and didn't like him decades before you had even heard his name, but there is no honour in pretending to see what is not there.


94 posted on 05/17/2005 3:51:03 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
I am surprised the scumbag dems on the Committee didn't side with Galloway much more vigorously.

Telling, isn't it.

Levin was almost dogged in pressing Galloway on the document (to those who are ignorant or ignoring the facts--there were documents and Galloway would not say all were forged) and on the Iraq dealings of his chairman of his charity.

95 posted on 05/17/2005 3:51:13 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

You clearly did not watch the hearing as you claim (or you're spinning like a top).

The first panel was a very detailed offer of documentation and witness statements.

Coleman pointed to some of this in his opening before Galloway spoke.

They have documentation and I'll bet you know it.


96 posted on 05/17/2005 3:53:06 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
(to those who are ignorant or ignoring the facts--there were documents and Galloway would not say all were forged)

This is the deliberate disengenous part I don't like. He didn't say they were not all forgeries, he actually said since he had never seen them before and didn't know what they were, how could he say whether the original documents were forgeries or not.

97 posted on 05/17/2005 3:55:23 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
You clearly did not watch the hearing as you claim (or you're spinning like a top). The first panel was a very detailed offer of documentation and witness statements. Coleman pointed to some of this in his opening before Galloway spoke. They have documentation and I'll bet you know it.

I did watch it, and since you are so sure of the proof tell us all it then? And be precise please.

98 posted on 05/17/2005 3:56:57 PM PDT by cooper72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: cooper72
He has also denied this as well. In fact the whole point of saying that he had never bought, sold, seen oil...etc is that he could only do it with vouchers.

Say, didja happen to catch his testimoney re Zuriekat?

I don't think your "he also denied" as if implying a flat denial really is accurate.

99 posted on 05/17/2005 3:58:00 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: cooper72

Not disingenuous. Factual.

And I directed you to a link to the hearing where more documentation was displayed.


100 posted on 05/17/2005 3:59:24 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-139 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson