Skip to comments.Buchanan Interviews Galloway
Posted on 01/08/2003 11:49:46 AM PST by Inyokern
A few minutes ago, Buchanan and Press interviewed British MP George Galloway regarding his views on Iraq. Galloway, naturally, was against any military action against Saddam Hussein. Buchanan seemed to cheer him on.
Strangely, Pat Buchanan gave no indication whatsoever that George Galloway is perhaps the farthest left and most anti-American member of the British parliament (and that is quite and accomplishment).
Check out this link on Galloway:
The usual way these guys are bought off is through speaking fees, honoraria, or moneys to spouse or family members.
Could be Saudi money too. The article linked below is the best analysis of why OPEC is against a "war" in Iraq. They profit from the sanctions regime. Indeed, opposition to the removal of WMD from Iraq is "about oil."
"...The ideal outcome for Russia is exactly the same as that for Saudi Arabia and OPEC, i.e. maintenance of the status quo and the sanctions regime on Iraqi oil. Thus, Russia's opposition to a U.S. invasion of Iraq is completely rational..."
No, because he's interviewing raging lefty nutcases who think Kim Jong-Il is an agrarian reformer.
BTW, I do advocate defending our borders--I just don't want it done at the expense of our ability to actually fight and win wars, which is what YOU advocate.
You're right, Poopster. I'm adamently opposed to your conversion of NATO forces for use as a UN sanctioned globo-police force. I firmly believe the United States should retain sovereign control over our armed forces.
I'm adamantly opposed to lying sacks of fecal material such as yourself. I say "screw the UN" and sing the praises of unilateral action on behalf of US interests.
Anyone who still thinks Buchanan is a conservative should be disabused of that notion after seeing the cordial reception he gave the loonie leftist Galloway.
I saw Hannity schmoozing all over Susan Estrich (sp) so there is no need to call him conservative.
Sorry, Willie...high-tech military forces ain't the kind of force you use for interdicting mostly unarmed illegal immigrants. A force structure similar to the Chinese People's Liberation Army--lots of infantry on foot--would be better if you were to insist on using military troops.
Of course, then we wouldn't be able to fight and win wars, so my point is now proven--and you're still a worthless lying sack of fecal material.
Poopster, your hypocrisy is showing.
Willie, your stupidity has always shown through clearly. Stick to extorting money from your fellow citizens to fund your maglev fetish--at least, in that respect, you're no MORE idiotic than the other train freaks.
All the high-tech motion detection, night vision, infra-red, communication and rapid deployment capabilities that we have available, and you come up with this lame excuse. Thanks for proving my point, Poopster.
Sez Willie Green...without any explanation of WHY they're "lame excuses."
Willie, I have no idea why you insist on starting flame wars with me. But that's about all you're ever good for...that, and panhandling for tax dollars to support your maglev fetish.
So, with all respect due to you...go have an improper relationship with yourself.
Frankly, I don't shive a git what your cup of tea is, s**tbird.
For "America First" Buchanan to have Galloway on is breathtaking. What is even more astonishing is how people are rushing to defend him.
First of all, anyone who watches Hannity and Colmes knows very well who Susan Estrich is and knows that Hannity disagrees with her on most issues.
Secondly, most Buchanan and Press viewers are NOT familiar with who George Galloway is. They do not know he is a rabid leftist and America-hater. And they got no hint of that from Buchanan's fawning interview.
I agree on both counts. Buchanan seemed friendlier to the America-hater Galloway than to George W. Bush. I found it incredible.
What should he have done, introduced him as 'a rabid leftist and American hater'? I think not, Pat is a class act and always the gentleman.
Personally I don't want to be preconditioned when listening to an interview. All I want are the 'opinions' and 'reasons'. Let the viewers decide my friend, not you,Ivan or Poohbah!
Operation Allied Farce was a silly excuse of a war. I don't think that an International Tribunal should judge Milosevic, I'd leave that to the good folk of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Montenegro.
Would you mind explaining the relevance of your question?
I think this sympathetic interview with Galloway proves that Buchanan's alliance with Lenora Fulani was not a fluke. Buchanan has no problem making common cause with the left. He is no conservative.
Pat is one a very few 'pundits', 'commentators' that takes this position. On other issues, past and current, he's right on, much more than off. Hardly can you say, he's off his rocker.
Seems you're not to keen on Pat.
Due to his cozying up to leftists and the enemies of America, I lump Pat with the leftists and enemies of America. I merely give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he has some mental disorder, as opposed to being consciously evil.
Sounds like a major contradiction on your part.
No, it isn't.
Exactly who do you think are 'conservatives'? McCain, Spector, Olympia, Kristol, Safire? All of the Democrats and most of the Republicans are preaching NWO first, US sovereignty second. Hence comes the term 'neo conservative'.
It must have been good interview, in that Pat didn't 'opiniate'. Object of an interview is to find out what the 'interviewee' thinks. We all know what Pat thinks, as he one of few that is a straight talker in his columns and on the air. And as a bonus he's right on the 'facts' all the time, and most of the time the time on the analysis of the facts. A real God sent, especially in this piont of 'history'. He would make a better 'newspaper' of record than the cruddy New York Times.