George Galloway
23 October 2003, 06:44 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go on George, at last, a politician who says what he thinks and stands behind his convictions. Kangaroo court isn’t the half of it.
Thumbs up from me George, I’ll be voting for you as an independent np m8.
I liked his comments about having ‘a strong heart’ unlike the spineless slimey weasel Bliar.
Hope phoney Bliar lives to regret this, or perhaps not
Thumbs up from me George, I’ll be voting for you as an independent np m8.
I liked his comments about having ‘a strong heart’ unlike the spineless slimey weasel Bliar.
Hope phoney Bliar lives to regret this, or perhaps not
23 October 2003, 07:40 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's bang on about 'the war', simple, it was and still is an illegal action. What the troops were asked/made to do was illegal. Anywhere else it would be a war crimes tribunals ahoy and perhaps will be. Following orders was and is no excuse.
Histroy will prove Galloway as being in the right. Iraq is the new Vietnam, only this time the wavey smiley one has got the UK embroiled in it all.
We all know why Bush went to war, now what was Bliars reason? Feckin poodle puppet, the more I see him the more I want to smack him hard.
Get the Muppet and his cronies out ASAP.
edited to say; Jason, say what you think m8, dont link to spurious old news, it's today that matters.
[Edited by Jye - 10/23/2003 7:43:27 PM]
Histroy will prove Galloway as being in the right. Iraq is the new Vietnam, only this time the wavey smiley one has got the UK embroiled in it all.
We all know why Bush went to war, now what was Bliars reason? Feckin poodle puppet, the more I see him the more I want to smack him hard.
Get the Muppet and his cronies out ASAP.
edited to say; Jason, say what you think m8, dont link to spurious old news, it's today that matters.
[Edited by Jye - 10/23/2003 7:43:27 PM]
24 October 2003, 12:30 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think George has a right to say what he wants, however, once OUR troops were at war in Iraq, illegal or not, inciting other armed forces to attack OUR troops is a big fecking no no.
Soldiers don’t have a say in what they do they follow orders. Inciting others to attack them is bang out of order.
Soldiers don’t have a say in what they do they follow orders. Inciting others to attack them is bang out of order.
24 October 2003, 12:32 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saying our troops were engaged in "illegal" actions is an outragous statement....
so here's another one....
Treason. You have just comitted it, now off to the tower for you! [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
so here's another one....
Treason. You have just comitted it, now off to the tower for you! [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
Trending Topics
24 October 2003, 12:35 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Buck.
We all have our opinions on the war. But for him, as a British citizen to encourage the 'enemy' to kill his own citizens is a p1ss take.
I have many friends who were in that 'war', and although I wasn't behind it wouldn't encourage any act of violence against our troops.
He's a disgrace.
We all have our opinions on the war. But for him, as a British citizen to encourage the 'enemy' to kill his own citizens is a p1ss take.
I have many friends who were in that 'war', and although I wasn't behind it wouldn't encourage any act of violence against our troops.
He's a disgrace.
24 October 2003, 02:14 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there's the alternative viewpoint ... and there's treaon.
this guy is bent; he was uncovered earlier this year by the daily telegraph for inexcusably corrupt and intimate relations with saddam's regime ... he said he'd sue for defamation ... he has not gone to court. why not? because he can't win. why not? because he's in an indefensible position.
why has he not been investigated?
he publicly called for UK forces to disobey their battle orders. he publicly called for arab nations to stand up and fight us. he batted for those that we fought, right or wrong.
get a grip people - this man is poisonous. 40 years ago he'd be tried for treason. i don't know why he hasn't already been charged. no, i do know in fact, it's because the establishment is too scared to invoke such an "old" law for fear of media reaction.
he's gone beyond opposition to sleeping with saddam's regime - for cash (allegedly).
reasoned opposition to the war is one thing; and i respect those that can argue against it with logic, fact and passion. i may not agree but that i have time for.
but this man covers none of the above. he's a radical socialist who'd prefer to see his brutal financial sponsor stay in power than be toppled. regardless of said sponsor's track record. because he was sucking on the tit.
i wouldn't pi55 on him if he was on fire in front of me. he's the type of litigious scum who would have got into bed with stalin, hitler, pol pot and amin if the price was right.
sacked from the labour party? he has got off very, very, very lightly ... and woe ye that cannot tell the difference between passive conscientious objection and active treason...
galloway? gallows. go rot in your silk suit.
[Edited by Holy Ghost - 10/24/2003 2:16:24 AM]
this guy is bent; he was uncovered earlier this year by the daily telegraph for inexcusably corrupt and intimate relations with saddam's regime ... he said he'd sue for defamation ... he has not gone to court. why not? because he can't win. why not? because he's in an indefensible position.
why has he not been investigated?
he publicly called for UK forces to disobey their battle orders. he publicly called for arab nations to stand up and fight us. he batted for those that we fought, right or wrong.
get a grip people - this man is poisonous. 40 years ago he'd be tried for treason. i don't know why he hasn't already been charged. no, i do know in fact, it's because the establishment is too scared to invoke such an "old" law for fear of media reaction.
he's gone beyond opposition to sleeping with saddam's regime - for cash (allegedly).
reasoned opposition to the war is one thing; and i respect those that can argue against it with logic, fact and passion. i may not agree but that i have time for.
but this man covers none of the above. he's a radical socialist who'd prefer to see his brutal financial sponsor stay in power than be toppled. regardless of said sponsor's track record. because he was sucking on the tit.
i wouldn't pi55 on him if he was on fire in front of me. he's the type of litigious scum who would have got into bed with stalin, hitler, pol pot and amin if the price was right.
sacked from the labour party? he has got off very, very, very lightly ... and woe ye that cannot tell the difference between passive conscientious objection and active treason...
galloway? gallows. go rot in your silk suit.
[Edited by Holy Ghost - 10/24/2003 2:16:24 AM]
24 October 2003, 09:29 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sacked from the labour party?
The real old labour party would not have gone to war. They were old fashioned stuck in the mud militants but at least they had priciples.
Chip.
24 October 2003, 10:31 AM
#14
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this guy is bent; he was uncovered earlier this year by the daily telegraph for inexcusably corrupt and intimate relations with saddam's regime ... he said he'd sue for defamation ... he has not gone to court. why not? because he can't win. why not? because he's in an indefensible position.
HG, can YOU prove this, or are you just regurgitating the distorted 'facts' by Daily Telegraph? If GG did actually receive money (allegedly £375,000 a year over a number of years, a fair sum to hide under your bed btw) the cheques would have been written by the United Nations in New York. So all anyone would have to do is check with the UN whether they have ever written any cheques to GG, when they wrote them and where the money went.
No such thing has ever happened. I wonder why?
he publicly called for UK forces to disobey their battle orders. he publicly called for arab nations to stand up and fight us. he batted for those that we fought, right or wrong.
Yes the Abu Dhabi ‘report’, this was that bastion of impartiality the SUN which led this one off after receiving a ‘briefing’ from Westminster. Strange why the Sun led on this one, it’s hardly known for its Abu Dhabi coverage.
The allegation was that GG had been inviting the slaughter of British troops and that this was against rule 2A.8 of the party rule book which says: 'No member of the party shall engage in conduct which in the opinion of the national constitutional committee (NCC) is prejudicial, or in any act which in the opinion of the NCC is grossly detrimental to the party.'
Hardly described as treason, is it? GG also stated that he was on the side of the British troops, whom he described in Parliament as "lions" led by "donkeys". Again, all these ‘facts’ are open to interpretation.
GG was one of the most articulate MP’s from the far Left, and has been an embarrassment to ‘New Labour’ for years so there is no doubt that Bliar has been trying to get rid of him for ages.
The war with Iraq WAS illegal, its only because the US were involved that no action has been taken. Troops were therefore following illegal orders in an illegal war. No distortion of these 'facts' can alter what has happened. Simple.
And anyway HG a man is still innocent until he is proven otherwise, although perhaps in your world, like NL’s world of lies and spin, this doesn’t apply.
I’d trust GG over the slime ball Blair and his party of arsewipes any day.
GG, Independent for Glasgow Kelvin (thumbs up).
HG, can YOU prove this, or are you just regurgitating the distorted 'facts' by Daily Telegraph? If GG did actually receive money (allegedly £375,000 a year over a number of years, a fair sum to hide under your bed btw) the cheques would have been written by the United Nations in New York. So all anyone would have to do is check with the UN whether they have ever written any cheques to GG, when they wrote them and where the money went.
No such thing has ever happened. I wonder why?
he publicly called for UK forces to disobey their battle orders. he publicly called for arab nations to stand up and fight us. he batted for those that we fought, right or wrong.
Yes the Abu Dhabi ‘report’, this was that bastion of impartiality the SUN which led this one off after receiving a ‘briefing’ from Westminster. Strange why the Sun led on this one, it’s hardly known for its Abu Dhabi coverage.
The allegation was that GG had been inviting the slaughter of British troops and that this was against rule 2A.8 of the party rule book which says: 'No member of the party shall engage in conduct which in the opinion of the national constitutional committee (NCC) is prejudicial, or in any act which in the opinion of the NCC is grossly detrimental to the party.'
Hardly described as treason, is it? GG also stated that he was on the side of the British troops, whom he described in Parliament as "lions" led by "donkeys". Again, all these ‘facts’ are open to interpretation.
GG was one of the most articulate MP’s from the far Left, and has been an embarrassment to ‘New Labour’ for years so there is no doubt that Bliar has been trying to get rid of him for ages.
The war with Iraq WAS illegal, its only because the US were involved that no action has been taken. Troops were therefore following illegal orders in an illegal war. No distortion of these 'facts' can alter what has happened. Simple.
And anyway HG a man is still innocent until he is proven otherwise, although perhaps in your world, like NL’s world of lies and spin, this doesn’t apply.
I’d trust GG over the slime ball Blair and his party of arsewipes any day.
GG, Independent for Glasgow Kelvin (thumbs up).
24 October 2003, 10:34 AM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The US says he killed 100,000 minimum. The red cross says less than 10,000. Red cross are supposedly neutral. U.S are liars.
How many have the US/UK killed since going in in 93? Thats OK is it.
Blair did not go to war for anything to do with ethnic cleansing. It was about so called WMDs. Or dont you recall this.
By principles I mean that someone should be really have 100% proof of why they were going to go to war and kill 1000's of innocent people.Not just on the heresay of the mighty US.This has over the past 6 months been hard to justify thgough Blair likes to change his wording to suit on this subject as is usual.
We have seen time and time again the Iraqis telling the US and UK to get out of their country. They do not want them or us there.I wonder why?
Chip.
How many have the US/UK killed since going in in 93? Thats OK is it.
Blair did not go to war for anything to do with ethnic cleansing. It was about so called WMDs. Or dont you recall this.
By principles I mean that someone should be really have 100% proof of why they were going to go to war and kill 1000's of innocent people.Not just on the heresay of the mighty US.This has over the past 6 months been hard to justify thgough Blair likes to change his wording to suit on this subject as is usual.
We have seen time and time again the Iraqis telling the US and UK to get out of their country. They do not want them or us there.I wonder why?
Chip.
24 October 2003, 10:35 AM
#17
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
--Principles that would let a dictator carry on murdering 1000's every year - so ethnic cleansing sits comfortably with you does it Chip?--
We didnt go to war because of ethnic cleansing m8, we let them hang out to dry on that one. Encouraged them to rise up and then ran a mile.
We went to war supposidly because of the 45 min story and WOMD. Oh and of course oil.
We didnt go to war because of ethnic cleansing m8, we let them hang out to dry on that one. Encouraged them to rise up and then ran a mile.
We went to war supposidly because of the 45 min story and WOMD. Oh and of course oil.
24 October 2003, 11:25 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Surviving as a soldier of fortune on the Los Angeles underground...
Posts: 7,181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If his beleifs were that strong he should have quit the Labour Party in the first place, and he should have known that his expulsion would come eventually.
That git in Iraq needed booting out, Blair did the right thing in sending the troops in - and Galloway should have bitten his lip while the war was on. It's fair enough that he disagreed with the war, but when citing the troops to disobey orders - thats ******* treason in my book.
That git in Iraq needed booting out, Blair did the right thing in sending the troops in - and Galloway should have bitten his lip while the war was on. It's fair enough that he disagreed with the war, but when citing the troops to disobey orders - thats ******* treason in my book.
24 October 2003, 11:39 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the war was as a result of Iraqs continued refusal to meets its obligations to the UN Security Council Resolution #687.
Anyway as long as the price of Optimax goes down I'll be happy, joke
Edited to say - OK let the UN start a war crimes trial - wouldnt get past day 1 IMO.
I believe the only people actively taking this seriously are Belgian on behalf of 17 Iraqis and 2 Jordanians by citing Col Franks (US Army) due to the following:
The use of cluster bombs;
The killing of civilians by other means;
Attacks on the infrastructure essential for public health;
And the failure to prevent looting of hospitals
Wars war IMO - there will never ever be a clean war fought (ie no civilian loss of life). I'm pretty confident in saying that the Iraqis have probably never even read the Geneva Convention!
[Edited by Scooby96 - 10/24/2003 11:49:04 AM]
Anyway as long as the price of Optimax goes down I'll be happy, joke
Edited to say - OK let the UN start a war crimes trial - wouldnt get past day 1 IMO.
I believe the only people actively taking this seriously are Belgian on behalf of 17 Iraqis and 2 Jordanians by citing Col Franks (US Army) due to the following:
The use of cluster bombs;
The killing of civilians by other means;
Attacks on the infrastructure essential for public health;
And the failure to prevent looting of hospitals
Wars war IMO - there will never ever be a clean war fought (ie no civilian loss of life). I'm pretty confident in saying that the Iraqis have probably never even read the Geneva Convention!
[Edited by Scooby96 - 10/24/2003 11:49:04 AM]
24 October 2003, 02:03 PM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm with Holy Ghost and Scooby96 on this one, he should be hung shot whatever for treason [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img] He is a traitor, first and foremost for shaking hands with Saddam and being on his side [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
However i'd settle for him being deported and being made to live with hook hand as his gay live in lover in a shack in the middle of Afghanistan!
However i'd settle for him being deported and being made to live with hook hand as his gay live in lover in a shack in the middle of Afghanistan!
24 October 2003, 02:22 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another well thought out and structured reply 
Syrias President Bashar Assad was feted by no less than Tony Blair in Downing Street last December, he was the first Syrian leader to be greeted in this country and even met the Queen.
I'd settle for both of the above being deported and being made to live with hook hand as his gay live in lover in a shack in the middle of Afghanistan!
edited as I just found a few quotes
On Thursday, President Assad said in an interview that America and Britain would never be able to subdue the whole of Iraq. "For sure, the United States is a superpower that can occupy a relatively small country. The United States and Britain will not be able to control all of Iraq. There will be much tougher resistance."
"But if the American-British designs succeed - and we hope they do not succeed and doubt that they will - there will be Arab popular resistance, and this has begun."
His comments came on the same day as Syria's mufti Sheikh Ahmad Kaftaro, the country's leading Muslim religious authority, called for suicide bombings against the US and British forces.
Yup Bliar and the Queen, traitors both.
[Edited by Jye - 10/24/2003 2:32:03 PM]
Syrias President Bashar Assad was feted by no less than Tony Blair in Downing Street last December, he was the first Syrian leader to be greeted in this country and even met the Queen.
I'd settle for both of the above being deported and being made to live with hook hand as his gay live in lover in a shack in the middle of Afghanistan!
edited as I just found a few quotes
On Thursday, President Assad said in an interview that America and Britain would never be able to subdue the whole of Iraq. "For sure, the United States is a superpower that can occupy a relatively small country. The United States and Britain will not be able to control all of Iraq. There will be much tougher resistance."
"But if the American-British designs succeed - and we hope they do not succeed and doubt that they will - there will be Arab popular resistance, and this has begun."
His comments came on the same day as Syria's mufti Sheikh Ahmad Kaftaro, the country's leading Muslim religious authority, called for suicide bombings against the US and British forces.
Yup Bliar and the Queen, traitors both.
[Edited by Jye - 10/24/2003 2:32:03 PM]
24 October 2003, 02:32 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thats because I can't be bothered to spend time with lengthy answers to those who live in this country but support those who in turn support the enemy 
So if you like GG so much does that mean you also support his views as to how hard done by Saddam Hussein has been? Perhaps you also think that its perfectly ok for Iraq to harbour terrorist training camps north of Baghdad used by Al Quaeda and others?
If you want to support the enmy get out of this country and go and live in the enemy's own land!!! [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
Truly fcuked off with those who live in this country and support enemies of the state [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
So if you like GG so much does that mean you also support his views as to how hard done by Saddam Hussein has been? Perhaps you also think that its perfectly ok for Iraq to harbour terrorist training camps north of Baghdad used by Al Quaeda and others?
If you want to support the enmy get out of this country and go and live in the enemy's own land!!! [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
Truly fcuked off with those who live in this country and support enemies of the state [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]
24 October 2003, 02:34 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
His views were distorted, as is everything in the media Bravo.
GG does overstep the mark now and again, but hey, no one is perfect.
A few quotes I added to my last post above for you btw
GG does overstep the mark now and again, but hey, no one is perfect.
A few quotes I added to my last post above for you btw
24 October 2003, 02:45 PM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jye last time I saw GG on video with a microphone in his hand I couldn't see any media around him distorting the bullsh!t he was spouting Perhaps it was a secret voiceover organised by The Sun 
All to easy to go the other way with the 'media distorts stuff' and believe they are responsible for twisting every word by somone you so adore when in fact no such thing has happened!
Perhaps it was a secret voiceover organised by The Sun All to easy to go the other way with the 'media distorts stuff' and believe they are responsible for twisting every word by somone you so adore when in fact no such thing has happened!