| Submit your comments on this article |
| Fifth Column |
| Galloway bluster fails to convince Senate |
| 2005-05-18 |
| via InstaPundit Last night watched a CBS news piece on the hearings. I can't ever recall such a one sided report. The entire video consisted of Galloway reciting preplanned denials and insults. Not one second showing any senator asking a question or Galloway answering. Without knowing any background info, I would have thought Galloway was holding a press conference. Shame on CBS. No wonder the Press is now less trusted by Americans than even the government. My only question is has trust in the press fallen below used car salemen or Michael Jackson? Key points • Galloway's testimony against accusations leaves US Senate bewildered • Respect MP used meeting as platform for vocal criticism of Iraq war • US Senate remains to unsure of Galloway's credibility and approach Key quote "I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns." - GEORGE GALLOWAY Story in full George Galloway yesterday failed in his attempt to convince a sceptical US Senate investigative committee that he had not profited from oil dealings with Iraq under the UN's controversial oil-for-food programme. Despite a typically barnstorming performance full of bluster and rhetorical flourishes, the former Glasgow Kelvin MP was pinned down by persistent questioning over his business relationship with Fawaz Zureikat, the chairman of the Mariam Appeal - set up to assist a four-year-old Iraqi girl suffering from leukaemia. And it was a Democrat senator, Carl Levin, rather than the Republican committee chairman, Norm Coleman, who gave him the hardest time as Mr Galloway sought to turn the tables on his inquisitors, leaving him no closer to clearing his name than when he took his seat in front of the sub-committee of the Senate's homeland security and government affairs committee in Washington. Time and again, Mr Levin questioned him, requesting wearily that he deliver a straight answer to a straight question. But Mr Galloway could, or would not. The Respect MP clearly thought he came out on top, and said so bluntly afterwards, describing the chairman as "not much of a lyncher". But Mr Coleman, accused by the MP of being "remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice", appeared unswayed by Mr Galloway's testimony. "If in fact he lied to this committee, there will have to be consequences," he said afterwards. Asked whether Mr Galloway violated his oath to tell the truth before the committee, Mr Coleman said: "I don't know. We'll have to look over the record. I just don't think he was a credible witness." The committee's report on Mr Galloway's alleged involvement, published to coincide with yesterday's hearing, pulled few punches. Despite the MP's denials, it said, the evidence showed that: "Iraq granted George Galloway allocations for millions of barrels of oil under the oil-for-food programme. "Moreover, some evidence indicates that Galloway appeared to use a charity for children's leukaemia to conceal payments associated with at least one such allocation. Lastly, according to senior Saddam officials, the oil allocations were granted by Iraq because of Galloway's support for the Saddam regime and his opposition to UN sanctions." Mr Galloway, the MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, had pledged to take the fight to the committee and did not disappoint. Sitting up straight, he stared ahead as he delivered an impassioned diatribe against the US approach to Iraq. "I am not now, nor have I ever been an oil trader and neither has anyone on my behalf," he told the chairman. "I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and American governments and businessmen were selling him guns and gas." In a lengthy opening statement, Mr Galloway insisted the sub-committee had no evidence against him. "You have nothing on me, Senator, except my name on lists of names from Iraq, many of which have been drawn up after the installation of your puppet government in Iraq." And Mr Galloway rejected a claim in the sub-committee's report that he had had "many" meetings with Saddam Hussein, saying he had only met the former dictator twice. "I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns," he said. It was the speech of a man believing himself wronged: "I gave my heart and soul to stop you from committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq," he said. "And I told the world that the case for war was a pack of lies." And he poured scorn on the documentation produced in evidence against him, insisting, on his oath, that he had never heard of the company which, it was suggested, acted as a conduit for oil deals on his behalf. He accused the sub-committee of committing a "schoolboy howler" in its presentation of the evidence. Under repeated questioning, Mr Galloway conceded that Mr Zureikat did have extensive business dealings with the Saddam regime but, challenged over whether his friend's generous contributions to the Mariam Appeal - £900,000 by his own previous assessments - could have come from the sale of oil, he stonewalled. Urged to say if he would repay the cash if it could be proved to have come from such a source, he again ducked the question. Mr Galloway first met Mr Zureikat, a Jordanian businessman, through his now-estranged wife Amineh Abu-Zayyad, who had attended the same university in Jordan. The men became friends and set up the Mariam Appeal in 1998. • BBC Scotland flew its own reporter, Bob Wylie, out to cover Mr Galloway's appearance, while the corporation is looking to make job cuts and savings. |
| Posted by:ed |
| #36 comment #25 included several valid statements regarding Galloway's status in the UK, and I feel these add to the debate not detract, as you know very well rkb. Freedom of speech ? mmm... |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1434 2005-05-18 20:16 |
| #35 Galloway is a pariah in UK politics. No real influence other than causing trouble for the PM. He is not representative of the UK. He won his seat recently using very underhand tactics, such as the race card; in a district he has no knowledge of, to make a point to Tony Blair. Namely, don’t mess with me. He ousted one of Tony’s up and coming stars in the process who was a black girl in a black / Asian area. HE STILL WON. He is a heavy-weight political professional that can rattle Tony Blair time and time again. In the UK, unlike the US you normally need talent and intellect to make it, not just money, influence, money, connections, money, etc. Please don’t argue this one… There are decent clever Americans, the Democrat Levin seems one. But sorry, there are a lot of stupid people as well. Galloway is not cool, no-one trusts him in the UK, used car salesman image, but he went to the senate and showed SOME politicians in the US to be MORONS, and that’s the problem with the US. If the smart, talented people ran the US, it would be even greater than what it is today. Also when I made fun of trailing wife, I was being a little tongue in cheek, and I got the reaction I expected. You lock the Scottish windbag up. Keep him, as we never wanted him anyway. JERRY, JERRY, JERRY… |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1433 2005-05-18 19:01 |
| #34 ""#1 Galloway came to play cricket at a rugby match. He really must develop an understanding and appreciation of cultures other than his own."" Come on !! You mean he payed RUGBY at a CRICKET match. |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1433 2005-05-18 07:44 |
| #33 one comment Norm ? Is he not that lump in cheers I think Dan Dan the potaro (potato) man would have done a better job. One thing for george, he's got more 'uptop' than that senate loser, and no, I'm not talking well groomed hair ! |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1433 2005-05-18 07:41 |
| #32 He came off better than Trafficant in the short blurb I watched. Must be the lack of the pelt of a roadkill stapled to his pate. Michael Moore must have written his address. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2005-05-18 21:37 |
| #31 TW, thanks. |
| Posted by: Matt 2005-05-18 21:20 |
| #30 I think it had to do with persistent use of the word "potato." The items about the inevitability of nuking the US and "carpet napalm" on the settlements might have also tipped the scales a little. |
| Posted by: Asedwich 2005-05-18 20:46 |
| #29 Comments about Galloway don't need to include wholesale insults to Americans, WO. Or to our commenters here. And this has nothing to do with free speech. Fred pays for this bandwidth and makes it (and his programming) available to us. We're all guests here. |
| Posted by: rkb 2005-05-18 20:37 |
| #28 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1434 TROLL 2005-05-18 20:16 |
| #27 Our buddy was TROLLed because s/he persisted in calling people names rather than engaging in respectful disagreement, or even a good rant. |
| Posted by: rkb 2005-05-18 19:52 |
| #26 Very well said, Matt. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-05-18 19:48 |
| #25 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1433 TROLL 2005-05-18 19:01 |
| #24 Galloway did a very good job of executing a very stupid strategy. He could have stayed on his side of the pond, but, for the sake of showing us what a clever fellow he is, crossed to our side and arguably committed perjury on US soil. Further, instead of giving the Senators a straightforward explanation of his side of the story -- which would have been the best thing to do if he could not be dissuaded from testifying to begin with-- he went out of his way to insult (and thereby motivate) two ranking bi-partisan Senators. So be sure to collect your press clippings, GG, you may find that the extra reading material comes in handy. That little show was egotism run amok. |
| Posted by: Matt 2005-05-18 17:38 |
| #23 BBC comparision with Braveheart? How about a comparision with Blowhard |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-05-18 17:00 |
| #22 And the best part? Any federal prosecutor, and any citizen in the land can prosecute a RICO charge against Galloway and the UN. We don't have to wait for the government to shut this enemy organization down. Even better, the UN can be shut down along with any and every company that EVER did business with Hussein. You f*cking lewftists want to crow about how cool Galloway is, maybe it's best you all be thankful Galloway got back home with any portion of his Islamist-ass kissing ass intact. |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-05-18 16:50 |
| #21 Wanna know something smartass? Galloway can be indicted TODAY THIS HOUR activity that falls under RICO, just based on the doucments the US Senate has now. |
| Posted by: BADANOV 2005-05-18 16:46 |
| #20 I'm afraid you are all living in a dream world. Coleman was blown to smithereens and was very anxious to draw the proceedings to a close. The so called "evidence" was pathetic. I don't think Coleman would be brave enough to make these allegations outside the Senate since he would then be subject to libel action. It's crazy to think that the USA would ask for extradition based on this contrived evidence, not that it would succeed in any case. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-18 16:31 |
| #19 No surer way to turn the normally apathetic, UN-supporting American center into advocates of UN reform than to make Galloway the OFF posterboy. More, please. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-05-18 13:18 |
| #18 "My only question is has trust in the press fallen below used car salemen or Michael Jackson?" I, for one, trust the MSM less than used car salesmen and politicians - at least you know up front they're spreading manure while trying to pick your pocket. With the MSM you have to work at separating the wheat from the chaff. As for Michael Jackson: he's in a class by himself - certifiably nuts IMO, so trust doesn't really enter into it. |
| Posted by: Xbalanke 2005-05-18 12:54 |
| #17 Have all the Maryam's Appeal records disappeared from the bank as well? What about the records at the banks to/from which monies were transferred? And the bank records of those who made donations to the cause? A good forensic accountant (and we've got plenty of those in this country!) should have the missing records reconstituted in jig time. Oh, and Whomoting Omeaper1433: I've seen both games, and I know the difference. Your clever little British MP thinks he is still operating under the polite rules of the British Parliament. The U.S. Senate is not at all interested in his clever word games -- this is a legal trial, and your boyo is gleefully lying under oath to people who have the financial documents in front of them, and some of the best financial people in the world to advise them. Arrest for perjury is only the first of Galloway's worries, had he the brains to realize it. But don't worry, eventually it will be brought to his attention. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-05-18 12:08 |
| #16 This lost records thing is SOP for fraudsters using charities and nonprofit entities as a vehicle for concealing their cash flow and it's sources. It's a particular favorite with politicians and their operatives for collecting and disbursing bribes, "campaign contributions", kickbacks and other ill gotten gains. |
| Posted by: Tkat 2005-05-18 11:39 |
| #15 How convenient. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-18 10:54 |
| #14 AFAICR, all the documentation on the Mariam's Appeal finances have disappeared. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-05-18 10:22 |
| #13 ed I agree on putting some effort into the financial investigation approach. One thing to look into is the Mariam charity finances. My recollection of an earlier investigation into this charity was that virtually none of the funds collected by the charity went to Mariam or to Mariam's treatment. There was, at that time, some obfuscation about the indirect financing of medical services. |
| Posted by: mhw 2005-05-18 10:04 |
| #12 Watched and read live-bloggings -- WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT. Here's hoping the Senate knowingly "took the fall" for making yesterday so lopsided, for tactical reasons - will there be another testimony day? - and is going to call him back at some point to confront him with new evidence, and a stronger response next time. |
| Posted by: Edward Yee 2005-05-18 09:54 |
| #11 yay for Senator Levin!!! |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2005-05-18 09:42 |
| #10 Somebody tell W.O. that his attempts to insult someone's intelligence would have a better chance of succeeding if he himself could spell and use correct grammar. How pathetic... |
| Posted by: Dar 2005-05-18 09:13 |
| #9 I don't believe UK MPs have immunity in the UK, why should they have diplomatic immunity in the USA - Galloway is not a registered diplomat, nor does he represent the UK government, the normal criteria for diplomatic immunity. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-18 09:04 |
| #8 Seeing how he had no problem throwing his buddy Mr. Zureikat under the bus, you might want to consider getting him in there to testify. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2005-05-18 08:57 |
| #7 We can't indict Galloway. He's an MP and has diplomatic immunity. Far from indicting him, I'd keep him talking. And talking. And talking. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-05-18 08:56 |
| #6 Hey, we owe it to ourselves and Blair to hang this slimeball, figuratively if not literally. |
| Posted by: too true 2005-05-18 08:49 |
| #5 The senate now has Galloway testifying under oath. They also have testimony from Taha Yassin Ramadan, Saddam's VP, implicating Galloway in both the oil and charity scams. In addition, we have Iraqi ministry documents detailing amount allocated for Galloway. 1. Indite Galloway for senate perjury using the trove of Iraqi documents, testimony of ex-Iraqi officials, and any Galloway confidants who can be turned. 2. Charge and convicthis underlings that sold the oil and transferred the money to Galloway. Get them to testify againt Galloway. 3. Turn his soon to be ex-wife into testifying about the sources of money and the Miriam charity scam. Probably a tough sell, but as a cousin of Arafat, she most ikely has her own financial skeletons. 4. Trace the money spent and property owned by Galloway and show his spendthrift ways were much more than his reported income. British cooperation will be required to charge his with tax evasion. Historically, #4 may be the easiest to prove since it does not rely on Galloway's ex-cronies. I may take a wjile, but in his case, it's worth it. The fun will begin when Britain is asked to charge or extradite Galloway. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-05-18 08:42 |
| #4 Comparisons with Braveheart on the BBC evening news last night. I kid you not. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2005-05-18 07:55 |
| #3 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1433 TROLL 2005-05-18 07:44 |
| #2 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Whomoting Omeaper1433 TROLL 2005-05-18 07:41 |
| #1 Galloway came to play cricket at a rugby match. He really must develop an understanding and appreciation of cultures other than his own. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-05-18 07:41 |