>> ^my15minutes:
>> ^MINK:
and the sift is silent.
implying that this wasn't something most were aware of?
yeah, galloway's clearly backpedaling on earlier statements supportive of saddam.
not exactly shocking. rumsfeld's wishing his happy handshake footage didn't exist, too.
the interviewer's actual question is a slippery slope, though, and should've been presented more honestly. and galloway's a goof for not catching it, like powell did.
but if this is topical and suchlike for the submitter, than sure. upped.


The interviewer was leading him with a tricky question? You've got to be kidding me. When Galloway has repeatedly boasted of how he has been condemning Saddam since the 80's, I think it's fair to point out that in the 90's Galloway went to Saddam to share 'heartfelt fraternal greetings and support'.

If you oppose the war, it doesn't mean you need to defend anyone else who opposes it as well. Galloway is a liar,propagandist and apologist for middle eastern dictators. He needs to be condemned for it. Much like even though I now support the Iraq war, I still feel free to condemn Bush and Cheney for a laundry list of very bad things they've been responsible for.

>> ^MINK:
and the sift is silent.

implying that this wasn't something most were aware of?

yeah, galloway's clearly backpedaling on earlier statements supportive of saddam.
not exactly shocking. rumsfeld's wishing his happy handshake footage didn't exist, too.

the interviewer's actual question is a slippery slope, though, and should've been presented more honestly. and galloway's a goof for not catching it, like powell did.

but if this is topical and suchlike for the submitter, then sure. upped.

They've basically taken the country from the arabs and then imprisoned them. They've created the biggest ghetto of all time. They've moved their borders over all the water supply in the area, coincidence?


And if that's how warped your view of Israel's history is then I think you've demonstrated my point for me. Expanding their borders beyond the UN mandate back in 1948 was there insidious plan all along. By tricking all surrounding arab nations to declare war on them, Israel was able to seize all the good land for themselves.


I give up, George Galloway is obviously a big fat liar


Well I guess that's something. Of course, if you've watched either of the videos I've linked it's completely impossible to deny.

>> ^bcglorf:
^"If McCain is elected, any talks with Iran would follow policies that have been proven ineffective."
Isn't 'talking' itself one of the policies that have been proven ineffective in working with Iran?


No.

Condoleeza Rice struck a deal with Iran to halt uranium enrichment, which Cheney and Gates stopped. Cheney, Bush and Patreus have no interest in wide-open diplomatic relations with Iran, as they want their bullshit war-on-terror to go on indefinitely.

And a friendly Iran would stop their war machine dead in its tracks.

Israel kills on average 4 Palestinians for every Israeli killed. Self defence? They've basically taken the country from the arabs and then imprisoned them. They've created the biggest ghetto of all time. They've moved their borders over all the water supply in the area, coincidence? The prison wall cleared 110.000 olive trees.. that's alot of Palestinian livelyhoods. Since WW2 they've gone from the abused to the abuser. Suicide bombers are frowned upon, but expenisve cluster bombs and F-16's are ok? A child killed with a suicide bomb is somehow a more of a loss than a child killed with a tank shell?

The biggest supporter of horrific dictators:

America.

That is, until the horrific dictators in question stop supporting american business and goverment.

Saudi Arabia? Where women get sent to jail for the horrible crime of getting raped? One of America's best buddys. I could go on, name more horrific regimes both past(Iraq, 80's) and present(any corrupt African gov. delivering oil) that America supports because it suits them.. but I would be wasting my time and energy.

I give up, George Galloway is obviously a big fat liar, Iran must be bombed to the stone ages and God Bless America. The greatest nation on earth.

However, Iran having nuclear weapons does not equal them actually using them.


So your content then to count on their leadership's sense of self preservation to prevent them from using them. Forgive my if I still have my doubts what might be done by a leader who denies the holocaust, publicly calls for 'Death to Israel', and provides funds, training and weapons to Hezbollah.


Condemning Israel in my book is a good thing, their behavior towards Palestinians is horrible


Indeed it is, but I beg you to remember the context. Israel's invasions into Palestinian territory are continually in self defense against rocket attacks from groups supported by Syria and Iran. Most Palestinian deaths are from lack of aid, but Egypt has an even more complete blockade in place than Israel. The question that must eventually come up is why does all the blame get lain on Israel alone? Looking at the spokesmen here is revealing.

Galloway is adamant that Ahmadinejad should not be accused of calling for Israel to be wiped from the map, and yet there are multiple videos of Ahmadinejad calling for 'Death to Israel'. Galloway also claims he has condemned Saddam Hussein since the 80's, and yet there is a video from '94 were he commends Saddam in person for his courage. Be very careful listening to the words of someone like George Galloway who is a proven liar and supporter of truly horrific dictators. It would be extremely ill advised to take any information about the middle east from Galloway as anything but propaganda and outright bold faced lies.

>> ^ElJardinero:
What concerns me more than Iran trying to make nuclear weapons, is the fact that the USA have over 10.000 of them. They being the only country that's used them before.. they being the country that has started most wars in the last 100 years. It's like watching a serial murderer taking a a pen from someone. Completely insane.


I'm going to take a wild guess that you are from somewhere like the US or UK rather than one of the nations they condemn like Iraq, Syria or Iran. The reason being your everyday Iranian has a much different perspective.

Ayatollah Khomeini's grand son, for example, condemns his grandfather and refuses to call the American presence in Iraq anything but the liberation of Iraq. In fact, Iran's own leadership is held in such contempt by their youth that if you wear a beard like the hard-liners you'll have a hard time getting cabs and are liable to be spat on.

Go ahead and condemn Bush and Cheney, for they surely deserve it(gitmo alone should have them not only impeached, but jailed). But don't destroy that by even pretending that there aren't much worse rulers out there in places like, say, Iran.

In particular, don't expect rational people to fear nukes in the hands of America more than nukes in the hands of a religious dictatorship that denies the holocaust and routinely gives speeches calling for 'Death to Israel!'.

Giggles for Galloway calling someone else a liar. Go look at actual video of Ahmadinejad talking about Israel. Maybe he hasn't verbatim called for Israel to be wiped from the map, but he has verbatim rallied crowds in chanting "Death to Israel". Galloway is a sickening apologist for the worst regimes in the world. Am I being too harsh on him? Watch this and tell me what you think?

Oh, and the clips from Galloway in this video are edited in from his radio program while responding to callers. It does not appear that he was ever actually referencing anything Obama has said. In fact I'm quite certain that the Galloway clips edited into this one all pre-date Obama's speech.

Still, I'm up voting as I really think Galloway and his supporters need to be dragged out into the light of day for who they really are.

ARRRGHGHGHGHGHGHGHGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

fucking tv presenters

fucking robots

whatever you think about galloway, try to save your vitriole for the scum that make TV news.

They both make amazingly poignant remarks, its worth watching multiple times.
Hitchens makes some extremely good arguments for the invasion and continued occupation, and conversely Galloway does a brilliant job of slapping down many of those same arguments.

These two seem to be literary titans, with an impeccable understanding of history and the current situation, absolutely BRILLIANT debate.

Basically what Ive pulled from this...is as follows.
War, preemptive or otherwise, is atrocious in its current state.
Weapons, equipment, tactics and resources are simply not geared to carry out a "war" with the least impact on the nation in the target.

At the moment, war is a blunt, wide-reaching tool that is used to stamp out what we in the western world (read: developed world), through the lens of our own morals and ethics, see as something that must be stopped, for purely humanitarian reasons.

War is the worst tool for it, and the desired outcome leaves a horrendous trail of death and destruction in its wake.

There has to be a better way to hold to account these international war criminals without devastating the nation under which they rule.

I still hold that the war is wrong, the troops need to come home instantly, and reparations need to be considered for what we've done to that region.

We used the wrong tool for the job, you don't fight an ideal with a hammer, but unfortunately I don't have a better answer....if I did id be rich.

Galloway makes his points along the same lines but doesn't go that far, he stops at saying the war is wrong.
I don't think there's a single person alive today, in the western society, that isn't in some respect happy that Saddam is gone. Its the abject conditions that have been created as a result of the methods used in order to get him gone in the first place, is where we have this huge divide.

Cutting to the bone, generally, everyone in the world that follows our humanitarian ethics and morals in the most broad sense, knows that these international bullies and mongrels need to be held to account. The left see war as the wrong way to go about it, the right don't see any other method, and so are content with using one evil to oust another.

Inaction or action, both are atrocities in their own right. Its rather depressing.

its dead..... but these masterminds belong in here, i wouldnt dare oppose galloway at any point after seeing this, he is amazing......hitchens has a brain for sure, but wikipedia only mentions one personal friend of his, an iraqi buisnessman.....makes me wonder for his motivations about supporting the iraq-war....i just wonder, but then again, galloway might be right, it could be to land a vanity fair contract or too much whiskey!

I'm certain I've seen this before... be right back after a search.

edit: http://www.videosift.com/video/George-Galloway-debates-Christopher-Hitchens-on-Iraq-part-1 ? It's dead and I'm not sure if this is a different video, so I won't call dupe.

I could try to say something remotely intelligent but i'll let do with;

George Galloway ftw

There is footage of him meeting with Saddam back in the day:
http://www.videosift.com/video/George-Galloway-on-Saddam

It's hard to know if there has been some editing done in the photos, but the comments he made (unless they were made to someone else entirely and the film has been edited) are pretty damning.

He has since claimed that his statements were actually addressed to the resolve of the Iraqi people against the sanctions that followed the 1991 war... I would love to know if anyone has a reference that either proves or disproves the myth?

I LOL'd a few times. I had completely forgotten about Mr. Galloway, as I hadn't seen him in 3 or 4 years now.

Way to go Galloway. Maybe he should come over to visit Canada AND the U.S. in the upcoming elections in both countries.