Greg Palast on George Galloway - hold your flames and read this.

[Nothing Without Hope]

In Great Britain George Galloway is known a "colorful" politician with some controversial opinions, including his extreme opposition to womens' reproductive rights and some others. And from what Greg Palast - a respected UK-based investigative journalist whom I trust - has found, there is also other reason for concern.

Greg Palast, like us, loved Galloway's blasting of the neocons in Congress. But he cautions that before embracing Galloway as a prominent hero of the US Progressives, we need to take a closer look and ask some tough questions. I'm not saying Galloway was a fraud in his wonderful takedown of the Congressional GOP liars - I believe he spoke from honest outrage and it was glorious. But let's be careful in putting him on a pedestal.

No flames, please. I trust Greg Palast and have followed his work for a long time. He has been on-target so many times - in the US election, on the WMD lies, on so much more. I've never known him to publish something that was not carefully researched. I've never known of his having to publish a retraction.

So let's read this article and keep our eyes and minds open.

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=460&row=0

GALLOWAY: DEADLY ANTI-ABORTION THREATS FROM REPUBLICAN'S FAVORITE "LEFTIST"

Saturday, September 17, 2005
by Greg Palast

(snip)

The Honorable Member of Britain's House of Commons has become the new love-child of American progressives for his in-your-face accusations about our own government's mendacity in sending our troops to war in Iraq. I myself quoted Galloway with admiration.

But the man who saluted the "courage" of Saddam Hussein in 1994, who today can't and won't account for nearly a million dollars in income and expenditures for a charity he founded to buy medicine for Iraqi children is not, friends, the best choice as our anti-war spokesman.

Where did this guy come from? Who invited him here? The answer: US Senate REPUBLICANS. As Cindy Sheehan was gathering public sympathy as the Gold Star mom against the killing in Iraq, the Republican party decided to import an easier target to pummel. So they brought over the "I-salute-your-courage, Saddam" religious fundamentalist crack-pot who can't tell us where the money went.

That's why the Republicans chose him for us. This gross cartoon from abroad whose "charity" is stuffed with loot from an Oil-for-Food profiteer is the image they prefer on TV to Cindy Sheehan whom they dare not confront.

(snip)

This article is preceded by this NOTE:

Note: Palast and Cindy Sheehan will be speaking at the Operation Ceasefire concert sponsored by DC Anti-War Network and United for Peace and Justice -- all day and night at the Washington Monument.

[U4ikLefty]

1. So should we demonize Hillary for voting to invade Iraq as well???

Thus negating her achievements??? What about Bill with NAFTA & "welfare reform"???

...not to mention the "defense of marriage act."

on edit: "Im sure some may get technical here & say she gave Bu$h "authorization to use force as a last resort"...not buying it!!!

[Nothing Without Hope]

2. No, I'm not calling for demonization. Galloway was magnificent in Congress

and I believe he spoke from his heart. I don't think it would have had the impact it did if his outrage had not been genuine. I'm saying we should keep our eyes open and not be taken by surprise if there is an exposé later on other areas of Galloway's life. I feel it's best to know the truth, warts and all. There is much to admire in the man and huge amounts to admire in what he did that wonderful day in Congress. But let's not be taken by surprise if he turns out to have some less admirable aspects as well.

[U4ikLefty]

4. We all have warts...but why is Palast so ready to expose them right now???

I don't deify ANY MAN, but to reject Galloway at this time is like rejecting Hillary because of her few sellout votes in Congress. Is it not???

[BurtWorm]

51. I think it may be because Palast knows more about Galloway

than the average American lefty. He's not the first jounralist working in the UK I've read to express wonderment over American lefties' worship of Galloway. They know him a bit better in the UK than we do here, and they're not quite as impressed.

[U4ikLefty]

54. Has he done an expose' on Hillary??? The question remains...why now?

I also said in my post that I DON'T DEIFY GALLOWAY & I strongly suspect MOST leftys don't either...we tend not to be followers. What we DON'T need is Palast spouting off at this critical time to give Hitchen's & his neocon masters more ammo.

Why not point out Cindy Sheehan's divorce on his site as well??? It seems that he could have held his tounge till the hichens/Galloway tour was over if he was truly interested in forwarding the argument against the "war"n Iraq. It seems that he just needed some new material & Galloway was fair game for his glory-seeking ass.

I'm sorry, but I have lost some respect for Palast. Not because of the content, but because of the opportunistic timing that hurts the message. He should not have carried water for the right, but that's just what he did with his "article."

[BurtWorm]

62. I think he has legitimate problems with Galloway's anti-choice position.

What do American lefties know about Galloway besides the fact that he cut Coleman and Hitchens down to size? Those were indeed enjoyable spectacles. But what more do we know about him?

(I do know that Galloway has a sizable glory-seeking ass himself. I wouldn't hold glory seeking against one of his critics.)

[gulfcoastliberal]

11. What achievements?

I'm not aware of any? Except maybe raising more corporate cash than any other dem senator?

[U4ikLefty]

12. My bad n/t

[Clark2008]

56. What acheivements would those be?

Seriously, I can't name one thing that's she's done for the country. Maybe there's things she's done for New York - which is good, because that's what she's SUPPOSED to be doing - but I can't name one initiative she's had that's actually been passed into law.

I'm not being glib, here. I seriously don't know.

[U4ikLefty]

57. Again..my mistake. Probably should've used a better example.

sorry

[snot]

3. Hey everyone, we need to nominate this. I just saw another thread

where Rove was belittling Cindy . . . I think they're really afraid of her.

And I agree, Palast has been great--from what I've seen, I'd take his concerns very seriously.

[Maple]

5. Galloway is considered a nutbar

by most people in the UK.

Very well spoken, says a lot of things people like...and has a built-in Twilight Zone.

[U4ikLefty]

6. Please point to the "nutbar" poll taken in the UK ???

And I love the Twilight Zone..."to serve man is a cookbook!!!" lol

[Maple]

7. Do you live in the UK?

No.

So you have no idea what people there think of him.

The fact he is the lone member of his 'party' might give you a hint though.

[U4ikLefty]

8. I see you have no facts. Nice try...please provide evidence!!!

I live in the US, but I cannot accurately pull the public sentiment the American citizenry out of my ass & neither can you.

Please try using FACTS instead of condescending remarks to "prove your point"

[Maple]

9. I just did

UK election results are public record

[U4ikLefty]

10. Please show the vote/"nutbar" correlation

You are grasping at straws. Just walk away from the "nutbar" comment as fact. It was YOUR opinion.

[Maple]

17. Please stop playing games

If you want to worship someone, feel free. Just don't expect everyone to do so.

[U4ikLefty]

24. No, maybe it's YOU should stop playing games.

I said in an above post that I deify NO MAN, but I guess you can't read...or maybe you just want to win a pissing contest.

Let it go!!!

[Maple]

27. Hero worship all you want

Galloway is a nutbar

[U4ikLefty]

29. Oh Jeebus, you have resorted to "broken record"...LOL!!!

I'm done with you on this thread...unless you make another ridiculous assertion.

[Maple]

30. You're done, period

[0007]

61. Here's a good read!

Here, Palast goes off on one about Galloway, citing from the usual catalogue of charges and slanders from the liberal warmongers and miniscule sectarian grouplets. Like I say, Palast is - whatever else he is not - an investigative journalist. So, judge for yourself why he gets it so profoundly wrong on the following three accounts.

1. The title. He invites readers into his screed with the following words: 'GALLOWAY: DEADLY ANTI-ABORTION THREATS FROM REPUBLICAN'S FAVORITE "LEFTIST"'. Note that not a single word of Galloway's is adduced to support the thesis that he has issued "deadly anti-abortion threats" of any kind. This is for the perfectly excellent pragmatic reason that Galloway has issued no such threats. There is also the intriguing suggestion that Galloway is a 'favourite' among Republicans - which would possibly explain why they singled him out in 'investigations' as part of an unsuccessful effort to discredit the antiwar movement.

2. The claim that Galloway endorsed the death threats against Salman Rushdie at the Edinburgh Fringe some weeks back. Here is how The Guardian reported his remarks:

Mr Galloway, MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, said TV executives had to be "very sensitive about people's religion" and if broadcasters did not show sufficient sensitivity they "had to deal with the consequences".
He said: "You have to be aware if you do you will get blowback. You should do it very carefully, especially if you are a public service broadcaster."



Palast reassembles those remarks on the basis of what Salman Rushdie apparently said (to whom is unclear) to expostulate that this was an endorsement of the fatwah issued by Ayatollah Khomeini. However, I think you may have noticed, even if Mr Palast has not, that there is a considerable difference between urging sensitivity and advocating killing for God.

3. The charge that Galloway has a 'record' of opposing a woman's right to choose in parliament:

Add this endorsement of killing for God to Galloway's notorious opposition in Parliament to a woman's right to choose abortion, and you get yourself a British Pat Robertson.



The first thing to make clear is that Galloway has not voted in parliament on a woman's right to choose. An investigative journalist might have been able to find this out straightforwardly enough, by checking his voting record. (Incidentally, would a 'British Pat Robertson' vote in favour of extending gay rights or denounce the bigoted Keep the Clause campaign ran by Scottish tycoon and union-buster Brian Souter? Or break with Cardinal Winning, someone he had been friends with, over the latter's bigoted outbursts against gays?) Galloway has, however, explained that "I am not opposed to a woman's right to choose". Again, it might well have occurred to you that saying "I am not opposed to a woman's right to choose" is not quite the same thing as uttering "deadly anti-abortion threats".

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2005/09/palasts-palimpsest.html

[assclown_bush]

16. You just did what?

:shrug:

[Maple]

19. UK election results are public record

He is his entire party

[U4ikLefty]

21. You are stuttering...try again

[stevietheman]

18. I agree with U4ikLefty... show us some facts. Or retract the statement.

n/t

[0007]

58. Show us stupid Americans some facts instead being

parrot like.

[lockdown]

59. It "hints"

that New Labour won't allow dissent in their ranks, which is why they expelled him for speaking up on Iraq and he formed a new party.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

13. Palast is considered a nutbar

so what's your point :shrug:

[U4ikLefty]

14. Yeah, nutbars are tasty...I love Payday, Baby Ruth & Snickers.

Of course, it's usually when I have imbibed of the herb. ;)

[assclown_bush]

20. Oh, there's that power of suggestion, again. n/t

[U4ikLefty]

36. LOL, you found me out...I work for the Mars Candy company.

Good to see a sense of humor once in a while on DU ;)

[Nothing Without Hope]

22. Doubtless some extreme GOPs consider Greg Palast a nutbar, but I don't.

I respect him and he has produced important reports that have withstood criticism and attack by neocons.

This isn't about nutbar-ness. It's about troubling facts and the need to avoid being blindsided.

[Maple]

26. Galloway is the nutbar, not Palast

[Nothing Without Hope]

28. Here is part of a short political bio of George Galloway. Maybe someone

else can post something with more substance and detail. Galloway is clearly a man who pisses off a lot of people. That very pugnacity and his ability to speak forcefully are what made his performace in Congress so spectacular. The ruling GOPs are used to "polite," timid Dem opponents who could be bullied. They got a surprise and it was glorious.

http://www.biogs.com/famous/galloway.html

(snip)

Since then, George Galloway has been a leading figure in the anti-war party, Respect - The Unity Coalition.

Galloway decided to stand as a candidate for Respect in the 2005 general elction in the London constituency of Bethnal Green and Bow.

In the run-up to the election, Galloway's Palestinian-born wife, Dr Amineh Abu-Zayyad, told the Sunday Times that she intends to divorce him over his friendships with other women.

In December 2004, George Galloway won his libel case against the Daily Telegraph over their claims, published in April 2003, that he received money from Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

(snip)

[StellaBlue]

15. Having spent the last four years living and working in Britain...

I'd say your post was SPOT-ON.

:D

[Maple]

25. Exactly.

Pure nutbar.

Reprinted from The Spectator:

"The steering committee of the Marxist-Islamist alliance consists of 33 members - 18 from myriad hard-Left groups, three from the radical wing of the Labour party, eight from the ranks of the radical Islamists and four leftist ecologists (also known as 'Watermelons' -green outside, red inside). The chairman is Andrew Murray, a leading light in the British Communist party; co-chair is Muhammad Aslam Ijaz, of the London Council of Mosques. Among the major players from the Left are Lindsey German, who resigned as editor of the Socialist Workers' party newspaper to become convenor of the Stop the War coalition; John Rees, also of the SWP, and, of course, George Galloway. Indeed, the first proud progeny of the alliance is Galloway's Respect party, which fought and won the London seat of Bethnal Green and Bow, with its substantial Muslim electorate."

SNIP

"But there are small voices of doubt. To some within Britain's Trotskyite Alliance for Workers' Liberty, the unholy marriage is outright heresy. One Trot describes SWP advocates of the Black-Red alliance as 'demoralised Guardian readers with headscarves', a withering allusion to the SWP organiser who ordered secular, socialist women to cover their heads while demonstrating with their Muslim sisters outside the Israeli embassy in London. And he is scathing of SWP monitors who enforced gender segregation to mollify Muslim sensibilities at a demonstration in Trafalgar Square. 'Marxists are secular or they are not Marxists,' said the Trot with principled purity.

Dogma runs deep. The Islamists accentuate the positive, noting Galloway's opposition to abortion and his professed religious faith, which, according to one, 'will surely be welcomed by British Muslims who see Respect as a real alternative'. And why complain when the Left is so obligingly on message? Take Spark, the organ of Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour party, which hailed Asif Mohammed Hanif, the British suicide-bomber who attacked a beachfront bar in Tel Aviv, as a 'hero of the revolutionary youth'. Hanif, declared the paper, had carried out his mission 'in the spirit of internationalism'."

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19207

[U4ikLefty]

32. Everyone please read the source of Maple's evidence.

OMG, this site has a Horowitz section...that should tell you something.

[Maple]

34. It's a reprint from the Spectator

Please pay attention

[U4ikLefty]

40. Yet like you, an ultra right-wing site uses the same "evidence"

please try again. I could reprint a right-wing editorial from the New York Times that was reprinted on Ann Coulter's website & argue "it was from the NYT"...nice try!!!

If you get agreement from sources like these, perhaps you should look in the mirror.

[Maple]

41. If you're so frantic for leadership

that you'd worship a nutbar like Galloway, you have more problems than anyone can solve.

PS...here's the Spectator. First item.

1. 2005-08-20 United in hate by Douglas Davis
Douglas Davis shows how secular Marxists and Islamic fundamentalists have buried their differences to wage war on the war against terror

http://www.spectator.co.uk/search.php

See...it isn't difficult to find.

However, I have a subscription but I doubt you do. That's why I gave you the reprint url.

[U4ikLefty]

43. Another article by Douglas Davis to show his "balance" on Galloway.

Since Galloway is critical of Israeli policy, perhpas this article from your sacred source will shed more light on his POV.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Biological warfare

Douglas Davis reveals Arafat's plan to achieve a single Palestinian state by encouraging his people to breed

more

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_200309/ai_n9256015#continue

[Maple]

45. Galloway is a nutbar and a flake

but if you wish to bend over like that for every fast-talker that comes along, be my guest.

That's how they've always managed to sell snakeoil

[U4ikLefty]

46. More "broken record"...please read post #27 for my reply. n/t

[Maple]

48. I repeat: You're done, period.

[StellaBlue]

35. I am just saying

That among the 'liberals' in the UK, it is generally accepted that Galloway is a somewhat-sincere, somewhat-self-aggrandizing figure. Not at all a Hero of the Left. Not someone whose statements can just be taken on faith or at face value. He's no Blair, but...

He's no Tony Benn.

[Mr Rabble]

23. Thanks N_W_H.

I am a regular reader of Greg's features and have developed trust in his work.

This is a worthy read.

[StellaBlue]

31. My impression

Is that Chavez is far less seedy than Galloway.

Though I did of course love his both-guns-blazing attack on Congress. That was priceless. Too bad NO DEMOCRAT HAS ANY BALLS.

[Nothing Without Hope]

37. Yes, I think that was his great message that day: stand up to the bullies

and call them on their lies. I wish more Dems and the few GOPs of integrity would take note of that and find some 'nads. (both genders have those, unless they are sellouts.)

[Maple]

33. George Galloway

"The steering committee of the Marxist-Islamist alliance consists of 33 members - 18 from myriad hard-Left groups, three from the radical wing of the Labour party, eight from the ranks of the radical Islamists and four leftist ecologists (also known as 'Watermelons' -green outside, red inside). The chairman is Andrew Murray, a leading light in the British Communist party; co-chair is Muhammad Aslam Ijaz, of the London Council of Mosques. Among the major players from the Left are Lindsey German, who resigned as editor of the Socialist Workers' party newspaper to become convenor of the Stop the War coalition; John Rees, also of the SWP, and, of course, George Galloway. Indeed, the first proud progeny of the alliance is Galloway's Respect party, which fought and won the London seat of Bethnal Green and Bow, with its substantial Muslim electorate."

SNIP

"But there are small voices of doubt. To some within Britain's Trotskyite Alliance for Workers' Liberty, the unholy marriage is outright heresy. One Trot describes SWP advocates of the Black-Red alliance as 'demoralised Guardian readers with headscarves', a withering allusion to the SWP organiser who ordered secular, socialist women to cover their heads while demonstrating with their Muslim sisters outside the Israeli embassy in London. And he is scathing of SWP monitors who enforced gender segregation to mollify Muslim sensibilities at a demonstration in Trafalgar Square. 'Marxists are secular or they are not Marxists,' said the Trot with principled purity.

Dogma runs deep. The Islamists accentuate the positive, noting Galloway's opposition to abortion and his professed religious faith, which, according to one, 'will surely be welcomed by British Muslims who see Respect as a real alternative'. And why complain when the Left is so obligingly on message? Take Spark, the organ of Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour party, which hailed Asif Mohammed Hanif, the British suicide-bomber who attacked a beachfront bar in Tel Aviv, as a 'hero of the revolutionary youth'. Hanif, declared the paper, had carried out his mission 'in the spirit of internationalism'. "

Reprinted from The Spectator:

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19207

[Maple]

38. And of course, Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway

[wtmusic]

42. Just curious Maple

did you see Galloway's testimony on May 17? Did you not see a man completely exonerate himself, while tearing another country's foreign policy to pieces?

As a Socialist/Marxist who decried the fall of the Soviet Union and flattered Saddam Hussein, he is a tough pill to swallow. But the more I see out of this administration and our own party, the more he reflects my own views than anyone in American politics.

Extremist, yes. Nutbar? Not by any stretch.

[Maple]

44. I saw a well spoken man

who is fast on his feet verbally...but then I've seen a lot of them in public life over my 60 years. It doesn't mean he's telling the truth.

I realize you're fed up with Bush, but that doesn't make Galloway any better than he really is. Or any answer.

Unfortunately yes, he's a nutbar and a flake.

[wtmusic]

47. How was he not telling the truth

can you give an example?

[Maple]

49. I said

it doesn't mean he's telling the truth.

Galloway has long been suspected of skimming money for himself, and mostly he fast talks his way around it. Or puts up a smokescreen.

Since he is no danger to the country or the govt, people mostly find him amusing. But publicity, and the resulting money appear to be his driving force. Goodness knows he's backed a lot of wacko causes.

[wtmusic]

52. WADR

there's a lot of personal bias in your statements without much to back it up. I thought he was quite thorough in repudiating the Oil-For-Food charges, and his alleged skimming from the Mariam Appeal.

I wouldn't consider raising money for starving Iraqi children a "wacko" cause. It seems, on the surface, to be an entirely altruistic and generous gesture. Maybe there is more to it. But based on the administration-led assault on his character (sound familiar?) it sure doesn't look that way.

Documents presented at his hearing have had his name clumsily added. No witnesses appeared to testify against him. His scathing testimony has been scrubbed from the Senate subcommittee website. To me, that sounds more like our administration doing what it does best.

[wtmusic]

39. Palast's MIHOP is ridiculous

Senate Republicans WANTED Galloway to come over and make them look like fools? So that they can say: "Look, this eloquent nutbar says the war in Iraq is wrong, so it must be right"? :crazy: :tinfoilhat:

The Oil-For-Food investigation was dropped like a hot potato IMMEDIATELY after Galloway demonstrated (quite ably) that there was zero substance to it, proving that he was framed because of his opposition to the war. They failed miserably with the same tactic on Kofi Annan in 2004.

Galloway has taken some nutbar stances, but on the war he speaks for me and millions of others. And he does so very, very well. He's the last thing the GOP wants set loose on the American public.

[Nothing Without Hope]

50. Another thread on this piece by Palast was posted here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4803688
thread title: Palast delivers another scathing review of Galloway, anti-abortionist

(I didn't see it before I posted this one.)

[mrfrapp]

53. Rebuttal

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2005/09/palasts-palimpsest.html

Palast's smears are ridiculous. Considering Palast's excellent results as an investigative journalist I find it absurd that he hasn't even read the very sources he cites.

Galloway isn't anywhere near liberal enough for my liking so I don't have much time for him but the endless repetition of these charges is bordering on obsessive.

[U4ikLefty]

55. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!! n/t

[lockdown]

60. Thanks

Julianer started a thread on the same link, it didn't get the requisite nutbar and flake posts though...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4810039

[Taxloss]

63. Are the nutbars made with that great whiff of anti-semitism?

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1461621,00.html

"To add to the foul atmosphere, there's a whiff of old hatreds in the air. Oona King, the Labour candidate, is getting fed up with Respect supporters bringing up her Jewish mother, although she says it makes a change from the British National Party bringing up her black father. Last week, King and a group of mainly Jewish pensioners gathered for a 60th anniversary memorial service for the 132 people who died in the last V2 rocket attack on London in 1945. Muslim youths spat and threw eggs at the mourners and shouted: 'You fucking Jews.'

In a letter to the Guardian, members of Respect said there was 'no evidence that this egg-throwing was anti-semitic'. Although it didn't condone them, 'such episodes do occur', and Galloway, John Major, Tony Blair and John Prescott had all had eggs thrown at them.

What can you say to that? Either it's slyly trying to avoid alienating potential supporters or Respect is so morally shrivelled it can't tell the difference between disrupting a political speech and attacking a service for the victims of fascism."

[lockdown]

64. Do you think Galloway is anti-semitic?

[Taxloss]

65. I think he has a strong whiff of anti-semitism.

There's this:

http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/tm_objectid=15654192%26method=full%26siteid=50061%26headline=ellman%2dstunned%2dby%2dgalloway%2ds%2d%2disrael%2ds%2dmp%2d%2dslur-name_page.html

CONTROVERSIAL politician George Galloway is targeting Louise Ellman's Riverside seat, saying she is "Israel's MP on Merseyside".

The anti-war MP, who took the London Bethnal Green seat from Labour's Oona King in May's general election, told a meeeting in Liverpool his Respect party would stand in Riverside in the next general election.

He made the comment about Labour's Mrs Ellman who, like Miss King is Jewish, at a public meeting at Liverpool's Guild of Students last night.

And this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4744685.stm

Calling Israelis "foreigners" who are "raping" Jerusalem?

Edit: typo

[lockdown]

66. You would

;)

[Taxloss]

67. You know I'm Labour.

And you know I don't like Galloway. What's the big attraction with him, anyway, other than the showmanship?

[Taxloss]

69. I'll draw your attention to this now:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=191&topic_id=10527&mesg_id=10613

I wouldn't want you to miss another opportunity to ignore a response of mine.

[U4ikLefty]

70. resorting to "playing the victim" ,and using another thread...nice try

totally irrelevant to your assertion of Galloway as "anti-semitic".

[Taxloss]

72. Irrelevant, yes

That's why it was the second of two responses.

Lockdown and I are actually on reasonably good terms. I really didn't want him to miss the other thread.

[U4ikLefty]

74. mmm'kay n/t

[U4ikLefty]

68. You'll have to do better than that. Those links are silly support

for your assertion that Galloway is "anti-semitic". He says nothing anti-Jewish in these two "articles"...one of which is a commentary.

Perhaps you think many on DU won't actually READ your links...I did & they suck as evidence to your argument. Try again.

LOL...I knew when I heard "strong whiff of anti-semitism", there was probably little actual substance. It's like calling someone a Nazi without actually using the word.

[Taxloss]

71. Neither of those links are comment pieces.

And I did not assert that Galloway is anti-semitic. But he certainly sails close to the wind in that regard.

I like your use of quote marks around "articles" to denigrate news stories on the BBC and from a reputable Liverpool newspaper. Those are true stories from legitimate stories.

You presumably think Galloway's comments about Ms Ellman and Jerusalem are AOK?

[U4ikLefty]

73. Post #65: "I think he has a strong whiff of anti-semitism"

Perhaps you do not know the meaning of asssert.

See I will admit that I accidentally read another's post which WAS a commentary, but I bet you don't retract YOUR statment that you "did not assert that Galloway is anti-semitic."

I think criticism of Israel is okay, but some equate Israel to Jew...and then call the person anti-semitic. And thus a Nazi...it's a weak & cheap tactic that is tired here in the US & I would imagine in Britain as well.