The Discerning Texan
All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.
-- Edmund Burke
-- Edmund Burke
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Galloway took cash from Saddam to Support Saddam--and Lied about it under Oath
Isn't is lovely how what goes around so often comes back around. And there is no more appropriate recipient of this karmic law than the iconic leftist moron, George Galloway. Austin Bay has the story and a number of links to the proof of Galloway's complicity in the Oil for Food bribery--at the very time when he most vehemently opposed Tony Blair's entry into the war.
Ladies and Gentlemen, meet George Galloway, has been:
Yes indeedy. It looks like the chief apologist for Saddam and Middle Eastern fascism took cash from Saddam.
A couple of months ago I dubbed Galloway “Terror’s Lord Haw Haw.” Lord Haw Haw was a Brit who made propaganda broadcasts for Hitler. Someday historians will cast Galloway into the same outer darkness.
Galloway denies the allegations. Here’s the lede (from Bloomberg):
British lawmaker George Galloway denied allegations in a U.S. Senate subcommittee report of lying under oath after he was accused of profiting from oil money during former President Saddam Hussein’s rule in Iraq.
Senator Norm Coleman, Republican of Minnesota and chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, yesterday said he had new evidence that showed an organization linked to Galloway and his wife received money from oil allocations under the United Nations Oil for Food Program. Galloway today dared the investigators to charge him with perjury so he can fight the claims in court.
“Charge me, please; prosecute me and I’ll be on the next plane to America,'’ Galloway said today. “Nobody has ever given me one thin dime from an oil deal or any other deal. And if they had you would have the evidence in front of you now.'’
The inquiry led by Coleman says Galloway “knowingly made false or misleading statements under oath'’ during the U.K. lawmaker’s appearance in May at a subcommittee hearing in Washington, according to a document published on Coleman’s Web site. The report said Galloway sought and was given oil allocations from Iraq during Hussein’s reign and that Galloway’s wife, Dr. Amineh Abu-Zayyad, got $150,000 in connection with one of those oil allocations.
The BBC offers a a short-take on Galloway.
Get this graf:
The Daily Telegraph focuses on a claim that Mr Galloway’s Palestinian-born wife, Amineh Abu Zayyad, received £100,000 derived from the UN oil-for-food programme.
The paper cannot resist the opportunity to fill in a little background information about Mr Galloway’s relationship with his (now estranged) wife.
It describes how he once said that his idea of happiness was “a hilltop in Portugal with… a Havana cigar and a Palestinian scientist running her fingers through my hair”.
Ah yes, call it anti-American bliss. Viva Fidel meets Lord Haw Haw. Red and brown fascism coalesces in Galloway.
Here’s a Telegraph article on Galloway, though not the one the BBC quotes. Remember, Galloway won a libel suit against the Telegraph. Galloway won 150,000 pounds from the Telegraph. The Telegraph’s claim? The newspaper published an article (based on documents found in Iraq) that Galloway had received pay-offs from the UN’s “Oil for Food” program.
UPDATE: Christopher Hitchens adds another Galloway smackdown.
Hitchens’ lede:
Just before my last exchange with George Galloway, which occurred on the set of Bill Maher’s show in Los Angeles in mid-September, I was approached by a representative of the program and asked if I planned to repeat my challenge to Galloway on air. That challenge—would he sign an affidavit saying that he had never discussed Oil-for-Food monies with Tariq Aziz?—I had already made on a public stage in New York. Maher’s producers had been asked, obviously by a nervous Galloway, to find out whether I had brought such an affidavit along with me. I replied that this was not necessary, since his public denial to me was on the record and had been broadcast, and since it further confirmed the apparent perjury that he had committed in front of the U.S. Senate on May 17, 2005. I added that I wanted no further contact with Galloway until I could have the opportunity of reviewing his prison diaries.That day has now been brought measurably closer by the publication of the report of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. This report, which comes with a vast archive of supporting material, was embargoed until 10 p.m. Monday and contains the “smoking gun” evidence that Galloway, along with his wife and his chief business associate, were consistent profiteers from Saddam Hussein’s regime and its criminal exploitation of the “Oil for Food” program. In particular:
1) Between 1999 and 2003, Galloway personally solicited and received eight oil “allocations” totaling 23 million barrels, which went either to him or to a politicized “charity” of his named the Mariam Appeal.
2) In connection with just one of these allocations, Galloway’s wife, Amineh Abu-Zayyad, received about $150,000 directly.
3) A minimum of $446,000 was directed to the Mariam Appeal, which campaigned against the very sanctions from which it was secretly benefiting.
4) Through the connections established by the Galloway and “Mariam” allocations, the Saddam Hussein regime was enabled to reap $1,642,000 in kickbacks or “surcharge” payments.
Another fine Hitchens graf:
For George Galloway, however, the war would seem to be over. The evidence presented suggests that he lied in court when he sued the Daily Telegraph in London over similar allegations (and collected money for that, too). It suggests that he lied to the Senate under oath.
Here’s a link to the Senate Permanent Sub-Committee report Hitchens’ to which Hitchens refers.
And a link to Hitchens’ website.
Read the entire Hitchens essay. Laugh and weep.
Ladies and Gentlemen, meet George Galloway, has been:
Yes indeedy. It looks like the chief apologist for Saddam and Middle Eastern fascism took cash from Saddam.
A couple of months ago I dubbed Galloway “Terror’s Lord Haw Haw.” Lord Haw Haw was a Brit who made propaganda broadcasts for Hitler. Someday historians will cast Galloway into the same outer darkness.
Galloway denies the allegations. Here’s the lede (from Bloomberg):
British lawmaker George Galloway denied allegations in a U.S. Senate subcommittee report of lying under oath after he was accused of profiting from oil money during former President Saddam Hussein’s rule in Iraq.
Senator Norm Coleman, Republican of Minnesota and chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, yesterday said he had new evidence that showed an organization linked to Galloway and his wife received money from oil allocations under the United Nations Oil for Food Program. Galloway today dared the investigators to charge him with perjury so he can fight the claims in court.
“Charge me, please; prosecute me and I’ll be on the next plane to America,'’ Galloway said today. “Nobody has ever given me one thin dime from an oil deal or any other deal. And if they had you would have the evidence in front of you now.'’
The inquiry led by Coleman says Galloway “knowingly made false or misleading statements under oath'’ during the U.K. lawmaker’s appearance in May at a subcommittee hearing in Washington, according to a document published on Coleman’s Web site. The report said Galloway sought and was given oil allocations from Iraq during Hussein’s reign and that Galloway’s wife, Dr. Amineh Abu-Zayyad, got $150,000 in connection with one of those oil allocations.
The BBC offers a a short-take on Galloway.
Get this graf:
The Daily Telegraph focuses on a claim that Mr Galloway’s Palestinian-born wife, Amineh Abu Zayyad, received £100,000 derived from the UN oil-for-food programme.
The paper cannot resist the opportunity to fill in a little background information about Mr Galloway’s relationship with his (now estranged) wife.
It describes how he once said that his idea of happiness was “a hilltop in Portugal with… a Havana cigar and a Palestinian scientist running her fingers through my hair”.
Ah yes, call it anti-American bliss. Viva Fidel meets Lord Haw Haw. Red and brown fascism coalesces in Galloway.
Here’s a Telegraph article on Galloway, though not the one the BBC quotes. Remember, Galloway won a libel suit against the Telegraph. Galloway won 150,000 pounds from the Telegraph. The Telegraph’s claim? The newspaper published an article (based on documents found in Iraq) that Galloway had received pay-offs from the UN’s “Oil for Food” program.
UPDATE: Christopher Hitchens adds another Galloway smackdown.
Hitchens’ lede:
Just before my last exchange with George Galloway, which occurred on the set of Bill Maher’s show in Los Angeles in mid-September, I was approached by a representative of the program and asked if I planned to repeat my challenge to Galloway on air. That challenge—would he sign an affidavit saying that he had never discussed Oil-for-Food monies with Tariq Aziz?—I had already made on a public stage in New York. Maher’s producers had been asked, obviously by a nervous Galloway, to find out whether I had brought such an affidavit along with me. I replied that this was not necessary, since his public denial to me was on the record and had been broadcast, and since it further confirmed the apparent perjury that he had committed in front of the U.S. Senate on May 17, 2005. I added that I wanted no further contact with Galloway until I could have the opportunity of reviewing his prison diaries.That day has now been brought measurably closer by the publication of the report of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. This report, which comes with a vast archive of supporting material, was embargoed until 10 p.m. Monday and contains the “smoking gun” evidence that Galloway, along with his wife and his chief business associate, were consistent profiteers from Saddam Hussein’s regime and its criminal exploitation of the “Oil for Food” program. In particular:
1) Between 1999 and 2003, Galloway personally solicited and received eight oil “allocations” totaling 23 million barrels, which went either to him or to a politicized “charity” of his named the Mariam Appeal.
2) In connection with just one of these allocations, Galloway’s wife, Amineh Abu-Zayyad, received about $150,000 directly.
3) A minimum of $446,000 was directed to the Mariam Appeal, which campaigned against the very sanctions from which it was secretly benefiting.
4) Through the connections established by the Galloway and “Mariam” allocations, the Saddam Hussein regime was enabled to reap $1,642,000 in kickbacks or “surcharge” payments.
Another fine Hitchens graf:
For George Galloway, however, the war would seem to be over. The evidence presented suggests that he lied in court when he sued the Daily Telegraph in London over similar allegations (and collected money for that, too). It suggests that he lied to the Senate under oath.
Here’s a link to the Senate Permanent Sub-Committee report Hitchens’ to which Hitchens refers.
And a link to Hitchens’ website.
Read the entire Hitchens essay. Laugh and weep.
