NationStates Jolt Archive

FAQ
Galloway vs the Senate

The continuing battle between George Galloway MP and US senators over his alleged involvement in the UN Oil-for-Food programme

#1 What was the Oil-for-Food programme?
The UN set up the $65 billion (£33 billion) Oil-for-Food programme under the Clinton Administration in 1996 in response to the suffering faced by the Iraqi population under economic sanctions imposed after Iraq invaded Kuwait.

Saddam Hussein was allowed to sell oil under close supervision from the UN and use the money raised to buy food, medical supplies and humanitarian aid.

#2 How did Saddam Hussein exploit this?
The regime exploited a loophole in the arrangement: Saddam had the power to select to whom the consignments of oil could be sold. Supporters of his regime and personal friends were granted contracts to purchase oil at knock-down prices, which they could sell on the open market - pocketing a transaction fee of between 15c and 50c a barrel.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1841799,00.html

#3 How did George Galloway become involved?
An opponent of the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent sanctions, Mr Galloway visited Iraq several times in the early 1990s. In 1998, he founded the Mariam Appeal to provide medical treatment for Mariam Hamza, a child suffering from leukaemia who was flown from Baghdad to Britain. It also campaigned against sanctions on Iraq.

In 1999 Mr Galloway spent Christmas with Tariq Aziz, the deputy prime minister. He met Saddam Hussein for a second time in 2002. He was expelled from the Labour Party the following year for "bringing the party into disrepute" over inflammatory comments made over the Iraqi war.

In 2003, questions were raised over payments made by the Mariam Appeal, but the organisation and Mr Galloway were cleared of any impropriety after an investigation by the Charity Commission.


#4 What are the senators' allegations about Mr Galloway?
#5 What charges could he face?
-----4 and 5 are all over the Media...

You're forgetting that at this time, there is more evidence than was seen by the Charity Commission. Evidence that proves he lied to the Senate while under oath.

Anything else?
There is an appendix in today's report which also suggests that Mr Galloway may have violated British rules on MPs' financial disclosure. It also suggests that he may have committed perjury in a number of statements made to the Daily Telegraph libel trial.

There is also the question of illegal kickbacks paid to Iraq in relation to oil-for-food. The committee has provided no evidence that Mr Galloway was aware of these illegal kickbacks, but it did quote an Iraqi official as saying that all those allocated oil knew about them. To pay illegal kickbacks would be a violation of UN sanctions.

What do Mr Galloway and his wife say?
Mr Galloway has always denied receiving any funds from the sale of Iraqi oil either directly or through the appeal. He said today that he was "bemused" by the allegations and challenged the panel to lay charges, to "put up or shut up".

Mr Galloway has likened Mr Coleman to Joseph McCarthy, the US senator who led the witch-hunt for Communists in the 1950s. He told one interviewer: "To be accused of a lack of moral character by Senator Norm Coleman is a bit like being told to sit up straight by the Hunchback of Notre Dame."

Mr Galloway believes the allegations are politically motivated, the result of his outspoken opposition to the sanctions and the US-led invasion.

Dr Abu-Zayyad is quoted in the report specifically denying that she received any money: "I have never solicited or received from Iraq or anyone else any proceeds of any oil deals, either for myself or my former [sic] husband."

What happens next?
Mr Galloway has today challenged the Senate committee to apply for formal charges. The Committee will now refer its report to the Justice Department which will then have to determine whether Mr Galloway has broken US laws.

It is impossible to predict how long that will take, although the Justice Department will be given the detailed dossier that the committee has compiled, which will certainly speed things up.

Is this all sour grapes?
The committee was publicly humiliated when Mr Galloway appeared before it the first time in May. It appears to have established evidence of a money trail between the regime, a middle-man and Mr Galloway's wife and the Mariam Appeal - the so-called smoking gun.

Mr Galloway has become a folk-hero of the anti-war left in America, his speaking tour with Christopher Hitchens turned him into something of a celebrity.

It is clear from Mr Galloway’s reaction today that he will fight the allegations in the committee's report.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1841799,00.html

It is clear from Mr Galloway’s reaction today that he will fight the allegations in the committee's report.

And lose. They have direct, irrefutable evidence that the money went to accounts under his control - his wife's account, for instance, was an account which he had direct control over - and the money clearly went there.

It makes Galloway and his ex-wife both liars.

You're forgetting that at this time, there is more evidence than was seen by the Charity Commission. Evidence that proves he lied to the Senate while under oath.fell free to tell us what is this new evidence...with a link.

fell free to tell us what is this new evidence...with a link.
*plays dramatic music*

fell free to tell us what is this new evidence...with a link.
Why don't you just go to the Senate web page and download the report yourself. Everything is in there.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/PSIREPORTGallowayOct05FINAL.pdf

Now you can eat crow along with Mr. Galloway.

You may also be interested to know that it looks like there's enough new evidence in there to overturn his libel award against the Telegraph.

He's going to look really funny having to pay back the money, and then go to the US (of his own volition) and get a cell with Bubba.

Galloway is a loudmouth boor - he thinks that by blustering and lying and appealing to people's love of the underdog, he can get his way. Now he's about to have a large comeuppance. Very large.

*plays dramatic music*

I can feel the tension http://drumpounders.com/forum/images/smiles/dj_smiley.gif

:D

Why don't you just go to the Senate web page and download the report yourself. Everything is in there.
http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/PSIREPORTGallowayOct05FINAL.pdf

Now you can eat crow along with Mr. Galloway.

You may also be interested to know that it looks like there's enough new evidence in there to overturn his libel award against the Telegraph.

He's going to look really funny having to pay back the money, and then go to the US (of his own volition) and get a cell with Bubba.

Galloway is a loudmouth boor - he thinks that by blustering and lying and appealing to people's love of the underdog, he can get his way. Now he's about to have a large comeuppance. Very large.


If you can't read the report, you can read the summary here:
http://slate.com/id/2128742

You're forgetting that at this time, there is more evidence than was seen by the Charity Commission. Evidence that proves he lied to the Senate while under oath.

And? What authority does the senate retain over Galloway?

If you can't read the report, you can read the summary here:
http://slate.com/id/2128742

LOL you call that a "Report"...that is an editotial piece...this is like FOXnews:

Christopher Hitchens: "For another, he continues, through his lawyers, to deny what is also certainly true, namely that he personally offered a $2 million bribe to Rolf Ekeus, then the head of the U.N. weapons inspectors."

He has already made his mind that Galloway is guilty of whatever the Sour-Grapes senators may acuse him...

LOL you call that a "Report"...that is an editotial piece...this is like FOXnews:

Christopher Hitchens: "For another, he continues, through his lawyers, to deny what is also certainly true, namely that he personally offered a $2 million bribe to Rolf Ekeus, then the head of the U.N. weapons inspectors."

He has already made his mind that Galloway is guilty of whatever the Sour-Grapes senators may acuse him...

The senate report is solid. And it finds him guilty of lying.

And? What authority does the senate retain over Galloway?

If he returns to the US, as he says he will most definitely do, he would be subject to charges of perjury while testifying before the Senate.

There is plenty of statutory authority for that.

The senate report is solid. And it finds him guilty of lying.

Then i await his extradition and/or arrest in the United States post haste.....

The senate report is solid. And it finds him guilty of lying.If you can't read the report, you can read the summary here:
http://slate.com/id/2128742 Christopher Hitchens is a drink-soaked former Trotskyite popinjay.

:D :D :p :D

Christopher Hitchens is a drink-soaked former Trotskyite popinjay.

:D :D :p :D

Now you're only quoting Galloway, who was pwned in the Hitchens-Galloway debate.

You're refusing to read the Senate report yourself, I see.

Well, you'll have plenty of time to read it when Galloway is in his cell.

Now you can eat crow along with Mr. Galloway..here I have 10$ that say you..along with your NeoCon friend Mr Christopher Hitchens..are sitting on loser town...

Galloway will not expend one day in Jail...

here I have 10$ that say you..along with your NeoCon friend Mr Christopher Hitchens..are sitting on the loser chair...

Galloway will not expend one day in Jail...

If he comes to the US, voluntarily, as he says he will, he most certainly will.

here I have 10$ that say you..along with your NeoCon friend Mr Christopher Hitchens..are sitting on the loser chair...

Galloway will not expend one day in Jail...

Naturally, since he isn't actually guilty.

Naturally, since he isn't actually guilty.

Speaking as an American, and having read the Senate report, it would be child's play to find him guilty of perjury.

Speaking as an American, and having read the Senate report, it would be child's play to find him guilty of perjury.

Then all we need is a lawyer equivilent to Doogie Howser and we can have a sitcom while we're at it. :p

Now you're only quoting Galloway, who was pwned in the Hitchens-Galloway debate.You are quoting Hitchens AND I am quoting Galloway...what is the difference?

and if you really want to know if anyone was pwned...(or who was pwned)you should check Wikipedia ;)

You are quoting Hitchens AND I am Quoting Galloway...what is the difference?

and if you really want to know if anyone was pwned...(or who was pwned)you should check Wikipedia ;)

I'm quoting the Senate report.

And Wikipedia is a source written by volunteers. If I was to volunteer to write for Wikipedia, along with about 50 people, I could have that entire article rewritten to say just about anything.

I'm quoting the Senate report.

And Wikipedia is a source written by volunteers. If I was to volunteer to write for Wikipedia, along with about 50 people, I could have that entire article rewritten to say just about anything.

And then would be reverted back to what it was before you vandalised it. Wikipedia volunteers are getting very good at giving only facts, a NPOV and resisting attempts to insert biased opinion.

Lets clear up the myth that Galloway was ejected from the Labour party for opposing the Iraq war, if that was the case then they would have likewise ejected the other 180 odd members who voted against military action. Galloway was ejected from the Labour party for many reasons including his attempts to incite Iraqis to rise up and kill our soldiers, his close personal (and now it would seem economic) ties to Saddam Hussein, and for his quasi-communist political ideology.

To name but a few of the reasons that makes me ashamed that Galloway is a parliamentary representative of my country. I severely hope that this latest round of accusations is of good substance.

And then would be reverted back to what it was before you vandalised it. Wikipedia volunteers are getting very good at giving only facts, a NPOV and resisting attempts to insert biased opinion.

I've seen plenty of biased entries in Wikipedia that will never be NPOV and will never be repaired. I suggest that you saunter over to the section on Swinging and Sexuality, and take a look at the back and forth war over what the facts are, especially concerning homosexuality and swing clubs.

Wikipedia is not as solid as you think.

And Wikipedia is a source written by volunteers. If I was to volunteer to write for Wikipedia, along with about 50 people, I could have that entire article rewritten to say just about anything.Wikipedia volunteers are fine.

...here some other sources...

http://www.ezilon.com/information/article_9796.shtml
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/massie200509160904.asp

>>> Hitchens on Galloway >>>

* "The man's search for a tyrannical fatherland never ends! The Soviet Union's let him down, Albania's gone, the Red Army's out of Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia, the hunt persists! Saddam has been overthrown. On to the next on the 30th July in Damascus in Syria, appearing... I've given it all to you in a piece of paper, in front of Mr Assad, whose death squads are cutting down the leaders of democracy in Lebanonas this is going on to tell the Syrian people they're fortunate to have such a leader."

* "I believe it is a disgrace that a member of the British House of Commons should go before the United States Senate Subcommittee, and not testify, but decline to testify, and to insult all those who try to ask him questions with the most vile and cheap guttersnipe abuse, I think that's a disgrace. How can anyone who has had dealings with this regime show their face at a city like this and not content with it, not content with it!"

>>> Galloway on Hitchens >>>

* "You start off being the liberal mouthpiece for one of the most reactionary governments this country has ever known and you end up a mouthpiece and apologist for these miserable malevolent incompetents who cannot even pick up the bodies of their own citizens in New Orleans."

* "The most foreign fighters in Iraq are wearing British and American uniforms. The level of self-delusion is bordering frankly on the racist. The vast majority of the people of Iraq are against the occupation of Iraq by the American and British forces."

* "They intend, if they can, to have an Iraq Americana, but the Iraqi people have decided otherwise."

* "People like Mr Hitchens are ready to fight to the last drop of other people's blood, and it's utterly and completely contemptible".

Wikipedia volunteers are fine.


Depends on who the volunteers are.

I've seen plenty of biased entries in Wikipedia that will never be NPOV and will never be repaired. I suggest that you saunter over to the section on Swinging and Sexuality, and take a look at the back and forth war over what the facts are, especially concerning homosexuality and swing clubs.

Wikipedia is not as solid as you think. It is not neutral in all things - especially things political.

Wikipedia volunteers are fine.

...here some other sources...

http://www.ezilon.com/information/article_9796.shtml
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/massie200509160904.asp

>>> Hitchens on Galloway >>>

* "The man's search for a tyrannical fatherland never ends! The Soviet Union's let him down, Albania's gone, the Red Army's out of Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia, the hunt persists! Saddam has been overthrown. On to the next on the 30th July in Damascus in Syria, appearing... I've given it all to you in a piece of paper, in front of Mr Assad, whose death squads are cutting down the leaders of democracy in Lebanonas this is going on to tell the Syrian people they're fortunate to have such a leader."

* "I believe it is a disgrace that a member of the British House of Commons should go before the United States Senate Subcommittee, and not testify, but decline to testify, and to insult all those who try to ask him questions with the most vile and cheap guttersnipe abuse, I think that's a disgrace. How can anyone who has had dealings with this regime show their face at a city like this and not content with it, not content with it!"

>>> Galloway on Hitchens >>>

* "You start off being the liberal mouthpiece for one of the most reactionary governments this country has ever known and you end up a mouthpiece and apologist for these miserable malevolent incompetents who cannot even pick up the bodies of their own citizens in New Orleans."

* "The most foreign fighters in Iraq are wearing British and American uniforms. The level of self-delusion is bordering frankly on the racist. The vast majority of the people of Iraq are against the occupation of Iraq by the American and British forces."

* "They intend, if they can, to have an Iraq Americana, but the Iraqi people have decided otherwise."

* "People like Mr Hitchens are ready to fight to the last drop of other people's blood, and it's utterly and completely contemptible".
Wow. When British opposing idealogues go after each other like dogs, it sounds so much more witty and intelligent than when the American ones do it. I'm ashamed of our so-called educational system.

Wow. When British opposing idealogues go after each other like dogs, it sounds so much more witty and intelligent than when the American ones do it. I'm ashamed of our so-called educational system.whahahahaha

good one...

Wow. When British opposing idealogues go after each other like dogs, it sounds so much more witty and intelligent than when the American ones do it. I'm ashamed of our so-called educational system.

You mean like this?

"Study the photographs of Galloway from Syrian state television, however, and you will see how unwise and incautious it is for such a hideous person to resort to personal remarks. Unkind nature, which could have made a perfectly good butt out of his face, has spoiled the whole effect by taking an asshole and studding it with ill-brushed fangs."

Galloway was ejected from the Labour party for many reasons including his attempts to incite Iraqis to rise up and kill our soldiers....WOW did he actually say the words "kill our soldiers"...

That means he is not going to be reelected...rite?

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,6903,1572389,00.html

"As the debate drew to a close, both speakers were eager to finish. Like two fighters who had no more punches to throw, they were waiting for the bell. Opinion was divided over who triumphed, though from where I sat Hitchens won on points. America may see itself as the home of democracy, but there was no vote. So it was left to the market to decide. A post-event book signing was convened and it was noticeable that the queue was almost twice as long to see Hitchens."

You mean like this?

"Study the photographs of Galloway from Syrian state television, however, and you will see how unwise and incautious it is for such a hideous person to resort to personal remarks. Unkind nature, which could have made a perfectly good butt out of his face, has spoiled the whole effect by taking an asshole and studding it with ill-brushed fangs."LOL...is that Hitchens?

LOL...is that Hitchens?
If you're going to quote Galloway's lame insults, I can quote Hitchens.

If you're going to quote Galloway's lame insults, I can quote Hitchens.Its all good...I do not take them seriously...

But they are Fun to watch...

Lying under oath to the US Senate is most definitely purgery. This guy should come to the US to face his crimes.

He's guilty as anything, he's a crook, simple as that, and a traitor to boot- if this was the Second World War, he would have been hanged by now.

Lying under oath to the US Senate is most definitely purgery. This guy should come to the US to face his crimes.so we can send him to the purgatory.

whahahahaha

good one...
This is why I like to watch the Q/A from the House of Commons. They're not saying anything more than our guys do, but they're quicker and funnier, and they heckle each other. This is the way politics should be. Hell, I say let's do it the Korean way and get into fistfights every other week. At least they look busy. :D

You know Sierra, for someone who has a wait and see attitude about the Plame affair, you sure are ready to convict someone of another political stripe than you without a trial.

This is why I like to watch the Q/A from the House of Commons. They're not saying anything more than our guys do, but they're quicker and funnier, and they heckle each other. This is the way politics should be. Hell, I say let's do it the Korean way and get into fistfights every other week. At least they look busy. :DPoliticians Fist-fighting !!!

I am ready to pay top PPV dollars to see that.:D

I want to see some Galloway VS GWBush..10 rounds... no rules :D :D

Politicians Fist-fighting !!!

I am ready to pay top PPV dollars to see that.:D

I want to see some Galloway VS GWBush..10 rounds... no rules :D :D
I want front row tickets for the Hastert/Schumer smackdown. :D

EDIT: Look at all the smilies. We may onto something here.

Politicians Fist-fighting !!!

I am ready to pay top PPV dollars to see that.:D

I want to see some Galloway VS GWBush..10 rounds... no rules :D :D

I wouldn't know about that. Apparently, according to his last physical, Bush is in excellent physical condition for a man of his age. I'm not sure Galloway could hold his own fists up for the entire first round without getting out of breath.

Also, if there are no rules, it's common knowledge that Bush sleeps with a Glock on his bedside table. Loaded. Even in the White House.

I'm not sure Galloway could compete with that.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4383700.stm

Ooops! More evidence on Galloway! :rolleyes:

WOW did he actually say the words "kill our soldiers"...

That means he is not going to be reelected...rite?

He did not use those exact words, it was more something along the lines of encouraging Iraqis to resist the foreign occupiers, which in essence is saying the same thing. (It annoys me that I can't find a source).