1
   

George Galloway blasts the Senate

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:11 pm
I'm laughin' so hard Oh Thou Launcher of a Thousand Ships, that i may have to emmigrate . . .
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:18 pm
Setanta - you may keep laughing (don't emigrate, we need literate people!) esp. when you think that the neocons thought they had set up Galloway into perjuring himself, are now working hard to find the least factual error in his statements, and - side-splitting this - had actually bamboozled the subcommittee chairman into believing they will bankroll him for a presidential run in 2008 if he manages to discredit the UN, Galloway, Pasqua, the Russians with the tankers, et al.

Sen. Coleman is now to be left slowly, slowly twisting in the wind, while neoconland regroups...

You need more Republicans on this site to stay informed on the political subtext <G>
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:21 pm
Kinda scarey, but sad at the same time . . .

Com'ere little boy, howdya like to earn this bright, shiney new dollar . . .
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:24 pm
....

Okay, don't know...

"This is G o o g l e's cache of http://hsgac.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Hearings.Detail&HearingID=232 as retrieved on 19 May 2005 05:12:14 GMT."

aaand there, it just says:

Panel 2
George Galloway
, Member of Parliament for Bethnal Green and Bow , Great Britain


no pdf at all, you can still look it up here.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:40 pm
This becomes more truly bizarre . . . on May 18, i looked at the site for links, but the BBC link for the subcommittee report was faster, so i used that . . . there was a report, of what i don't know, there at that time. OE has a web page cache on May 19, which simply lists his name with no other comment. Today, May 20, the entry says he submitted no statement.

Winston from 1984 would know what's goin' on here, where is George Orwell when we need him?
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:49 pm
Teaching duck-speak to the Republicans.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:51 pm
Went to the Congressional Record web site, nothin' . . . went to the Library of Congress, only mentions that Mr. Galloway testified, nothin' else . . . at the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs web site, in the testimony section, Mr. Galloway's name does not appear . . .
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 07:54 pm
You'd have to ask Emmanuel Goldstein, anyways.... what would Winston know?

I'm wondering, has the page been cached anywhere else? Besides Google? Or does Google cache it on different machines, maybe at different intervals?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 08:16 pm
HofT wrote:
Sen. Coleman is now to be left slowly, slowly twisting in the wind, while neoconland regroups...


By the By, Boss, i didn't congratulate you on the ironic use of the Erlichman quote . . .
0 Replies
 
HofT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 08:21 pm
Neh, echt?! Presumably I'm likened to the old Monsieur Jourdain in Moliere, who spoke prose all his life without realizing it!

Love you too, but goodbye until sometime in June Smile
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 08:35 pm
k, Google uses 'Datacenters' to store the cached versions, and there's the same version everywhere (I checked). More about that tech stuff here, if anybody really cares....
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 10:31 pm
It's reported now quite often elsewhere:

Quote:

All other witness testimonies for the hearings on the Oil for Food scandal are available on the Committee's website in PDF form. But Galloway's testimony is the only document not on the site.

Press representatives for the Committee had no comment.
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 10:42 pm
I wonder just how much came into the US on the good ship 'Condoleeza Rice', the Chevron oil tanker named for her.

http://portland.indymedia.org/icon/2004/11/303680.jpg
'You have to get up oily to beat the U.N.'
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 10:49 pm
Quote:
In the belly of the beast

Scott Ritter
Saturday May 21, 2005
The Guardian

In the recent parliamentary elections, the British people, given the choice between standing for the rule of law or embracing partisan politics, chose the latter, voting with their pocketbooks, even though it meant re-electing a man who led Britain into an illegal war of aggression, based on lies and misrepresentation of fact.

Tony Blair is a man who has shown himself more subservient to an American president with empire in his eyes than to a British tradition of respect for the rule of law that dates back to the Magna Carta. There is at least one politician, however, that the citizens of Britain can today be proud of, regardless of how one views his politics. This is a man who, back in 2002, had the courage to stand up to Blair and George Bush, calling Blair a liar and declaring that both were behaving like "wolves" towards Iraq. For speaking the truth, he was castigated, thrown out of the Labour party and smeared with false allegations of corruption - at the same time as the US government hid its role in enriching Saddam Hussein's government with illegal kickbacks. He has now charged back, winning a parliamentary seat previously controlled by the very party that evicted him.

And now the same man has done something that no other British politician has been brave enough to do: cross the Atlantic and confront the United States over the lies spread about the reasons for war with Iraq, the oil for food agreement and the failure of US lawmakers to do their own job when it comes to the rule of law.

George Galloway, the politician in question, stared down the US Senate subcommittee on homeland security and government affairs, and its notoriously partisan chairman Norm Coleman, and blasted as totally unfounded the committee's allegations that he had profited from oil vouchers in exchange for his anti-war stance. He emerged from the hearing victorious. If only more politicians, British and American alike, were able to display such courage in the face of the atmosphere of neoconservative intimidation prevalent in Washington these days.

Galloway is now the darling of the American left, and has fed punch lines for late-night comics and generated headlines like the New York Post's "Brit fries senators in oil". But mainstream America still seems unable to digest the horrific reality that the MP's testimony underscored: that Senator Coleman's McCarthy-like hearings are but a smoke screen for a crime of horrific proportions.

Galloway has nevertheless had the courage to stand up to unjust charges and an unjust war - and that is the only way that opinion will shift. Two years ago I wrote that the accusations of corruption against Galloway were too convenient, designed to silence one of the Iraq war's harshest critics. The honourable member for Bethnal Green and Bow has entered the lair of a conservative American political body to confront it head-on about a war and occupation that many on both sides of the Atlantic, politicians and public alike, seem only too willing to sweep under the carpet. So, Mr Galloway, please accept from this American three cheers for a job well done.

ยท Scott Ritter was a senior UN weapons inspector in Iraq between 1991 and 1998; his new book, Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, will be published this summer
Source
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 10:54 pm
http://www.bradblog.com/Images/Galloway_MissingTestimony.jpg
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 May, 2005 01:56 am
Well bloody hell, Walter.

The "mother of all smokescreens", indeed.

How could they have the gall to do that?
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 May, 2005 05:49 am
You are being sarcastic, aren't you McTag?
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 May, 2005 06:32 am
Quote:
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001407.htm

Galloway's Senate Testimony Scrubbed from Official Subcommittee Website!
Chairman Coleman's Office Passes Buck for Explanation!
The stunning testimony given by British MP George Galloway before the U.S. Senate subcommittee on Investigations is apparently so hot that it seems to have "gone AWOL" from the subcommittee's...

The stunning testimony given by British MP George Galloway before the U.S. Senate subcommittee on Investigations is apparently so hot that it seems to have "gone AWOL" from the subcommittee's website according to the British newsite VNU Network.

The BRAD BLOG can confirm that all witness testimony -- except that of Galloway's -- from last Tuesday's extraordinary hearings is available in PDF format on the subcommittee's webpage on the hearings.

At those hearings, Galloway blasted subcommittee Chairman Sen Norm Coleman's (R-MN) investigation into the U.N. Oil-for-Food "scandal" which Galloway referred to as "the mother of all smokescreens".

That testimony can be read and/or viewed here.

We have been unable to receive a statement from Senate spokesmen as yet as to why Galloway's testimony is now unavailable on the website.

A staffer in Coleman's office referred us to the subcommittee staff when we asked for the reasons for "the removal of the testimony". Her reply: "That's a question for the subcommittee. Senator Coleman is the chairman, but the committee makes their own decisions about what goes on the website."

We were forwarded to the subcommittee's voice mail where we left a message. If we receive a call back, we will let you know.

A screenshot just taken from the subcommittee's website showing the missing Galloway testimony is below.

UPDATE: As of 2:30pm PT, the subcommittee's webpage has now been updated to include, "Mr Galloway did not submit a statement" underneath his missing testimony.

As a Capitol Hill source familiar with such testimony emailed us moments ago: "I'd find it strange if they simply published the prepared remarks of these other people as submitted instead of transcribing them especially since nowehere does it say 'as prepared.' That might be a good question to ask them if you call back."

We have still been unable to reach anybody at the subcommittee willing to give comment on the matter as of this time.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 May, 2005 07:05 am
These people will stop at nothing too petty or too low. I mean, really, to take a person's remarks off the web merely because it makes you look a buffoon is just too petty. I expect there will be excuses for it though.

I like the remark, "that Senator Coleman's McCarthy-like hearings."
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 May, 2005 08:36 am
Fancy screenshot, Walter, thanks.

WEIRD.

Still casting around for a reasonable explanation -- that there were mistakes, they took it down to fix it and will put it back up, something -- but nothing comes to mind, really.

:-?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/16/2025 at 11:55:22