Author Topic: Western anti-war politicaians on Saddam's payroll... (Read 1516 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **on:** April 25, 2003, 01:09:47 AM »

Associated Press report via fox:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85070,00.html

It really is intersting how sincerely some of these staunch anti-war politicans care so deeply for the iraqi people and their safety..

I cant think of any way this kind of behavior, treason?, can be justfied?

straffo · « **Reply #1 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:00:44 AM »

Galloway pissed Murdoch ?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #2 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:10:14 AM »

Nice try straffo, but no good.

Its an ASSOCIATED PRESS report... You lefties cant make excuses for that traitor by saying it was a fox news story..

And how do you dispute the documents found in the iraaqi intelligence headqurters that show payments to this man?

straffo · « **Reply #3 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:17:45 AM »

I guess the AP report is coming from the Sun article ?

And if I'm leftie your a go-go dancer

Dowding · « **Reply #4 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:18:51 AM »

Galloway has always been a retard. This is no surprise. Also, he doesn't represent the whole of the anti-war movement.

Secondly, several businessmen have been playing on his name in Iraq ever since his high profile visit there in '99. We'll see if he wins his libel case - he's won all his others.

So, in summary, he's a bit of a nob but this is old news.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #5 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:25:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding

So, in summary, he's a bit of a nob but this is old news.

So people allready knoew he was being paid off by Iraq to the tune of $10,000,000? And that he was still on Saddam's payroll right up to the war.. Why was he not kicked out from the government?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #6 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:27:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
I guess the AP report is coming from the Sun article ?

And if I'm leftie your a go-go dancer

Thete is no "Sun" article. You know straffo I dont know why you are trying to make excuses for this traitor, its really shameful of you... But wait, you're French, ahh never mind..

straffo · « **Reply #7 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:31:34 AM »

A typical gogo dancer answer.

Btw I agree I made an error it was an article from the Telegraph.

You don't find strange how fast such a paper can be found and used ?

Spooky · « **Reply #8 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:35:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo

And if I'm leftie your a go-go dancer

Straffo you communist squeak ! I knew it, driving yaks turned you into a Stalinist !

lol these guys don't have a clue this is funnier every day !

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #9 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:37:17 AM »

And there was a report from the christian science monitor.

I just dont undersstand why you have this bizzare need to defend an obviously corrupt traitor - hell even dowding didnt feel the need to...

It's gotta be because you are french, doesnt it? Your country sure knows how this traitor game works...

straffo · « **Reply #10 on:** April 25, 2003, 02:43:12 AM »

You got me wrong : I don't want to defend this guy, I never heard of him before yesterday and I don't give a **** of what can happen to a british MP.

But I question the validity of the clue found (a bit conveniently) by a journalist of a newspaper from the other political side (if I'm not mistaken).

and after reading that :

Quote

It's gotta be because you are french, doesnt it? Your country sure knows how this traitor game works...

I've only one answer :

Gogo dancer !!
Gogo dancer !!
Gogo dancer !!
Gogo dancer !!

yada yada

I know it's childish but I'm a child myself (*)

(*) otherwise I won't spend so many time playing AH ....

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #11 on:** April 25, 2003, 03:01:48 AM »

"But I question the validity of the clue found (a bit conveniently) by a journalist of a newspaper from the other political side (if I'm not mistaken."

Isnt this why we have a free press? Or do you only want the official party line. And these arent mere clues by one paper they are serious documented evedinvce of a long term financial relationship between this British anti-war offiacial and the Iraqi government found by multiple unrelated independant sources... This is scandalous.

Trying to question the sources and painting them as unreliable or liers is defending the guy...

Why?

straffo · « **Reply #12 on:** April 25, 2003, 03:08:43 AM »

You want an honest answer ?

To piss you
I know I'm a naughty boy

Have a bad night now
(It's a morning joke,I'm having my 1st café of the day I'm just warming up)

Dowding · « **Reply #13 on:** April 25, 2003, 03:09:48 AM »

He's not 'in government'. He's a backbench MP and Labour rebel. He's an enemy of Blair.

He's always been a outspoken supporter of Saddam - that's what I meant by old news.

Generally speaking, before a democratically elected member of parliament loses his seat, he has to be found guilty of a crime that would make his position untenable, or at least proven to be involved in a scandal that would have the same effect. I think that's the proper way to proceed. If he's proven guilty of fraud (which is the allegation - via his charity dealings), then fair enough. But until that time, however much I might dislike him, it would be undemocratic to do otherwise.

Dowding · « **Reply #14 on:** April 25, 2003, 03:12:37 AM »

Quote

Trying to question the sources and painting them as unreliable or liers is defending the guy...

Don't be ridiculous. Checking the reliability of evidence is a cornerstone of judicial procedure. How else would you want it? Anyone can make a claim and it is automatically believed?