My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

December 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

« German cannibal's verdict: Guilty of manslaughter | Main | Why was a priest getting money from Saddam? »

January 30, 2004


Iraq Free R.

Did you notice Galloway's Clintonesque (non)denial?
While it appears to be a denial, if you parse the words, you will find that it actually is not.

George Galloway said, "I've never seen a bottle of oil, owned one or bought one" in an interview with ABCNEWS.

That doesn't preclude receiving a contract that would have profitted him $90.5 million if Saddam Hussein were still around to fulfill the contract. Galloway doesn't actually deny receiving the generous promise of money from Saddam; he just denies receiving actual oil.


... originally posted on wrong thread...

To be fair, it's easy to put someone's name on a list for whatever reasons. It's also not real hard to deposit money in someone's account and make it look like they took a bribe.

In the particular case of George Galloway, however, it would be hard to justify his actions on any basis, and hard to believe he hadn't enriched himself in some unethical manner. To oppose the war was one thing, but for any non-Arab to express a favorable opinion of Saddam's character is, to me, convincing evidence of insanity or corruption. And if he were an Arab, he would be denied a visa.

The comments to this entry are closed.