A pox upon George Galloway

[Dinner]

[/q]He also may have PERSONALLY profited from the Oil-for-Food program that he SO vehemently opposed.[q]

Don't you think Coleman would have shown evidence if he had any proof that occured? Don't you think the British Parlement's inquiry would have found something when they audited his books? This is sounding like another "Saddam is hiding WMD" or "Saddam is helping Al Qaeda" type claim. Republicans lied so now they don't get free rides any more; now they most show proof or their claims get ignored.

[notyoueither]

Actually, I think Levin is a Democrat, and he was very interested in knowing where Galloway's supporters' money came from. Galloway didn't seem too concerned though.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Oerdin
[/q]He also may have PERSONALLY profited from the Oil-for-Food program that he SO vehemently opposed.[q]

Don't you think Coleman would have shown evidence if he had any proof that occured? Don't you think the British Parlement's inquiry would have found something when they audited his books? This is sounding like another "Saddam is hiding WMD" or "Saddam is helping Al Qaeda" type claim. Republicans lied so now they don't get free rides any more; now they most show proof or their claims get ignored.

Word

[notyoueither]

DanS bastard.

[Ted Striker]

Dan is a good guy, he's just misguided.

[notyoueither]

Can Ted explain why a Democrat was asking these questions? Oerdin doesn't seem interested.

[Dinner]

BTW where is a mod when you need one? This thread is about three days to late and we've already linked to the original thread.

[notyoueither]

Why not discuss the issue, Oerdin, instead of appealing for some higher power to shut down discussions you don't like?

[MrFun]

He's not necessarily trying to shut down discussion -- can't you post this article (which I agree, is very revealing and interesting) to the other thread?

[notyoueither]

Article? That was Fab's take on it. I don't see a link.

There was already an 'OMFG, the Brit PWNd the Yanks' thread.

Now let there be a discussion thread.

[Ted Striker]

Levin asked Galloway to look over a document. Galloway did not want to say it was authenticate, without looking at the original first. This is because Galloway had been the victim of forged documents in the past. He had been cleared of any wrongdoing in the past related to these forged documents, and had a formal apology issued to him by the Christian Science Monitor.

So hell no he's not going to say anything about the actual document, which he had never seen, because of what has happened in the past.

All Levin got him to do was agree to look at the document.

As far as Coleman goes, he got completely clowned.

Galloway addressed most of the questions asked of him. The ones he did dance around were questions that did not implicate him personally. That was smart because it was none of his business, as he said, and he's not going to stab his friend in the back on an internationally covered media event.

He just piggybacked the moral issue and f'ed up the US Senate in the process.

As for Levin being a Democrat, I have no idea why he agreed to do this. There are far better issues he could be addressing.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Here you go Mister Fun:

http://www.saviodsilva.com/092/guyz.htm

Ah, the always delectable Richard Jenkins (#3). A fine specimen

[Ted Striker]

I have to admit I'm impressed. Someday I hope to achieve that level of bodyfat.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Article? That was Fab's take on it. I don't see a link.

There was already an 'OMFG, the Brit PWNd the Yanks' thread.

Now let there be a discussion thread.

That is the discussion thread.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
As for Levin being a Democrat, I have no idea why he agreed to do this. There are far better issues he could be addressing.

You mean like corruption in the UN that could have been pleased to see sanctions end and Saddam free to murder millions and start wars with large bombs?