The Command Post - Op-Ed - Galloway: Traitor or Dupe?

April 26, 2003

Galloway: Traitor or Dupe?

A Labour MP speaks to Galloway's recent statements in defence of himself.

Re: Show some integrity and go
Date: 26 April 2003

Sir - I have listened to the utterances of George Galloway in recent days with growing dismay and anger. His statements and attitude before, during and in the aftermath of the war in Iraq have been increasingly outrageous and untenable and have reached the point where I feel that he is tarnishing the reputation of Parliament by association.

Despite the incontrovertible evidence of the savage barbarity of Saddam Hussein's murderous regime, well-known for many years and made terrifyingly clear by what has been uncovered in Iraq in recent weeks, he has persisted in the defence of the indefensible.

His attacks on the Prime Minister and President Bush have been contemptible, and his apparent encouragement of British troops to disobey lawful orders put him beyond the pale of civilised behaviour. He has forfeited the sympathy of many of his constituents and of the vast majority of his own party and has flown in the face of right-thinking men and women of all political persuasions.

The recent accusations of financial involvement in the defunct Iraqi regime, whatever their final outcome, are a further indicator of the world in which George Galloway seems to live. But long before suggestions of corrupt practice surfaced, this man's opinions, and indeed his very lifestyle, have suggested that he inhabits a fantasy world, in which he believes what it suits him to believe and ignores the overwhelming evidence condemning the barbarous dictator to whose coat-tails he clings.

It is possible that he is no more than a sad dupe, refusing, like the regime he still persists in supporting, to recognise the inevitability of his downfall and of theirs. It seems equally possible that he may be found guilty of deliberate distortion of the truth, even without the charges implicit in the newspaper revelations of recent days.

What is certain is that his position is now indeed untenable. Better men than George Galloway, holding views far less extreme than his, have chosen to resign in defence of their position. There is still time for him to regain some credibility, and perhaps demonstrate some degree of integrity, by following their example.

From:
Claire Curtis-Thomas, MP (Lab), London SW1

I am afraid expecting Galloway to show any integrity is a bit much. Is this the first salvo in Galloway's ejection from the Labour Party and the House of Commons?

Posted By at April 26, 2003 01:25 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Georgeous George, the member for Baghdad Central is guilty as charged.

Since the first allegations that a document detailing a meeting at which Galloway requested additional funding from the Iraqi regime had been found, further documents have come to light, detailing actual payments. As these documents were found in different document caches Galloways insistance that they were a 'plant' loses much credibility.

Galloways rebutal also called into question the signature on the initial document which Tim Blair of the Telegraph could not identify. This has since been verified by a minor flunkey as the hand of the head of Iraq's buthery-with-menaces squad.

Galloway is left with the single argument - that someone with so senior connections to the regime would not deal through a minor functionary as was documented. (No - doesn't convince me either).

In the UK however we have this awkward freedom of speech thing which means we can't string someone up for expressing their views.

On the up-side however treason is still a capitol crime here, so if Galloway did line his pockets with money meant for the 1/2 a million Iraqi children that starved to death under twelve years of hugely corrupted (I'll mention no names but I'm looking at you Jaques) sanctions, then I have evey faith in the British legal system to execute him. Slowly for preference.

Posted by: Simon Barnett at April 26, 2003 02:24 PM

I don't believe Galloway faces execution , unfortunately.

It will take some time even to eject him from the Labour Party. He can and will cling on to his seat in Parliament until the next election, even if expelled from Labour, and even he is treated as a pariah in the House of Commons.

The man has no scruples, no shame.

Posted by: JohninLondon at April 26, 2003 09:31 PM

But, just for the thrill, fantasize this: Parliament steps forward and reinstates the death penalty for treason. The unmentionable personage is so sentenced...and then, broadcast on live TV, he gets the firing squad! No muss, no fuss, just a great nation protecting itself and its citizens and its honor, in the proper manner. Bracing? The world would sit up and take notice, and everywhere, bad people would avoid each other's eyes, and start thinking a little bit differently.

Posted by: Buddy at April 26, 2003 11:25 PM

Buddy

A lovely thought - but not likely, as the UK seldom passes retrospective legislation.

But there may be possibilities of prosecution for incitement to Brit troops desert, as well as tax and other financial shenanigans. The guy is going to be hung out to dry, as an example of how immoral the extreme left can be.

Posted by: JohninLondon at April 27, 2003 01:38 PM

Basically, I am in agreement with JIL (besides, it's really the business of the British as to what to do) but I would personally like to see something 18th century and Dickensian - like, say, the Treadmill, or the Pillory. (Even I blanch at the thought of going back to Elizabethan penalties for treason - although drawing and quartering at Tyburn would make a nice cover for the Sun.)

Posted by: John Sabotta at April 28, 2003 02:05 AM