(Live Thread) British Parliament member George Galloway to face oil-for-food accusers (Live Thread)

CNN.com ^ | 5/17/05 | Phil Hirschkorn

[onyx]

His wife is a "cousin" of Arafat's? Now THAT is news to me.

[cyncooper]

Here is an article that gave the impression that Galloway took it upon himself to demand a hearing.

It isn't clear, though, but that's how I took it last week when I heard the news:

Committee Releases Oil-For-Food Documents

excerpt:

Galloway called the claim "patently absurd" and said he would appear before the Senate committee Tuesday to defend himself.

"I'll be telling them that they are liars and that they have made a fool of America, which is supposed to be a land where justice prevails," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "I've been pronounced guilty of this all without a single question asked of me."

~snip~

I also heard Coleman state at the hearing today that Galloway was appearing voluntarily and had not been subpoenaed. I'd have to review the transcript to see if he mentions if Galloway asked to appear or if an invitation had been extended.

[processing please hold]

Well, well, well. I see it as bait and galloway gobbled it up hook, line, and sinker.

[elc]

So sorry if this has been asked a hundred times, but that's a lotta posts to go through at work to find the answer...

Will C-Span or any other station replay Galloway's testimony?

If not, how soon and where will a transcript be posted?

[processing please hold]

He may not be saying that, but that is what I am saying.

I now know what was going on. I have to be hit over the head when nuances are thrown at me. Thanks to you and everyone else for explaining it.

[cyncooper]

CNN just played clips of Coleman comments from today, after the hearing. Again I happened on it at the tail end.

Coleman said several times that Galloway did not appear credible and if he was not honest before the Committee there will be consequences.

Judy says incredulously that Sen. Coleman and others are making very serious allegations here, who's right?

Reporter says there is evidence that supports the Coleman charges. Reporter says UN investigating the same charges and Galloway is a fan of the UN. Reporter says will be interesting if the UN comes to the same conclusion.

Reporter points out Galloway is mostly sticking to decrying the quality of the evidence, not the substance.

[pau1f0rd]

his wife, Aminah Abu-Zayyhad, is actually Arafat's niece but I was close enough :-)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/898440/posts

[processing please hold]

Coleman said several times that Galloway did not appear credible and if he was not honest before the Committee there will be consequences.

If it is proven that galloway is guilty, does the ICC have the gonads to try him?

Reporter says will be interesting if the UN comes to the same conclusion.

Do you know if the UN has the same evidence as Coleman? I wonder if this was in the boxes of documents that Parton turned over to the committee.

[cyncooper]

I'm not sure what the UN (and other investigative bodies) has, but there's seemingly scads of documentation against Galloway.

The CNN reporter seemed to mention the UN because Galloway is fan of that body and if they come to the same conclusion, what will Galloway say, then, seemed to be his point.

That would be most interesting.

[processing please hold]

The CNN reporter seemed to mention the UN because Galloway is fan of that body and if they come to the same conclusion, what will Galloway say, then, seemed to be his point.

Looks like his arrogance might be his downfall.

That would be most interesting.

Most interesting indeed.

If galloway is prosecuted and found guilty, does that mean he would have to return the money he won in his case against the newspaper? If he's guilty now...he was guilty then. They just didn't have the paper evidence.

[kabar]

Here is the entire video of the testimony

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ifs_news/hi/nb_rm_fs.stm?nbram=1&news=1&nbwm=1&bbwm=1&bbram=1&nol_storyid=4556887

[cyncooper]

Thanks, I bookmarked it.

I knew right where Coleman stated how Galloway came to appear today so went right to it.

First Coleman lays out the evidence. He then states Galloway is not under any privilege or asserting any immunity and that Galloway's appearance is "entirely voluntary and on your own accord. No subpoena was issued..."

He is then sworn in and gives his statement.

[Mo1]

or asserting any immunity

That's where Norm nailed him

[processing please hold]

Thanks for reminding me...I bookmarked it too. Now we wait. There's where that patience thing comes in again. :-)

[processing please hold]

or asserting any immunity

That's where Norm nailed him

Yep.

[cyncooper]

Yes, that part caught my ear, too.

Coleman's description/characterization of Galloway's appearance is even a wee bit more detailed but I jotted down the main points.

[Timeout]

I saw Galloway on CNN

I just saw it. Did you catch the part at the end where he "showed off" his shoes with the soles worn through and said he was staying at the cheapest hotel in Washington?

You don't suppose the media's gonna buy that cr*p do ya?

[wildcatf4f3]

Galloway, DUers, Dean -- all they have is schtick, and thats all it is -- schtick. I agree that there are alot of Americans who are unworthy of citizenship and believe that a little "purge" would do us good. Plenty of room for camps in Alaska.

[cyncooper]

Dang, I missed the soles of his shoes part.

Thanks for that tidbit.

I'm sure the media knows better and I must say, I detect an attitude on their part as if they know the evidence outweighed Galloway's invective, but of course I'm sure they're ready to be convinced otherwise.

[Timeout]

If worn soles and cheap hotels work, look for the next
Ken Lay or Martha Stewart to bunk at Motel 6 prior to
their hearings...and invite the media to film 'em in
their squalor!