Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Galloway vs. The US Senate: Transcript of Statement
Times Online ^ | May 18, 2005 | George Galloway

Posted on 05/17/2005 11:00:31 PM PDT by echoBoomer

Galloway v the US Senate: transcript of statement By Times Online George Galloway, Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, delivered this statement to US Senators today who have accused him of corruption

"Senator, I am not now, nor have I ever been, an oil trader. and neither has anyone on my behalf. I have never seen a barrel of oil, owned one, bought one, sold one - and neither has anyone on my behalf.

"Now I know that standards have slipped in the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice. I am here today but last week you already found me guilty. You traduced my name around the world without ever having asked me a single question, without ever having contacted me, without ever written to me or telephoned me, without any attempt to contact me whatsoever. And you call that justice.

"Now I want to deal with the pages that relate to me in this dossier and I want to point out areas where there are - let's be charitable and say errors. Then I want to put this in the context where I believe it ought to be. On the very first page of your document about me you assert that I have had 'many meetings' with Saddam Hussein. This is false.

"I have had two meetings with Saddam Hussein, once in 1994 and once in August of 2002. By no stretch of the English language can that be described as "many meetings" with Saddam Hussein.

"As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns. I met him to try and bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war, and on the second of the two occasions, I met him to try and persuade him to let Dr Hans Blix and the United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country - a rather better use of two meetings with Saddam Hussein than your own Secretary of State for Defence made of his.

"I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and Americans governments and businessmen were selling him guns and gas. I used to demonstrate outside the Iraqi embassy when British and American officials were going in and doing commerce.

"You will see from the official parliamentary record, Hansard, from the 15th March 1990 onwards, voluminous evidence that I have a rather better record of opposition to Saddam Hussein than you do and than any other member of the British or American governments do.

"Now you say in this document, you quote a source, you have the gall to quote a source, without ever having asked me whether the allegation from the source is true, that I am 'the owner of a company which has made substantial profits from trading in Iraqi oil'.

"Senator, I do not own any companies, beyond a small company whose entire purpose, whose sole purpose, is to receive the income from my journalistic earnings from my employer, Associated Newspapers, in London. I do not own a company that's been trading in Iraqi oil. And you have no business to carry a quotation, utterly unsubstantiated and false, implying otherwise.

"Now you have nothing on me, Senator, except my name on lists of names from Iraq, many of which have been drawn up after the installation of your puppet government in Baghdad. If you had any of the letters against me that you had against Zhirinovsky, and even Pasqua, they would have been up there in your slideshow for the members of your committee today.

"You have my name on lists provided to you by the Duelfer inquiry, provided to him by the convicted bank robber, and fraudster and conman Ahmed Chalabi who many people to their credit in your country now realise played a decisive role in leading your country into the disaster in Iraq.

"There were 270 names on that list originally. That's somehow been filleted down to the names you chose to deal with in this committee. Some of the names on that committee included the former secretary to his Holiness Pope John Paul II, the former head of the African National Congress Presidential office and many others who had one defining characteristic in common: they all stood against the policy of sanctions and war which you vociferously prosecuted and which has led us to this disaster.

"You quote Mr Dahar Yassein Ramadan. Well, you have something on me, I've never met Mr Dahar Yassein Ramadan. Your sub-committee apparently has. But I do know that he's your prisoner, I believe he's in Abu Ghraib prison. I believe he is facing war crimes charges, punishable by death. In these circumstances, knowing what the world knows about how you treat prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison, in Bagram Airbase, in Guantanamo Bay, including I may say, British citizens being held in those places.

"I'm not sure how much credibility anyone would put on anything you manage to get from a prisoner in those circumstances. But you quote 13 words from Dahar Yassein Ramadan whom I have never met. If he said what he said, then he is wrong.

And if you had any evidence that I had ever engaged in any actual oil transaction, if you had any evidence that anybody ever gave me any money, it would be before the public and before this committee today because I agreed with your Mr Greenblatt [Mark Greenblatt, legal counsel on the committee].

"Your Mr Greenblatt was absolutely correct. What counts is not the names on the paper, what counts is where's the money. Senator? Who paid me hundreds of thousands of dollars of money? The answer to that is nobody. And if you had anybody who ever paid me a penny, you would have produced them today.

"Now you refer at length to a company names in these documents as Aredio Petroleum. I say to you under oath here today: I have never heard of this company, I have never met anyone from this company. This company has never paid a penny to me and I'll tell you something else: I can assure you that Aredio Petroleum has never paid a single penny to the Mariam Appeal Campaign. Not a thin dime. I don't know who Aredio Petroleum are, but I daresay if you were to ask them they would confirm that they have never met me or ever paid me a penny.

"Whilst I'm on that subject, who is this senior former regime official that you spoke to yesterday? Don't you think I have a right to know? Don't you think the Committee and the public have a right to know who this senior former regime official you were quoting against me interviewed yesterday actually is?

"Now, one of the most serious of the mistakes you have made in this set of documents is, to be frank, such a schoolboy howler as to make a fool of the efforts that you have made. You assert on page 19, not once but twice, that the documents that you are referring to cover a different period in time from the documents covered by The Daily Telegraph which were a subject of a libel action won by me in the High Court in England late last year.

"You state that The Daily Telegraph article cited documents from 1992 and 1993 whilst you are dealing with documents dating from 2001. Senator, The Daily Telegraph's documents date identically to the documents that you were dealing with in your report here. None of The Daily Telegraph's documents dealt with a period of 1992, 1993. I had never set foot in Iraq until late in 1993 - never in my life. There could possibly be no documents relating to Oil-for-Food matters in 1992, 1993, for the Oil-for-Food scheme did not exist at that time.

"And yet you've allocated a full section of this document to claiming that your documents are from a different era to the Daily Telegraph documents when the opposite is true. Your documents and the Daily Telegraph documents deal with exactly the same period.

"But perhaps you were confusing the Daily Telegraph action with the Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor did indeed publish on its front pages a set of allegations against me very similar to the ones that your committee have made. They did indeed rely on documents which started in 1992, 1993. These documents were unmasked by the Christian Science Monitor themselves as forgeries.

"Now, the neo-con websites and newspapers in which you're such a hero, senator, were all absolutely cock-a-hoop at the publication of the Christian Science Monitor documents, they were all absolutely convinced of their authenticity. They were all absolutely convinced that these documents showed me receiving $10 million from the Saddam regime. And they were all lies.

"In the same week as the Daily Telegraph published their documents against me, the Christian Science Monitor published theirs which turned out to be forgeries and the British newspaper, Mail on Sunday, purchased a third set of documents which also upon forensic examination turned out to be forgeries. So there's nothing fanciful about this. Nothing at all fanciful about it.

"The existence of forged documents implicating me in commercial activities with the Iraqi regime is a proven fact. It's a proven fact that these forged documents existed and were being circulated amongst right-wing newspapers in Baghdad and around the world in the immediate aftermath of the fall of the Iraqi regime.

"Now, Senator, I gave my heart and soul to oppose the policy that you promoted. I gave my political life's blood to try to stop the mass killing of Iraqis by the sanctions on Iraq which killed one million Iraqis, most of them children, most of them died before they even knew that they were Iraqis, but they died for no other reason other than that they were Iraqis with the misfortune to born at that time. I gave my heart and soul to stop you committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq. And I told the world that your case for the war was a pack of lies.

“I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have weapons of mass destruction. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al-Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning.   "Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.

If the world had listened to Kofi Annan, whose dismissal you demanded, if the world had listened to President Chirac who you want to paint as some kind of corrupt traitor, if the world had listened to me and the anti-war movement in Britain, we would not be in the disaster that we are in today. Senator, this is the mother of all smokescreens. You are trying to divert attention from the crimes that you supported, from the theft of billions of dollars of Iraq's wealth.

"Have a look at the real Oil-for-Food scandal. Have a look at the 14 months you were in charge of Baghdad, the first 14 months when $8.8 billion of Iraq's wealth went missing on your watch. Have a look at Haliburton and other American corporations that stole not only Iraq's money, but the money of the American taxpayer.

"Have a look at the oil that you didn't even meter, that you were shipping out of the country and selling, the proceeds of which went who knows where? Have a look at the $800 million you gave to American military commanders to hand out around the country without even counting it or weighing it.

"Have a look at the real scandal breaking in the newspapers today, revealed in the earlier testimony in this committee. That the biggest sanctions busters were not me or Russian politicians or French politicians. The real sanctions busters were your own companies with the connivance of your own Government."

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: 109th; britishmp; galloway; iraq; lyingcommiecrook; oilforfood; oilforfoodprogram; ussenate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

1 posted on 05/17/2005 11:00:31 PM PDT by echoBoomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MJY1288; snugs; DrDeb

Galloway Ping! Let's see the complete transcript: questions AND answers.... then we'll have a "fair and balanced" report. This man is unbelievable.... he needed a saucer to catch the disdainful drool spewing from his foul mouth.

2 posted on 05/17/2005 11:08:48 PM PDT by STARWISE (Is your voice being heard in Washington? You get the govt. you deserve.U.S. CONGRESS: 1-877-762-8762)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: echoBoomer
I thought this was the funniest thing I have seen in a very long time. This Galloway character started lecturing us and turned a pale shade of purple while he went thru his racist diatribe. He looked like a cross between The Swimmer (Ted Kennedy) and CA House Rep. George Miller. At one point they flashed to Norm Coleman and I could swear that he was trying not to laugh in this pukes face. I would have paid to see that. I haven't heard so many neo-con's, Zionists, war mongers and right wing Christian extremest in one speech in my life. He could probably give Al Quida a few pointers on their talking points.
3 posted on 05/17/2005 11:14:31 PM PDT by Anti-Christ is Hillary (If Moreen Dowd can call herself a journalist than so can I.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: echoBoomer

This dude should be a candiate for sainthood, or the gallows...

I suspect the gallows are more appropriate..

Semper Fi

4 posted on 05/17/2005 11:25:05 PM PDT by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Christ is Hillary
What a script! Socialists love to invent enemies. Like, who are these neo-cons everyone talks about? I'm conservative. Very conservative. I believe war has its place, not always, but it should be used when all else fails. So that makes me a neo-con? Gee, I didn't know? I thought I was just a Christian? I didn't know there was such a thing as right wing Christian. Well, Zionist. I think we all know that is just another way of saying ... JEW! Let's look at the record of pacifists in Britain. Essentially before World War II a pacifists was a German sympathizer. An agent acting on their behalf. I think I rather be labeled a warmonger.
5 posted on 05/17/2005 11:46:29 PM PDT by Lord Nelson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: echoBoomer
You know this is the first time I have heard anyone on the receiving end of this scandal defend themselves. I guess until now the rest of them just hoped this scandal went away. This speech means he is scared. He is corrupt or know who is.

This little tirade makes me think that Huntington is full of crap. He said that the West would unite and that each cultural group would banner together. Other than Australia I don't see any coming together. The rest of the West are enemies of America. America will find allies across cultural regions. India is the most promising.
6 posted on 05/17/2005 11:50:58 PM PDT by Lord Nelson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: river rat

I agree, and I can't decide which. He reads like someone who is believable.

He exhibits a "crispness" with apparent facts which is very unlike the way that the Clintonites attempted to deflect attacks.

Perhaps this guy IS being framed in order to derail the rest of the investigation. If the Senate can be induced to go out on a limb to take on someone who is demonstrably innocent, then others may be able to escape when the Senators lose their appetite for the hunt.

7 posted on 05/17/2005 11:55:31 PM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: echoBoomer

Entertaining if nothing else.

8 posted on 05/17/2005 11:56:50 PM PDT by Dave Elias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lord Nelson
"Like, who are these neo-cons everyone talks about?"

My husband told me that a neo-con is a person who once was a liberal and has turned conservative. But someone else said that they are conservative JEWS. I think that I believe my husband because libs like to really put down the Jews and neo-con just doesn't sound derogatory enough.
9 posted on 05/18/2005 12:13:54 AM PDT by Anti-Christ is Hillary (If Moreen Dowd can call herself a journalist than so can I.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Christ is Hillary
John Podhoritz and William Krystal's father, are two Jewish Neo-cons. Mr. Krystal actually coined the term. Originally it meant someone who was once a far lefty ( usually a Trotskyite) and JEWISH, who saw the light and became a Conservative.

Your husband is wrong. It's far more than what he said.

And through the years, neo-con has become a pejorative and used as an antisemitic slur.

Though now the term is also misused ( but still used as a slur ) against those who were for the WoT; especially against those who think that America going after Saddam and into Iraq, a good thing.

10 posted on 05/18/2005 12:24:02 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

I agree that largely it is anti-semitic slur - usually uttered by Eurotrash. Europeans believe that America, with maybe 3% of its population Jewish, is run by Jews. Yet, somehow, Moslems with 6%+ of European population don't run their agenda?

11 posted on 05/18/2005 12:31:49 AM PDT by Lord Nelson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lord Nelson

It's also used by American trash...i.e. the Dems and Pat Buchanan and his supporters.

12 posted on 05/18/2005 12:42:39 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Does anyone know if any senators talked back to this puke?
Or did they just sit there like stupid Republicans and take it?

13 posted on 05/18/2005 12:46:07 AM PDT by California Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: California Patriot
There were only TWO Senators present.

I didn't watch it, but on another thread, supposedly Carl Levin, the Dem, needled Galloway a bit.

14 posted on 05/18/2005 12:55:56 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Yes, somehow the very very extreme right is in on this neo-con crap. You will notice that Pat also hates the state of Israel. He also claims to be a "constitutionalist", meaning he makes up whatever he wants as far as how to interpret it.

15 posted on 05/18/2005 1:00:02 AM PDT by Lord Nelson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: echoBoomer; All
Yes, these are interlinked:

-"No Blood for Oil"- Kojo & Kofi: Unbelievable U.N. stories--

-ADSCAM -- Canada's Corruption Scandal Breaks Wide Open--

-MP George Galloway- voice cries "peace," hand in Saddam's till...--

16 posted on 05/18/2005 1:04:50 AM PDT by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lord Nelson
Yes, you are correct.

But Pat also thinks that we should NEVER have been involved in WW II. He claims that Hitler would "never" have gone after America and wasn't really all that "bad" a guy.

17 posted on 05/18/2005 1:05:18 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: backhoe

You ALWAYS have the best links! :-)

18 posted on 05/18/2005 1:07:14 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Yeah, apparently he was more aggressive than the Republican, Norm Coleman. If you want the job done,
give it to a Rat, I guess.

19 posted on 05/18/2005 1:13:13 AM PDT by California Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: California Patriot
Naaaaaaaaaaaaaw...he ( Carl ) only went after Galloway, because Galloway was bad mouthing the UN.

Actually, Galloway made a fool of himself and it was better that Norm didn't react in kind.

20 posted on 05/18/2005 1:16:26 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson