...in an awfully suspect circumstance-
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182797,00.html
Is this of significance to anybody, or merely good for a larf? :huh:
Printable View
...in an awfully suspect circumstance-
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182797,00.html
Is this of significance to anybody, or merely good for a larf? :huh:
It's far from being a larf.
The man's a disgrace and has no place in public life.
Wow!:huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
What does MP mean, j2?nvm
Will he be drummed out?Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
If he can no longer make use of it, perhaps we might procure his tongue, which we can graft to our somewhat less-than-glib President...
If he's guilty of what he's accused of he deserves no more respect than those who cause the deaths of innocent people, condone torture, etc.
..disgusting, I remember Rumsfeld doing that with his father, Sadam..
bad foto... http://www.kargar.org/images/saddam_rumsfeld.jpg
George would have done it too, but he was still wearing nappies (diapers) in those days..executing mentally disturbed patients in Texas...
Hell in those times, Iraq was "friend" to the US. The US picked a side in the Iran/Iraq war.Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel123
the thing is there is a moral here to be learned
Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house....
What stone, pray?
In any case, has Rumsfeld appeared before Parliament only to bloviate as Galloway has?
That was priceless...:D
Well... at least now I know the name of 1 MP...
Good thing I'm not allowed to vote.
I believe the "big brother" show was punishment enough
On the other hand it might have been a smart move by Gorgeous George.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Vote for me ... or the red lycra goes back on :ph34r:
J2 I don't think he has ever denied meeting these nutcases. Not sure if it has any relevance. The Daily Telgraph lost their appeal in the libel case on Wednesday so none of this stuff appears to have any legal value.
Skweeky is right though. He is the one MP almost everybody knows (for good or ill :shifty: )
Never mind George; we have a skweeky sighting!Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
Happy days were here again...:)
Ah, I just wondered whether he was anyone's hero for his lark in our Congress; apparently for some, he is.
He reminds me of our Don King, the boxing promoter-mouthy as all get-out, with a closetfull of mis-matched bones.
I am gladdened thus. :)
He has stated that he will not stand for re-election.
My reading of it. He had already decided this (probably new he wouldn't win again) and went on big brother to widen his notoriety, making the potential for earning higher.
There are plenty newspapers which will give him column inches, TV, books, public speaking etc. I think this was all part of an enforced career change.
His performance in Congress did give many UKers a chuckle I'm sure. I tend to admire a man who is good with words, especially when standing up to the big guys.
As a member of Parliament however, he is more than a little embarrassing sometimes. If his political career is over soon, I imagine he will make a decent living from appearances on Have I Got News For You and the like.
I'm sure there are some politicians in the US who would love to see him go down in flames over some big scandal, but I find that pretty unlikely.
He has had an enormous amount of press coverage for the Big Brother thing and I suspect that it matters little to him that it is negative. He already earns well on the speaker circuit and a little notoriety does no harm.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
He may have made an error of judgement because C4 censored much of his political input but I dare say he will be able to capitalise on it.
As to the US thing, I am not sure as to its impact. George has been around a long time and that was just one day in many full of colourful incidents. I think Tony Blair may have been disappointed in the poor showing of the Senate - I think he would have been more than happy if you had kept George over there. :shifty:
Quite the reverse, old bean. I imagine that was the plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
That way any negative revelations which occur only add to the character, rather than detract from it. I think being an arrogant, condescending, bully also comes more naturally to him.
I think the mere fact that he looked down on the US senate and was obsequious towards Saddam and then his evil, sadistic, murdering, rapist son says all you really need to know about the man.
A true Politician's Politician :unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Incredible how he took so much column space (and incredible how grateful the Lib Dems must be :shifty: )
All true, both ways, and comes now a correlative to the old saying about falling into the shithouse hole, but coming out smelling as a rose-
One may fall into the shithouse, but having done (or not), one always manages to emit a passable odor to the olfactory processes of a few, which, in the case of Mr. Galloway, will surely include his accountant, though only manker and perhaps les could say for sure.
Indeed, his money making potential is much increased.
The only thing which may scupper that is a Serious Fraud Office investigation. However given their form it is more likely that they will fanny about for a decade or so, then apologise for any inconvenience they have caused.
That's the problem with using bean counters to "prosecute" serious criminals. It's not a level playing field.
He will see said investigation as an easy chapter or two in his pension plan, sorry memoirs.
He's not involved in your parliament thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Skweeky1
He's not involved in any Parliament, apparentement.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanB