“Galloway” Blair and Bush have blood on their hands

“Galloway” Blair and Bush have blood on their hands

Oh so true, Galloway is right George Bush is the worlds biggest terrorist in the world today with Tony Blair happily killing and burning lives along with him.

Snip~~

He repeated his view that it was Mr. Bush who was the world's "biggest terrorist" and said that the US president and Mr. Blair had shed far more blood than the bombers

"If it is a question of quantum, there is far more blood on the hands of George Bush and Tony Blair than there is on the hands of the murderers who killed those people in London," he said.

The al-Qaida phenomenon arose out of the first war on Iraq; arose out of the occupation of Jerusalem and the killing of the Palestinians and the dispersal of the refugees around the world; arose out of our support for the puppet presidents and corrupt kings of the Muslim world," he said. Mr Galloway's comments were condemned as "twisted" and "absurd" by the shadow foreign secretary, Liam Fox

"I think that his self-righteousness is matched only by his stupidity. I think his views are quite ridiculous."

politics.guardian.co.uk...

Well I think Mr. Fox is taking out his sphincter, and what Galloway has said is true. The increase of terrorism goes hand in hand with what the coalition forces are doing to innocent people around the world. One would think Britain would know better after messing with Ireland.

Question.
Being that the Honorable Mr. Galloway is currently visiting in Syria, do you think that Galloway has had the chance to read this article yet?
Fundamentally, we're useful idiots

I'm wondering what his response would be to it...hmmm....






seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Question.
Being that the Honorable Mr. Galloway is currently visiting in Syria, do you think that Galloway has had the chance to read this article yet?
Fundamentally, we're useful idiots

I'm wondering what his response would be to it...hmmm....

seekerof

August 01, 2005

Fundamentally, we're useful idiots
Anthony Browne
As the rest of Europe acts, extreme Islamists take advantage of British naivety
ELEMENTS WITHIN the British establishment were notoriously sympathetic to Hitler. Today the Islamists enjoy similar support. In the 1930s it was Edward VIII, aristocrats and the Daily Mail; this time it is left-wing activists, The Guardian and sections of the BBC. They may not want a global theocracy, but they are like the West’s apologists for the Soviet Union — useful idiots.

Ohhh plleeease. This is one Times online guest contribution I do not care for, Seekerof, this article is an absolute disgrace.

Anthony Browne, you are the usefull Idiot, stick your article where the sun neglects to shine.

Thank you kindly.

[edit on 103131p://290810 by MERC]

Does this jackass ever shut up?


hes like a a little child....

Originally posted by C0le
Does this jackass ever shut up?


hes like a a little child....

I dont think he is one , he did point out a few good points in his defence and pointed out how "dodgy" the intel was...

Originally posted by devilwasp

I dunn realy care so much about what he says per say, he just coems across an an ass to me. hes just annoying.

[edit on 6-8-2005 by C0le]

Originally posted by C0le


I dunn realy care so much about what he says per say, he just coems across an an ass to me. hes just annoying.

[edit on 6-8-2005 by C0le]

I find many americans anoying (yourself included btw) but I find no reason to call them jackass's..

Originally posted by devilwasp

Here i am talking about 1 person, I could careless where hes from, and you start throwing out crap about americans being annoying?

[edit on 6-8-2005 by C0le]

Will anyone detract his statements or just allude to articles that have nothing to do with anything? It's become annoying and tuatologous.

He said that the "al-Qaida phenomenon" had arisen directly as a result of western policies in the Middle East.

This is the argument, debate this, dont' make ignorant ad hominem remarks against his countenance.

Luxifero

Delete me.

[edit on 6-8-2005 by C0le]

"I am on the anti-imperialist left." The Stalinist left? "I wouldn't define it that way because of the pejoratives loaded around it; that would be making a rod for your own back. If you are asking did I support the Soviet Union, yes I did. Yes, I did support the Soviet Union, and I think the disappearance of the Soviet Union is the biggest catastrophe of my life. If there was a Soviet Union today, we would not be having this conversation about plunging into a new war in the Middle East, and the US would not be rampaging around the globe."

Of course a man who speaks of the mass murders of children by the US, yet a man who gives is cold heart support for the Soviet Union. A union that has killed almost as much people as the entire Second World War.

This is why I don't like him.
He's visited Saddam numerous times. He's also been accused in the Oil for Food scheme.

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 6-8-2005 by evanfitz]

When will he shut up?

His days of taking bribes from Saddam are over, at first I understood his anger when Saddam was overthrown and his money stopped coming in, but this is riddiculess.

Originally posted by Frosty
When will he shut up?

His days of taking bribes from Saddam are over, at first I understood his anger when Saddam was overthrown and his money stopped coming in, but this is riddiculess.

Proof please,

Galloway has been to court and won.

Proof please,

Galloway has been to court and won.

Indeed. People still are fixated in depleting this discussion into nothingness. Do debate wether or not the west is directly responsible for the creation of these terrorists, it's just cordial and good debate decorum.

Luxifero

Originally posted by Luxifero

Indeed. People still are fixated in depleting this discussion into nothingness. Do debate wether or not the west is directly responsible for the creation of these terrorists, it's just cordial and good debate decorum.

Luxifero

I my self personally believe Mr. Galloway is correct, in that the West (American foreign policy along with Britain) has increased the levels of terrorism and terrorist world wide.
It would only be expected, keep shoving some one you will get shoved back.

Originally posted by Sauron
I my self personally believe Mr. Galloway is correct, in that the West (American foreign policy along with Britain) has increased the levels of terrorism and terrorist world wide.
It would only be expected, keep shoving some one you will get shoved back.

What does this mean? Im sure Russian resistance against the Nazis increased Nazi activity, but what does this all mean. You aren't implying that we wouldn't have terrorism if we didn't go into Iraq, by that same standard there would have be no Nazis in Russia.

Originally posted by Sauron
“Galloway” Blair and Bush have blood on their hands

Galloway has blood in his panties.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by Sauron
“Galloway” Blair and Bush have blood on their hands

Galloway has blood in his panties.

NOt exactly sure why I found this funny, but none the less...

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Galloway has blood in his panties.

**Raises hand**

Are you speaking from first hand experience or hearsay?