please empty your brain below
|
Ah, I was wondering when you'd post about this latest furore. Can't say I'd be surprised if he were guilty.
And the book deal? What a suprise. Truly unexpected...
Fyse | Homepage | 13.05.05 - 1:34 a.m. | #
|
I'm shocked that you haven'y been excluded from the book launch yet DG
NiC | Homepage | 13.05.05 - 9:25 a.m. | #
|
Are these the same documents that the Daily Telegraph "scooped" after one of the atacks on Baghdad? The ones that later turned out to be false?
I'm surprised at you dg... you may not like him, but he hasn't been found guilty of sanction-breaking yet. And besides, can we really accept the authority of the US in this, given that they shun international law unless it suits them?
dg writes: I'm surprised too.
I never said my MP was (or even might be) guilty, nor even that I thought he was.
Le Bob | 13.05.05 - 9:45 a.m. | #
|
"ITN will be excluded, as will Jeremy Paxman" - I expect they'll be heartbroken. Still, er, The Community Channel will be there. Probably.
I'm amazed that George is actually going to have any term to be a constituency MP, what with all this other activity going on. Maybe he should resign so that someone else can do the job properly.
Vaughan | Homepage | 13.05.05 - 10:21 a.m. | #
|
Actually, Le Bob, the US Senate committee has already said that their evidence is nothing to do with the Daily Telegraph 'evidence'. Not that that means it is true. Just saying.
This man is the kind of person that gives the left wing a bad name. We should shoot all extremists - or is that too extreme?
Katherine | 13.05.05 - 10:29 a.m. | #
|
What a petty, puerile, grubby excuse for a human being. Galloway, that is, not Paxman.
Joules | Homepage | 13.05.05 - 1:39 p.m. | #
|
I am obviously highly naive in the subject of Galloway. This is the first time I have been in this week. Apart from a passing knowledge of his Iraq business and the law suits, the only thing I saw was Paxman trying to place a sexist race card, looking absolutely ridiculous, trying to pull it back with a half sensible question by which time Galloway was (in my opinion rightly)off. I said to BW when we saw it that I would have done the same. Paxman had 3 chances to change his question but would't. He came across as a complete dick I am afraid (backfiring on what was obviously designed to be a repeat of the question session with Michael Howard which was a reasonable question to push home and good interviewing). Anyway that aside I guess I had better go read up some more, as if he has wound up DG so much there has to be substance to this.
MrBW | 13.05.05 - 2:34 p.m. | #
|
Galloway for Guantanamo!
Matt | Homepage | 13.05.05 - 9:39 p.m. | #
|
Take out the 'tanam' and we could have Galloway for guano...
pop artist | 14.05.05 - 12:52 a.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|