Starmer needed a kicking. The only thing worse than Galloway delivering it would have been Simon Danczuk.
I wish Galloway would fuck off to Russia or somewhere else his dodgy authoritarian views fit. Being right about Palestine doesn't make up for him being a shit about almost everything else. When you get Nick Griffin's endorsement you have to wonder why.
I wish Galloway would fuck off to Russia or somewhere else his dodgy authoritarian views fit. Being right about Palestine doesn't make up for him being a shit about almost everything else. When you get Nick Griffin's endorsement you have to wonder why.
On the other hand Griffin is equally a chancer and we should probably ignore everything he says and consider each case on its individual merits (otherwise it's just a variant on the 'no smoke' pseudo-profundity).
A fine result for anti-semites. This is the person who stormed out of a debate after discovering that one of his opponents had joint British/Israeli nationality stating "I don't recognize Israel and I don't debate with Israelis" . He later justified his actions saying “ The reason is simple: no recognition, no normalisation. Just boycott , divestment and sanctions, until the state is defeated. I never debate with Israelis nor speak to their media. If they want to speak about Palestine – the address is the PLO”
On another occasion he said in a speech “We have declared Bradford an Israel-free zone. We don't want any Israeli goods, we don't want any Israeli services, we don't want any Israeli academics coming to the university or the college, we don't even want any Israeli tourists to come to Bradford even if any of them had thought of doing so. We reject this illegal, barbarous, savage state that calls itself Israel. And you have to do the same.”
Hasn’t it been established that being against the state of Israel (even to the extreme he displays) is not the same as being anti Semitic?
Fair enough, but even so, refusing to debate with people of a certain nationality, banning people from a certain country attending a university or banning people from that country visiting as tourists is pretty racist.
So I accept that according to the IHRA definition, George Galloway is not Anti-Semitic, he is just racist. I apologise for any offence I may have caused Mr Galloway in this misunderstanding.
I lived in Rochdale for 40 years. I love town and the people.
This is a sad day.
I don’t think this set of circumstances will happen anywhere else. Labour needs to do much more work vetting their candidates so that this nonsense doesn’t happen again. I hope it’s a wake up call for them.
Hasn’t it been established that being against the state of Israel (even to the extreme he displays) is not the same as being anti Semitic?
Fair enough, but even so, refusing to debate with people of a certain nationality, banning people from a certain country attending a university or banning people from that country visiting as tourists is pretty racist.
So I accept that according to the IHRA definition, George Galloway is not Anti-Semitic, he is just racist. I apologise for any offence I may have caused Mr Galloway in this misunderstanding.
Was the anti-apartheid movement and the UN racist in sanctioning and boycotting South Africa?
Hasn’t it been established that being against the state of Israel (even to the extreme he displays) is not the same as being anti Semitic?
Fair enough, but even so, refusing to debate with people of a certain nationality, banning people from a certain country attending a university or banning people from that country visiting as tourists is pretty racist.
So I accept that according to the IHRA definition, George Galloway is not Anti-Semitic, he is just racist. I apologise for any offence I may have caused Mr Galloway in this misunderstanding.
Was the anti-apartheid movement and the UN racist in sanctioning and boycotting South Africa?
Did the anti-apartheid movement call for a ban on all South Africans visiting an area? Did the ant-apartheid movement refuse to recognise South Africa as a state?
Boycotting a nation is one thing. Tarring all citizens of that nation with the same brush is something else entirely.
I'm not sure what Galloway's personal views are, he might well be an anti-semite.
I do, however, think that a boycott of a country can legitimately extend to all its citizens if other measures to encourage the country to comply with international law have failed. It's got to be better than violence. Of course if governments would actually enforce lesser measures such as arms embargoes and economic sanctions it wouldn't fall to private individuals to go to such lengths.
Yes I do. We get on. I told him I'd have had a black op done on him in Thatcher's day, when I described my political volte-face.
"One of our finest socialists, internationalists, and democrats of his generation"
RT HON TONY BENN
And parliamentarians (like Tone, the appallingly diminished (The 2nd) Viscount Stansgate, as Bill Tidy described him. Always respected Tony Benn. Even as a right wing loon.)
Galloway's bravura performance before the US Senate nineteen years ago, when I was coming out of my liberal interventionist era, was truly courageous to me at the time. It was part of the Blair-Bush Oil for Food black op against him.
If I thought for one moment that Mr Galloway was going to spend the time until the forthcoming GE working for the good of all the people of Rochdale, and then fight to keep the seat so that he could continue so doing, then maybe I'd hold my nose to acknowleedge a winning campaign. However, he's already made it crystal clear he has no intention of becoming a long-serving MP for Rochdale. Moreover, the disgraceful tactics employed by some of his supporters reached a new low in electoral skullduggery for the UK.
Whatever their views on the appalling situation in the Middle East, the people of Rochdale need an MP who will address the town's decline, the sub-standard schools, the desperate situation with social care, etc: I fear Mr Galloway will ignore all of those vital subjects to pursue his own single-issue agenda. As I said, Rochdale deserves better.
I hope you're wrong @TheOrganist. 100% Catholic Rathlin Island's MP, whom none of the islanders would have (admitted) voting for, was The Reverend Ian Paisley. They universally acknowledged him as a superb constituency MP.
Unlike @Martin54, I've no time whatsoever for Galloway. I hadn't before and haven't now. Like Trump, Farage, Johnson and alas too many politicians, he's a loathsome loudmouth, the type who disgraces whatever cause they propound. I do not and cannot understand, sympathise or identify with anyone, of whatever persuasion, who is prepared to degrade themselves by voting for such a person.
Nor can I see what is the appeal of such specimens.
Unlike @Martin54, I've no time whatsoever for Galloway. I hadn't before and haven't now. Like Trump, Farage, Johnson and alas too many politicians, he's a loathsome loudmouth, the type who disgraces whatever cause they propound. I do not and cannot understand, sympathise or identify with anyone, of whatever persuasion, who is prepared to degrade themselves by voting for such a person.
Nor can I see what is the appeal of such specimens.
This.
It's only too obviously true these days that it's the empty vessels making the most noise...
One of the issues with Galloway is that he's a good orator. I remember him in the US Senate, where he tore people to shreds, dripping with sarcasm. I haven't seen him recently, and I don't really know if he is sincere or not, in relation to Gaza. He did make Labour look stupid, and in a way exposed the feebleness of many politicians.
Rochdale is a town in very severe decline. It really needs someone to actively lobby whichever government we have to try to do something about it.
Galloway will not do that. The counter-argument is that none of the others would either.
Rochdale would be a good case for an academic study on how to reverse decline. I wouldn't know where to start. It has some nice leafy suburbs, and a quite remarkable Town Hall - well worth a visit if you are in the area - but as a shopping centre, the town is almost entirely dead. Many locals take their money to Bury, which is like Las Vegas in comparative terms.
Rochdale is a town in very severe decline. It really needs someone to actively lobby whichever government we have to try to do something about it.
Galloway will not do that. The counter-argument is that none of the others would either.
Rochdale would be a good case for an academic study on how to reverse decline. I wouldn't know where to start. It has some nice leafy suburbs, and a quite remarkable Town Hall - well worth a visit if you are in the area - but as a shopping centre, the town is almost entirely dead. Many locals take their money to Bury, which is like Las Vegas in comparative terms.
Give them the thousand year back rent from the stolen land.
A rather depressing article from today's Guardian, outlining Galloway's less than inspiring career to date - and pointing out that he's not the only *politician* trying to benefit from the horrors of Gaza:
A rather depressing article from today's Guardian, outlining Galloway's less than inspiring career to date - and pointing out that he's not the only *politician* trying to benefit from the horrors of Gaza:
Rhetoric is always something to be wary of. 😟 There are those who'd say it led us into two World Wars.
Yes, yes, I know. It's more complicated than that.
It's even more the case when there's very little substance behind it. Kinnock was dismissed as a 'Welsh windbag' but I still admire his rhetoric and feel he had some substance behind him. Benn the same.
Not Galloway.
He'll be out at the next General Election, taking his silly hat with him.
The other George - Boy George - can get away with hats.
Totally tangential, but one thing I've really found myself losing all tolerance for these past few years is I'm-such-a-character hats. Not sure why that is, as I don't have a similar aversion to eg. bow ties, which basically send the same message.
Not to worry, Martin. Let me remind you of a Churchillian phrase. Now your eyes have been opened you will be better able to spot his “terminalogical inexactitudes” in the Commons. I’m sure there will be opportunities .
Totally tangential, but one thing I've really found myself losing all tolerance for these past few years is I'm-such-a-character hats. Not sure why that is, as I don't have a similar aversion to eg. bow ties, which basically send the same message.
Totally tangential, but one thing I've really found myself losing all tolerance for these past few years is I'm-such-a-character hats. Not sure why that is, as I don't have a similar aversion to eg. bow ties, which basically send the same message.
And with your name! ...
Well, I can assure you I haven't developed any animosity toward suburban corpse-planters.
My favourite Galloway moment was where he denied Russian agents had killed in Salisbury with Novichok.
He's got quite a catalogue of hits; including that time where he was chummy with Saddam, where he lied for the Syrian regime, where he took ££s to make an Iranian TV channel look vaguely respectable, that time where he was telling Scots to vote Tory and where he spent time on a silly reality show instead of doing his job.
And now he gets to spend a few months being a blowhard in the Commons.
He's like the anti-Johnson, same bullshit but in reverse. Luckily Not-Boris no longer has a Commons seat otherwise the critical mass of George F Galloway and BJ in the same room would cause a critical nuclear incident.
He's like the anti-Johnson, same bullshit but in reverse. Luckily Not-Boris no longer has a Commons seat otherwise the critical mass of George F Galloway and BJ in the same room would cause a critical nuclear incident.
Not even necessarily in reverse. The cosying up to Russia and beating the anti-immigrant drum when convenient is as much Johnson as Galloway. The difference is that Labour long since yeeted Galloway to the fringe, whereas the tories embraced and promoted Johnson.
Not to worry, Martin. Let me remind you of a Churchillian phrase. Now your eyes have been opened you will be better able to spot his “terminalogical inexactitudes” in the Commons. I’m sure there will be opportunities .
I will be gimlet eared. What a sucker. Shame on me. And the bugger still has one hell of a Wiki page. And the neo-radical in me is still attracted. As with being an atheist republican monarchist.
Totally tangential, but one thing I've really found myself losing all tolerance for these past few years is I'm-such-a-character hats. Not sure why that is, as I don't have a similar aversion to eg. bow ties, which basically send the same message.
As an aside, the reason he habitually wears a hat these days is to cover up the scarring from an assault that didn't get much coverage at the time (given he was a parliamentarian):
Totally tangential, but one thing I've really found myself losing all tolerance for these past few years is I'm-such-a-character hats. Not sure why that is, as I don't have a similar aversion to eg. bow ties, which basically send the same message.
As an aside, the reason he habitually wears a hat these days is to cover up the scarring from an assault that didn't get much coverage at the time (given he was a parliamentarian):
Thank you. I was unaware of that. And I don't consider it an aside, as it certainly makes me more sympathetic toward Galloway's fashion choice.
FWIW, from what I know of GG's views on Israel/Palestine, I don't regard them as sufficient evidence to consider him antisemitic, and would, in fact, happily vote for any candidate sharing those views.
That said, his apparent pandering to religious transphobes puts him in a category morally indistinguishable from antisemitism.
(And I maintain my overall objection to character-hats.)
Galloway was sworn in today (minus Hat!) as MP for Rochdale, breathing fire, threatening to put up a candidate against Angela Rayner (deputy Labour leader), and saying that he and his party will win lots of seats from Labour.
Time will tell.
Meanwhile, he promises to Make Rochdale Great Again, by reviving the football club, and by giving the town a new postcode.
I was interested to hear about this terrible scarring, so when he was on the Parliament TV footage without a hat (because they are banned inside the Commons.. for arcane reasons) I took special note of the top of his bonce.
Turns out that if there is any scarring there, it is not so bad as to be obvious when he isn't wearing a hat.
Who'd have thought he might lie about that?
Maybe in fact the whole hat thing is a gimmick and he wants everyone to keep talking about the hat and his appearance rather than all the bullshit he spouts on a regular basis.
I have a very large and prominent scar on my (bald) head, caused, not by violence, but by the surgical removal of a brain tumour.
I've never felt the need to cover it up, so maybe Galloway's Hat has become something of a gimmick and a distraction.
Meanwhile, no doubt Angela Rayner is shaking in her shoes, and the good people of Rochdale are looking forward to the joy of altering their address on everything when they get their new postcode...
Comments
I wish Galloway would fuck off to Russia or somewhere else his dodgy authoritarian views fit. Being right about Palestine doesn't make up for him being a shit about almost everything else. When you get Nick Griffin's endorsement you have to wonder why.
On the other hand Griffin is equally a chancer and we should probably ignore everything he says and consider each case on its individual merits (otherwise it's just a variant on the 'no smoke' pseudo-profundity).
On another occasion he said in a speech “We have declared Bradford an Israel-free zone. We don't want any Israeli goods, we don't want any Israeli services, we don't want any Israeli academics coming to the university or the college, we don't even want any Israeli tourists to come to Bradford even if any of them had thought of doing so. We reject this illegal, barbarous, savage state that calls itself Israel. And you have to do the same.”
Sounds like a lovely bloke 🙄
Only among the rational. Although it is rational for Israel to make them synonymous.
Fair enough, but even so, refusing to debate with people of a certain nationality, banning people from a certain country attending a university or banning people from that country visiting as tourists is pretty racist.
So I accept that according to the IHRA definition, George Galloway is not Anti-Semitic, he is just racist. I apologise for any offence I may have caused Mr Galloway in this misunderstanding.
This is a sad day.
I don’t think this set of circumstances will happen anywhere else. Labour needs to do much more work vetting their candidates so that this nonsense doesn’t happen again. I hope it’s a wake up call for them.
Was the anti-apartheid movement and the UN racist in sanctioning and boycotting South Africa?
Did the anti-apartheid movement call for a ban on all South Africans visiting an area? Did the ant-apartheid movement refuse to recognise South Africa as a state?
Boycotting a nation is one thing. Tarring all citizens of that nation with the same brush is something else entirely.
I do, however, think that a boycott of a country can legitimately extend to all its citizens if other measures to encourage the country to comply with international law have failed. It's got to be better than violence. Of course if governments would actually enforce lesser measures such as arms embargoes and economic sanctions it wouldn't fall to private individuals to go to such lengths.
Yes I do. We get on. I told him I'd have had a black op done on him in Thatcher's day, when I described my political volte-face.
"One of our finest socialists, internationalists, and democrats of his generation"
RT HON TONY BENN
And parliamentarians (like Tone, the appallingly diminished (The 2nd) Viscount Stansgate, as Bill Tidy described him. Always respected Tony Benn. Even as a right wing loon.)
Galloway's bravura performance before the US Senate nineteen years ago, when I was coming out of my liberal interventionist era, was truly courageous to me at the time. It was part of the Blair-Bush Oil for Food black op against him.
If I thought for one moment that Mr Galloway was going to spend the time until the forthcoming GE working for the good of all the people of Rochdale, and then fight to keep the seat so that he could continue so doing, then maybe I'd hold my nose to acknowleedge a winning campaign. However, he's already made it crystal clear he has no intention of becoming a long-serving MP for Rochdale. Moreover, the disgraceful tactics employed by some of his supporters reached a new low in electoral skullduggery for the UK.
Whatever their views on the appalling situation in the Middle East, the people of Rochdale need an MP who will address the town's decline, the sub-standard schools, the desperate situation with social care, etc: I fear Mr Galloway will ignore all of those vital subjects to pursue his own single-issue agenda. As I said, Rochdale deserves better.
Meanwhile, for all Galloway's rhetoric, the people of Gaza continue to be killed.
Nor can I see what is the appeal of such specimens.
This.
It's only too obviously true these days that it's the empty vessels making the most noise...
And cheerfully take the salary of an MP.
I always thought he was an asshole.
Galloway will not do that. The counter-argument is that none of the others would either.
Rochdale would be a good case for an academic study on how to reverse decline. I wouldn't know where to start. It has some nice leafy suburbs, and a quite remarkable Town Hall - well worth a visit if you are in the area - but as a shopping centre, the town is almost entirely dead. Many locals take their money to Bury, which is like Las Vegas in comparative terms.
Give them the thousand year back rent from the stolen land.
Can't say I blame you, but, IIRC, you live on the other side of the Pennines, so the mountains may protect you...
None of the others could because the UK is excessively centralised and its beyond all but Westminster to fix.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/01/george-galloway-profiting-pain-gaza-rochdale
Superb.
What a fool I've been.
Again.
And his slogan was Make Rochdale Great Again. He's basically full-on red/brown at this point.
Rhetoric is always something to be wary of. 😟 There are those who'd say it led us into two World Wars.
Yes, yes, I know. It's more complicated than that.
It's even more the case when there's very little substance behind it. Kinnock was dismissed as a 'Welsh windbag' but I still admire his rhetoric and feel he had some substance behind him. Benn the same.
Not Galloway.
He'll be out at the next General Election, taking his silly hat with him.
The other George - Boy George - can get away with hats.
Totally tangential, but one thing I've really found myself losing all tolerance for these past few years is I'm-such-a-character hats. Not sure why that is, as I don't have a similar aversion to eg. bow ties, which basically send the same message.
And with your name! ...
Well, I can assure you I haven't developed any animosity toward suburban corpse-planters.
He's got quite a catalogue of hits; including that time where he was chummy with Saddam, where he lied for the Syrian regime, where he took ££s to make an Iranian TV channel look vaguely respectable, that time where he was telling Scots to vote Tory and where he spent time on a silly reality show instead of doing his job.
And now he gets to spend a few months being a blowhard in the Commons.
He's like the anti-Johnson, same bullshit but in reverse. Luckily Not-Boris no longer has a Commons seat otherwise the critical mass of George F Galloway and BJ in the same room would cause a critical nuclear incident.
Not even necessarily in reverse. The cosying up to Russia and beating the anti-immigrant drum when convenient is as much Johnson as Galloway. The difference is that Labour long since yeeted Galloway to the fringe, whereas the tories embraced and promoted Johnson.
I will be gimlet eared. What a sucker. Shame on me. And the bugger still has one hell of a Wiki page. And the neo-radical in me is still attracted. As with being an atheist republican monarchist.
What 'appens in Bury, stays in Bury. So don't ask me about the black-pudding-and-steam-preservation-railway incident.
(ETA - my daughter was at a party in Whitefield last night. This train of thought it not something I want to dwell on!).
As an aside, the reason he habitually wears a hat these days is to cover up the scarring from an assault that didn't get much coverage at the time (given he was a parliamentarian):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/11/george-galloway-attacker-jailed-respect-mp
Thank you. I was unaware of that. And I don't consider it an aside, as it certainly makes me more sympathetic toward Galloway's fashion choice.
FWIW, from what I know of GG's views on Israel/Palestine, I don't regard them as sufficient evidence to consider him antisemitic, and would, in fact, happily vote for any candidate sharing those views.
That said, his apparent pandering to religious transphobes puts him in a category morally indistinguishable from antisemitism.
(And I maintain my overall objection to character-hats.)
Time will tell.
Meanwhile, he promises to Make Rochdale Great Again, by reviving the football club, and by giving the town a new postcode.
Turns out that if there is any scarring there, it is not so bad as to be obvious when he isn't wearing a hat.
Who'd have thought he might lie about that?
Maybe in fact the whole hat thing is a gimmick and he wants everyone to keep talking about the hat and his appearance rather than all the bullshit he spouts on a regular basis.
I've never felt the need to cover it up, so maybe Galloway's Hat has become something of a gimmick and a distraction.
Meanwhile, no doubt Angela Rayner is shaking in her shoes, and the good people of Rochdale are looking forward to the joy of altering their address on everything when they get their new postcode...