It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

George Galloway accused of Perjury!!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I think that the whole issue is to scare him enough to make him confess but I think that Mr. Galloway is smarted that many people may think.

He is will not go down very easily he already has prove that.




posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   
If I were receiving money from Saddam. I would have been against the war, just like Galloway, France, and Germany.

I hope he gets what is coming to him! A long prison sentence.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 05:25 AM
link   
I have never particulary liked the guy, but i think he is smart enough that if he was recieving illigal payouts from saddam he would not have put it in his wifes current account.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 05:47 AM
link   
George was on Newsnight (BBC2) last night saying that he has information that Coleman brokered a deal with Tarik Aziz (his main source for the financial evidence). He also begged the US to charge him with perjury (I'm not sure if this is on the net or not, apologies for the lack of links). So I guess the US haven't charged him yet.

George is the former MP for my constituency. He gets slaughtered in the right wing press here and still retains his dignity, for that he gets my utmost respect. I'm still not 100% sure of his honesty, but I have heard enough lies from the US administration to know that this could go either way. Will be watching with interest....



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   
It's Funny to watch people here, like skippy, djohnson, flyersfan and other affiliates, how quicly they accuse mister Galloway of being a Liar and that he should deserve to have a cell in federal prison - yet you are not Enraged over the fact, that your current "president" lied to you numerous times and is still doing that. That does not bother you?

I bet in your eyes he is the Enemy of the State, a terrorist-lover, a Saddam worshiper, an enemy of the Freedom and Democracy, a cheap Liar and he should be locked somewhere in a Gitmo.

Mister Galloway stood Pround at that Hearing and he told the United States in the Face, what no man ever had Balls to say.

Articles like that are made just to divert the Attention from the Real Deal:

The Oil-For-Food 'Scandal' is a Cynical Smokescreen



United States Senators, led by the Republican Norm Coleman, have launched a crusade of sorts, seeking to "expose" the oil-for-food programme implemented by the United Nations from 1996 until 2003 as the "greatest scandal in the history of the UN". But this posturing is nothing more than a hypocritical charade, designed to shift attention away from the debacle of George Bush's self-made quagmire in Iraq, and legitimise the invasion of Iraq by using Iraqi corruption, and not the now-missing weapons of mass destruction, as the excuse.

The oil-for-food programme was derived from the US-sponsored Security Council resolution, passed in April 1995 but not implemented until December 1996. During this time, the CIA sponsored two coup attempts against Saddam, the second, most famously, a joint effort with the British that imploded in June 1996, at the height of the "oil for food" implementation negotiations. The oil-for-food programme was never a sincere humanitarian relief effort, but rather a politically motivated device designed to implement the true policy of the United States - regime change.

Source:
www.commondreams.org...



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Well well well, lookie who has the OFFICIAL report outlining his perjury...

Read the PDF here:


Here is the Executive Summary for the time deprived or lazy people (whole PDF is 64 pages):



Because Galloway’s testimony and sweeping denials conflicted with the Subcommittee’s
evidence and May 12, 2005 Report, the Subcommittee continued its inquiry into the matter to test the veracity of Galloway’s claims. Since the May hearing, the Subcommittee has obtained additional evidence establishing that the Hussein regime granted oil allocations to Galloway and the Mariam Appeal. This Report, prepared by the Majority staff of the Subcommittee,1 presents evidence establishing that:

1. Galloway personally solicited and was granted oil allocations from the
Government of Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein. The Hussein regime
granted Galloway and the Mariam Appeal eight allocations totaling 23 million
barrels from 1999 through 2003;

2. Galloway’s wife, Dr. Amineh Abu-Zayyad, received approximately $150,000
in connection with one of those oil allocations;

3. Galloway’s political campaign, the Mariam Appeal, received at least $446,000
in connection with the oil allocations granted to Galloway and the Mariam
Appeal under the Oil-for-Food Program;

4. The Hussein regime received improper “surcharge” payments amounting to
$1,642,000.65 in connection with the oil allocations granted to Galloway and
the Mariam Appeal;

5. Galloway knowingly made false or misleading statements under oath before
the Subcommittee at its hearing on May 17, 2005;

Evidence supporting each of the preceding findings is presented in detail below. That evidence includes:

(1) Documents, including bank account information and wire transfers, establishing that Fawaz Zureikat, a Jordanian businessman and close friend of Galloway, received money in connection with an oil allocation under the Oil-for-Food Program and transferred a significant portion of that money to Galloway’s wife and Galloway’s political campaign, the Mariam Appeal;

(2) Testimony from Tariq Aziz in which Aziz describes in detail his discussions with
Galloway concerning oil allocations, including Galloway’s request for allocations and his subsequent request to increase the amount of oil allocated to him and his political organization, the Mariam Appeal;

(3) Documents created by the Iraqi Ministry of Oil, including records created during the Hussein regime that were authenticated by the Minister of Oil;

(4) Documents created by senior Hussein officials detailing Galloway’s efforts to obtain financial support from the Hussein regime for his political campaign, including documents that were authenticated by Tariq Aziz and Ali Hasan al-Majid;

(5) Interviews with an oil trader stating that he discussed the oil allocation process with Galloway, and that “[Galloway] told me that, if he were to obtain an oil allocation, he would contact us directly or indirectly” and that “[Galloway] said he or his representative in Iraq would contact [me] in connection with the sale of an allocation;

(6) Written affirmation from a second oil trader who negotiated with Galloway’s agent for the purchase of Galloway’s oil allocation.





[edit on 26-10-2005 by skippytjc]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Skippy, I don't think you realise that he hasn't been CHARGED with perjury. So forgive me for this, but this is still a non story considering these very same people allegedly had something on him before and look how that turned out.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Corrupt republican politicians have a way of accusing people that expose the lies and corruption that is crippling our country these days. I’d love to see them drag Galloway into a court of law that’s just what republicans need right now someone else to expose more of their incompetence and corruption. They will never charge him for that reason alone just try and place doubt about his creditability in the public’s mind. Common sleaze bag tactic’s which we see on a daily basis from them. Wouldn’t it be nice to see Galloway bring up liable charges against Coleman. Just more fuel for the left in establishing republican’s true characters as lairs’s and slaves to big buisness, instead of being slaves to the people like they should be.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Galloway has already sued the Daily Telegraph and won £150,000 for their printing of this nonsense. The same accusations were then rehashed by the Senate, who were stunned into silence by Galloways audacity in pointing out that Rumsfeld also visited Saddam a few times.

If Galloway had all the money Saddam apparantly gave him then where is it? What on earth can he do with it? (Its hard to spend money when you cant explain where it came from...)

Galloway may be a nasty, anti semitic little loony, heading a party thats the left wing equivalent of the BNP, but he really isnt guilty.

This is a senator trying to recover from the verbal beating he recieved when he tried to attack a man with already discredited evidence. This is all grade A bull#.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
, who were stunned into silence


And that’s all that happened. Galloway grandstanded and hooted and made a good show. But that does not reduce or undermine the accusations or prove his innocence. I would do the same thing if I was in his shoes.

And yes, I understand 100% he hasn’t been charged with anything, but its coming.

My opinion is perfectly clear: He is guilty as sin.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
My opinion is perfectly clear: He is guilty as sin.


Uhh...yeah dude, we got it the first 10 times. Your opinion is clear. k, thx.



Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Galloway has already sued the Daily Telegraph and won £150,000 for their printing of this nonsense. The same accusations were then rehashed by the Senate, who were stunned into silence by Galloways audacity in pointing out that Rumsfeld also visited Saddam a few times.


And isn't it ironic that all these accusations of Galloway making millions from oil deals, are actually ending up making him millions in successful libel suits.
It's a mad, mad world!



[edit on 2005-10-26 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Well seems the US doesnt like someone, jeez and we thought we took it a bit far with bush jokes. Well everyones entitled to an opinion..wonder if we could charge a US government employee since the US can try and charge ours?



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   
With our governments history of using forged documents I am sure they will get a conviction. Or just another Special Prosecutor and grand jury all over again.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Skip, you ignored the fact that Galloway has alread won a case regarding these accusations.

What reason do you have to think that he is guilty?



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
What reason do you have to think that he is guilty?


Because the Republican Party told him so.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Skip, you ignored the fact that Galloway has alread won a case regarding these accusations.

What reason do you have to think that he is guilty?


He hasnt won any case brought to him by the US government, your talking about two entirely different cases based of different sets of evidence.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 10:04 AM
link   
The current administration has a history of how they deal with dissent, even as to go as far as treason (i.e. Valerie Plame), so any charges that the US may claim, against someone who is critical of them, should not be blindly believed. IMHO.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
He hasnt won any case brought to him by the US government,


Not yet.


your talking about two entirely different cases based of different sets of evidence.


If you'd actually listened to Galloway when he was testifying instead of screaming at your television every time his face appeared, you would have noticed that the "evidence" presented there included the "evidence" that the Daily Telegraph supposedly had against him.

If Coleman has new "evidence" that he wants to use to make an international fool of himself with again, then why doesn't he lay the perjury charges? Galloway has already challenged them to do so.



[edit on 2005-10-26 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
I bet in your eyes he is the Enemy of the State, a terrorist-lover,
a Saddam worshiper, an enemy of the Freedom and Democracy,
a cheap Liar ...


Yep ... but you forgot money-grubber. He was against liberating
Iraq mainly because it would cut off his MONEY supply. He is also just
a plain ol' bigot that ignorantly hates America - so whatever is good for
America, he'll be against.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by curme
even as to go as far as treason (i.e. Valerie Plame),


That's a completely different subject and it is being discussed on
many different threads. BTW - Valerie Plame was outted by her
HUSBAND all over D.C. not to mention the fact that she hadn't
been 'undercover' for more than 5 years - which was past the
limit to consider her an 'undercover' agent.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join