There was the one time when Mely, graeme and I went camping with George...and when we managed to get him alone, we decided to do something very special for him. Of course, he still doesn't write us or return our phone calls. He really does have sensuous lips.

Some on the left might consider him a hero, others might want simply to hear what he has to say. Given that there are those who want to hear Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and others from FAUX, what's the problem? We have a "rightist" government, too, whose members obviously have a number of speaking opportunities.

George Galloway = mirror image of Ann Coulter.  Both are despicable.

Indeed...thank you, chansen.

Sources don't matter!  Didn't you know that Chansen?  

That's what everyone at Wondercafe has told me (on a thread on the topic), especially Graeme, who considers The New York Times beneath him.

I've never heard of BCF before but, since the claim in the title of the most recent blog is false, their credibility is already in doubt.

A search of the NDP website for Galloway (by using www.ndp.ca/search) produces one hit from March 2009 that follows. It's hardly an endorsement of George Galloway but rather it's a comment on the decision of the government.

Minister of Censorship Jason Kenney denies entry to British MP Galloway

Sources don't matter, Mof5.  (That is what Graeme says over and over).

As for you Graeme, give me your link.  If it was so misleading why didn't NYT publish a correction?

You say "I won't ever learn anything I don't want to know."   Look in mirror, pal.

BAH HUMBUG--this thread is over for me!

If opposing the war in Afghanistan makes you a "scumbag", I guess I am too.

It's OK not to agree, it's not OK to stop people from disagreeing with you.

I did not wish to return here to post, but I must rebut some of this.

Daviticus:  No one said Galloway was disreputable for opposing the Afghan war.  The situation is much more complex than that.  

I personally would not have posted this video, since Galloway is a fringe character and has a limited following.  By posting it, she will be if anything drawing in adherents.

Many people are opposed to the Afghan war, including the bizarre Republican candidate Ron Paul.   If X opposed the Afghan war, and then someone else criticizes X, it does not then follow that you must agree with everything X stands for simply on that basis alone.  

Graeme:  You did NOT give me a link.  You told me to look something up on Democracy Now, a name I can no longer remember.

Democracy Now = mirror image of Fox News.

I would like a more unbiased source and I would like the actual link please, not just instructions on how "go and google it."  

I am not calling anyone names.  That was Mely's title, not mine.  As I said, I would never have posted it in the first place.

EO - you can't google democracy now? That's a challenge?

I've no doubt DN has faults. but the comment I cited is a direct quotation from the NYT reporter. And if the NYT did not specify the reporter was looking only at a smal sample of bomb sites then, no, I don't think much of the NYT.

As well, use common sense. The idea that we can bomb cities with tens of hundreds of thousands of bombs over a period of six months and kill only 80 or so civilians is bizarre.

Anyway, if evil is just built into Islam, then that means are closest allies (Saudi Arabia, the Emirates) are evil.

Please see follow-up comments about the NATO bombing operation in Libya under the correct thread.

http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/politics/natos-civilian-death-toll-l...

I agree completely. Looking back now, it was probably unwise to comment in this thread at all.

EO: You're right, of course. You don't have to support someone just because someone you dislike criticizes them. I just wanted to make clear my feelings on that sort of Canadian jingoism.

I wonder how many of us could define the word Nazi? I'm not at all sure I could.