Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FarnhamBoy)
    They are fairly similar on economic issues, but on every other issue, they are diametrically opposed. This is a typical conservative rant that socialism and national socialism are one and the same.
    yep. Most modern historians agree.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Shouting your mouth off and proclaiming you are an expert in Middle East politics does not make you one. There are low profile politicians and academics who know a huge amount more Middle East politics than Mr Galloway but understand something about diplomacy
    Who? How do you know? Assumption?

    Mr Galloway has changed his views equally as often though.
    AntiGalloway/RESPECT ranters never back up their arguments

    So Mr Galloway also voted for the war then - as he was a member of the House of Commons that did so? That is the logic of what you are saying.
    No it is not. The point is, a member from the US Senate which voted for the illegal war in Iraq was lecturing an antiwar activist on legality. The irony is sickening

    Luxurious lifestyle - 2 luxury houses, an overseas, first class travel all over the world, Jaguars, designers suits and Cuban cigars!
    What luxury homes? He lives in his constituency in Bethnal Green and Bow. Have you seen this house? Can you tell me how it is luxury? So he has a modest holiday villa in Portugal. Most politicians have a lot more! He's now begrudged an occasional retreat after devoting his energies all year round to helping the vulnerable? He has had the same car for years and years and years. Designer suits? I have heard him say he doesn't wear expensive suits. Do you have evidence to the contrary.

    Cuban cigars
    Not that expensive (especially when bough in Havana themselves eh?)

    first class travel all over the world
    Really? He pays for things himself actually. Do you have any evdence to say he doesn't or that his tickets are first class in the first place?

    I don't consider to be value for money
    First of all, where did you come by the figure of millions of pounds? Have you compared it to your average MP who makes average achievments? And I'm glad his constituents think it's value for money.

    who actually dedicated their lives to serving the poor without seeking personal glory.
    If he seeked personal glroy he could have done many other things which didn't involve putting principles first and thus being savaged by the press. In fact, until the last few months, most people on the street had never heard of George Galloway.

    If Mr Galloway had any dignity he would have stood in a seat in which comprised part of his old constituency. I know he feels "good MPs" like Mohammad Sarwar who paid his election rivals 5 grand to scale down their campaign and who were at the centre of election vote rigging allegations are the sort of people Mr Galloway admires - speaks volumes about Mr Galloway really.
    Do you have a link to your allegations? And how many times do I have to say it? RESPECT doesn't exist in Scotland, and I'm sure at the time any ellegations (which I have yet to see any evidence for) hadn't surfaced

    That does not stop him being an irrelevance in terms of achieving things in British politics.
    You could say that about 99% of MPs

    Apart from immigration and the military, they are pretty hard to separate.
    Racism? Allowing doddery old veterans to carry guns?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Who? How do you know? Assumption?

    What luxury homes? he has a modest holiday villa in Portugal. Most politicians have a lot more!

    Really? He pays for things himself actually. Do you have any evdence to say he doesn't or that his tickets are first class in the first place?

    First of all, where did you come by the figure of millions of pounds? Have you compared it to your average MP who makes average achievments? And I'm glad his constituents think it's value for money.


    Do you have a link to your allegations? And how many times do I have to say it? RESPECT doesn't exist in Scotland, and I'm sure at the time any ellegations (which I have yet to see any evidence for) hadn't surfaced

    You could say that about 99% of MPs
    Professor Shlaim. Professor Hale. There are many many more.

    He admits himself his house was valued at 500,000 pounds a few years ago - hardly a cardboard box is? :rolleyes: I don't think the majority of people have ever set foot in a 500 grand home, let alone own one!

    All MPs travel first class and he has some claims listed in the expenses along with the rest of the MPs!

    As an MP for 18 years - an average of 100 grand a year - that's well over a million pounds - that's the calculation. Not hard to do really.


    The allegations hadn't yet surfaced :rolleyes: :rolleyes: - it was from the 1997 election and were proved in a court of law before Galloway was expelled from the Labour Party. Perhaps instead of reading RESPECT propaganda and making stupid assumptions you should actually try and take an independent view.


    On the final point we can at least agree on something. We have far too many of the buggars - an eighth of the number would do!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Is RESPECT an Islamist party? If not, why does its biggest financial backer call for an Islamic government to rule Britain?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    Is RESPECT an Islamist party? If not, why does its biggest financial backer call for an Islamic government to rule Britain?
    I have no idea about the truth of that statement (as neither do you, I'm sure), but just because Lord Sainsbury is a major financial backer of the Labour Party, doesnt make Jamie Oliver a spokesmen for Labour.

    If the insinuation is that parties are only representing those that give them copious amounts of money, you've just admitted that party politics in all countries that allow private finanical backing is an undemocratic sham.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingslaw)
    I have no idea about the truth of that statement (as neither do you, I'm sure), but just because Lord Sainsbury is a major financial backer of the Labour Party, doesnt make Jamie Oliver a spokesmen for Labour.

    If the insinuation is that parties are only representing those that give them copious amounts of money, you've just admitted that party politics in all countries that allow private finanical backing is an undemocratic sham.
    Welll said
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingslaw)
    I have no idea about the truth of that statement (as neither do you, I'm sure), but just because Lord Sainsbury is a major financial backer of the Labour Party, doesnt make Jamie Oliver a spokesmen for Labour.
    Well, it wasn't my research, but it seems trustworthy.

    If the insinuation is that parties are only representing those that give them copious amounts of money, you've just admitted that party politics in all countries that allow private finanical backing is an undemocratic sham.
    I haven't claimed any such thing, I think that's more likely your very own hate. Though, I'm sure you'd be the last to deny that parties are susceptible to lobbying from those who control their resources (and therefore one who donates the most is the most capable of doing this); but that wasn't an issue I raised.

    Surely donors would only give resources to parties that served their interests. Where does RESPECT come into forwarding the cause for Islamic world government? Is it an Islamist party?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FarnhamBoy)
    Hilarious to hear thebucketwoman claiming Labour as the official anti-BNP party. .
    As I explained, that was a joke. I know that every other party finds them as abhorrent as Labour does.

    But as I said, the various groups of UAF usually support Labour in elections, and most of them are Labour members.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FarnhamBoy)
    Also JonD; "Respect and the BNP may as well merge" - I don't see Galloway and Griffin agreeing on many issues. They may not share the same views as each other on immigration.
    I think that was also a joke, FarnhamBoy... :rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thebucketwoman)
    As I explained, that was a joke. I know that every other party finds them as abhorrent as Labour does.

    But as I said, the various groups of UAF usually support Labour in elections, and most of them are Labour members.
    You'd be suprised. The only reason many of them support Labour in elections is because where the BNP do well, Labour is generally the biggest party, so it would make sense to unite the vote against the BNP through voting for Labour.

    However, most groups blame Labour and its rather reckless language and policies regarding immigration for fostering a growth in BNP support over the last few years (Mr Blunket's we are being "swamped" by asylum seekers, anyone?).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingslaw)
    However, most groups blame Labour and its rather reckless language and policies regarding immigration for fostering a growth in BNP support over the last few years (Mr Blunket's we are being "swamped" by asylum seekers, anyone?).

    And Michael Howard told me that 'the contribution of immigrants to this country is negligeble'. An ironic statement for the son of asylum seekers.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thebucketwoman)
    And Michael Howard told me that 'the contribution of immigrants to this country is negligeble'. An ironic statement for the son of asylum seekers.
    And what did his parents do for the country that isn't negligible? Asylum seekers aren't immigrants.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheVlad)
    And what did his parents do for the country that isn't negligible? Asylum seekers aren't immigrants.
    Well they produced Michael Howard who, at least to himself, could've been PM and is thus a useful contribution to the UK.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thebucketwoman)
    And Michael Howard told me that 'the contribution of immigrants to this country is negligeble'. An ironic statement for the son of asylum seekers.
    He wasn't the son of an asylum seeker. Are you sure it wasn't a Labour minister who told you this, and not Michael Howard? Overall, a very lazy statement. As lazy as the "Oh but everyone was an immigrant from Africa in the last 200,000 years!" one liners.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    To justify, Michael Howard at no point suggested that immigrants have never, ever been useful (that might be ironic); but he did suggest that (something like) a 0.3% GDP increase for every million immigrants really wasn't worth it. I can't see how such a comment could be ironic, since he was not encouraging immigration at the same time and was not one of those immigrants at the same time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thebucketwoman)
    Well they produced Michael Howard who, at least to himself, could've been PM and is thus a useful contribution to the UK.
    That is not a direct contribution. It was Howard who became leader of the Conservative Party, not his parents.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    He wasn't the son of an asylum seeker. .
    Do you have some info about his parents origins? I was under the impression they came from Romania as asylum seekers. Well I apologise if I got their status wrong, they were certainly not born here though.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    Are you sure it wasn't a Labour minister who told you this, and not Michael Howard?
    Yes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    Overall, a very lazy statement. .
    I'm tired!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thebucketwoman)
    I'm tired!
    Shouldn't have been getting my gf drunk yesterday then, should you?
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 12, 2005

1,414

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.