|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Galloway was in Saddam's pay... national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Wednesday April 23, 2003 12:51 by David Blair - Daily Telegraph, London
 {this is an execise in how to destroy an anti-war MP - Read on how the documents were found!! Weird, eh??} Galloway was in Saddam's pay, say secret Iraqi documents By David Blair in Baghdad (Filed: 22/04/2003) George Galloway, the Labour backbencher, received money from Saddam Hussein's regime, taking a slice of oil earnings worth at least £375,000 a year, according to Iraqi intelligence documents found by The Daily Telegraph in Baghdad.
George Galloway, the Labour backbencher, received money from Saddam Hussein's regime, taking a slice of oil earnings worth at least £375,000 a year, according to Iraqi intelligence documents found by The Daily Telegraph in Baghdad. A confidential memorandum sent to Saddam by his spy chief said that Mr Galloway asked an agent of the Mukhabarat secret service for a greater cut of Iraq's exports under the oil for food programme. George Galloway: 'I have never in my life seen a barrel of oil, let alone owned, bought or sold one' He also said that Mr Galloway was profiting from food contracts and sought "exceptional" business deals. Mr Galloway has always denied receiving any financial assistance from Baghdad. Asked to explain the document, he said yesterday: "Maybe it is the product of the same forgers who forged so many other things in this whole Iraq picture. Maybe The Daily Telegraph forged it. Who knows?" When the letter from the head of the Iraqi intelligence service was read to him, he said: "The truth is I have never met, to the best of my knowledge, any member of Iraqi intelligence. I have never in my life seen a barrel of oil, let alone owned, bought or sold one." In the papers, which were found in the looted foreign ministry, Iraqi intelligence continually stresses the need for secrecy about Mr Galloway's alleged business links with the regime. One memo says that payments to him must be made under "commercial cover". For more than a decade, Mr Galloway, MP for Glasgow Kelvin, has been the leading critic of Anglo-American policy towards Iraq, campaigning against sanctions and the war that toppled Saddam. He led the Mariam Appeal, named after an Iraqi child he flew to Britain for leukaemia treatment. The campaign was the supposed beneficiary of his fund-raising. But the papers say that, behind the scenes, Mr Galloway was conducting a relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Among documents found in the foreign ministry was a memorandum from the chief of the Mukhabarat to Saddam's office on Jan 3, 2000, marked "Confidential and Personal". It purported to outline talks between Mr Galloway and an Iraqi spy. During the meeting on Boxing Day 1999, Mr Galloway detailed his campaign plans for the year ahead. The spy chief wrote that Mr Galloway told the Mukhabarat agent: "He [Galloway] needs continuous financial support from Iraq. He obtained through Mr Tariq Aziz [deputy prime minister] three million barrels of oil every six months, according to the oil for food programme. His share would be only between 10 and 15 cents per barrel." Iraq's oil sales, administered by the United Nations, were intended to pay for only essential humanitarian supplies. If the memo was accurate, Mr Galloway's share would have amounted to about £375,000 per year. The documents say that Mr Galloway entered into partnership with a named Iraqi oil broker to sell the oil on the international market. The memorandum continues: "He [Galloway] also obtained a limited number of food contracts with the ministry of trade. The percentage of its profits does not go above one per cent." The Iraqi spy chief, whose illegible signature appears at the bottom of the memorandum, says that Mr Galloway asked for more money. "He suggested to us the following: first, increase his share of oil; second, grant him exceptional commercial and contractual facilities." The spy chief, who is not named, recommends acceptance of the proposals. Mr Galloway's intermediary in Iraq was Fawaz Zureikat, a Jordanian. In a letter found in one foreign ministry file, Mr Galloway wrote: "This is to certify that Mr Fawaz A Zureikat is my representative in Baghdad on all matters concerning my work with the Mariam Appeal or the Emergency Committee in Iraq." The intelligence chief's memorandum describes a meeting with Mr Zureikat in which he said that Mr Galloway's campaigning on behalf of Iraq was putting "his future as a British MP in a circle surrounded by many question marks and doubts". Mr Zureikat is then quoted as saying: "His projects and future plans for the benefit of the country need financial support to become a motive for him to do more work and, because of the sensitivity of getting money directly from Iraq, it is necessary to grant him oil contracts and special and exceptional commercial opportunities to provide him with an income under commercial cover, without being connected to him directly." Mr Zureikat is said to have emphasised that the "name of Mr Galloway or his wife should not be mentioned".
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (26 of 26)
Jump To Comment: 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1And used to be the "Daily Worker". How the mighty have fallen...
That posting is by the Communist Party of great Britain. They publish the newspaper "Weekly Worker"- commonly known as the Gossip sheet of the left (Socialist Alternative leaving SWSS was even covered in it this time last year!)
SPGB is the Socialist Party of Great Britain, who are diferent to (and far far smaller) the Socialist Party (Which is the CWI affiliate)
interesting article from SPGB just posted (not by me !) on the whole Galloway issue - see the main page or
http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=45039
conor
OK, OK, OK. I get the point, Meme, you don't like what I said. I don't believe I was being rude at all; a little on the sarcastic side, maybe. It should be clear (even to you) that I wasn't writing as an editor and if another editor wants to delete my grossly offensive attack then that may very well happen.
If you don't like the heat get out of the kitchen. I am not going to suspend logic or inquiry based on the God-like status of George Galloway or anyone. If you, and other commentators on this topic, are so sure of your facts, well give yourself a pat on the back, I'm happy for you :P In some circles that sort of blind devotion is an asset but it's never been of much use to me. I'll think for myself thank you very much.
"I'm not Hilda but Dathi was very rude to her"
Oh so that was what you were actually asking me, all this concern about the anti-war movement actually boils down to you feeling that Dathi was rude to Hilda. Your sudden concern with rudeness with be a mite more convincing if you weren't so 'rude' yourself, not that I care all that much beyond thinking that rudeness tends to confuse rather then clarify issues.
Daithi's rudeness has nothing to do with is being AN indymedia editor. On indymedia anyone, even you can get away with all sorts of rudeness.
BTW Galloway isn't what I would call an anti-war hero, I'd save that sort of label for those in court or in jail for acting against the war. Galloway is defending himself from his villa in Portugal, there are worse places to be.
Dont treat me like an idiot Andrew. I'm not Hilda but Dathi was very rude to her and so are you and your anarchist buddies. You and Labour traitors are standing with each other instead of with an anti-war hero. He should not be allowed get away with sneering at socialists because he is editor of Indymedia!
George Galloway's full statement
The following is the full statement made by George Galloway MP
Tuesday April 22, 2003
This attack is part of a smear campaign, against those who stood against the illegal and bloody war on Iraq and against its occupation by foreign forces.
As I am out of the country, writing a book about Iraq, I have not seen the so-called "documents" the Telegraph - a highly partisan source - claims to have access to.
The idea that such documents have, as if to order, come to light just days after the massive assault on Baghdad, the looting and destruction of its ministries and government buildings, and the chaos in the country must be treated as highly suspect.
This is especially so in the light of the widespread deception and forgery deployed already by those bent upon war on Iraq, for example in the so-called "dossier" and in the forged documents, now discredited, appearing to show Iraqi purchases of Uranium from Niger.
Without having seen the Telegraph's documents, from the way they have been described to me I can state that they bear all the hallmarks of having been either forged or doctored and are designed to discredit those who stood against the war.
Insofar as the contents of these documents have been described to me, I would make the following points:
1. To the best of my knowledge, I have never met an officer of the Iraqi intelligence.
2. Given that I have had access over the years to Iraq's political leadership, most often the deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz, I would have absolutely no reason to be meeting with an official of Iraqi intelligence.
3. I have never solicited nor received money from Iraq for our campaign against war and sanctions.
4. I have never seen a barrel of oil, never owned one, never bought one, never sold one.
5. The campaign which I fought over many years was funded by only three significant sources, ie donors of more than, say, three thousand pounds. These were the pro-western governments of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia and the Jordanian businessman Fawaz Zeurekat, who took over responsibility for the Mariam Appeal some time ago. Of these three sources, by far the most significant was the government of the UAE which donated in excess of half a million pounds to the Mariam Appeal.
6. I have never been a signatory or trustee of the Mariam Appeal. I was its founder.
7. Any interests I had in relation to the Mariam Appeal are registered in the House of Commons register of members' interests.
meme (or is it Hilda?) why do you care what some anarchist (whom you don't agree with) has to say about what some labour party guy (whom you don't agree with) has to say about Galloway (whom you don't agree with). Your question is an excellent example of what I already wrote about above - the fixation with spin. You don't give a fuck about the story you just want to smear though 'guit by association'. Which is ironic because that is what the Torygraph likes to do as well.
As to your weird question I'm not at all sure what bit of what Daiti wrote you are asking me about anyway. Was it
"Hilda, I still can't work out if you're a web-crawling robot"
or
"if you actually want to know Labour policy well ring or email the press office"
or
"I think he's being shafted by the Blairites"
or
"I can't say for sure that the documents aren't genuine"
or
""I salute you, sir" is not what I would say to a dictator"
For whats it worth I'd say
Don't know, yes, yes, yes but I'd rephrase it and yes.
So know you know what this anarchist thought of what that labour party member said about that other labour party member and a member of the socialist party. Be sure to preserve it for history.
Back to the issue rather then the spin.
The Torygraph is frequently used by M16/M15 to plant stories in the media including ones targetting anarchists (MaryDay 2000 etc). It's rather obvious that this story must be an intelligence plant unless we are to belive that some journalist simply found not just one but several documents on this issue. That their source is brit intelligence does not mean there is definetly no truth to the allegations (and Galloway seems to have conceeded that someone associated with him may have received money) but it should make us wary of them to say the least.
The Guardian has a useful short list of similar smears against Labour party figures that turned out to be false. This is at
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,942552,00.html
Do you anarchists agree with what Labour scum Dathai says about Galloway?
Some Anonymous Fool: It is very interesting that the anarchists are refusing to see this and are in effect joining in a Tory smear campaign against the anti war movement. It seems to me when the shit hits the fan the anarchists will always take the easy option and join the forces of reaction like they have done on countless other times throughout history.
Well firstly I don't represent "the anarchists"
I'm just an individual anarchist posting a personal opinion under my real name (shock horror)
Secondly neither I nor your imaginary "anarchists" have joined any Tory hate campaign I have simply pointed out that it is not unknown for leading lefties to take bribes from Arab dictators (as you have admitted yourself! - "Yes Galloway probably has taken money from some fairly dodgy types in his time" )
I have also pointed out that it is PROBABLY a fix
but the Jury isn't in and if you read the Guardian today Galloway is actually getting increasingly evasive on it.
I don’t jump to defend every fool and charlatan that happens to share ONE political point of view with me – that quite rightly could be used to tarnish “the movement”.
Its complete “George Bush logic” – you do not defend George Galloway therefore you are Tory reactionary yada yada ……………………
SAF: This attack on Galloway is an attempt by the right wing Tory press in the UK to discredit the anti war movement and is being used by Blair and the rest of his supporters to purge the Labour Party of any remaining 'left' opposition.
Well its the self proclaimed LEADERSHIP of the anti war movement who waste their time associating with media personalities and politicos individuals of whom YOU SAY
"Yes Galloway probably has taken money from some fairly dodgy types in his time"
Instead of getting off their asses and building a grass roots movement which might actually take on the real task of stopping the war.
If there is any “left opposition” in the British Labour Party (which I doubt!) maybe their time would be better spent getting out of it and fighting to change things
Obviously I also take Andrews points of this Looney generalisation from one in duh viduals point of view (namely me) to a hysterical denunciation of an entire political tradition worked well in the 1930s !
What 'Anarchowatcher' writes above reveals a lot of what is wrong with the modern left in Ireland and elsewhere. Rather then being interested in real discussion they are fixated with spining stories to suit their end. In this case a rather casual remark by a single anarchist that we should 'wait and see' on Galloway is spun into all anarchists lining up with reaction.
Of course its not just the Irish left, there is a long history of this sort of spin on the left. So in the 1930's Trotskys opposition to stalinism was spun into Trotskyists being fascists. And in 1921 the left opposition to Bolshevism was spun into opposition to the October revolution.
The amusing thing is that the dumb trots who used this technique in 1921 and again above fail to spot how they were victims of their own methods in the 30's.
Here are a few hints 'anarcho-watcher' to help you in future
One anarchists personal musings are not the same as 'anarchists say'
One individual (Galloway) is not the anti-war movement so accusations against him are not accusations against the movement
Most amusingly when you start off by saying that "Galloway probably has taken money from some fairly dodgy types in his time" you are actually saying exactly what Conor said above, presumably you also are 'lining up with the tories'. Of course you qualify this with the magical assertion that "these allegations are completely false". Unless you actually forged the papers in question its hard to see how you reached this conclusion.
Finally if you think this storm in a tea cup is an example of the "shit hits the fan" you have led a very quiet life indeed.
Yes Galloway probably has taken money from some fairly dodgy types in his time, but these allegations are completely false. It may be nice to simpley say that this is what happens when you have leaders etc but this is not what it is about. This attack on Galloway is an attempt by the right wing Tory press in the UK to discredit the anti war movement and is being used by Blair and the rest of his supporters to purge the Labour Party of any remaining 'left' opposition.
It is very interesting that the anarchists are refusing to see this and are in effect joining in a Tory smear campaign agains the anti war movement. It seems to me when the shit hits the fan the anarchists will always take the easy option and join the forces of reaction like they have done on countless other times throughout history.
Conor, your position is pathetic
by Hilda Robinson Wed, Apr 23 2003, 6:01pm
Conor of the WSM (personal capacity) how can you even say that Galloway may be guilty. You need more time to wait and see!
me: er
yeah thats exactly what I said - wait and see (confused)...............
Anarchists ditch your hang-ups!
An attack on one is an attack on all!
Defend George Galloway from Tory attack!
Its PROBABLY a set up but as I pointed out other "mis leaders" eg Healys gang in the UK have taken schillings from Arab dictators in the past and this was documented and uncontested (eg not just invented by the Tory press)
If it is proved that he took money from a fuck like Saddam then I have no sympathy for him what ever.
- its a side show from building real movements from the ground up that get results
- yeah maybe I am an anarchist purist
Conor
Poor attempt by right-wing, tory press to discredit anti-war movement. Interested to see who will come to his defence and who will jump on this obvious fabrication.
Hilda, I still can't work out if you're a web-crawling robot, based on the phrases you spout, but I'll assume for now that you're for real. First of all, demanding that Labour members who use Indymedia come on here for whatever purpose you want (and this isn't the only story that you are issuing your demands on - should we be scared now?). Maybe being a little less strident might get you somewhere; if you actually want to know Labour policy well ring or email the press office, if you want to know what random members who happen to use this site think, they're not obliged to answer any of your electronically shrill shouts, and Labour not being a strictly platform-based party, you're likely to get about ten answers anyway. So be it.
I think he's being shafted by the Blairites, hardly unexpected given their attitude to the war, and no, I wouldn't agree with it one bit. However not possessing your eternal wisdom, I can't say for sure that the documents aren't genuine - I certainly would love to think so, but wanting isn't the same as knowing, at least in the real world. I'm suspicious, to say the least. Thant doesn't take away from some disagreements that I would have with Galloway ("I salute you, sir" is not what I would say to a dictator, unless he had a knife under my fingernails, and it's a fairly stuipd attitude for a supposed anti-war activist) and I don't think the anti-war movements will stand or fall on the actions of one particular activist who is fortunate enough to have MP after his name.
Now did you actually want to know, Hilda, have I now changed your mind completely, or have you a pre-prepared response to throw back at me?
And tony is in fear of the israelis but the media would never say that.
What about the money lord levy gave to new labour?
An israeli war just like so many rothschild wars in the 19th century.
Excellent book on that at www.jrbooksonline.com
and some other classics...
Michael Foot was a Commie spy
Scragill's mortgage was paid for by Ghaddafi
and a classic from the Daily Mail in the late 70's
- "Trots hire IRA to bomb english cities"
I have my suspicions tha tLabour members in Ireland wouldn't mind Geogre getting shafted. The Irish Labour party memebers that are on indymedia should come and make their positions clear about the shafting of their Scottish 'colleague' by Comrade Blair.
Ditch all links with bourgeois Labour Party!
Build a Mass Workers Party- Tribune of the people!
Conor of the WSM (personal capacity) how can you even say that Galloway may be guilty. You need more time to wait and see!
Galloway is not an anarchist, he is not a revolutionary socialist either. He is an activist in the anti-war movement who has been prominant. As a result the Tory press are attacking his credibility. Within his own party he has enemies, who also have their knives out.
Conor, you should come out an defend anti-war activists (regardless of their political allegance) if they are clearly being attacked by pro-war media and politicians.
I think that Conor's last posting is an example of Anarchists being obsessed with their own anarchist ideology. Conor is not defending Galloway because he is an elected representative. And he has ideological difficulties. When he read the above positings what went through Conors head was not "there is the Tory press attacking the anti-war movement" but rather it was "oh look a MP getting attacked- that cant be too bad"
Anarchists ditch your hang-ups!
An attack on one is an attack on all!
Defend George Galloway from Tory attack!
they would have sold out on the war if they were in government with their blueshirt pals or if the UN had given its blessing for Georgie boy and Tony's war.
Hilda's impassioned call to arms is kind of typical of many. Personally I think the anti war movements in both countries could have done with a few less "big names" and quite a few more activists wishing to go a bit further then "keeping in" with full time politicians
the way the alegations have come out does look HIGHLY suspicious BUT still I'd be much more on for waiting and seeing.
Interestingly our own David Andrews has extensive business interests in Iraq - not that it stopped him from voting with Bertie in every dail division on the stop over.
These sort of things are CERTAINLY NOT without precedent - Healy's Daily (now weekly !) World Worker in England was extensively financed by Libya for example - maybe it still is.
What we do need to do is get our heads out of the asses of politicians and famous personalities and build real grass roots actions
Conor
If so, Georgie has been a very naughty boy indeed.
What does it have to do with Ireland: not a lot, but then, Ireland has never quite loosened its emotional association with the UK. Its a weird kind of love and hate...
After a jail term, of course
George Galloway should be defended against attack from the Tory Dail Telegraph/Labour Party.
Galloway is no revolutionary, but he is a leftist and an anti-war figure. He should be defended! Galloway is being shafted by his own party 'comrades'. Galloway is likely to leave Labour and possibly join the SSP, this would be a blow to Labour- so they are attempting to discredit Galloway.
What do Irish Labour Party members say on this issue?
Poor george, maryhill will no doubt be getting rid of their shite shopping center and the jags will be falling to div3 soon. And george' holidays to portugal and Cuba (probably paid for commie scum stick together) will become less frequent.
SWP can learn from his mistakes
PS what the fuck has this to do with Ireland?