This entry was posted on Monday, January 9th, 2006 at 8:39 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
29 Responses to “George Galloway in Celebrity Big Brother”
What do you mean he is now simply a joke. He has always been a joke. I suggest they make a special exception for him when he is evicted and send him straight to one of those Middle East countries he loves so much. Tehran should be great.
Probably not, Logix. I don’t willingly put myself in close quarters with pathological bigots.
Risible. You all know exactly what I mean. You all know that compared to Galloway you all lead small unremarkable lives filled mainly with petty gossip and backstabbing. What do you really think that achieving? Is it some noble ideal that you imagine you are defending, that somehow the rest of us are to be impressed with your titters and schoolyard putdowns? Yet if perchance any of you were to actually come face to face in debate with someone like Galloway, Fisk, or Pilger, you would get chewed up and spat out within seconds.
Men like them don’t need me to actually defend them. Nor would I claim for them some spurious “journalistic infallibility”, or suggest that they exist on some heroic and exalted moral plane beyond the ken of us ordinary people….but I do know one thing…these men LIVE their lives with energy, passion and courage. And for what reward largely? Certainly not wealth, or the baubles of power. A certain fame and notoriety for sure, a life of being a target, for having every failure and foible trumpeted as their, what now, “pathological bigotry”, their monstrous motives to single handedly destroy Western civilisation?
Fisk for example, whose very name you all treat as a joke, has lived much of his life cheek by very jowl to the events we just read about. Just one small example. The car bomb that murdered Hariri last year, Fisk was literally standing peering into the crater within minutes of it happening. Fisk has seen things, been places, and has walked among the corpses, the horrors and tragedies about which he writes. He has EARNED the right to say something about these events, by contrast all any of you have done is cower as non-entities typing blather from behind the safety of your keyboards.
Pilger whether you like it or not is a hero to millions and his life’s work consists of a pile of articles, books, documentaries and films, that not one of you could produce anything to match but a single item from. You show not the capacity to debate him, so instead you would demean him with smears and insults.
And Galloway, you are all perfectly free to disagree with the man, and type childish cant about him into blogs, if that is what gratifies you, but equally, I am free also to tell you how utterly irrelevant your wasted words would be to him.
Thing is, Logix, that Pilger/Fisk/Galloway are seen to be ‘objectively supporting fascism’ in the words of some old last-century writer or other. So it doesn’t really matter about their ‘passion’ or debating skills. And it certainly doesn’t matter about the adjectival quality or the size-of-life of the anklebiting class who call them out.
The real judge is the long sweep of history, and it is unlikely to be kind to P/F/G, in much the same way as it has dealt to, say, William Joyce. They were all, in that long view, simply not on the side of civilisation, but of barbarism.
Logix – I would prefer to be the child saying the emperor has no clothes than a courtier like yourself with no concept of reality.
Fisk is a whole different prospect from Galloway, I may disagree with many of Fisks conclusions but I respect his reportage. dont link him to your support of Galloway.
Galloway is a gutless, arrogant, corrupt buffoon who sold his soul.
Every soldier/policeman/fireman who puts their life on the line in their daily job has more honour in their shit than Galloway.
Read the australians article about Burchett linked on my site. galloway will be judged the same way by history.
Logix, how Fisk and Pilger can be placed in the same sentence as Galloway is bizarre. It would be quite easy to verbally bitch slap Galloway within “5 minutes”. His secret love, Saddam Hussein, would be a topic I would bring up immediately upon entering the BB house. Maybe it was Galloway who went swimming with Stuart Lubbock?
taking your own logic then I suspect you have a similar doting admiration for Daniel Pipes,Victor David Hanson,Mark Steyn,Michael Yon,Tony Blair, and George W? All those men have surely walked the walk, put their own lives in Yon’s case and certainly their reputations on the line on a daily basis. VDH and Pipes are recognised leading authorities in their fields, a fawner such as yourself is surely impressed by their vast knowledge? I would suggest if you were placed in that debating chamber up against Ann Coulter there would be only one outcome also. My point is that just because someone has got themselves into a position of authority and influence through their own hard work, and I do not doubt Galloway’s obstinate persistence and drive to achieve his goals, it does not mean they are actually correct in their own views. If we were all to just blindly follow what these people tell us to be true and not to try to come formulate our own conclusions on issues, be it by way of internet news or even blog postings or however, then we may as well wrap ourselves in wool and start baa-ing.
And finally to James Dean, you couldn’t drive then and you don’t seem to have improved.
While it was hard not to admire the style of Galloway’s Senate committee appearance last year – he really did hand Norm Coleman his ass – he’s arrogant, unprincipled (his playing of the race card in in winning his current seat was creepy) and probably a liar. So the Mark Steyn comparison works for me.
But Coulter? She can’t debate. She just makes baseless assertions and goes off-topic when she’s called on it. I’ve lost count of the number of times she’s been rolled on the facts.
Damn another outbreak of bipartisan agreeableness. ; Well, Galloway didn’t do quite so well toe-to-toe against Christopher Hitchens in NYC a few months back. He’s patiently fisked the arse off Curious George more time than I can count, and (unlike Coleman) Hitchens is absolutely uninhibited about bullying Galloway right back.
You really do have to despair for a world where Coulter and Mike Moore are what passes for public intellectuals though…
Craig, I agree. I read parts of that Galloway/Hitchens debate and Galloway came across as a blustering arsehole. And I have to admit, I find the whole Michael Moore thing extremely annoying – I first encountered him on BBC2 many years ago with TV Nation, and the reason I liked him was not because he was some kind of enlightened political thinker. It’s because he… well… at least used to be funny. I mean, really funny. He’s a comedian.
I’m not even inclined to give Moore that much of a pass. He tends to trot out the “I’m just a satirist” line when people actually bother to fact-check his arse (something his publishers obviously don’t do) – the other 364 days of the year, he’s the brave speaker of truth to power. Well, you can’t have it both ways Mike.
To be frank, I think you should treat both Mike and Ann exactly the same way – shills of hyper-partisan bloviations that are (mildly) entertaining on the level of political camp. But there’s just a frightening number of wing-nuts who put them right up there with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. I don’t actually think that does much for the quality of politics when we’ve for serious issues that need to be debated by serious people.
Remember that time that Ann Coulter was invited to the Republican convention and sat in a place of honor next to President Reagan?
Wasn’t that just the most embarassing thing ever?!
oops, couple of mistakes…… Michael Moore…. Democratic…… President Carter.
Coulter is a lightening rod for the Left. You can attack her all you like, it doesnt matter because she may be witty and twitty but she doesnt form the Conservative argument. For a long time Michael Moore formed the liberal argument.
“I’m not even inclined to give Moore that much of a pass. He tends to trot out the “I’m just a satirist” line when people actually bother to fact-check his arse (something his publishers obviously don’t do) – the other 364 days of the year, he’s the brave speaker of truth to power. Well, you can’t have it both ways Mike. ”
This is why I stopped enjoying what he does. Back in the days of TV Nation he actually was riotously funny. Then we got The Awful Truth, which saw him taking himself a bit more seriously, trying to approach larger issues and being somewhat less funny. Then there’s the books, which are just shockingly crap. That trend has continued, and ended up with F911 which was basically naked progaganda and really not very funny at all.
He does, on the other hand, have the excuse of coming from a comedy background. I mean, the reason he’s famous is that he did make some side-splittingly funny stuff.
I agree with your assessment now. They’re both as bad as the other. What baffles me is how Coulter managed to sneak in at all.
Well George is one of the 3 nominated by the participants to be evicted first – and his spokesman has complained that Channel 4 is biased because it hasn’t broadcast him debating the war in Iraq. He has complained about young women talking about sex openly, because it wasn’t done in his day – he doesn’t think it should be allowed. This has proven to be a big mistake for him as there are constituents protesting that he is being paid to be in Big Brother while the House of Commons is sitting – his Muslim constituents think it is wrong he is participating in such a lewd and lascivious show.