George Galloway debates Christopher Hitchens

[morkinva]

on Book TV hosted by Amy Goodman. I agree with Galloway and his non Zionist view. It seemed to me the first thing out of Hitchens mouth was bullsheit so he had nearly lost me from the start. Some nice jabs from both sides, and at the very least it makes for some good jousting fun.

http://www.booktv.org/ram/feature/0905/btv091705_4b.ram

Debate on the War in Iraq
George Galloway and Christopher Hitchens
Watch

Description: From the City University of New York, authors George Galloway and Christopher Hitchens debate the war in Iraq. George Galloway, opposed to the Iraq War, is a member of the British Parliment and the author of "Mr. Galloway Goes to Washington: The Brit Who Set Congress Straight About Iraq." The book tells the story of his recent appearance before the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, where he verbally attacked U.S. Senators while responding to charges related to Iraq's oil-for-food program. Christopher Hitchens, in favor of the Iraq War, is the author of "Love, Poverty, and War: Journeys and Essays" and "Blood, Class and Empire: The Enduring Anglo-American Relationship." "Democracy Now!" radio host Amy Goodman moderates. She is the author of "The Exception to the Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers, and the Media That Love Them."

Author Bio: George Galloway is the Respect Party's Member of Parliament for Bethnal Green and Bow in London. He won the seat after his expulsion from the Labour Party for his opposition to the Iraq War. Christopher Hitchens is a contributing editor to Vanity Fair and a visiting professor of liberal studies at the New School in New York.

 

[conjur]

We could use several dozen Galloways here.

I'm still laughing at the dressing down he gave Michael Medved last week.

 

[morkinva]

Originally posted by: conjur
We could use several dozen Galloways here.

I'm still laughing at the dressing down he gave Michael Medved last week.

Wow do you have some audio of that?

 

[jai6638]

I think George Galloway was great.. Has anyone read his book? Is it any good?

 

[sandorski]

Not sure who "won", thought both made very good arguements though. The reason why I'm not sure who "won" is that the subject of this debate has been discussed here on P&N ad nauseum and I've made up my mind a long time ago. Because of that, one usually sides with the debater that most reflects their own view, Mr Galloway in my situation. That said, I thought Hitchens made a good defense and compelling arguement for why the War is justified, though not compelling enough to change my mind on it.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Interesting debate.

 

[Beowulf]

Personally I think Galloway is crazy I know he got some fame here for telling the Congress off but his past comments and history isn't the greatest.

In an interview with the Guardian [7], Galloway outlined his political views in relation to the Soviet Union:

"I am on the anti-imperialist left." The Stalinist left? "I wouldn't define it that way because of the pejoratives loaded around it; that would be making a rod for your own back. If you are asking did I support the Soviet Union, yes I did. Yes, I did support the Soviet Union, and I think the disappearance of the Soviet Union is the biggest catastrophe of my life.

Galloway regards Fidel Castro's Cuba as "a remarkable society" and "a model for the world." He has said Castro is "not a dictator, not at all", and described him as "the greatest man I have met."

You can read about the man,history and scandals here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway

 

[conjur]

Every claim of scandal against Galloway has been baseless and has cost those involved dearly (to the tune of millions of pounds).


morkinva, I wish I had audio of that...dearly. It was awesome!

Here's a bit of what I recall:



At one point, Medved brought up that Galloway criticized him saying "the greatest nation on God's green earth."

Galloway said it was arrogant and false patriotism and, essentially, insulting to people in other countries. He brought up the horrid response to Katrina and said we're not the greatest nation on earth. Brought up the Abu Ghraib photos and said we're not the greatest nation on earth.

Medved was saying Galloway was a close friend of Saddam's and Galloway fired back he'd only met him twice, the same number of times as Rumsfeld. Galloway said he knew of Saddam and criticized his rise to leadership in the 70s before Medved had ever even heard of him.

==========================

Galloway was countering charges that he was supporting terrorists or appeasing them by saying that fighting terrorism (and he is definitely against the likes of bin Laden and Hussein) can't be done by military means alone. We have to understand why terrorism exists and his explaining terrorism does NOT mean he supports it.


Essentially, he was just trying to cut through the BS RW talking points parroted by so many ignorant callers and shows like Medved's.

================

At one point, he called Medved a D.J.! :laugh:

 

[Taggart]

I just can't believe what I'm hearing in this thread, George Galloway is an enemy of the United States and a disgusting human being. I love his best quote: 'Iraq is fighting for all the Arabs. Where are the Arab armies?'

He is advocating killing British and American troops.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/24/ngall124.xml

 

[conjur]

<yawn>

More bitter, partisan BS.

 

[NeenerNeener]

Originally posted by: Taggart
I just can't believe what I'm hearing in this thread, George Galloway is an enemy of the United States and a disgusting human being. I love his best quote: 'Iraq is fighting for all the Arabs. Where are the Arab armies?'

He is advocating killing British and American troops.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/24/ngall124.xml

Huh? Too many paintchips? Is he an enemy of Britain as well?

 

[Beowulf]

BTW who's Medved?

Even if the scandals didn't stick and I haven't done enough research on them I still don't like his comments and his views on certain things.I'm downloading real alternative to watch this debate though...Hitchens is usually a good writer.

 

[conjur]

Medved? A long-time RW AM-radio talking head.

 

[Beowulf]

Originally posted by: conjur
Medved? A long-time RW AM-radio talking head.

Oh alright...don't really hear AM-radio unless I'm trying to keep track on a sports game.

 

[Taggart]

Originally posted by: conjur
<yawn>

More bitter, partisan BS.

That's ok with me that you think that, but I'm curious how you can counter anything I said about Galloway. Let's pretend for a minute that he didn't say anything about Iraq. Beowulf pretty much sums up what kind of person Galloway is. He's a Communist and supports oppressive regimes. I mean, that comes from his own mouth!

How exactly can you defend someone like that if you aren't AT LEAST a Communist sympathizer or a part of the radical left? Are you saddened that the USSR is gone? Galloway is. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is marginalized and you lose all credibility with everyone but extremists when you take sides with a guy like that.

 

[conjur]

You see, that's complete and utter BS. That's taking his words and twisting them. He has said the USSR gone has left the US as the sole superpower, unchecked in its imperialistic policy. If the Soviet Union were still around, it's highly likely we wouldn't be in Iraq right now. Let's look at that Guardian article:

He says his political position is no different now than it was then; that while there are so many politicians marching across the ideological spectrum without explanation, he has stayed put. What is that position? "I am on the anti-imperialist left." The Stalinist left? "I wouldn't define it that way because of the pejoratives loaded around it; that would be making a rod for your own back. If you are asking did I support the Soviet Union, yes I did. Yes, I did support the Soviet Union, and I think the disappearance of the Soviet Union is the biggest catastrophe of my life. If there was a Soviet Union today, we would not be having this conversation about plunging into a new war in the Middle East, and the US would not be rampaging around the globe."

Also, it's VERY clear from that article that the writer holds nothing but ill-will toward Galloway. The bias in that article is overwhelming.

And, I am taking sides with Galloway? On the one issue concerning the Iraq War, yes. On other issues? No, at least not by default.

See, that's the problem with you black-and-white "thinkers". You don't see the entire spectrum and ASSume way too much.

 

[0roo0roo]

galloway is no better than windbags like rush limbaugh and michael savage with his sh*t in place of critical thought arguements. its just empty rhetoric from the man, no valid arguments. sorry, he does the left no good. his hatred of the west and i guess white guilt complex has made him defend the least progressive causes out there. its rather disturbing.

christopher hitchens is generally well reasoned and eloquent. an impressive man.

 

[conjur]

BWA HA HA HA HA!!

Hitchens is a war-mongering chickenhawk. He would kiss the feet of Wolfowitz and Perle if he could.

 

[0roo0roo]

right....
and galloway is a integrity free supporter of terror and islamofacism who life arafat said one thing in the west and in other places spewed his true hatred..

hitchens is no conservative nut. he believes in such things as separation of church and state. he simply agrees with the administration on this point, regardless of how the admin botched the effort of carrying it out.

 

[conjur]

I never said Hitchens was a conservative nut. I know full well of his secular bent. However, he has fallen madly in love with the PNAC ideology. That makes him a dangerous man.

Galloway is fighting against that imperialistic ideology and I support Galloway for that. Galloway is NOT a supporter of terror nor of islamofascism. If he were, he'd be a supporter of bin Laden. Why then did Galloway criticize the U.S. and Britain for supporting bin Laden in the fighting in Afghanistan?

 

[0roo0roo]

oh god. galloway is just full of it. he'd rather the afgans be under soviet oppression?? ignore the cold war? of course when convenient. its just how he works. he just hates the west and will distort anything for his silly cause. in the end his arguements do lead to support of terror and islamofacsim, but he's not the type to take that kind of responsibility for what he says.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Garbage . . . both of them. Hitchens arguments were generally weak. His mastery of the English language cannot begin to compensate for the lack of substance in much of what he said. Amazingly, Galloway managed to be worse.

 

[conjur]

Again you distort his meaning. By saying he wishes the USSR were still around, he means it in the context of a check to the power of the U.S. He even said so last week on his appearance on the Medved show.

 

[0roo0roo]

sorry, with friends like galloway you don't need enemies. put it this way. if he were up against bush i'd hold my nose and vote for bush.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
sorry, with friends like galloway you don't need enemies. put it this way. if he were up against bush i'd hold my nose and vote for bush.

Whatever . . . the real Bush agenda versus a hypothetical Galloway . . . I would take the British loon.