Hitchens would do better contending with the Christers. He is outgunned, outwitted and outmanoeuvered by Galloway. I'm an ex-Muslim atheist and he doesn't speak for me.
This is pathetic. The only point he even remotely gets close to is the tragedy of death in war, but even just wars have casualties that are unfortunate and worth mourning. This might have been a better debate if Hitchens weren't the only one actually speaking about the issue up there.
@yukikoforevernoise At the end he does bring up a couple of things that happened, but it's too little too late. He's just appealing to people's emotions.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
First natural metamorphoses of a butterfly into a slug... hahaha How can any hitchen's fans agree with hitch on this one, its like asking to be on both him and galloway's side choosing based on how you FEEL towards the situation at a given time. Galloway does a perfect job exposing hitches inconsistency, but more importantly his weak, yet confusingly hopeful reasoning!
@waldoistwisted How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then these morons ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war & post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
@roac7777 No perhaps a greater whore would be Donald Rumsfeld, you know the individual who went to Baghdad in 1983 (a year after it was reported saddamn used chemical weapons), shook his hand, fawned over him and then advised the reagan administration to resume relations with him and support him (which they did)..two decades later the same rumsfeld argued for his removal on the same basis that he argued his support...
@Ruffneckization Not really, sometimes governments have to deal with the likes of Saddam Hussein. Galloway was a personal friend of Hussein. Galloway is a whore of Islamic terrorism, he applauds the acts of Hamas and alike.
@roac7777 you're JOKING right? Please do some research on this, it was more than "dealing with him" he was on the terrorists list, and they had no relations with him UNTIL he started using chemical weapons, there was an internal white house memo which said his use of chemical weapons proved he could be "our guy" in the region, when the un security council in 87 voted to censure and sanction him...the us vetoed it. Give me a break that's pure criminal right there...and hypocritical.
@Ruffneckization No government is perfect and all countries have committed wrongful deeds. That is life Im afraid. However there are some governments/people more wrongful than others. All dictators represent the worst of human traits. Saddam Hussein was useful to the west even though he committed evil acts when he first came to power. I am not saying that certain politicians are always lily white its that people like Galloway actually support Islamic terrorism.
@roac7777 I'm sorry but I think governments have to be held to a higher standard than that. When it was broadcast on 60 minutes that Saddam had gassed the Kurds and they showed the bodies of women and children, that was what spurred the UN security council resolution, that the U.S. vetoed. That's beyond misguided politics. We've done it in many other countries, supporting pinochet, indonesia, mobuto and countless other cruel dictators...all for either profit or geopolitics.
@Ruffneckization You are morally right, however politics is never always morally right. However at least in the free west we all aim to achieve that goal.
Hitchens couldn't be more wrong on this issue. His argument is largely based upon the same disinformation and spurious 'morality' the Bush administration used to terrorize, kill, maim, and displace more than 1 million innocent Iraqis.
@amet1980 How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
@idb87 How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
@mcgeem5 How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
@OverusedChewToy How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only is it enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war & post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
only a part of a cunt? which part? I love you erg.....I mean........ yeah whatever i know you are you said you are but what am I? We are both agnostics.....thats a starting point I guess
oh i didnt realise. i'll stick to what I know then you twit. get a girlfriend, a life, lose some weight. you need to do something to control your anger
Wikipedia - The word twat has various functions, its primary meaning being a vulgar synonym for the human vulva, vagina, or clitoris. It is also widely used as a derogatory epithet, especially in British English. The word is usually considered vulgar in all contexts. It that right mr knowitall?
I don't know what debate you're watching but it seems to me Hitchens got a rather stern spanking. But if you like the war I guess you'll support anyone who speaks in favor of it and oppose anyone who opposes it. Oh well, peace :-)
Good point. But if being liberated meant even more Canadians than ever would die I'd still be a terrorist. Besides the US supplied my tyrant leader with weapons to terrorize Canada for years (and fight a war with Iran). The gas he used to kill the French (ethnic group) was supplied by same. Without all his help from the US we would have got rid of him a long time ago. I see your point though. Peace :-)
@VanDoodah You are incorrect, the strange irony of the BUSH administration is that many of its members, including cheney and rumsfeld vehemently supported Saddam when HE ACTUALLY used chemical weapons in the 80's and there is strong evidence he was sold materials from the U.S. that only strengthened his arsenal. Additionally there was a UN security council resolution calling for censure and sanctions in Iraq that was vetoed by only ONE member.. guess who? Correct...the United Hypocrites.
How dare that bastard bring up 1916 to play to ignorant ex-pats from my country. It bears no relation to the current situation. None. Its not even a particularly moral uprising (admitedly romanic) to be dragging up, even if it did
A million? Now you're just making up numbers! Anyway, it isn't US-UK forces killing people, it's the religious fanatics and totalitarians who despise the democracy which the Iraqi's are building.
Galloway is an idiot but he tore Hitchens to shreds. Hitchens should stick to matters of religion- his politics views are hideous. How can the man responsible for such eloquent arguments against religion also be responsible for such irrational views on the Iraq war?
wow you are a jew cock sucker of hitchens and harris . dont let the yahweh race of master deceiver. listen to a true ahtheist and a socialist like H. G WELLS and GEORGE GALLOWAY
Galloway sure does come up with some flabby metaphors. How can you try and sound authoritative, no matter how many pauses you take, when you say silly shit like this: 'That's not coal dust you're covered with, Mrrrr. Hitchens!'?
i tell you from the bottom of my ass where my mind is trapped i am a self hatin jew, i hate my foul race which controls the media and banks of america and case the iraq war.
reverse metamorphosis ....love it GG .........hitchens looks shitfaced ...yet again...fuckin public schoolboy who spent too many years being anally invaded with vegatables.....
200000 iraqi civilians have been killed as a direct result of the US and the UK military intervention , why don't you just stop making a fucking troubles around the world , why don't you just keep helping your own people and stop meddling in other nations affairs , look at your near europeins nations , the Frensh,Germans,Italians, they are keeping to themselves and they don't have any problems with Muslims
Well, I can think of a few Danish cartoonists that had trouble with Muslims. The French got paid big by Saddam to build bunkers for the Iraqi army. Don't look to Europe as a moral high ground.
Some idiots americans and britons think that spreading democracy around the world is tier duties , I wanna tell them before even think about that you need to apply democracy in your own countries , 1 million people went for a demonistration against iraqi war in London ( the biggest in the UK history ) and the government never listened to them , HOW ON EARTH you call this democrac , you went thier for the iraqi oil fields not anything else ,
does not translate to mass graves, torture chambers, and sadistic children run amok that
Saddam was responsible for. If you are the least bit concerned for free thought it would behoove you to(however distasteful it may be) to at least recognize free elections would never happend under him. My critisism is not
that we went to war, it is that we lost the goddamn peace. We took a golden opportunity and turned it into a complete disaster.
There are many millions in Iraq that have died because of the US wars and sanctions. The Bush family and Blair have killed more Iraqi's that the US armed and backed Saddam ever did.
Total B.S. First estimated Iraqi deaths by even the most virulent anti-war estimates are 650,000. Not the "millions" you claim. Second
Kofi Anonns corruption of the oil for food program led to unestimateable deaths which you
would like to lay at the feet of the U.S. instead of th U.N. where it belongs. Those are
the facts relative to the distortions you profer to support your weak and innacurate statement. You sir, are either uninformed or a prevaricator promoting your agenda with misinformat
ORB report says 1.22m and extrapolations from the JHU and the Lancet support that. Your own 650k is from nearly two years ago and is from the Lancet. So THESE are the facts, it is YOU that is uninformed.
I stick to the proven facts and the truth. Next time you approach me, do it with real figures, not out of date ones.
Also, I said "millions in Iraq have died because of US wars AND sanction". This is without mentions the many millions of Iraqi refugees inside and outside of Iraq.
I'm still not clear on why the pro-war left and independent thinkers like Hitchens think the administration's reasons for going to war line up with their own idealistic motives. Why should we believe the political class has grown a conscience all of a sudden? What are the 'four reasons' Hitchens has mentioned elsewhere for thinking the US has wound up 'on the right side of history'? If anyone could point me to where the Hitch gives a comprehensive explanation I'd really appreciate it.
i'm not sure about this entirely either though i've seen hitchens mock the bush admin many times. I don't think he endorses the current USA government although welcomes the removal of Sadam...
don't get so personal, what nonsense have i spoken? why are you assuming i'm a supporter of the iraq war? I've not once mentioned an advocation of it but I do believe it is too early to tell whether it was a good thing.
I'm not assuming that you supported it, I was directly replying to what you said.
It's clear that it wasn't a good thing. It cost trillions, it cost over a million lives and it's destroyed a country. It was based on lies, it was illegal and it was done in your name.
It's clear now, as it was from the beginning, that no good can possibly come from this.
Notice how galloway doesn't attack the issues, but rather attacks Hitchen's character as well as the character of any one opposed to his view. He doesn't even respond to the comments posed by Hitchens.
Galloway is all bluster, but is one of the most fearless and brilliant political speakers and thinkers of his time. Not to mention being right about almost everything (relligion being the only sticking point for me personally - he's a devout Catholic and pro-life). Hitchens is to be fair at his best when attacking the corruption inherent in organised relligion, which he has written about with great clarity. He has his reasons for his stance over Iraq but he is very, very misguided i fear.
If Galloway was a joke, why does he have the role of a minister (Bethnal Green). Moreover, it's better to be a 'meowing joke', than a mass murderer, who advocated a illegal and imoral war. A meow does not kill, but sending troops to a nation does!
So tell me how many us citizens has our government has mass murdered. The US is not perfect by any means, I'm not saying that. But democracy is better then a dictatorship. Look at the world wars, afterwards it was our duty to end dictators for democracy. What the heck are you trying to say, that we should just turn a blind eye to the world? It would have been better if we waited for the UN. But we had a reason and that sparked the war. Eventually I hope we take down all dictators.
I agree that democracy is better than dictatorship (in most, but not all, cases). It's a shame that the US isn't a democracy. You might believe it is, but it isn't.
"we should just turn a blind eye to the world?"
There are many ways to make a difference, killing a many millions (2 wars + sanctions) isn't the way to liberate people. It grows hatred, it's the reason for attacks like 9/11 and 7/7.
I can see the money is the power and it can corrupt any government, so maybe its not a true democracy. But we have to be realistic, nothing is going to change with sanctions, there will be war for a better democracy to be established. And there will be backlash its life. Hey I wish we could get rid of religion. You wish for the world to settle all of its problems with peace. But I do not criticize people who need Jesus for now. U need to realize there will be war. I understand your intention.
...also listen to chomsky denying the Srebrenica Genocide. The man is an ideologue and can't move beyond this. To be left wing is not to condone genocide or dictaorships.
I know everyone keeps banging on about Dahl's polyarchy (to take Chomsky out of the equasion) but America has a very good civil society in which basic freedoms are taken into account. Better than ancient Greece's democracy which wasn't open to women and slaves!
...the US is a democracy, you might not like who they vote in but that's a different matter.
It's poisonous to say that the USA "grows hatred, it's the reason for attacks like 9/11 and 7/7." whether you agree or disagree with America's foreign policy do not give rationale to suicide attacks.
Precisely, I'd add to what you've said by saying that to agree with Galloway is to trust and accept the sincerity of mass murdering psychopaths prepared to blow themselves and others up when they say "oh, I wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't for 'the west'". How can we take the word of people with this crazed?
mate, no one is dubbing Saddam as a hero, I know the extent of his anarchy, as I have a friend whos family suffered from this thugs wrath. However, this Iraq war has cost enough lifes, Western soldiers and largely the civilians of Iraq. You know well that it was scenario of evil versus no lesser evil. So to make it simple to you 'the blood in your hand' guy, Bush and Blair are the ones responsible - and so let them burn in hell with Saddam. Less with patriotism, and more for human life!
Galloway is a true patriot for the any people who are victims of evil empire NWO
IMPERIALISM.
coolmamac 3 months ago
Hitchens: Propaganda we always hear on T.V.
Galloway: Actually debating against hitchens and exposing his lies.
fazlam 6 months ago
funny, when you listen to gollaway you get the impression saddam was an elected beloved democratic leader. don't fall for that scum...
AgnosticPete 7 months ago 2
Galloway is a demagogue whose only tactic is character assassination.
dobyboby 10 months ago 4
Hitchens would do better contending with the Christers. He is outgunned, outwitted and outmanoeuvered by Galloway. I'm an ex-Muslim atheist and he doesn't speak for me.
FromAtomsMade 1 year ago
This is pathetic. The only point he even remotely gets close to is the tragedy of death in war, but even just wars have casualties that are unfortunate and worth mourning. This might have been a better debate if Hitchens weren't the only one actually speaking about the issue up there.
yukikoforevernoise 1 year ago
@yukikoforevernoise At the end he does bring up a couple of things that happened, but it's too little too late. He's just appealing to people's emotions.
yukikoforevernoise 1 year ago
Absolutely nothing nothing of substance or relevance in Galloways argument.
Seaworldexists 1 year ago
cindy sheehan? lol how did that work out?
nubbs 1 year ago
Galloway says nothing about Iraq.
neillfitz 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
First natural metamorphoses of a butterfly into a slug... hahaha How can any hitchen's fans agree with hitch on this one, its like asking to be on both him and galloway's side choosing based on how you FEEL towards the situation at a given time. Galloway does a perfect job exposing hitches inconsistency, but more importantly his weak, yet confusingly hopeful reasoning!
architect333 1 year ago
Jerry Springer Audience Much??
FPSBukkakke 1 year ago 5
george galloway's argument seemed to be primarily opinion and grandstanding. Imo.
503mindst 1 year ago 5
Galloway's argument so far: "Hitchens use to be as dumb as me!" How about you talk about Iraq, my friend?
adraim69 1 year ago 3
slugs dont turn into butterflies BTW
mooglebee 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Galloway is a true whore for Islamic terrorism.
roac7777 2 years ago 16
@roac7777 shut up .. read upon you history.. yyou just look very stupid making a comment like that. ur disgusting
sezeddin 1 year ago
@sezeddin ho ho, ;not only are you incorrect, but I do not give a rat's arse what you think.
roac7777 1 year ago
@sezeddin Look at your history. Please not al-jazeera tv....
waldoistwisted 1 year ago
@waldoistwisted buddy i think its the other way around. OPEN A BOOK AND READ!!
sezeddin 1 year ago
@waldoistwisted How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then these morons ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war & post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
@roac7777 No perhaps a greater whore would be Donald Rumsfeld, you know the individual who went to Baghdad in 1983 (a year after it was reported saddamn used chemical weapons), shook his hand, fawned over him and then advised the reagan administration to resume relations with him and support him (which they did)..two decades later the same rumsfeld argued for his removal on the same basis that he argued his support...
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
@Ruffneckization Not really, sometimes governments have to deal with the likes of Saddam Hussein. Galloway was a personal friend of Hussein. Galloway is a whore of Islamic terrorism, he applauds the acts of Hamas and alike.
roac7777 10 months ago 2
@roac7777 you're JOKING right? Please do some research on this, it was more than "dealing with him" he was on the terrorists list, and they had no relations with him UNTIL he started using chemical weapons, there was an internal white house memo which said his use of chemical weapons proved he could be "our guy" in the region, when the un security council in 87 voted to censure and sanction him...the us vetoed it. Give me a break that's pure criminal right there...and hypocritical.
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
@Ruffneckization No government is perfect and all countries have committed wrongful deeds. That is life Im afraid. However there are some governments/people more wrongful than others. All dictators represent the worst of human traits. Saddam Hussein was useful to the west even though he committed evil acts when he first came to power. I am not saying that certain politicians are always lily white its that people like Galloway actually support Islamic terrorism.
roac7777 10 months ago
@roac7777 I'm sorry but I think governments have to be held to a higher standard than that. When it was broadcast on 60 minutes that Saddam had gassed the Kurds and they showed the bodies of women and children, that was what spurred the UN security council resolution, that the U.S. vetoed. That's beyond misguided politics. We've done it in many other countries, supporting pinochet, indonesia, mobuto and countless other cruel dictators...all for either profit or geopolitics.
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
@Ruffneckization You are morally right, however politics is never always morally right. However at least in the free west we all aim to achieve that goal.
roac7777 10 months ago 2
what is this guys point
breerex123 2 years ago
Hitchens couldn't be more wrong on this issue. His argument is largely based upon the same disinformation and spurious 'morality' the Bush administration used to terrorize, kill, maim, and displace more than 1 million innocent Iraqis.
mmissinglink 2 years ago
finally, someone put hitchens in his place
courtabeth 2 years ago
Galloway is a true legend.
LeCatnip 2 years ago
Both of these men are worthy of support. Both come to this debate with an agenda that far exceed it's limits.
Please research their backgrounds and decide for yourself.
FLUSEM666 2 years ago
I like hitchens but i think Galloway butchered him
CookiesForAll 2 years ago
but slug's don't every metamorphosise in butterflies??? Its catterpillars that galloway his trying to find in his fascist head
jameswp266 3 years ago
that why he says he picked slugs intentionally !
CookiesForAll 2 years ago
galloway is a poet in plitics..
run over him like a german panzer over a rotten pumbkin..
amet1980 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@amet1980 How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
Yeah. Too shouty as well, don't you think? Here's a thought: picture him saying all this in a German accent instead of a Scottish one? Brrrr...
He should lose the moustache, is all I'm saying.
flankspeed 3 years ago
Ten minutes of one gigantic Ad hominem. Disgusting.
idb87 3 years ago 3
Right, its OK for Hitchens to do that but when Galloway responds in kind, its disgusting. Galloway set the tone.
WATCH THE WHOLE DEBATE and then get back to us with an informed outlook.
howitsdun 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@idb87 How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
Is Galloway going to debate the war in Iraq?
mcgeem5 3 years ago 15
@mcgeem5 How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
Galloways entire argument is a Tu Quoque fallacy. An Ad Hominem. Snore.
OverusedChewToy 3 years ago 3
@OverusedChewToy How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only is it enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war & post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
Hitchens is a massive twat
paulclargo 3 years ago
You are a massive twat and a part of a cunt...
ghayklan 3 years ago
only a part of a cunt? which part? I love you erg.....I mean........ yeah whatever i know you are you said you are but what am I? We are both agnostics.....thats a starting point I guess
paulclargo 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The part of a cunt which is a twat..
Do you know what a twat is? ... you twat.
You use the word enough... I do hope you know what it means?
ghayklan 3 years ago
why are you so aggressive?
oh i didnt realise. i'll stick to what I know then you twit. get a girlfriend, a life, lose some weight. you need to do something to control your anger
paulclargo 3 years ago
I take it from you hurling insults and not answering my question that you don't know what a twat is... how sad!
May I suggest you don't use words you don't know the meaning of.. that was the only point I wanted to make :)
ghayklan 3 years ago
Wikipedia - The word twat has various functions, its primary meaning being a vulgar synonym for the human vulva, vagina, or clitoris. It is also widely used as a derogatory epithet, especially in British English. The word is usually considered vulgar in all contexts. It that right mr knowitall?
paulclargo 3 years ago
you are so funny.
paulclargo 3 years ago
No ... you are funny, I bet you have been using the word twat for years and you did not know that you were calling people a clitoris!
ha ha ha .... how funny!
ghayklan 3 years ago
yes because my whole existance is based upon my understanding of the word twat.
paulclargo 3 years ago
Comment removed
VanDoodah 3 years ago
I don't know what debate you're watching but it seems to me Hitchens got a rather stern spanking. But if you like the war I guess you'll support anyone who speaks in favor of it and oppose anyone who opposes it. Oh well, peace :-)
MarcCrombie 3 years ago
Comment removed
VanDoodah 3 years ago
Well, if someone invaded my country (Cananda) I guess I'd turn into a terrorist too because I would die trying to defend it.
MarcCrombie 3 years ago
Comment removed
VanDoodah 3 years ago 3
Good point. But if being liberated meant even more Canadians than ever would die I'd still be a terrorist. Besides the US supplied my tyrant leader with weapons to terrorize Canada for years (and fight a war with Iran). The gas he used to kill the French (ethnic group) was supplied by same. Without all his help from the US we would have got rid of him a long time ago. I see your point though. Peace :-)
MarcCrombie 3 years ago
Comment removed
VanDoodah 3 years ago 2
@VanDoodah You are incorrect, the strange irony of the BUSH administration is that many of its members, including cheney and rumsfeld vehemently supported Saddam when HE ACTUALLY used chemical weapons in the 80's and there is strong evidence he was sold materials from the U.S. that only strengthened his arsenal. Additionally there was a UN security council resolution calling for censure and sanctions in Iraq that was vetoed by only ONE member.. guess who? Correct...the United Hypocrites.
Ruffneckization 10 months ago
How dare that bastard bring up 1916 to play to ignorant ex-pats from my country. It bears no relation to the current situation. None. Its not even a particularly moral uprising (admitedly romanic) to be dragging up, even if it did
Ghoul47 3 years ago
alll the filthy kikes comenting on the lies of hypocritchens get the hell out of here.
yahwehdirtydog 3 years ago
idiots cheering galloway, accusing hithcens of demagoguery when that's all galloway ever does.
davidesugar 3 years ago 3
Hitchens' demagoguery helped kill off a million people. Galloway's hot air is just hot air.
Jelperman 3 years ago
A million? Now you're just making up numbers! Anyway, it isn't US-UK forces killing people, it's the religious fanatics and totalitarians who despise the democracy which the Iraqi's are building.
grayabc1234 3 years ago 2
soooooo...is this galloway dude ever going to try debating?
he should try running for office. he sure sounds like a politician.
AARONRULES666 3 years ago 3
Galloway isn't even participating in the debate, its just a drawn out ad hominem personal attack with not rhyme or reason.
BilboBaggins009 3 years ago 4
Exactly Bilbo009, and when you read the pro-galloway responses you see how affective it is
UNGVEN 3 years ago 2
quite so, galloway is poisonous - and people applaud him.
davidesugar 3 years ago
Can't stand Galloway.
clearvision12 3 years ago 3
go george - i love you!!!!
Sherillla 3 years ago
So did Jalal Talabani.
SourAlex85 3 years ago
Galloway is an idiot but he tore Hitchens to shreds. Hitchens should stick to matters of religion- his politics views are hideous. How can the man responsible for such eloquent arguments against religion also be responsible for such irrational views on the Iraq war?
karledge26 3 years ago
Perhaps because they are not irrational and it is only a failure of your objectivity that makes them appear so.
meiitbe 3 years ago
The moral of this story is that both men are fallible mudslingers
WonderWomanUS 3 years ago
it shows the janus faced nature of jewhitchens
SUHEL2COOL 3 years ago
WOW GALLOWAY IS A WANKER
hbsux 3 years ago
wow you are a jew cock sucker of hitchens and harris
rahul2col 3 years ago
You don't like Jews? How original of you, you fucking dipshit.
Croscros72 3 years ago 2
wow you are a jew cock sucker of hitchens and harris . dont let the yahweh race of master deceiver. listen to a true ahtheist and a socialist like H. G WELLS and GEORGE GALLOWAY
rahul2col 3 years ago
Dipshit.
Croscros72 3 years ago
jews are evil, i tell you, know this they own our banks, media and our lives. let us both kick shit out of kikes
rahul2col 3 years ago
Dipshit.
Croscros72 3 years ago
Will ad hominem resort to anything but george galloways? I mean...ah forget it.
requiemdexter 3 years ago
Galloway sure does come up with some flabby metaphors. How can you try and sound authoritative, no matter how many pauses you take, when you say silly shit like this: 'That's not coal dust you're covered with, Mrrrr. Hitchens!'?
Croscros72 3 years ago 3
hitchens comes up with anything but lies that his sheenie race will benefit.
rahul2col 3 years ago
Debating personal attacks and name calling against real issues...congratulations Mr. Galloway. You've sunk to a incredibly low level.
Mildmannered06 3 years ago 2
Galloway is a blustering fool
bearguyisdanny 3 years ago
hichens is a slobbering liar and a coward who wants usa to invade iran.
rahul2col 3 years ago
we could use more galloways in this world
BabyBeamer 3 years ago
It is also a Vaginocracy,
A Tyranny of Cruel Vaginas.
ludachris475 3 years ago 3
This man is a beleaguered champion of truth in a world of lies.
ludachris475 3 years ago
galloway owns..
IKingValerioI 3 years ago
look at hitchens the fat hog sweating away lol stick to hiding behind your books, his bullshit hits the fan when directly challenged
theviola 3 years ago
"God would never trust the English in the dark"...love it GG ...Mon the Scots and my Celtic brothers and sisters all over the world....
Dundee1961 3 years ago
absolutely right there
rahul2col 3 years ago
you're jewish
SourAlex85 3 years ago
i tell you from the bottom of my ass where my mind is trapped i am a self hatin jew, i hate my foul race which controls the media and banks of america and case the iraq war.
yahwehdirtydog 3 years ago
woah.
is this a joke?
snot funny if it is.
davidesugar 3 years ago
reverse metamorphosis ....love it GG .........hitchens looks shitfaced ...yet again...fuckin public schoolboy who spent too many years being anally invaded with vegatables.....
Dundee1961 3 years ago
200000 iraqi civilians have been killed as a direct result of the US and the UK military intervention , why don't you just stop making a fucking troubles around the world , why don't you just keep helping your own people and stop meddling in other nations affairs , look at your near europeins nations , the Frensh,Germans,Italians, they are keeping to themselves and they don't have any problems with Muslims
romario321 3 years ago
Well, I can think of a few Danish cartoonists that had trouble with Muslims. The French got paid big by Saddam to build bunkers for the Iraqi army. Don't look to Europe as a moral high ground.
genovesachx 3 years ago 3
Some idiots americans and britons think that spreading democracy around the world is tier duties , I wanna tell them before even think about that you need to apply democracy in your own countries , 1 million people went for a demonistration against iraqi war in London ( the biggest in the UK history ) and the government never listened to them , HOW ON EARTH you call this democrac , you went thier for the iraqi oil fields not anything else ,
romario321 3 years ago
Democracy is a fancy name for mob rule.
shanewendi 3 years ago
Maybe if the muslim animals didnt slam planes into americas buildings the muslim animals would be dead now.
Killer0fTheSun 3 years ago
What would UK do? NOT side with USA??
Don't be fucking stupid, we had no choice.
dubzy81 3 years ago
you're right. UK is the US lap dog
kloten 3 years ago
Fucking owned hitchens!
Galloway is the man.
gholis 3 years ago
A few pictures from Abu Gra(though outrageous
does not translate to mass graves, torture chambers, and sadistic children run amok that
Saddam was responsible for. If you are the least bit concerned for free thought it would behoove you to(however distasteful it may be) to at least recognize free elections would never happend under him. My critisism is not
that we went to war, it is that we lost the goddamn peace. We took a golden opportunity and turned it into a complete disaster.
mick0057 3 years ago 3
There are many millions in Iraq that have died because of the US wars and sanctions. The Bush family and Blair have killed more Iraqi's that the US armed and backed Saddam ever did.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
Total B.S. First estimated Iraqi deaths by even the most virulent anti-war estimates are 650,000. Not the "millions" you claim. Second
Kofi Anonns corruption of the oil for food program led to unestimateable deaths which you
would like to lay at the feet of the U.S. instead of th U.N. where it belongs. Those are
the facts relative to the distortions you profer to support your weak and innacurate statement. You sir, are either uninformed or a prevaricator promoting your agenda with misinformat
mick0057 3 years ago 4
ORB report says 1.22m and extrapolations from the JHU and the Lancet support that. Your own 650k is from nearly two years ago and is from the Lancet. So THESE are the facts, it is YOU that is uninformed.
I stick to the proven facts and the truth. Next time you approach me, do it with real figures, not out of date ones.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
Also, I said "millions in Iraq have died because of US wars AND sanction". This is without mentions the many millions of Iraqi refugees inside and outside of Iraq.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
I'm still not clear on why the pro-war left and independent thinkers like Hitchens think the administration's reasons for going to war line up with their own idealistic motives. Why should we believe the political class has grown a conscience all of a sudden? What are the 'four reasons' Hitchens has mentioned elsewhere for thinking the US has wound up 'on the right side of history'? If anyone could point me to where the Hitch gives a comprehensive explanation I'd really appreciate it.
papagumption 3 years ago
i'm not sure about this entirely either though i've seen hitchens mock the bush admin many times. I don't think he endorses the current USA government although welcomes the removal of Sadam...
davidesugar 3 years ago
Galloway turned out to be right about everything, Hitchens backed a disaster. How can anyone deny this with any credibility.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
it's far to early to tell whose right and whose wrong on this.
davidesugar 3 years ago 2
Yeah, only 1.2 million have died - we need at least 1.5 million to die before we can call it a failure.
Imbecile.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
please dont call me names :(
davidesugar 3 years ago
Please stop talking nonsense.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
don't get so personal, what nonsense have i spoken? why are you assuming i'm a supporter of the iraq war? I've not once mentioned an advocation of it but I do believe it is too early to tell whether it was a good thing.
davidesugar 3 years ago
I'm not assuming that you supported it, I was directly replying to what you said.
It's clear that it wasn't a good thing. It cost trillions, it cost over a million lives and it's destroyed a country. It was based on lies, it was illegal and it was done in your name.
It's clear now, as it was from the beginning, that no good can possibly come from this.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
Notice how galloway doesn't attack the issues, but rather attacks Hitchen's character as well as the character of any one opposed to his view. He doesn't even respond to the comments posed by Hitchens.
spriteorbit 3 years ago 5
Galloway is all bluster, but is one of the most fearless and brilliant political speakers and thinkers of his time. Not to mention being right about almost everything (relligion being the only sticking point for me personally - he's a devout Catholic and pro-life). Hitchens is to be fair at his best when attacking the corruption inherent in organised relligion, which he has written about with great clarity. He has his reasons for his stance over Iraq but he is very, very misguided i fear.
steve62482 3 years ago
Galloway is a joke - a purring, meowing joke
KerryPanda 3 years ago 4
Kerry Panda:
If Galloway was a joke, why does he have the role of a minister (Bethnal Green). Moreover, it's better to be a 'meowing joke', than a mass murderer, who advocated a illegal and imoral war. A meow does not kill, but sending troops to a nation does!
raskinman 3 years ago
I thought we were so post to take down dictators and spread Democracy.
knighcs66 3 years ago
Do you mean 'supposed'?
The acts of terrorism from the Bush family and Tony Blair have killed far more Iraqi people than the bastard Saddam ever did.
There is no democracy in Iraq, it's like the gangs of New York.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
So tell me how many us citizens has our government has mass murdered. The US is not perfect by any means, I'm not saying that. But democracy is better then a dictatorship. Look at the world wars, afterwards it was our duty to end dictators for democracy. What the heck are you trying to say, that we should just turn a blind eye to the world? It would have been better if we waited for the UN. But we had a reason and that sparked the war. Eventually I hope we take down all dictators.
knighcs66 3 years ago 2
"But democracy is better then a dictatorship"
I agree that democracy is better than dictatorship (in most, but not all, cases). It's a shame that the US isn't a democracy. You might believe it is, but it isn't.
"we should just turn a blind eye to the world?"
There are many ways to make a difference, killing a many millions (2 wars + sanctions) isn't the way to liberate people. It grows hatred, it's the reason for attacks like 9/11 and 7/7.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
I can see the money is the power and it can corrupt any government, so maybe its not a true democracy. But we have to be realistic, nothing is going to change with sanctions, there will be war for a better democracy to be established. And there will be backlash its life. Hey I wish we could get rid of religion. You wish for the world to settle all of its problems with peace. But I do not criticize people who need Jesus for now. U need to realize there will be war. I understand your intention.
knighcs66 3 years ago
Why do you not consider the US a democracy?
genovesachx 3 years ago
It's a fact, by definition it's not a democracy. Listen to Chomsky on this fact.
5StarRafa 3 years ago
...also listen to chomsky denying the Srebrenica Genocide. The man is an ideologue and can't move beyond this. To be left wing is not to condone genocide or dictaorships.
davidesugar 3 years ago
The United States is by definition, according to modern political science a Polyarchy. Chomsky acknowledges this.
ludachris475 3 years ago
Chomsky's a rotten old pussy. In my view. He sure is smart, though, huh?
Croscros72 3 years ago
I know everyone keeps banging on about Dahl's polyarchy (to take Chomsky out of the equasion) but America has a very good civil society in which basic freedoms are taken into account. Better than ancient Greece's democracy which wasn't open to women and slaves!
SourAlex85 3 years ago
...the US is a democracy, you might not like who they vote in but that's a different matter.
It's poisonous to say that the USA "grows hatred, it's the reason for attacks like 9/11 and 7/7." whether you agree or disagree with America's foreign policy do not give rationale to suicide attacks.
davidesugar 3 years ago
Precisely, I'd add to what you've said by saying that to agree with Galloway is to trust and accept the sincerity of mass murdering psychopaths prepared to blow themselves and others up when they say "oh, I wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't for 'the west'". How can we take the word of people with this crazed?
grayabc1234 3 years ago
"the US is a democracy"
You're wrong. The USA isn't a democracy. If you understood anything about politics, you'd be able to see this.
"whether you agree or disagree with America's foreign policy do not give rationale to suicide attacks. "
Utter nonsense. You clearly don't know your political history. You clearly don't read the news. You clear can't see what's going on around you.
NuevoNumeroNueve 3 years ago
"Utter nonsense. You clearly don't know your political history. You clearly don't read the news. You clear can't see what's going on around you."
How can you charge me with this when i said you cannot give rationale to suicide attacks? Do you justify suicide attacks?
davidesugar 3 years ago 3
'a mass murderer, who advocated a illegal and imoral war'
Are you referring to Saddam Hussein, by any chance?
littlegreymen 3 years ago
mate, no one is dubbing Saddam as a hero, I know the extent of his anarchy, as I have a friend whos family suffered from this thugs wrath. However, this Iraq war has cost enough lifes, Western soldiers and largely the civilians of Iraq. You know well that it was scenario of evil versus no lesser evil. So to make it simple to you 'the blood in your hand' guy, Bush and Blair are the ones responsible - and so let them burn in hell with Saddam. Less with patriotism, and more for human life!
raskinman 3 years ago
No, more with destroying Islamofascism.
dubzy81 3 years ago