Video - George Galloway Vs Neville-Jones: Dealing With The Prestitutes: Syria and Chemical Weapons Comments

Giuliano Valverde

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:36:26 +0000

The way they jumped Galloway when he first mentioned Israel's WMD stockpiles gave up their whole perspective on Middle Eastern issues. To merely utter the existence of such weapons is one thing when you're using it to demonize "enemies", but something completely different when you mention the "allies". Both the Baroness and Coburn seem to share that pro-Israeli view of affairs when it comes to that region. They don't even bother admitting its existence, brushing it off right away. Neville says "getting chemical weapons out of the battlefield it's a good thing in its own right". Sure. Getting armed radical Islamic factions affiliated with Al-Qaeda out of the battlefield isn't such a high priority, right? It's okay if armed gangs kill, rape and hurt people as long as they don't use toxins. It's funny how she goes on to say, maybe in anticipation of their next goals, that it's going to be very difficult for the Russians to pull the intervention. I'm betting she's right, but probably because the "good guys" have nothing to gain from the deal. They want this to fail. No wonder her opinion fits that of William Hague. Syria lied about their chemical weapons? Coburn's clueless about Israel? They lied for years until everyone found out ("Israel's Invisible Nukes, the Latest Chapter", Counterpunch, July 5, 2013). Why's THAT not an issue? What "consensus" is Jo Coburn talking about? There's no "consensus". What we have is Vitaly Churkin, the Russian Ambassador to the UN, with satellite imagery showing those chemical weapons were launched from Douma into Ghouta. Wasn't Douma a "rebel"-controlled area? The whole "red line" kabuki never gets old and people don't remember how many times they were played by that anymore, nor how often those red lines are crossed right after they're announced. They don't see a relationship there. Neville-Jones is certain the "evidence is pretty clear" around what's taking place in Syria, even though I'm sure she hasn't see it herself. I'm afraid doctored Mossad "reports" and intelligence concoctions do not really count as evidence. Galloway's warnings over BBC's dismissal of public opinion have solid ground: 1. "According to the Huffington Post poll, Americans oppose U.S. air strikes on Syria by 3-to-1. They oppose sending arms to the rebels by 4-to-1. They oppose putting U.S. ground troops into Syria by 14-to-1. Democrats, Republicans and independents are all against getting involved in that civil war that has produced 1.2 million refugees and 70,000 dead."

Giuliano Valverde

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:35:58 +0000

The Baroness made a fool of herself. Coburn was biased from the onset, making her biases obvious from the very first question in the interview, phrased in a very preposterous way. Can we trust the Russians? The spirit of that question reeks of Cold War paranoia. People from BBC usually frame their sentences like that, that's what they're paid to do, narrowing down the whole issue on whether or not the Russian government should be trusted, instead of the legitimacy of the American prerogative in taking military action against Syria. Tell people like that Russia is the one trying to protect international law and they'll laugh at you. They just can't deal with the facts without whitewashing them into some dogmatic narrative where there's no chance they're not the "good guys". Coburn's questions follow the doctrine to the word. Each one is framed within the limits of mainstream media consensus and, therefore, corporate consensus. The use of chemical weapons takes central stage and magically wipes out all the brutality in Syria, all memory of armed mobs--sadistically referred to by the media as "rebels", as if to grant it some level of popular legitimacy it certainly lacks--or massacres committed by Western-sponsored militias against Syrian civilians, all that erased by omission. As if in some darkly autistic vision of "humanitarianism" killing civilians with conventional weapons is less of a crime against humanity than gassing them.

shiatzu

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 15:54:28 +0000

Neville and Jones seem not to care about facts at all. There main concern is just to jawjaw for the fame/ paycheck and one of them is head of the intelligent agency can you believe that?

what-change

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 15:18:21 +0000

Funny, I always though it quite the childish response, "Where's your proof that Assad did NOT use chemical weapons?" When it has never been proven that he did, and here is a woman who calls herself a professional, with that same childish response.

summitflyer

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:41:24 +0000

I found George to be quite reserved in his replies .He usually is more forceful and direst in his replies .There is more evidence that the rebels used CW than Assad.And if one uses logic ,it is hands down the rebels that are responsible for the CW attack. What a crew of witches ,that was.

arthur

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 09:46:35 +0000

"So why did you bring me here then,cos I'm the MP for Bradford ?" Logic;I love it!

truth

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 08:32:09 +0000

About Tony Blair. As all politicians of Britain He had very little power. All big decisions are made by the Queen referring to her advisors. She is the one killed Robin Cook for opposing the Iraq war. Tony Blair could not go to WC without Queens permissions but nobody wants to tackle The Queen. Please watch these documentaries. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BRSEGw1NsU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shASI0yb0RQ

Bugger the Banksters

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:56:26 +0000

Sorry but until Galloway stops repeating the 'Al-Qaeda were responsible for 9/11' mantra I for one will be considering him as just one more gate keeper for the PTB. When you look at the big picture, there is no 'about face' in US policy at all. In fact it makes perfect sense: The perpetrators of 9/11 and the terrorists fighting against Assad are from the same stable (i.e. the CIA). Does this obviously erudite and intelligent man have so much trouble understanding this simple fact - or does he say one thing and know something else?

rosemerry

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 06:45:16 +0000

Why this concentration on one country's CW, when the use of these by all the "international community" is well-known? it is just a pretext to get another independent Arab nation destroyed. Israel, USA, France (I am disgusted with "our Socialist", president) UK with their threats and hypocrisy, use power for destruction, caring nothing for peace or freedom.

Akidahamad

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 06:32:31 +0000

Obama and his European cohorts want to execute "a humanitarian" intervention in Syria in order to save Syrians! What type of logic are they using? A logic that construes death and destruction as a life saver! Why doesn't Obama apply his humanitarian gesture to save Palestinians under the oppressive regime of their colonizers, the Israelis?

ian

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:47:02 +0000

its quite okay to be blown to bits by conventional weapons white phosphorus depleted uranium cluster bombs mines drones but goodness sake don't let people be killed by gases what a bunch of clowns what a bunch of hypocrites rule the western governments

David King

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:27:12 +0000

Thank you George. Lets all work to getting Blair. Blair first but not only. Plenty of work to do in Britain, israel, the US and Australia.

tom anocú

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:05:40 +0000

Happy Birthday Abby indeed !!! I love that girl !!!!!

Fitzhenrymac

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 02:43:19 +0000

The UN has known since May that the rebels have used chemical weapons http://www.silverdoctors.com/the-un-has-had-evide...

Maricia

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 01:31:49 +0000

Bravo to you Mr Galloway, the speaker of TRUTH! You above all deserves the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE! Obama did not deserve it-he speaks of War and not a word of PEACE! Obama looks up to his boss Netanyahoo =probably kisses his feet too.

greenwing

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 01:05:57 +0000

A pair of rude and arrogant bitche's, towing the warmongers point of view.

agitcam

Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:04:24 +0000

This Nelly Jones person is such a snotty elitist boob can she really think she makes sense to people?

bjmaclac

Tue, 17 Sep 2013 23:48:46 +0000

The world gets more and more surreal - particularly as the presstitute "in-crowd" in both the UK and North America (even including Canada's CBC) uncritically excepts as irrefutable fact that the Assad governernemnt is evil incarnate and that there is no question about his use of chemical weapons. It wa particularly interesting when Mr. Galloway spoke of Israeli and US possession and use of WMDs how quickly the host put a damper on any further discussion on that fact. Contrast this panel discussion to the one ICH presented a couple of weeks ago. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3... It is truly a fascinating (if not alarming) spectacle to watch this self-deluded sophistry in full display.

Joe Palooka

Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:58:35 +0000

George , you've got an uphill battle on your hands trying to use logic with women !

guest

Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:42:15 +0000

Thank you Mr.Galloway. . The poor dumbed down Britts have been misled by their controlled "Auntie" B.B.C.for too long.