Why does the BBC promote George Galloway?

[Teddy Bear]

Following George Galloway's return from facing the US Senate about receiving bribes from Saddam in the form of millions of barrels of oil, he was promptly put on BBC 'Question Time' from Scotland.

The BBC made sure that there were at least 3 other panelists that support his POV and stance. Having attended a live show as part of the audience, where the question asked on the application to attend is whether one was in support or anti the Iraq war, the BBC has had little diffculty ensuring a majority pro Galloway audience. No embarrassing questions like "What exactly prompted you to express your "greatest admiration" to Saddam when you shook his hand?". Instead they gave him a free reign to promote himself as some sort of moral Messiah, with enough support from member panelists and audience to quash any dissent from this view.

Now exactly why GG should be brought to Scotland, except for the BBC to promote him defies normal rationale, unless you are aware of other facts. So why should the BBC have an interest in doing this?

Most independant thinkers, who don't have a personal agenda, will be well aware of the BBC's anti Iraq war bias. Though many might not be aware of the reasons for this, so consider the following:

Both the BBC and CNN maintained offices in Iraq during the Saddam era. The only difference between them is that following the ousting of Saddam, The then Chief News executive of CNN - Eason Jordan, finally admitted to the NY Times, having had continually previously denying it, that CNN had been guilty of pro-Saddam bias. He gave the reason that Saddam threatened physical harm to their staff in Baghdad, and closure of their offices if all news reports weren't first vetted by him.

Now who thinks that the BBC never had the same restrictions? Or perhaps, it wasn't necessary for Saddam to impose any on the BBC as they were all too eager to give his party line.

Have you ever wondered why it is that many despotic and totalitarian regimes around the world pay the BBC for their TV and Radio broadcasts. Now why should any regime that is the antithesis of democracy, you know - the thing that the BBC is supposed to represent, pay for the BBC to broadcast in their countries?

Could it be that in the BBC hegemonic desire to rule the media world and extend its power as far as possible, it is prepared to sacrifice all of our values to give these regimes the 'balanced view' they seek, and not the perspective of a moral free society (you know - us dumb shmucks who pay for them) founded on contrary values to these despots? For the despots and dictators, having the BBC (the supposed independant democratic state funded media company) quote the propaganda the way they want it to be heard, is much more valuable than their local rag.

Any wonder then why Galloway is lauded by the BBC.

[Teddy Bear]

Anybody in doubt as to Galloway's treasonous behavious, and the BBC culpability in continuing to give him airtime to promote his vile agenda to gain the militant Islamic vote, should read his latest escapades following a trip he made to Syria.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/05/wgall05.xml

Galloway pours petrol on the flames
By Tim Butcher, Middle East Correspondent
(Filed: 05/08/2005)

In his most inflammatory outburst yet on the invasion of Iraq, George Galloway has sought to justify lethal attacks on British troops on the grounds that the rebels "are defending all the people of the world from American hegemony".

Mr Galloway described the insurgents as "ragged people, with their sandals, with their Kalashnikovs, with the lightest and most basic of weapons" but who were still managing to defeat the world's only superpower.


George Galloway appearing on al-Jazeera television

The Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow denounced those Iraqis who had joined the security forces as "collaborators" and said it was "normal" for them to be targets for suicide bombers - who have killed hundreds of them.

His remarks, contained in a series of interviews broadcast by three Arab television stations after a recent visit he made to Syria, were more provocative than the comments that led to his expulsion from the Labour Party in 2003.

In what the party interpreted as incitement to attack British forces, Mr Galloway said at the height of the American-led invasion in March 2003: "Iraq is fighting for all the Arabs. Where are the Arab armies?"

In an interview broadcast on al-Jazeera late last month, Mr Galloway accused President George W Bush and Tony Blair of being terrorists for launching an invasion that cost civilian lives. "It is not the Muslims who are the terrorists," he said. "The biggest terrorists are Bush and Blair."

Mocking America's military capabilities, he said the superpower was being defeated by a rag-tag army of lightly-armed soldiers in sandals.

"[The Americans] can control the skies if they don't come within range of a rocket-propelled grenade," he said. "But they cannot control one single street in any part of occupied Iraq.

"These poor Iraqis… are writing the names of their cities and towns in the stars. With 145 military operations every day, they have made the country ungovernable by the people who occupy it."

Making no reference to this year's election in Iraq or to the many Iraqis who have been willing to work for the new government, he continued to paint a romantic image of the insurgency.

"We don't know who they are," he said. "We don't know their names; we never saw their faces; they don't put up photographs of their martyrs; we don't know the names of their leaders. They are the base of this society. They are the young men and the young women who decided, whatever their feelings about the former regime - some are with, some are against.

"But they decided, when the foreign invaders came, to defend their country, to defend their honour, to defend their families, their religion, their way of life from a military superpower which landed amongst them. And they are winning the war. America is losing the war in Iraq and even the Americans now admit it.

"The resistance is getting stronger every day and the will to remain as an occupier by Britain and America is getting weaker every day.

"Therefore it can be said that the Iraqi resistance is not just defending Iraq. They are defending all the Arabs and they are defending all the people of the world from American hegemony."

In another section of the interview, carried by Arab News Broadcasting, Mr Galloway denied the claim, made by American and British forces, that most of the resistance was coming from non-Iraqi fighters. "Most of the resistance is Iraqis resisting the foreign occupation of their country," Mr Galloway said.

"Most of the operations which they carry out are against the occupying forces and their collaborators and this is normal in every liberation struggle."

In a third section of the interview, this time carried on Syrian television, Mr Galloway appealed to the Arab world, drawing a parallel between Baghdad under coalition control and Jerusalem under Israeli control since the 1967 war.

"Two of your beautiful daughters are in the hands of foreigners: Jerusalem and Baghdad," he said. "The foreigners are doing to your daughters as they will. The daughters are crying for help and the Arab world is silent. Some of them are collaborating with the rape of these two beautiful Arab daughters. Why? Because they are too weak and too corrupt to do anything about it."

During the part of the interview broadcast on al-Jazeera, Mr Galloway made a pun that, at first sight, suggested that he had become a Muslim.

"We believe in the prophets; peace be upon them," he said. "Mr Bush believes in the profits and how to get a piece of them. That's his god. That's his god.

"George Bush worships money. That's his god: Mammon."

Adding the words "peace be upon him" in any reference to the Prophet Mohammed is common in Islam. But Mr Galloway is believed to have been referring to the prophets such as Moses, Abraham and Adam, who are recognised equally by Christians and Muslims.

Last night, Mr Galloway stood by his remarks but denied putting British troops at risk in Iraq by calling insurgents "martyrs".

Eric Joyce, a Labour MP who served as a major in the Army, led criticism of Mr Galloway. "Passing comments like these puts the lives of British soldiers at risk and devalues the lives of British soldiers," he said.

Eric Moonman, a former Labour MP and ex-serviceman, said the comments ought to be investigated by the Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin.

"Galloway's remarks border on the unstable," he said. "He is throwing petrol on the flames and putting at risk the soldiers who serve the country he is supposed to represent"

Gerald Howarth, the Conservatives' defence spokesman, said: "Our Armed Forces are doing a fantastic job in the Middle East. It is utterly irresponsible to do anything which undermines the work that they are doing."

Experts in the Arab world said Mr Galloway was, consciously or unconsciously, aping the rhetoric of extremists. "No ordinary Arab politician or even journalist, would use such heightened language," said one. "To say your daughter is being raped is, for an Arab, completely over the top."