Telegraph hits George Galloway!

mike65

http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=460802003

This is one libel trail I'd pay to watch...someone is going to pay a high price for being wrong.

Mike.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

DMC

If Charles Moore, the Torygraph's editor, makes himself available to any media outlet, you will almost take it for granted that his story is water tight and cock sure. Today he was all over the telly and radio, and I don't remember him giving any interviews before....

Meh

Originally posted by daveirl
I dunno about this, I reckon there is something odd. I can't see the Telegraph faking something so elaborate, but only time will tell.

Maybe they didn't fake it. Wouldn't be the first time a British broadsheet has been taken in by forged documents. Remember the Sunday Times and the Hitler Diaries?

shotamoose

It's a weird one. I saw both Galloway and Charles Moore on the C4 news this evening, and Moore basically admitted that they had no corroborating source. That's not to say it's definitely wrong, but that they should have tried to check the story out more.

It just sounds too odd - why would Galloway demand millions of barrels of oil?? My theory is that there's been a mixup somewhere and that if anyone was asking for extra oil it's Galloway's associate Fawaz Zureikat, the 'Jordanian businessman' who apparently helped fund the 'Mariam appeal' (sick child used to campaign against sanctions) and part of the anti-war campaign in the UK. Maybe Zureikat was trading Iraqi oil and asked for more ...

Anyway it's not like we needed this story to dislike Galloway, personally I think he's an embarassment to the anti-war movement. Isn't there some way both he and the Torygraph can lose?

hmmm

This is a fantastic story, it'll be great to see how it pans out. The Telegraph is a (mostly :P) respectable paper, and I can't see them publishing a story like this without being sure of their ground.

mike65

If I were publishing this story I'd want a watertight case, so I would have been expecting the Telegraph to have
a "smoking gun" ready for when Galloway refutes the claims. So if Moore says they have no backup evidence
its all a bit lame...stilll maybe they know something else
but not related about Saddams Westminster proxy which will be made public in court and will do as much harm...

Mike.

shotamoose

Maybe - Moore did say they'd be publishing more tomorrow so watch this space etc...

dathi1

maybe...strange this hits the wires as Galloway was about to wage his new where's the WMD stint this week.

Éomer of Rohan

It may as well have been British Intelligence which planted the documents - it is not that unlikely and it would not be the first time a western intelligence agency has displyed political motivation *cough* FBI

pro_gnostic_8

Odd how the intact document was found by a Telegraph correspondent in a building ruined by a cruise missile and looted by the mob. Strangely strange. The words "dirty" and "tricks" spring to mind.

DMC

I wouldnt mind that, pro_gnostic_8. The Foreign Ministry, where these papers came from, was bombed and looted, and now the journos are rummaging for their supper. They are looking for who supplied what to Iraq or who supported them.

This one, from the Torygraph, has found his steak supper for the next ten years. Charles Moore is very shrewd in matters of libel.... this is tighter than a duck's arsé in water, in his eyes.

davelerave

he's fronted organisations that have received money from pakistan and iraq .also he is closely involved with business people
that dealt with the former iraqi regime.so he does have ties but exactly to what extent i don't know,but the telegraph would have nothing to gain from lies unless they are being used by british intelligence to discredit him

Bob the Unlucky Octopus

There is no grand British intelligence conspiracy. Way I see it- a very shaky story was taken on board by a newspaper desperately wanting headlines. During the war, the Telegraph's sales paled beside the Guardian & the Times. What tipped the editor's hand was doubtless the chance to pour scorn on George Galloway. So no, the documents were almost certainly "geniuine"- whether they actually prove anything beyond an Iraqi fabrication is a moot point.

My mother was in journalism for 30 years specializing in PR- when I told her about this she said it was terrible journalism. A scoop is only a scoop when the story is rooted in fact not speculation. Front page news stories need a lot more than a few scraps of dubious documentation. 99% of front page news is verified and cross-confirmed by multiple sources, discreetly if necessary. This was basically too good a *political* opportunity to pass up, and they made a terrible mistake.

The case for libel is pretty damn watertight, even for the British courts. The settlement won't be high I predict, but the Telegraph will have no choice but to settle. Galloway has a lot more to lose than the Telegraph in any event, so I wish him every success in fighting the case- the newspaper clearly crossed the bounds of decency in smearing his good name with such flimsy information.

Hobbes

I'm curious why the documents where half in english and half in arabic? Wouldn't they of been all in arabic on the page?

If they are going to start pulling people over for helping the regime, why not go all the way? Would be intrested to know everyone who profited by it.

They showed Galloway on TV butt kissing Saddam on a TV program, but then I've also see Donald Rumsfeld do the same thing.

gandalf

Originally posted by dathi1
maybe...strange this hits the wires as Galloway was about to wage his new where's the WMD stint this week.

I agree with Daithi here. Sounds like a deflection job by "intelligence" sources to me

Hey George "Show me the Weaponssss...."

<Silence>


Gandalf