Article

2005-05-21 Fifth Column

Galloway Takes a Trimmin at The Times UK

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by badanov 2005-05-21 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Don't forget he converted to Allan to marry his current wife.

Posted by 3dc 2005-05-21 02:45|| 2005-05-21 02:45|| Front Page Top

#2 Is it true that she was Arafat's niece?

Posted by Cynic 2005-05-21 10:01|| 2005-05-21 10:01|| Front Page Top

#3 Cynic - there's an Arafat connection, yes. Not sure if that's the one, though. (I'd check but my cat needs a vet right now, so I gotta split)

Posted by Raj 2005-05-21 10:12|| 2005-05-21 10:12|| Front Page Top

#4 It's true. I didn't know that he'd converted to Islam, though.

Posted by trailing wife 2005-05-21 11:12|| 2005-05-21 11:12|| Front Page Top

#5 Cynic - you're right.

Posted by Raj 2005-05-21 12:12|| 2005-05-21 12:12|| Front Page Top

#6 Article: The average MP, schooled in the knockabout tactics of the House of Commons, is far better equipped to score points and persuade undecided minds. And Mr Gallowayâs performance duly earned him some rave reviews, not least from startled American journalists who wouldnât dare treat their betters this way.

I find it amazing that a British specialist on American affairs can be so ignorant about the nature of Senate hearings while waxing superior about British debating techniques as exemplified by Galloway*. Senate hearings are not debates. They are trials by another name. Most people who show up at the hearings are cautious not because they respect the Senators, but because they know that anything they say, every lie they utter, could result in jail terms. Like Galloway, the writer of this article gets carried away with his own rhetoric, without understanding the essential truth - that Americans are not deferential to authority like the British are, which is why we won't submit to the D-notice (the British regulation barring newspapers from publishing facts not permitted by the government) or to British-style libel laws (where the defendant has to prove the truth of his statements - instead the person suing for libel has to prove not only that the defendant's statements are false, but that he knew that they were false, and the defendant's liability is restricted to a retraction of his statement). And this is the Times of London. As crappy as the American media are, their incompetence is far exceeded by the media around the rest of the world. Which is pretty sad, considering how incompetent the American media are.

* It was Blair's insistence on saying too much that got us into trouble about WMD's. Focus makes (on WMD's, for example) makes for better debating technique. But a shotgun approach makes sure you cover all your bases. British politicians love the sound of their own voices more than even Americans. Instead of building impregnable positions in a boring but methodical manner, they go for absolutes, in the manner of flashy trial lawyers. And Blair's rhetoric has come back to haunt us.

Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei 2005-05-21 13:01|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-05-21 13:01|| Front Page Top

#7 Britain has parlimentary immunity. An MP can say whatever they like in parliment without consequence. The only restrictions are on offensive language.

Posted by phil_b 2005-05-21 19:05|| 2005-05-21 19:05|| Front Page Top

23:52 .com
23:31 BH
23:27 Angavimp Flailing4010
23:19 Atomic Conspiracy
23:15 Hee Hee
23:11 Fred
23:01 BH
22:59 BH
22:59 Jackal
22:58 Jackal
22:56 Bomb-a-rama
22:49 Charles
22:48 Frank G
22:45 Frank G
22:44 Barbara Skolaut
22:44 Charles
22:43 Jackal
22:33 Frank G
22:33 Frank G
22:27 Super Hose
22:20 Angavimp Flailing4010
22:16 NA$A
22:12 Mrs. Davis
22:09 Frank G