h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

No, that's just being a d*ck.

It's Galloway, it's probably both.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/feb/21/george-galloway-debate-israeli-oxford

He's quoted as saying "I don't debate Israelis" - seems pretty clear-cut to me.

I could support him walking out of the middle of a debate if his opponent was spouting hard-line trenchant views and refusing to engage in reasonable debate. This way, I'm left wondering what Galloway does believe in.

Galloway believes in the creed of Galloway

And his bank balance. Don't forget his bank balance.

Have I said I really dislike Galloway?

And this delightful gentleman is a member of... which political party?

Oh. Someone should get him a dictionary for his birthday.

Anybody want a ship?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2013/02/13/nl-owner-hopes-orlova-can-be-recovered-213.html

A Russian cruise ship is adrift in the Atlantic and heading our way.

Maybe we hootizens can snaffle ourselves a new home - rename it HMS "C" Ark, put some high powered servers on her, a wireless router and we can finally get rid of the Pfilther and be free of prosecution so long as we stay in international waters. I nominate Whisky to command (so long as he remembers this boat isn't meant to sink), 2legs in charge of entertainment, Pastey can look after comms and Hoo can devise an Improbability Drive out of the ship's plumbing.

I'm not sure I'd want an improbability drive out of the plumbing, might make me very nervous every time I went to the toilet

Would that put us ACEs in charge of finding the shipwrecked people can welcoming them on board?

I refuse to redecorate

Finally! A use for the

~jwf~

think the trouble with a lot of these fraud and other court cases, given the recent goings on MP/expenses/banks, and what was known fact ect very few prosecutions yet thousands wasted on open and shut case over driving offense that warrents a fine for a fraction of the whole case more often than not.

It therefore follows any jury would be confused

George Galloway has been accused of many things, but what surprised me with the latest incident is that he is being accused of racism, yet for me the bigger accusation, should be one of stupidity:

He agrees to go to Oxford for a college debate.

He is supporting the position that "Israel should withdraw immediately from the West Bank"
His opponent in the debate, a Mr Eylon Aslan-Levy was opposing the position that Israel should withdraw

So the accusation of stupidity follows from the fact:
a) who was he expecting to be supporting the position that Israel should remain in the West Bank
b) where did he think his opponent in the debate, Mr Eylon Aslan-Levy, might be from?

With regard the "racism" allegation, I am not 100% certain that that allegation can be upheld - it seems more like a specific anti-state position. "Israeli's" are not a "race" - or are they?

You've got me confused, Stone Aart.

He agrees to take part in a debate and will support 'a position'.

Having agreed that, what does it matter who is opposing him or where they're from?
One may assume, if one wishes, that he had some level of forewarning but what the hell - is it a debate or is it a (sensitive) interview in a (secretive) news studio?

Or am I missing something?
It didn't used to matter who you were 'up against', what mattered was the debate (and who carried the vote was secondary).

Methinks George had been losing the debate and thought to indulge in a bit of deflection. Not the first time, won't be the last.

>> Having agreed that, what does it matter who is opposing him or where they're from? <<


You have missed my point. Do you agree it did matter to Mr George Galloway?

As a method of deflection it's impressively stupid - instead of losing a debate that a few hundred people would know about he walked out so now tens of thousands of people have heard about it

...Then again, I've never been overwhelmed by Galloway's intelligence

Two things - Galloway doesn't do "debate". He isn't interested in hearing any point of view other than his own so he (quite eloquently) shouts down the opposition, avoids the point being discussed and hammers home his own propaganda.

Secondly, he doesn't care in the slightest what his critics, opponents and the general public think. He plays to his own constituency and that is extremist Islamists and their supporters. He'll be received as a champion at his next constituency meeting.

On a separate matter what is Mr George Galloway's expertise on Middle-Eastern matters. Does he have any family connection with the middle east, has he lived in the middle east for any significant length of time, does he speak the semitic languages spoken in the middle east ... I hope he is not one of those "pompous Europeans" who just "meddle" in world affairs as a form of self-aggrandisement and self-publicity. Does he have financial interests in this region?

>>Secondly, he doesn't care in the slightest what his critics, opponents and the general public think. He plays to his own constituency and that is extremist Islamists and their supporters. He'll be received as a champion at his next constituency meeting.<<

Mostly true but interestingly, he won't say what his religious beliefs are. If, as is widely rumoured, he's a Muslim, it'd cement his core vote, but it'd mean no-one else in Bradford West would vote for him - not saying this is a good or a fair thing, but it's true. You can't win Bradford West by just appealing to one community, Marsha Singh's opponents (I should say I've a slight conflict of interest here as Marsha was an acquaintance of mine) consistently showed.

It proves that nothing, not even his religious beliefs, are more important to Galloway than taking a massive salary from the public and then not showing up to work.