George Galloway flew to the US to testify before the Senate investigative committee and to accuse them of being "Zionists" who conspired with George Bush to declare an illegal war against Saddam Hussein. Galloway later proclaimed himself greatly satisfied with his own performance, but his performance met with decidedly poorer marks back home. The Scotsman notes that Galloway appeared evasive and deceitful during direct testimony and never did provide any answer for the evidence and testimony that has exposed him as corrupted by UNSCAM bribes:

GEORGE Galloway yesterday failed in his attempt to convince a sceptical US Senate investigative committee that he had not profited from oil dealings with Iraq under the UN’s controversial oil-for-food programme.

Despite a typically barnstorming performance full of bluster and rhetorical flourishes, the former Glasgow Kelvin MP was pinned down by persistent questioning over his business relationship with Fawaz Zureikat, the chairman of the Mariam Appeal - set up to assist a four-year-old Iraqi girl suffering from leukaemia.

And it was a Democrat senator, Carl Levin, rather than the Republican committee chairman, Norm Coleman, who gave him the hardest time as Mr Galloway sought to turn the tables on his inquisitors, leaving him no closer to clearing his name than when he took his seat in front of the sub-committee of the Senate’s homeland security and government affairs committee in Washington.

Time and again, Mr Levin questioned him, requesting wearily that he deliver a straight answer to a straight question. But Mr Galloway could, or would not. ...

Under repeated questioning, Mr Galloway conceded that Mr Zureikat did have extensive business dealings with the Saddam regime but, challenged over whether his friend’s generous contributions to the Mariam Appeal - £900,000 by his own previous assessments - could have come from the sale of oil, he stonewalled.

Urged to say if he would repay the cash if it could be proved to have come from such a source, he again ducked the question.

While the Scotsman also ran an article which reported more approvingly on his antics, if not his effectiveness, it is clear that Galloway convinced no one yesterday of his truthfulness, especially the Senate investigative committee. Senator Norm Coleman was asked what he thought of Galloway's performance, and he indicated that perjury charges might be in order:

But Mr Coleman, accused by the MP of being "remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice", appeared unswayed by Mr Galloway’s testimony. "If in fact he lied to this committee, there will have to be consequences," he said afterwards.

Asked whether Mr Galloway violated his oath to tell the truth before the committee, Mr Coleman said: "I don’t know. We’ll have to look over the record. I just don’t think he was a credible witness."

I suspect that Galloway at that point might decide that discretion is the better part of valor and decline to return to the US, even if he could wangle diplomatic immunity out of his position as MP. He probably will be surprised that his act failed to fool the people who know him best, even if it did appear to bedazzle American media yesterday who kept repeating his opening statement at the expense of the actual questioning that destroyed it. (via Instapundit)

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry is