Grogeous George and George

The following link (if it works: I think if you copy and paste it into the address bar of Explorer or Safari it will work) takes you to an interview on one of my favourite shows in Canada, George Stroumboulopoulos Tonight

http://www.cbc.ca/strombo/videos.html?ID=1652524726

The interview is with our very own George Galloway and touches on his recent spat with the Canadian Federal government when they attempted to bar his entry into the country because of their perception that he was funding terrorism.

The claim originated from a video clip that was distributed throughout the world in which George hands over cash to the Palestinian government, lead by Hamas. Because Hamas have been responsible for rocket attacks on Israel in the past few years they have been formally named as terrorists by the Canadian government, although, apparently, not by the British government.

In the interview George Galloway offers that the money he handed over was for humanitarian efforts paying for health supplies and medical staff and that he was handing the money over to the Ministry of Health. However, due to the fact that the ruling party in Palestine is Hamas, they are involved and hence the allegations of "funding terrorism".

I'm always fascinated at the attention George Galloway receives from the politicians around the world and from the press; bordering on hate. I can understand why. The papers are the puppets for whatever political party they favour and print stories that put those political parties in a good light and their enemies in a less favourable light. The political parties do not like outspoken characters like George publicly denouncing their activities and when those opinions touch on globally significant events like the war in Iraq, the debate becomes very heated.

I'm a great believer in "don't believe everything you read in the papers or on the internet or what you see on the TV or internet" from politicians and the visual media. Organizations like Fox News are as controlled by their favoured party as are the print media in the UK and they are not the only ones in that boat.

So when the world's press call George Galloway a terrorist, a terrorist sympathiser or even an anti-Semite take it all with a sackful of salt.

If you actually listen to the man or read his columns you will and should conclude that he is nothing of the sort. He is outspoken, yes, and if he talks in terms that go against your political bias then you will clearly disagree with what he says but don't label him as a terrorist sympathiser. And he's not a racist either. If you listen to his radio show in which he invites members of the public to phone in with their views on the topic of discussion he always agressivley disagrees with those that offer racist views.

He is, in fact, a supporter of the underdog an almost uniquely British past time. That's why he supports and speaks for the Palestinians, that race who have been bullied by their neighbours for years. You could claim that they have simply been standing up for themselves although I don't agree with their methods in the past. Killing is wrong whoever perpetrates it. But why are the worlds press and their controlling political colleagues so quick to call them terrorists when they, through their conventional armies, are also responsible for killing thousands of innocent people? Pot/kettle.

That is why George Galloway was so against the war in Iraq, a view I share. Why invade a country that stands little threat to anyone, least of all the US and UK? All George Galloway does is highlight this to the world.

My advice: listen to what George actually says rather than rely on what you read in the papers or hear from the mouths of his enemies.

I admire him. He stands up for what he believes in and speaks his mind, eloquently, articulately and with much intelligence.