>Cox correctly noted that courage, strength, and indefatigability aren't
>necessarily praiseworthy. And indeed, if Galloway had said something like
>"your courage, strength, and indefatigability have served you well as a
>butcher of men," I'd have no quibble. But Galloway said, "I _salute_ your
>courage..." Salutation isn't merely notation.
>
What's the point of this kind of textual analysis, Luke? Galloway has spent the last decade apologizing for this remark. He waved a sheaf of his anti-Saddam quotes at Norm Coleman's face and had them entered into the Senate record. In what sense, then, can Galloway qualify as a "Saddamist"?
Isn't this sort of the Matt Drudge school of political analysis - see if you can find a one-sentence quote to rub someone's face into and ignore everything else? Don't you think Galloway's indisputable record of actually trying to improve the lives of Iraqis under sanctions outweighs one boneheaded utterance 11 years ago?
FWIW, the Iraqi blogger Raed Jarrar -- about whom all I know is that he's a good writer and has been using his family wealth to support all kinds of utterly decent medical relief and Sunni-Shiite reconciliation projects -- had this to say about Galloway's testimony: "Iraq and Iraqis won't forget the noble and brave stand of George Galloway against the US illegal war(s) and occupation(s)."
Seth