Pugliese forwarded:
>Looking back, it is impossible to avoid the
conclusion
>that Mr Galloway's aggressive response to scrutiny is
>nothing more than an unthinking, knee-jerk reaction.
Bro, Galloway's not some grad student receiving criticism in a seminar. He's fighting for his life.
Did he get oil money? I don't know. I don't think you have any evidence not available to me (I've finally figured this Google thing out). So why not suspend judgment until he is actually found guilty by a credible body (of course, it shouldn't be incumbent on an accused to prove their innocence, and previous accusers have been found against in civil courts)?
You'll leap all over people on this list for citing someone whose book of a decade ago was blurbed by someone who referenced a Larouche rag article a decade earlier yet, and I believe you've flirted with the 'objectively pro-Saddamist' line in the past. I can understand your need for purity in the bloodlines of an argument or an idea (as a pathologist understands dwarfism, say). Are you exempting yourself from your own criteria or are you content with the fact that by your curious standards you are objectively pro-Coleman/Hitchens/Bush/Abu Ghraib by perpetuating these as yet unfounded charges?
__________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com