David

You are right about Galloway and his verbal dexterity. He is undoubtedly a superb debater and he wiped the floor with the rest of the panel. Unfortunately, most of his points were American-hating and pro-jihadist. I was amazed when he opposed parents smacking their children because I am sure that smacking is popular with the muslim community whose votes he craves. At least Falconer was honest enough to admit that he had smacked his children, but why does the BBC select unelected political has-beens like Falconer to appear on the programme?

Smacking children is not part of the 'muslim' culture - except in the minds of the Red-top newspapers and if you had ANY Arab or Pakistani friends you'd know that was grossly untrue. We were caning children in schools until the late 80's don't forget!
It's the bible that says 'spare the rod, spoil the child' and America - especially the bible-belts - has a stupendous amount of spanking, caning, belting, paddling in schools and worse. Christians and Jews hit their kids just as much.
And Galloway is NOT pro-Jihadist. He is anti ALL death and ALL war and ALL fighting. He says he hates people fighting on our side and against our side and you are wrong to say he was pro-jihadist in that episode - what are you basing that on? Where he said we shouldn't invade Iran? A democratic country that America has been pissed at since they overthrew the puppet dictator they installed and the hopeless kings before him? He never ONCE said anything pro-terror, praised terror or encouraged it and you know that... don't let the prejudice and twisted words from the anti-left tabloids fool you. He hates all murderers. Go listen to his radio talkshow and you'll see there is NOTHING pro-Jihad in the man at all.

Robm,

Everything Galloway says is pro-Jihad. You need to listen more clearly to what is said.

PS Robyn,

Lucky they didn't talk about hanging gay people - very much part of Iranian culture, y'knoe, the guys we daren't deal with lest we make things worse.

really glad i missed that, i can't stand george "lord haw-haw" galloways voice, he spends most of his time on talk sport with his poisonous views, fortunately the radio has an off button. how he can spend so much time there, when he's a full time member of parliament, i really don't know!
these days there's nobody further right than the center on the beeb, as it might engender discussion, arguements and views that the bbc finds offensive (ie: that people may be individuals) in it's attempt to rule the UK.

WOW...ROBM you really make it plain you stand on the far left.Tony Blair once said in an interview that there was no comunicating with the far left `they' just would not listen.
And I know from experiance that trying to comunicate with the far left on ATW is just impossible.
I have lived in Muslim countries and they do `smack' their kids. Muslims will not tolerate their kids not doing has they are told..And Galloway is just a smarmy opportunist..

David,

Not sure if you get TG4 - the Irish language channel - but if you do, you should have watched that last night when Question Times was on. A really interesting documentary about criminal gangs (of various ethnic hues) and their infiltration of New York unions, especially the Longshoremen, in the early to middle twentieth century. My only complaint was that I missed about 10 minutes of it before I found it.

(And, the program was in Irish, but had subtitles, which is the only way I could have followed it.)

Stop watching Question Time. It's terrible. And, I'm generally a political junkie.

Eagle,

That sounds MUCH better than Question Time.

Jihadists and irrational comments.

First of all, I find it odd that one would call G.Galloway a Pro-Jihadist without offering a defintion as to what a Jihadist is. Such comments imply that having an anti-war position as I do is pro-Jihadist. Furthermore, I find it curious how David implies skepticism to the spectator's conservatism? They are conservative, just not the type of authoritarian conservative he wished they were. Being anti-war I risk being called anti-American, so let me qoute an American Republican Congressman - 'We can contiue to fund and fight no-win police actions around the globe, or we can refocus on securing America and bring the troops home. No war should ever be fought without a declaration of war voted upon by Congress, as required by the Constitution'. Ron Paul, R-Texas I call that principled and true conservatism, keeping taxes down by not funding expensive wars.
Who's the real anti-American David?

The real anti-American is George Galloway. Do you really need the hate-filled quotes from this man who embraced Saddam?

Being pro-Jihad means supporting those who kill our troops. Galloway is on record supporting the "insurgency" so I think it is black and white.

Since when did Ron Paul speak on behalf of all Americans? Like you, he has a perfect right to express it, just don't expect me to agree with it.

Galloway makes Lord Hee Haw look like a patriot. And his anti-war rhetoric is selective.

Ron Paul happens to be American, but as noted he speaks on his own behalf.

Justin's point was that Ron Paul's opinions obviously don't make him "anti-American".

>>And I know from experiance that trying to comunicate with the far left on ATW is just impossible.<<

For you perhaps, Coaldust. But learn how to think and to write and all things are possible.

Noel: I think Justin is disingenuous on Galloway and offering Ron Paul as cover.

Ron Paul speaks on behalf of the Constituion. The U.S. Constitution speaks on behalf of Americans. That is logical is it not?

Jihadism: I believe Jihadism means whatever such people wnat it to be. It is more propaganda than anything. Why would anyone engage such propagada? You could criticise George Galloway for many reasons, just make sure it is for the right ones. "Insurgents" would not have a target if troops were brought home. Not only would family members be reunited, our wallets would be reunited with extra money in them. A large part of the budget deficit can be attributed to the Iraqi war (amongst other things). We should be spending money on ourselves not on Iraq!

Hey Cunningham, I do think a lot and sarcastic remarks are what You! and all your ilk do..
Who do you bloody think you are, some bloody Guru..

Justin: Nope. Ron Paul speaks about the Constitution, not on behalf of it. He has a right to his opinion and we have a right to reject him for it.

Dunno if this link has been provided alredy, but for those who'd like to judge Galloway's (and the others') performance, here it is:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/