Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (198944)	5/21/2023 3:38:48 AM
From: maceng2	2 Recommendations Recommended By Pogeu Mahone Winfastorlose Respond to of 218544

George Galloway could have represented himself in his various crusades, but he chose to use the Parliamentary process to gain power. As such George should have done his job and represented the people who voted him in. He never did that. The press jeeringly used to refer to George Galloway as "the MP for Baghdad North" during the Saddam Hussein years. It was an accurate description. However it is also true that Saddam Hussein was Britain's and USA best pal when they went to war against Iran. Some would suggest Saddam Hussain just followed what the West wanted him to do, until the West decided they didn't like him. George Galloway that stated Kuwait was not a country after Saddam invaded it, and was on good pals terms with Saddam's son Uday, who had a really bad reputation for cruelty. George is not against violence, just who administers it, despite his protestations as just being a nice guy. I could make a guess which State was involved in the various stitch ups that came his way... but your guess is probably as good as mine. George was as bad as any of our current set of politicians who are plainly not doing the job they are paid for.