Talk:George Galloway

	This British politics related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed. If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Can we include a "stopped clock" section?

In the interest of balance (which "Gorgeous George's page most certainly isn't - currently), can we include moments of his that might be considered admirable? Such as his utter trouncing of the American senate and various mainstream media supporters of Zionism? ^{— Unsigned, by: John 3:16 / talk / contribs}

Rewrite

I have gone to the trouble of giving this page a rewrite. I'm sorry, but I thought this was Rationakwiki, not hit-piece wiki. Prior to my edits, the page read like one pissed off whatever-the-opposite-of-word-for-fanboy-is' rant. Clearly, this person has a major bone against GG. I can only suspect this person is a Blairite, a Remainiac, a Zionist, or all of the above. I don't agree with everything GG says, but let's be balanced here, shall we?^{— Unsigned, by: Levi Ackerman / talk / contribs}

So you think any person who has a bone to pick with Galloway is automatically a "Blairite, a Remainiac, a Zionist, or all of the above," then. Nabil (talk) 04:37, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

You mean; you went to great lengths to whitewash our otherwise well-sourced article on an authoritarian Commie that you happen to like? Aside from the fact that your edits blanked out all the categories, the entire reflist, and broke the page? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Why have you put you in inverted commas? Regardless, to paraphrase Boyd Crowder, I don't like what the man says, but I do like how he says it. I will simply re-edit the page in order to make it more "rational". That's how you use inverted commas by the way. Cheerio.

The man works for Russia Today and Press TV. That alone is all the proof you need he's a whackjob. CorruptUser (talk) 19:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. I wouldn't say that makes him a whackjob. I would say it raises questions about his principles. But come on, Alex Jones is a whackjob. Galloway? Hardly.

The not-so-subtle accusations of anti-semitism.

Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. George Galloway, like many Jewish people (e.g. Naom Chomsky), is a strong anti-zionist. I don't think anyone can make the claim that GG is an anti-semite. He may associate with people at whom such an accusation could be reasonably leveled - a massive error of judgement on his part, but GG himself is not an anti-semite. Isn't there an article on this site on how Anti-Zionism and antisemitism are not the same thing? Please, let's not conflate them, as those who resent criticism of Israel's foreign policy wilfully and knowingly do.^{— Unsigned, by: Levi Ackerman / talk / contribs}

If you start talking about vast conspiracies of Jewish-owned media you've crossed the line from criticism of Israel to something else. Plus he repeatedly endorses anti-semites, which you could excuse once or twice as a mistake, but there are limits to how stupid anyone can be, even a man who pretends to be a cat on live TV. Annquin (talk) 09:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

When has GG ever spoken about Jewish-owned media? I'm not being rhetorical? I've heard him talk about zionist controlled media and zionist lobby, but not Jewish. Unless, of course, you're one of those people, like Louise Mensch, who hears "Jewish", when someone says "Zionist" and thus shuts down any attempts at a rational debate, by conflating anti-zionism and anti-semitism. So, if you wouldn't mind, could you provide a source wherein GG talks about Jewish-owned media?^{— Unsigned, by: Levi Ackerman / talk / contribs}

I will give you the endorsement of anti-semites, though. However, I don't think their antisemitism is his reason for endorsing them. I think it's their Anti-Zionist position. Still, he should know better.^{— Unsigned, by: Levi Ackerman / talk / contribs}

"I'm not racist, I'm just a racial realist!" While Antizionism and Antisemitism are two different things, a significant amount (possibly a majority) of Antizionists are Antisemites trying to hide behind criticisms of Israel, legitimate or otherwise. Being an Antizionist is circumstantial evidence of Antisemitism at best, but enough circumstantial evidence is enough for induction. CorruptUser (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

"Being an Antizionist is circumstantial evidence of Antisemitism at best". Could you shed more light on this statement. Are you saying people who hold Anti-Zionist views - like Noam Chomsky, like Norman Finkelstein, both of whom are Jewish - hold Anti-Semitic views. Levi Ackerman (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

No, I am saying that people who claim to hold antizionist views are more likely than a random person to be an antisemite, but antizionist views alone is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt of antisemitism (though it may be probable). That's part of the definition of "circumstantial evidence"; evidence that relies on inference and can have multiple explanations. My bootprint on your lawn the night you were beaten to death by a frozen roast beef is circumstantial evidence, as is a package for frozen roast beef in my garbage, my fingerprints on your doorknob, scratches on my arm that appear to have been from that night as if from a struggle, a history of us fighting with increasing intensity, and me being out of my house during the hour you were murdered. Each piece of evidence alone has multiple explanations, but combined look very suspicious and may be enough for a conviction. CorruptUser (talk) 12:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

To me "Zionist controlled" whatever sound all too similar to "Jewish controlled". another Jewish conspiracy by (((Laurogeita Hamabost))) (talk) 17:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, it's pretty much a swap word for "Jewish" when anti-semites use it. If you say "Zionists are/do X" and it's racist if you replace "zionist" with "jewish people", it's anti-Semitic. At least that's the best shortcut I've got. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 18:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

It only sounds like that because for years, Zionists and Anti-Semites have worked to conflate Zionism and Judaism. Anti-Semites use it as a front - to legitimise their Anti-Semitism, while the Zionists use it to shut down debate. Also, are you all denying the existence of powerful, highly influential Zionist lobbies and pro-Zionist corporations? If not, what is wrong with saying they exist, which is what Galloway does? Should people avoid pointing out their existence simply because unseemly characters also point out their existence? What's that thing about stopped clock? Levi Ackerman (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I will say this, however, Galloway does take things to far. He does wander into la-la land very often. For instance, he theorised that Israel was supplying the Syrian opposition with gas, when it emerged that Syrians were being gassed. He later recanted this theory and theorised that Saudi Arabia was in fact the party supplying the rebels with gas. Lol. Levi Ackerman (talk) 10:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't know, is it Islamophobic if I say there is a powerful Saudi lobby? Is it Islamophobic to say that the Turkish ministry for religion controls about half the mosques in Europe? Does the accuracy of those claims figure in the calculation? A vast majority of those claiming to be Anti-Zionist are positively obsessed with Israel. And they are even more obsessed with finding a Jew that agrees with them to "prove" they are not antisemitic. Which to me sounds a lot like the Friend argument. another Jewish conspiracy by (((Laurogeita Hamabost))) (talk) 19:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I think there is some good evidence that Galloway crossed the line from anti-Zionism to anti-Semitism. (I'm not convinced Jeremy Corbyn and certain others did.) He has highlighted a rival candidate's Jewish background in the past to try and undermine her - which is inexcusable.-Albannach (talk) 23:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

GG's latest remarks

'Wrong sort of socialist.' 82.44.143.26 (talk) 16:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Christian?

I notice that Galloway is listed as a Christian. Can anyone provide evidence that he is? He has played the Catholic card before, but that is a quasi-ethnic (in this case pseudo-Irish), tribal identity. I don't see much evidence of him practising and his political career just now seems to be pandering to more gullible Muslims (even though he isn't one).-Albannach (talk) 23:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)