I have now watched the edition of Question Time (8/6/06) that featured a discussion of the death of Zarquawi (Z) and am delighted to bring you part 1 of this report (though I am slightly unnerved by the similarity between what I am doing here and the feverish reports posted by fans after the latest WWF pay per view.)
The panel: George Galloway (Respect MP for Bethnal Green & Bow - GG), David Lammy (Minister for Culture and MP for Tottenham - DL), Lynne Featherstone (MP for Hornsey and Wood Green - LF), Dr. Liam Fox (MP for Woodspring and Shadow Secretary of State for Defence – Dr. Fox) and Max Hastings (writer and historian - MH.) Chair: David Dimbleby (DD)
I must immediately declare a conflict of interest – David Lammy is my MP and despite having voted for him once in a fit of hating everyone else, I have quite a poor opinion of him. It stems from the time he ignored repeated ‘excuse me’s and didn’t move out of the way when we were trying to get past him with a double pushchair and one of Tottenham’s many charming summer fairs. This in itself has no bearing on the quality of his political thought and I will try to restrict myself to simply reporting what was said. Or at least making it obvious when I begin to editorialise.
Note: I will at times be using quotation marks, implying direct speech, but you should be aware that, given that I don’t have a transcript, these quotes will not be verbatim.
Round 1: Zarqawi – can’t remember the exact question – something along the lines of ‘will it make a significant difference’
First speaker GG: “[The death of Z.] won’t change anything. The U.S. built him up as a bogeyman, part of a lie that all resistance [my italics] was by foreigners / Al-qaeda. Only 1% of the conflict had anything to do with Z. 99% is indigenous resistance. 500,000 people are part of that resistance.” [Can’t chase down figures to see if GG is accurate or not. The Times reported 200,000 insurgents in 2005, CNN 13000-17000, ]
DD asked if GG would agree with Tony Blair that the death of Z was “very good news”. GG replied that Z was a monster, a killer, but added “I’m just cautioning you not to imagine, like Rumsfeld, Bush and Blair, that this will change anything.”
Next up: DL. He said that Z was responsible for 21 bombings as well as beheadings, the death of Kenneth Bigley and the televised beheading of Nick Berg. [Ordinarily the claim that Z is the one in the video beheading Nick Berg is slightly qualified as ‘probably’. However, in the context of a live debate, I think it’s not a significant distortion. (There’s a pretty good case that it was Z. )
DL went on to praise the latest developments in Iraqi democracy, with the appointment of a cabinet.
GG retorted that Bush & Blair have killed more people than Z, [I believe IBC is the lowest estimate for deaths caused by military intervention. I don’t have a figure for Zaraqawi.] GG said that the reaction to the death of Z was all cant and hypocrisy. “Bush and Blair are the biggest killers, not a tinpot dicator like Z.”
DD interrupted to ask if (following his remarks about Blair) GG thought that the killing of Z was morally justified. GG replied, “Absolutely. I could make a very good, sound, moral case for the assassination of Z.” He went on to say that it was hypocrisy to not see that a similar case could be made for an Iraqi assassinating Blair.
LF blahed some blah blah about more UN involvement. [I think I might be editorialising a tad.]
Dr. Fox said that GG was an apologist for Saddam and that is was disgraceful (pr similar) to see GG likewise being an apologist for Z. This was a bit of schoolboy error, because GG was able to cut reiterate his earlier remarks about Z being a monster, a murderer and there being a strong moral case for his assassination. He then returned to his theme that the links between the insurgency, Z and Al-Q had been inflated. He said, he was not the only one saying it – the Washington Post had said the same thing on May 11th. [Couldn’t find that – I may have misheard the date. I did find something, though it’s reporting a view in the Arab world, not offering its own opinion.] His death would make no difference. TB & GB had killed more people. He predicated the news would continue to be as bad, that when we checked the papers we would see violence continuing. [This does appear to be the case. However, it’s arguably a bit unfair to suggest that anyone seriously thought the violence would end overnight.]
Doc Fox tried to get back into the game but GG was immediately berating him for referring to “the West”, when it was now just Britain and the US. I can’t recall what point was being made.
Over to MH who said that the question was, regardless of whether or not the war was a good idea, had so many mistakes been made that it was too late to stabilise Iraq? Were the troops serving any purpose? What use was democracy without law and order? He didn’t answer these questions but his tone implied ‘yes, no and none’.
Someone from the audience asked GG if he would prefer the killing of marsha arabs and kurds. GG said that he had condemned the attacks on Kurds when it happened, unlike Fox & DL – bit harsh as DL only entered parliament in 2000 and was 16 when Saddam gassed the Kurds. Fox came in in ’92, though he contested a seat in ‘87.
GG has certainly claimed before that he protested against the attacks on the Kurds. However, as it was in 1988 I don’t have a source to confirm it.
DL talked about having sat down with Kurdish refugees (he sits down with a lot of people – more on this later) and said that he worked with them in his constituency while GG was busy with Big Brother, trips to Cuba and writing books. In the verbal melee that followed all I recall is GG saying “Why don’t you go there and fight? Here’s your tin hat and your gun and go.”
End of Part 1
Still to come – DL plays the BB card again. MH & GG agree that Bush and Blair should be in the dock, not British soldiers and DL tells more tales of sitting down with people.
4 comments:
Wonder what Galloway has to say about this. Maybe he's in mourning.
Did anyone see Galloway on Question Time?
I have now watched the edition of Question Time (8/6/06) that featured a discussion of the death of Zarquawi (Z) and am delighted to bring you part 1 of this report (though I am slightly unnerved by the similarity between what I am doing here and the feverish reports posted by fans after the latest WWF pay per view.)
The panel: George Galloway (Respect MP for Bethnal Green & Bow - GG), David Lammy (Minister for Culture and MP for Tottenham - DL), Lynne Featherstone (MP for Hornsey and Wood Green - LF), Dr. Liam Fox (MP for Woodspring and Shadow Secretary of State for Defence – Dr. Fox) and Max Hastings (writer and historian - MH.) Chair: David Dimbleby (DD)
I must immediately declare a conflict of interest – David Lammy is my MP and despite having voted for him once in a fit of hating everyone else, I have quite a poor opinion of him. It stems from the time he ignored repeated ‘excuse me’s and didn’t move out of the way when we were trying to get past him with a double pushchair and one of Tottenham’s many charming summer fairs. This in itself has no bearing on the quality of his political thought and I will try to restrict myself to simply reporting what was said. Or at least making it obvious when I begin to editorialise.
Note: I will at times be using quotation marks, implying direct speech, but you should be aware that, given that I don’t have a transcript, these quotes will not be verbatim.
Round 1: Zarqawi – can’t remember the exact question – something along the lines of ‘will it make a significant difference’
First speaker GG: “[The death of Z.] won’t change anything. The U.S. built him up as a bogeyman, part of a lie that all resistance [my italics] was by foreigners / Al-qaeda. Only 1% of the conflict had anything to do with Z. 99% is indigenous resistance. 500,000 people are part of that resistance.” [Can’t chase down figures to see if GG is accurate or not. The Times reported 200,000 insurgents in 2005, CNN 13000-17000, ]
DD asked if GG would agree with Tony Blair that the death of Z was “very good news”. GG replied that Z was a monster, a killer, but added “I’m just cautioning you not to imagine, like Rumsfeld, Bush and Blair, that this will change anything.”
Next up: DL. He said that Z was responsible for 21 bombings as well as beheadings, the death of Kenneth Bigley and the televised beheading of Nick Berg. [Ordinarily the claim that Z is the one in the video beheading Nick Berg is slightly qualified as ‘probably’. However, in the context of a live debate, I think it’s not a significant distortion. (There’s a pretty good case that it was Z. )
DL went on to praise the latest developments in Iraqi democracy, with the appointment of a cabinet.
GG retorted that Bush & Blair have killed more people than Z, [I believe IBC is the lowest estimate for deaths caused by military intervention. I don’t have a figure for Zaraqawi.] GG said that the reaction to the death of Z was all cant and hypocrisy. “Bush and Blair are the biggest killers, not a tinpot dicator like Z.”
DD interrupted to ask if (following his remarks about Blair) GG thought that the killing of Z was morally justified. GG replied, “Absolutely. I could make a very good, sound, moral case for the assassination of Z.” He went on to say that it was hypocrisy to not see that a similar case could be made for an Iraqi assassinating Blair.
LF blahed some blah blah about more UN involvement. [I think I might be editorialising a tad.]
Dr. Fox said that GG was an apologist for Saddam and that is was disgraceful (pr similar) to see GG likewise being an apologist for Z. This was a bit of schoolboy error, because GG was able to cut reiterate his earlier remarks about Z being a monster, a murderer and there being a strong moral case for his assassination. He then returned to his theme that the links between the insurgency, Z and Al-Q had been inflated. He said, he was not the only one saying it – the Washington Post had said the same thing on May 11th. [Couldn’t find that – I may have misheard the date. I did find something, though it’s reporting a view in the Arab world, not offering its own opinion.] His death would make no difference. TB & GB had killed more people. He predicated the news would continue to be as bad, that when we checked the papers we would see violence continuing. [This does appear to be the case. However, it’s arguably a bit unfair to suggest that anyone seriously thought the violence would end overnight.]
Doc Fox tried to get back into the game but GG was immediately berating him for referring to “the West”, when it was now just Britain and the US. I can’t recall what point was being made.
Over to MH who said that the question was, regardless of whether or not the war was a good idea, had so many mistakes been made that it was too late to stabilise Iraq? Were the troops serving any purpose? What use was democracy without law and order? He didn’t answer these questions but his tone implied ‘yes, no and none’.
Someone from the audience asked GG if he would prefer the killing of marsha arabs and kurds. GG said that he had condemned the attacks on Kurds when it happened, unlike Fox & DL – bit harsh as DL only entered parliament in 2000 and was 16 when Saddam gassed the Kurds. Fox came in in ’92, though he contested a seat in ‘87.
GG has certainly claimed before that he protested against the attacks on the Kurds. However, as it was in 1988 I don’t have a source to confirm it.
DL talked about having sat down with Kurdish refugees (he sits down with a lot of people – more on this later) and said that he worked with them in his constituency while GG was busy with Big Brother, trips to Cuba and writing books. In the verbal melee that followed all I recall is GG saying “Why don’t you go there and fight? Here’s your tin hat and your gun and go.”
End of Part 1
Still to come – DL plays the BB card again. MH & GG agree that Bush and Blair should be in the dock, not British soldiers and DL tells more tales of sitting down with people.
Great report.
Post a Comment