Who is responsible for the discrediting of 'British anti-war MP' George Galloway- the Muhammad Haque daily word commentary

AADHIKARonline EXCLUSIVELY warns Galloway of a possible collapse of his RESPECT 'party' - a full report, starts here:

By©Muhammad Haque
1720 Hrs GMT
London Saturday 28 July 2007


The things that any objectively ethical and morally sound person in any ‘part of the UK where there is a constituency for the House of Commons’ would like to tell their 'local MP’, would include the following

1. Be honest, be truthful and do your job and do not take us or granted and do not think you are too clever for us to see through any smokescreen behind which you may seek to hide to avoid accounting to us

So, how has Mr George Galloway been doing in that regard?

That the 'MP' can only be justified to call themselves so and to collect the cash and the perks of 'being an MP' if they are giving their ordinary time, skills and resource to the representation of their constituents is beyond dispute.

Why am I discussing this now?

Topicality is one part of the answer to that question, as Mr Galloway has been accused by a number of his fellow MPs of serious misconduct in relation to his involvement in the ‘Mariam Appeal’ that he helped set up around the plight of an Iraqi child.

The other part of the answer to the question is that Mr Galloway has been unable to show that the accusations were made against him because of those MPs’ prejudice and bias against him. And that those accusations would not stand in a forum that had not consisted of biased and prejudged individuals.

The third component of the answer is that those who have published in apparent defence of Mr Galloway following his [a] ouster and [b] suspension from the House of Commons [Monday last] have done so without themselves showing their reasons for ignoring the rules, the rulings and the requirements of the present House of Commons.

Rules and requirements– leaving aside [for the time being] the rulings, which emanated mainly from the ‘Gorbals Mick’ as Quentin Lett, a recently confirmed’ admirer of Mr Galloway has made an art of calling the current speaker of the House of Commons [on which more in the later parts of this series of comments] – that form parts of the contract between an MP and the managers of the House of Commons.

Those rules and requirements seem to have been acceptable to Mr Galloway on almost all other occasions and in particular including the occasions which a morally engaged and active MP would use to draw attention to the immorality of the rules. What am I referring to here?

I am referring to the rise in MPs’ salary or allowances or income – put it whatever way you like, the facts are the same – that the MPs awarded themselves not all that long ago.

Did Mr Galloway make an issue around that ?

Cannot find any record of his doing that,

And I could count hundreds of instances over the past 20 years [since 1987 when Mr Galloway first arrived in the House of Commons as a result of being elected as a ‘Labour Party MP’] of Mr Galloway making no protest about the immorality, the unethicality, the selfishness, the greediness and the downright institutional and personal abuse, misuse, nepotism, corruption and sleaze that go on under the covers of the ‘House of Commons’ and under the blanket shielding of ‘Parliamentary privilege’.
None of Mr Galloway’s alleged ‘friends’, ‘backers’ has been mentioned these elements. Neither has the so-called mainstream newspaper piece written by a known time-server trendy ‘left-winger’ in the Independent.

Indeed, those that have appeared to praise Mr Galloway for his alleged stand against the House of Commons [last Monday] have done so by claiming that the entire series of events including Mr Galloway’s exchanges – and lack of them – with the House of Commons management over the issue of the Mariam Appeal have been in one word a SERVICE to the cause of opposing the Western ‘war’ on Iraq.

Those are not very informed backers. Those persons appearing to be ‘praising’ Mr Galloway cannot be aware that opposing the attacks on the innocent people of any country, including those in and of Iraq, is above anything else a moral act and that such an act would lose its central credibility if it can be shown that it came from someone who did not attach the utmost importance to the morality or otherwise of their own conduct.


Nor are the ones who confect the so-called ‘inner circle’ apologia in Mr Galloway’s name and post those on the web sites – the number of such web sites seems to be getting bigger now, but including the Socialist Workers Party’s own named web site, the RESPECT ‘coalition’s web site and the web site that is run as part of Mr Galloway’s extra curricular and business engagements.

I here refer to Mr Galloway’s main job as being the ‘Member of Parliament’ for the constituency of Bethnal Green and Bow.




[To be continued]