Iraq

“Progressive”

You will remember George Galloway’s idiosyncratic view that Syria is a “castle of Arab dignity“, ruled by Bashar al-Assad, a man who Syria is “lucky to have … as her President.”

George Galloway has now given an interview for a Canadian magazine, the Eye – not online – during the course of which he has expanded upon the basis of his support for the present regime in Syria:

“The alternative govt in Syria is not democratic, but Islamic fundamentalist. I’m one of these people who doesn’t like IF, and wants secular nationalist progressive political forces to rule the Arab world. But they don’t. Because they’ve failed in all the goals that the Arab people have. The reason they’ve failed is because the West has ensured they’ve failed, and has ensured that the alternative of IF is seen as the hope by hundreds of millions of Arabs who are bitterly disappointed in the failure of Arab nationalism.”

Well that’s nice, then. Galloway’s real sympathies are with “progressive political forces“.

Unfortunately, in the same interview he goes and spoils it all:

Tariq Aziz is a very civilised and sophisticated man. If he’d been the leader of Iraq, we would not be having this conversation because Iraq would not be in the mess its in. … He’s not a compromised figure, and most people who’ve met him don’t think so, either. If you knew him, you’d understand what I’m talking about.

Ho hum.

Still, if you agree with George’s take on what constitutes “progressive political forces“, or indeed, with his conception of “not compromised“, you can sign his petition for the release of Tariq Aziz here

(Hat tip: Johann H)

Share this article.

shares