To echo Nick Cohen, why does the Today Programme find it so difficult to give Galloway a “proper grilling“?
Listen to James Naughtie’s interview with Galloway. When you consider the serious nature of the findings of the Senate Committee, was it not a notably anaemic affair?
Galloway was asked “Were you or he aware of that payment when it was made, and where it came from“. He answered that he did not, griped about his divorce twice, grandstanded about spouses not being regarded as “chattels”, and then shared with the world something I don’t believe his wife has made public before: that she has cancer. Naughtie gave then gave Galloway the opportunity to repeat the denial. And that was that.
Scott Burgess suggests that this is how the interview should have gone.
“But the allegations are that the money was transferred to your wife’s personal account in 2000, quite some time before your separation. Are you really saying that you would have known nothing about a $150,000 payment, made from a close personal friend directly into your wife’s bank account, at that time?”
See? it’s not that hard.
Any mention of the $446,000 alleged to have been received in connection with oil allocations by the Mariam Appeal. And the allegation that “the Hussein regime received improper ‘surcharge’ payments amounting to $1,642,000 in connection with the oil allocations granted to Galloway and the Mariam Appeal“?
The revelation that his wife is being treated for cancer was reportedly repeated on Channel 4 news. I wonder whether she agreed to this broadcasting of her condition.
Scott Burgess is asking readers to chuck him a tenner. Seems fair enough.
(Hat tip: the Popinjays)