Greg Palast opted for Colemanesque innuendo in lieu of new evidence that George Galloway is guilty of profitting from Mariam’s Appeal and the oil-for-food programme. He chastised people on the “left” for not casting Galloway down into the tar pits of terrorist sympathisers along with an unnamed, unsourced writer, he says, supports Iraq’s insurgency. He pleads with the “left” to condemn Galloway asking, “Are we about standing for the defenseless — or the cruel and senseless?”
Palast may have addressed this somewhere, somehow, that I can’t find through search engines, but it doesn’t appear that he’s hustling to answer that same question when it’s directed his way.
Also from Mr. Palast:
“When a snake devours a rat, it doesn’t liberate the captive mice. The mice are “saved” — for lunch.”
Greg is a regular contributor to a magazine that considers this a tasty morsel. (Be advised of this warning before clicking that link.)
I’m not anti-porn. I agree with Drucilla Cornell who argues that feminists should focus “on unleashing the feminine imaginary, rather than on constraining men.” But pedophilia is indefensible.
As for “unconditionally supporting the insurgency” or “anti-Bush” being the only leftist responses to occupation that Palast’s read I can’t imagine why he would write that but if he’s saying it’s time to choose sides in Iraq’s civil war, I strongly oppose taking one. And since the United States cannot in the wildest of any imaginings effectively or fairly broker a peace deal between Sunni, Shi’ites and Kurds, even if its military personnell were to stand down as it attempted to do so, the only logical and mercifull position to take is immediate withdrawal.