Galloway gets a right reeesult

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PartTimePongo, Mar 19, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    Galloway accepts libel damages

    Beers on you then George?

    Now ordinairily, I'd be thinking "You spawny get" , but the mental image of Bluppet choking on his cornflakes has brightened my day considerably :D
  2. Funny...a few months back we were all screaming for him to be hung, drawn and quartered for taking Iraqi blood money. I fell for it, as did many.

    I suspect that it was all a Blair trap...send the press, public and armed forces off on a blood frenzy. Look at how many stories are now shown to have been blatant lies. - the WMD, Galloway, the claims of Iraqi milita shooting the public to stop them fleeing, the covering up of that young Marine lad who was killed by friendly fire. The British public have been had by Mr BLiar I'm afraid.

    He should have been honest and asked squaddies if they fancied a big scrap with lots of murder, rape and looting. F*** me- I'd have my (purchased) body armour on and out the camp in a flash LOL. :D
  3. Just what was the 'lie' about the friendly-fire? Most out there knew about it, as the facts became clear, as was the case with several other incidents. As with all FF incidents they need to be investigated.

    And Galloway should still be sent to the Tower. Or at least tried for sedition.
  4. the way it was reported that his boat was hit by enemy fire and then it all went a bit Jessica Lynch with the govt telling everyone about some phoney fire fight that then happened.
  5. cheers - you beat me to it.

    I don't mind a bit of aggro - it just riles me when the Govt tries to make out that we're conquering heroes saving these people from their WMD-toting President. It's all going a bit Pete Tong.

    I bet he won't go for the WMD-possessing North Korean leader!

  6. got to agree with you there PD
  7. Totally agree with you there and to be honest am rather chuffed about that, I think that to be involved there would be alot more costly than the Gulf was for us in loss of life........ IMHO Mr Bush isnt interested in fighting there anyway because it would be not be thought of as an easy victory....Hmmmm and would that not cost votes ???