I'm not keen on the guy at all.
Some of what he says makes sense, but then again, I can say the same thing about just about any politician. Its just that some of them you have to pick out smaller and smaller bits for context, lol.

His tiananmen square rant is a classic.

andyh wrote:
This guy is new to me the videos I just posted are the only few of his I have watched yet.

As an American I thought they were exactly what we need to hear more of in the US.

I love when people are hardcore Anti-War like that when they speak to the public.

Im going to youtube this tiananmen square rant now.

Andy Is he from Ireland? feel free to post all his best youtube videos in this thread.

He is Scottish and I think he is a good bloke. I have not followed his every move but I have not seen any reason to dislike him.

i-baster wrote:
See above.

RealAmerican wrote: Galloway is Scottish.

He did have some useful things to say in the US Senate:



However, he has a monstrous ego, as evidenced by the fact that he agreed to appear on Big Brother. Even if he was the best human-being who ever lived - and I disagree with several of his views so I wouldn't attribute that title to him - there is just no comeback for me if you've agreed to appear on that programme. He claims that he was misled by directors the extent to which he would be able to have his views broadcast. But really, if he genuinely believed they were going to broadcast his views he's a complete idiot, which I don't believe for one second, as he would have had loads of advisers who would obviously have told him that his views wouldn't have been broadcast. It was a pure and simple PR vehicle, not for his views, but for him, as is virtually everything he does. There may be some sincerity in there somewhere, but you'd need to dig through a lot of self-interest to find it.

Surely though if you write or put views in any media format then there has to be an element of ego and if you go on Big Brother then maybe somebody will buy your book or give it a look at least. I don`t think it is so bad to go on a show even if that show has no merit in your eyes. It is an experience, maybe not one you personally might be interested in but you can learn from experiences like that.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-wight/geor...3.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

I'd rather "raise my profile" on merit than declare myself a celebrity and put on lycra and pretend to be a kitten.

I often agree with things Galloway says but he is undoubtedly a self-promoting opportunist who tends to use soaring rhetoric to the extent it makes him look ridiculous and consequently diverts from and weakens his point.

i-baster wrote:
Yea, I can only imagine that Alex Jones & David Icke would love to be on big brother.

RealAmerican wrote:
Nuff said!

i-baster wrote: I can agree with the first part of the first sentence, but appearing on a programme that is notoriously exploitative is no way to get your views across to people.
RealAmerican wrote: Actually, Icke was offered the 'opportunity', and I use the term loosely, to appear on the programme and declined.

wake_up_bomb wrote:
I would think that David Icke, Alex Jones or any other of the people in the Conspiracy world would wan't to do anything they can to get on the MSM and try to wake up the Masses.

It seems rather snobbish to judge somebody negatively for being on a t.v. show to me personally. No offense to anybody here is intended by that I just think some people are too quick to judge others. If you were seriously offered to go on a show maybe you would say no but would it be that bad if you said "yeah o.k. we can give this a go". Life is about trying things and challenging yourself and mixing with people who you might not normally and going on big brother seems like a fun way to do some of those things.

I've also met the guy. I trust my instincts.

oioioi wrote: Where's your sense of fun

RealAmerican wrote: There will be no opportunity to do this on Big Brother, they don't broadcast anything of substance,and bleep out anything that their lawyers tell them might be defamatory or libellous.i-baster wrote: Well, this is putting a very positive spin on it. The programme is completely exploitative of the people that appear on it, and its audience. The dynamic is slightly different when it's 'celebrities' appearing on it, as it tends to be used as a way for them to resurrect their dwindling careers. Nevertheless, it is still exploitative. Just the idea of agreeing to have your every move filmed and broadcast live on TV is exploitation. I wouldn't go anywhere near it under any circumstances, but of course other people are free to make up their own mind. But in the case of Galloway, I find it very hard to believe that no-one was able to advise him that absolutely none of his views would be broadcast under any circumstances. He claimed he wasn't aware of this, but I find this phenomenally unlikely.

Guevarista wrote:
I stop laughing each time I see what damage Galloway does for a cause by speaking up for it.