So out of touch in his politics and his sexism. Lovely.

‘What a minger, eh lads? And to judge by her name, she is of Islamic extraction, too! In George’s book, the dozy bint should presumably be hiding her ugly and promiscuous mug inside a burka, anyway.’

Now come on. Was this written by a child?

I think the OP may be jumping to conclusions. Galloways comments COULD be taken as referring to Anvar Khan’s looks, or, he could be referring to her previously being with the NOTW.

After all, no matter how lovely Thatcher’s ankles may have been, would you live with yourself after a week in bed with her?

After all, no matter how lovely Thatcher’s ankles may have been, would you live with yourself after a week in bed with her?

Or die a happy man…

Yet another childish, ill thought out article, I only read them as they are all so funny!

(Good Lord I’m sick.)

“And to judge by her name, she is of Muslim extraction, too! In George’s book, the dozy bint should presumably be hiding her ugly and promiscuous mug inside a burka, anyway.”

Erm, Galloway was previously married to one Dr Amineh Abu-Zayyad and later married researcher, Rima Husseini, judging by their names they’re both of Islamic extraction (Palestine and Lebanon respectively) yet to my knowledge neither of them were forced into a burka.

Having read Galloway’s post I can’t see any reference to Anzar Khan’s looks at all, just him saying that he has “reasonable doubts” that an old friend he’s known “man and boy” would have betrayed his wife. Indeed he doesn’t say that he’s “100% certain” he says explicitly that “No one knows what’s going on in other people’s bedrooms. It’s possible that the Tommy I’ve known for nearly 30 years deceived me as to his true character but I don’t think so.”

Oh, pass the vomit bag. This is reminiscent of the Battle of Kylie’s Arse where GG came over all faint in print contemplating La Dinky Diva’s rear end a while back.

GG’s disingenuous argument ignoring the appeal of dirty sex (only if it’s done right, (c) Woody Allen) for some is a mark of how thick our politicians think we are. Women lefties who don’t match GG’s high standards should start considering their position. (Cue smut — and make it good.)

Dave Osler,

this is a rather pathetic piece. Your previous one on Tommy Sheridan actually had some merit, as I acknowledged.

Surely the gist of the George Galloway’s comment is that he is disbelieving. And just going by the character of Anvar Khan, so am I.

Quite frankly the muslim and burka references exposes ignorance more than anything else. Ms Khan is of dual-heritage. Presumably one of those is biased towards latex and the other the burka?

Truly dispiriting!

“What a minger, eh lads? And to judge by her name, she is of Muslim extraction, too! In George’s book, the dozy bint should presumably be hiding her ugly and promiscuous mug inside a burka, anyway.”

What a biased, wilfully misleading article. I really hope people read the blog post in question and make their own minds up. Galloway does not say he is 100% certain of his friend’s innocence at all, in fact he implies otherwise. He doesn’t say, or imply, that we can be sure of Sheridan’s innocence because of Ms Kahn’s physical appearance. And as for saying he is an advocate of the burka, that’s not only obviously untrue but furthermore the decision to wilfully misrepresenting someone in that way is a disgraceful choice, and is completely unnecessary.

i feel very strongly that tommy should appeal
and i hope tommy considers this matter soon

“I spent the last week in a damp bed wrestling with influenza.”

I have a real doubt hat influenza would lower its standards to that extent.

Gorgeous George Galloway, Tommy Sheridan, Arthur Scargill, Gerry Healey. Is there some causal relationship between Revolutionary Socialism & vain, arrogant, mysoginist idiots, or is it simply coincidence ?

How do you justify the words “In George’s book, the dozy bint should presumably be hiding her ugly and promiscuous mug inside a burka, anyway.” If that’s a direct quote of GG then ok, if not then it’s wrongly attributed racism, and probly libellous too.

Oh dear Dave! I have just read this on the Lib Con’spys’ Home page:

“Our aim is to reinvigorate the liberal left in Britain through:

1. Having an intelligent conversation about liberal-left ideas and values”

This article isn’t even faintly funny – it is just scurrilous and childish. Are you sure you mailed it to the right address? It would perhaps be more at home in VIZ – but Lib Con? Intelligent conversation? The mind boggles despairingly. A joke is a joke – but sod a pantomime!
Time to think about your New Year’s Resolutions Dave – do you need any suggestions?

george galloway this song by the beatles sounds ideal for you
GET BACK TO WHERE YOU ONCE BELONGED
IAM SURE YOU WILL
PSYCHIC CHRIS

I normally enjoy your posts, Dave, unless I’m confusing you with another, but this is pretty weak stuff for the most part. Like some other commenters here, I’d be interested in your justification for saying that George Galloway thinks that Muslim women (and indeed women of Muslim extraction) should be forced to wear burkhas.

I also want to point out that it would be far easier to assert casual homophobia on your part from this: “If you are a well-known politician and you pay rent boys to poo in your mouth or go cruising for a gay pick-up on Clapham Common, you are obviously asking for it” than it would be to assert casual sexism from Galloway based on his statement quoted in the article.

you are obviously asking for it

Poor choice of words, there. It looks suspiciously like victim-blaming.

this would be Anvar Khan, “media whore”? as in:

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/393

These postings are not making sense to alternative policy for the future ? They’re just coming over as ya-boo-sucks I don’t like it inane rubbish.

there are a few twisted minds on this site

Another smashing article, full of intelligent and probing thoughts. Oh, wait, hang on a minute, it’s just a piece of scurrilous venomous nonsense – not quite sure how it made its way past the fine LC editors but there you go,

Seriously, this article is worthy of Jan Moir.

Asking for it? Daily Mail grade clap-trap. What on earth were the editors thinking, putting this rubbish up? Too much mulled wine & it’ll be pulled once they sober up, I should hope.

Look, anything that gets the goat of Galloway and Sheridan in one post has my vote.

And Dave even managed to avoid the US-cultural cringe of the word ‘gotten’.

Come on folks, let us be honest, Anvar Khan is big enough and, it really has to be said…
…ugly enough to look after herself.*

Save the political powder for defending people who actually need it

*irony never comes across in mesagge boards, but it worth a try.

“Dave Osler is a regular contributor. He is a British journalist and author, ex-punk and ex-Trot.”

So why does he sound like a homophobic, prudish, sexually repressed, stuck-up establishment stooge?

How… queer.

Galloway aint gonna win in Scotland. Anyone who votes for him need their head examined.

Sometimes it is reasonable to perform a sentence by sentence dissection of an article. On other occasions, it makes more sense to look at a block of words. In this case, Dave O quotes Gorgeous George:

“Maybe [Sheridan] even cheated on his wife Gail, as fragrant and graceful a wife as any man could ever have. With Anvar Khan? But I doubt it. At least I have “reasonable doubts” about it. Which is why the verdict came as such a shock. And why I hope this verdict is appealed.

I spent the last week in a damp bed wrestling with influenza. No floozy, this was the real deal.

Burning temperature, aching bones, chest raw with coughing, hallucinatory dreams. Still, better than a week in bed with Anvar Khan.”

The summary of which is “Anvar Khan”, “floozy”, “Anvar Khan”.

Dave O’s discussion about Gorgeous George’s words requires use of the irony filter. I understand that Glenda Slagg who appears in a fortnightly publication called “Private Eye” uses similar vernacular and tone.

“Gorgeous George Galloway, Tommy Sheridan, Arthur Scargill, Gerry Healey. Is there some causal relationship between Revolutionary Socialism & vain, arrogant, mysoginist idiots, or is it simply coincidence ?

Why mention Arthur Scargill with this bunch??

george galloway will win in scotland and he wont have
to wear his burka watch this space remember bannockburn

@30 Daisy: “Why mention Arthur Scargill with this bunch??”

Autofellatio?

good article. Loads of posters here just dont get it.

I agree with 13.

Galloway is answering calls (all from england) to stand as Sheridans Jesus (the second coming) to Tommys John. The fact is, no-one on the left wants him here – as they didnt when he left.

His coming up here breaks an agreement with the SSP for Respect not to stand up here – he didnt make an agreement with Tommy sheridan he made it with the SSP.

aw well – if he does stand, lets hope the electorate kick his arse. Galloway is only coming up in order to ensure his pension is better than it is. Oh – and he is brit left – which is diametrically opposed to what Sheridan and the SSP are (can’t speak for Solidarity as it SAID it was pro-independence, but was made up with a majority of Brit left organisations such as the CWI and SWP).

I might be prepared to accept GG’s ‘verdict’ on TS and his marital fidelity or otherwise if he hadn’t been a self-confessed adulterer himself and also political friend of TS so hardly independent.

Who can ever forget Gorgeous George being unmasked over his extra-marital frolics in Greece with a colleague from War on Want at a press conference he had called. The wife at that time was his first btw and not one of the other two named by another poster.

As to appealing a jury verdict – well three words come to mind: snowball, chance, hell