Ingrams on George

Here's Richard Ingrams's take on George Galloway on the Hill. I have just received a text message from a friend in Ohio, saying that she has joined Respect following George Galloway's demolition job in Congress. Now, note the fact that "two of America's most prestigious papers, the Washington Post and the New York Times," failed to report the proceedings.

George and the dragon

Galloway's knack of making smug Americans mad is his star quality

Richard Ingrams
Sunday May 22, 2005
The Observer

When George Galloway wrote his autobiography the publishers asked me for a quote to put on the cover which hopefully would help to boost sales. My submission ran as follows: 'George Galloway is awful - but I like him!'

For some reason, however, it failed to find favour and was not used. Yet it seemed to be the response of many people last week who up till then had failed to warm to the newly-elected member for Bethnal Green and Bow. Whatever their doubts and misgivings, they could not conceal their delight in the way the MP had flown to Washington and berated a group of smug-looking senators sitting in judgment on him.

Journalists like myself will also have relished his description of our own Bush-supporting hack, Mr Christopher Hitchens, described, accurately, by the MP as a 'drink-sodden former Trotskyite popinjay'.

The general satisfaction here perhaps had less to do with whether or not people supported the invasion of Iraq and more simply to do with seeing pompous Americans made to look foolish. Because when it comes to pomposity there is nothing to beat a pompous American, and if anything their journalists are even more pompous than their politicians.

Thus it was noted that Galloway's telling remark that, contrary to what was alleged, he had met Saddam Hussein no more often than Donald Rumsfeld (who had actually sold him weapons), this was not reported the following day in two of America's most prestigious papers, the Washington Post and the New York Times.

Why ever not? The only possible explanation would be that they considered it disrespectful towards a distinguished American statesman.