Scurrilous George

By Norm Coleman
July 24, 2007
The Wall Street Journal
Original Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118524076303375746.html
Two years ago George Galloway, a member of the British Parliament, came to the U.S. and attempted to make a mockery of an investigation into allegations of corruption within the United Nation's Oil for Food program. Readers will remember that Oil for Food started as a way to feed Iraqi children, but became a vehicle that Saddam Hussein used for bribery and extortion.
Mr. Galloway dismissed accusations that he benefited substantially through a charity he was involved with (the Mariam Appeal), from Saddam. Evidence that he and the Appeal had received lucrative oil benefits had been released by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, of which I was chairman. In testimony to the subcommittee, Mr. Galloway denied the accusations and later attacked the integrity of his accusers, including me. His bombastic denials won him international attention.
But now, thanks to an investigation conducted by the British Parliament, the truth is out. Last week the House of Commons's Committee on Standards and Privileges issued a damning report presenting undeniable evidence that Mr. Galloway and his political operation at the Mariam Appeal benefited from Saddam's regime through Oil for Food. This report is the fourth official investigation -- from the U.N. to the U.S. to the U.K. -- to condemn Mr. Galloway for his misconduct.
The committee report, which is remarkably thorough and objective, is highly critical of Mr. Galloway, ruling that he violated the House of Commons Code of Conduct on numerous different counts. In fact, the committee ruled against Mr. Galloway on every count brought against him. It concluded that Mr. Galloway, through his extensive misconduct, brought the House into disrepute. It also chastised him for his inappropriate conduct throughout their investigation, including making inconsistent statements, acting belligerently and verbally attacking key witnesses. Mr. Galloway has consistently denied, prevaricated and fudged in relation to the now undeniable evidence that his political operation (and he indirectly) received money from Saddam Hussein's regime via Oil for Food.
The committee recommends suspension from the House of Commons for a month -- a rare and severe punishment -- and that Mr. Galloway apologize to Parliament for his improper behavior.
The report relied heavily on evidence uncovered by my subcommittee, the U.N.'s investigation and the U.K. Charity Commission. But the Parliament report went further, even enlisting a forensic scientist to determine that other official Iraqi documents, which provide detailed descriptions of Mr. Galloway's personal involvement in nefarious deals, were authentic. Moreover, the report reveals the official Iraqi minutes of a meeting between Mr. Galloway and Saddam in which Mr. Galloway overtly discusses Iraqi oil deals -- the very deals he's denied knowing about. According to the minutes, which have been authenticated by the Iraqi government, Mr. Galloway complained to Saddam that problems with oil prices are reducing our income and delaying our dues.
These documents should quash any notion that Mr. Galloway did not know about oil transactions and had no idea his wife and his political operation were receiving under-the-table money. In short, this report and the volumes of evidence presented in it appear to confirm that Mr. Galloway was neck-deep in Oil for Food deals and that his vociferous denials were nothing more than a web of misleading half-truths.
Mr. Galloway is already claiming that the Parliament's report relies on fraudulent documents and mendacious witnesses. His shtick rings hollow. It is clear that he is putting up (to borrow his words) the mother of all smokescreens.
Consider that roughly six months after his Senate testimony, in October 2005, my subcommittee released another report presenting extensive evidence that Mr. Galloway's testimony was filled with false or misleading statements. That evidence included bank records showing that his wife received $150,000 from an Oil for Food deal, and that the political operation he portrayed as a children's charity received at least $446,000 from oil deals. Days later, the U.N.'s investigative committee revealed a different oil deal in which $120,000 went to Mr. Galloway's wife, and other deals in which hundreds of thousands of dollars went to his political operation.
More recently, the U.K. Charity Commission, concluding that the Mariam Appeal improperly received at least $376,000 from Oil for Food deals, chastised Mr. Galloway, and the Appeal's other trustees, for breaching their duties.
At each point, Mr. Galloway has vehemently denied every accusation and all the evidence. But the record should be clear: Mr. Galloway appears to have been personally involved in oil deals under the Oil for Food program and indirectly -- through his political operation and his wife -- received hundreds of thousands of dollars as a result. The U.K. report exposes a fraud who personally benefited at the expense of the Iraqi people -- the very people he was pretending to help.
Mr. Coleman is a Republican senator from Minnesota.