George Galloway


UK’s GCHQ Doing the NSA's Heavy Lifting   Part 1

23 December 2013, 13:20

Download audio file

The United Kingdom has been co-opted by the United States to carry out illegal surveillance and spying on its own citizens and on European countries, their citizens and officials. According to UK Member of Parliament, George Galloway, the way that the UK spyies on and hacks the phones of European leaders, while being paid a very small amount, is a crime against the world. Mr. Galloway described the way imperial powers and capitalist countries pretend to maintain  legality as "lipstick on a pig".  In an interview with the Voice of Russia’s John Robles, Mr. Galloway also discussed his upcoming documentary,  financed by donations from common UK citizens, titled "The Killing of Tony Blair" in which he will exposewhat he claims are heinous crimes committed by the former prime minister.

This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with George Galloway, a member of the British Parliament. This is Part 1 of a longer interview. 

Robles: Hello, Mr. Galloway. It's a great pleasure speaking with you, I'm actually an admirer of yours from way back. 

Galloway:Thank you! No, the pleasure is mine, thanks. 

Robles: Thanks. First question I'd like to ask you about… if we could talk a little bit about your film that you are putting together regarding Tony Blair and his war crimes… 

Galloway: Yes, not just his war crimes, but those will loom large in the charge sheet that the film intends to make. 

It's called "The Killing of Tony Blair," it's a triple entendre. It deals with his "killing of the Labor Party," as we knew it, a party that working people in Britain had come to depend on for the best part of a century and which was murdered by him, and turned into quite the opposite of what it was intended to be. 

The second "killing of Tony Blair," of course, is the killing of a million people in Iraq and Afghanistan and by extension in Lebanon and in Palestine and other places. 

And the third "killing" is the financial killing that he is making out of the previous two killings, having made the British economy more comfortable for the corporations, making their income tax bills shrink, easing their regulatory burden. He's being rewarded by them now at vast eye-watering salaries as a consultant (whatever that means) for a variety of sundry corporations. 

And of course having helped various tyrannies around the world he is now on the payroll of more countries than it is almost possible in one radio broadcast to adumbrate. 

Some of them are very dodgy indeed, the Kuwait Royal Family for example, the previous Gaddafi dictatorship, and of course the government of South Sudan has also been the beneficiary of Mr. Blair's "wisdom" and their country, the poorest in the world, the most corrupt in the world, just fell apart this very week and has collapsed as a state. 

So, I'm not sure why these countries want to hire Mr. Blair. He did enough damage to the British economy. I don't know why anyone else would want to employ him. But there you go. 

Robles: I see. You mentioned Kuwait, Sudan, what about Saudi Arabia? Now there are coming out more and more revelations about their involvement with the 9-11 and terrorist groups in Syria, etc. 

Galloway:Well of course, he is up to his neck with them, as the so-called "Peace Envoy," and one of the objectives of our film is to have him dismissed from that position, which is I've said is the most inappropriate appointment since Caligula appointed his own horse as a Proconsul of Rome. 

Mr. Blair is dripping in the blood of the people of the Middle East. And yet he's employed by The Quartet as its Peace Envoy. But, so, he is up to his neck with the Saudis in that. I am not able to say at this point what if any financial involvement he has with them but of course he works for a number of corporations who do very big business throughout the Gulf, and that would not exclude Saudi Arabia. 

Robles: I see. Now, you mentioned a number of a "million" people, I think it is purposefully obfuscated, the number of people that have died in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Libya, that are being killed in Syria, etc. Where did you get your number of one million? 

Galloway:Well, the Johns Hopkins University, one of the world's greatest, and the Lancet, the journal of the British Medical Association, their estimation is that more than one million people have died in Iraq as a direct and indirect result of Blair and Bush's invasion. And I think you don't have to be Einstein to work it out: a vast number of people were killed in the "shock and awe" of the initial invasion,and then of course the "serpent" of sectarianism was unleashed by the war and occupation, and deliberately fostered by the occupation. And it’s now taking a daily death toll in Iraq, almost as high as it ever was, at the very highest point of the post invasion killing around 2006 and 2007

And of course, you rightly say, the same mindset - although Mr. Blair had gone from office - the same mindset is involved in the imperial attacks against Libya and the one that was putative attack against Syria, and also those plans that definitely existed for an attack on Iran. All of these things run out of the same stable as the Bush and Blair stable. 

Just a reminder, you are listening to an interview with George Galloway 

Robles: You mentioned Syria, I'd like to complement you. I feel you were instrumental in preventing another invasion. I watched (we watched) your speech in front of the Parliament. 

Galloway:Well, it is kind of you to say that. I must say that in a lifetime in politics I don't think I ever experienced a better day, than the day that in our debate in the British Parliament, my own speech being one of two or three, perhaps four, taken at the very height of the debate definitely switched the audience, no doubt. And we only won by 13 votes, which means if we hadn't persuaded 7 people,if those 7 had voted the other way, then Britain would now be at war with Syria, and Iran by extension, and with Russia and China on the other side. And that would be a catastrophe hardly worth thinking about. 

Robles: Now, I've heard you speak about conspiracy theories before, and stuff,and I know you take a very realistic “show me the evidence” type of stand, I think, if I understand properly? 

Galloway:Yes, yes, you are right. 

Robles: Do you think…? This has been said several times by several people and some people I've interviewed that: they don't care, they would love to start – "they" meaning the banksters, or the elites or the 1 percent or whatever you want to call them - it would be very profitable for them to start World War 3, and they don't really care about anything? 

Galloway:Up to a point, John. Because if there has been war throughout the region, all-out-war throughout the region, then you wouldn't have been able to purchase a barrel of oil, not at $150, not at $550. And the British and other western economies would have slumped into collapse. 

So, of course, there are always some who profit from war. But few would have profited from that war, which is one of the reasons why I think the imperial powers have stepped back from it. 

It is a rather more complex matter. I don't buy the thesis that the 1 percent are organized in a kind of Bilderberg type of formation. It’s rather more complex than that. The oligarchies and the political elites just all automatically face the same direction because they have the same interests, by and large. They don't need a conference to discuss it, they don't need even a telephone call between each other in order to coordinate it. They, as a matter of instinct know which way to face in any conflict, in any big issue. 

And that’s not surprising because, well, on the other side I also instinctively know which way to face, I also can ask my question of "who benefits cui bono." And that gives me a diametrically opposite conclusion to them. 

So, and I don't need to consult anyone, I didn't need to consult Moscow in the old days, and I don't need to consult anybody now. I know what is in the interests of the mass of the working people, and the poor and the downtrodden of the world, and I know what is in the interests of the rulers of the world. And I'm with the poor and the working people always. 

Robles: Wonderful to hear that. Very few people will dare, especially with some sort of power, will dare to take that position. I think the record has shown that is entirely the case, and you should be commended for that. 

Galloway:Well, I once said, John, to a certain Senator, now ex-Senator Norman Coleman in the US Senate in 2005, when he was trying to push me around procedurally before we got started. I said: "Senator, don't make the mistake of imagining that I'm afraid of you. I'm afraid only of God." And that is the way that I conduct my life. 

Just a reminder, you are listening to an interview with George Galloway- 

Robles: You are in the halls of power, I mean you are dealing with things and you are witness to things that most people don't know about that are affecting everybody. I'd like to ask your opinion about all the illegality. I mean where do they get this carte blanche? 

Galloway:Well, John, I never put much store in their faith, or faith in their attitude to legality. I think this is lipstick on a pig. The capitalist states and the imperial powers – this is all just window dressing – its cosmetic. They talk about Law, but they practice something completely different overseas, and now increasingly in their decline they are practicing that same something different in their own countries. 

Let's just take one example. Edward Snowden's revelations which were a signal service to humanity, for which he should get the Nobel Peace Prize, were treated by the British State as an act of terrorism. And the British State then began acting like a pirate. 

The Guardian Newspaper, one of the great liberal institutions in the land, was raided by the political police with sledgehammers; I'm not making this up. And with those sledgehammers they,by force and without the permission of the owners of the computers, namely the Guardian Newspaper, smashed the hard drives – smashed them into pieces – so as to destroy evidence of malfeasance and wrong doing on the part of the British State. 

Now, such actions would have been caricatured in the past by the British State as being the kind of thing that happens in dictatorships and autocracies, the kind of thing that happens anywhere except Britain. But it did happen in Britain and it happened in 2013. 

So, I'm afraid it’s all just a veneer, that is very easily shredded, and if the British State had to, it would cast that veneer aside altogether. 

So, I never place much faith in laws and justice. At the end of the day all states will treat existential threats to their own continuance in exactly the same way. 

Robles: Do you think that the UK has lost a lot of sovereignty to the US, especially with all this NSA spying and stuff? Or is that…? 

Galloway:No, I do, I believe that the British State has essentially rented itself out, I don't want to be too candid in the analogy, but it has

Robles: I was going to say lapdog, but I tried not to. 

Galloway:Well it’s worse than that. It has prostituted itself to the United States. The GCHQ at Cheltenham is doing most of the heavy lifting for the National Security Agency, in the illegal vacuuming of the spectrum, and is collecting uncountable scores of millions of telephone calls, texts and e-mails every day across Europe, and further beyond, as the fiber optics cross the British landmass, coming from the United States across the Atlantic and thence to Europe. 

Now, the British State is doing this through GCHQ because of the fact that there are more restrictions on the American State – imagine - the American State is more circumscribed by law than the British State is. 

So the British hire themselves out to the US to carry out those things which would be illegal in the United States and hand over the rest. And by the way, if we are talking of prostitution, the price is no more than a $20 hooker, metaphorically speaking. We get 120 million pounds per year for carrying out this crime against the world, hacking the telephone of other European state’s people. For £120 million a year - my goodness! How cheap do you think we are? Well, pretty cheap as it turns out. 

That was the end of Part 1 of an interview with British Member of Parliament George Galloway. You can find the next part of this interview on our website at Thank you very much for listening, and as always I wish you all the best, and Happy Holidays wherever you may be

President Putin Man of the Year - Obama an Empty Raincoat – Part 2

26 December 2013, 03:21

Download audio file  

With regard to Syria, President Vladimir Putin, in the words of George Galloway, "played a blinder" and prevented a cataclysm for the entire world an accomplishment more than worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was also instrumental in preventing the evisceration of the Syrian people and Syria and also had a "great year". Outspoken defender of rule of law, sovereignty and the rights of the people, British MP George Galloway, spoke with the Voice of Russia about these issues and more. Calling US President Obama an "empty raincoat", he blasted Obama’s hypocrisy and callousness with regard to his attitude to the mothers of children who are "eviscerated by Hellfire Missiles" under Obama’s illegal and extra-judicially murder by drone of people around the world.

This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with George Galloway, a member of the British Parliament. This is part 2 of an interview in progress. You can find the previous and the following parts of this interview on our website at

Robles: Can I ask your opinion, since this is the Voice of Russia, what is your opinion about Russia’s position on Syria?

Galloway: President Putin is my man of the year. And I don’t see how anyone could stand up against that nomination. He really has played a blinder, first of all on the Snowden affair and then seizing the moment: I mean, John Kerry was in London when he presented that opportunity, when he said at a press conference with William Hague beside him, he said that: "… the only thing that can stop this imminent attack is for President Assad to give up his chemical weapons in their entirety."

And as soon as I heard that, I realized that an opening had just presented itself, that no sooner had Kerry spoken, when President Putin and Minister Lavrov, who is another man who has had a great year, seized that opportunity and saved the world from a cataclysm. And if you don’t get a Nobel Peace Prize for that, I'm not sure what you’d get it for. Perhaps, like Obama, you get it for actually creating war and mayhem around the world.

Robles: I think that Nobel has lost its credibility anyway, especially with Obama. I mean, they should have demanded it back. He is engaged in continuous, open extra-judicial execution and he is non-apologetic about it.

Galloway: That’s right! And he holds a meeting every week, I think it is on Thursday, but it may be on Tuesday…

Robles: Terror Tuesday.

Galloway: It’s Tuesday. He goes through a kill list and signs people’s death warrants. Absolutely extra-judicially, extra-territorially, murderously. And yet at Sandy Hook and other places, he goes there and sobs and breaks into tears rolling down his face over the death of innocents in these maniacal shootouts in American schools. But it doesn’t seem to occur to him that mothers whose children are eviscerated by these Hellfire Missiles, are crying just the same as the mothers at Sandy Hook.

Robles: What did you think about Obama at Nelson Mandela’s funeral? I’m sure you know what I’m talking about.

Galloway: I do, of course. I felt that the Obama myth has survived in some parts of the world, perhaps, obviously and particularly in Africa, but in truth President Obama is just an empty suit. The only thing that he has going for him, the only thing that is praiseworthy about him, is that he was a black man who got elected as President of the US.

He is a little better, if better at all, than George W. Bush, and you can’t say worse than that. And he doesn’t even have the alibi that George W. Bush had of being an imbecile. President Obama is a professor. He is probably the best educated president there’s ever been. And the alibi that Bush had just doesn't wash with him. So, that is all the more condemnable.

Robles: Who would you say…? People have said: "Well, it is not his fault, there is this shadow government controlling everything, it is the CIA, it is the banking interests and monied interests that are controlling everything, it is not Obama’s fault that he betrayed his own people and everybody else when he became President."

Galloway: I just don’t buy that. The elected President of the US is the most powerful man in the world. And that, at the beginning of his first term in his landslide victory, with the American capitalism on its knees, with the country embroiled in unpopular and losing wars, it was open to Obama to become Roosevelt +. He could have utterly transformed the landscape and he utterly failed to do so. He is just an empty raincoat, I’m sorry.

Robles: That’s true! I mean, even black Americans, they are worse off now than they were even in the 60s, when they were trying to get out of segregation. And they can’t say anything, the liberal left can’t say anything in the US against Obama because he is supposed to be "their" man. How can you say something bad about the first black president in history? But…

Galloway: You know, feminists, were equally wrong footed, when Margaret Thatcher became the Prime Minister of Britain in 1979, for a decade they had been telling us how different things would be if only women were in the top positions of power, how many fewer wars there would be, how much less aggression there would be in public life, how nicer and kinder and gentler politics would be. And Mrs. Thatcher came along and proved that it is not the presence of testicles in a leader that makes them venal, it is the politics and the economic beliefs that they have running through their veins; that’s what counts.

Robles: Well I think it’s what they have as well - a complete lack of conscience. Speaking about Thatcher, I was shocked when I found out about the people she’d let that had starved themselves to death.

Galloway: Indeed, the Irish hunger strikers were willfully starved to death by the Thatcher administration, and ten men were dead and blood flooded pitifully in Ireland and in Britain for many-many years, directly as a result of her obduracy. She thought nothing of assassination, she thought nothing of killing and she certainly thought nothing of laying waste industrial Britain and leaving it as a kind of postindustrial slagheap which sowed problems an ocean deep.

Robles: She devastated, as I understand, all the unions and all the working collectives and everything.

Galloway: Indeed, she destroyed the trade unionism; she destroyed 35% of manufacturing capacity in Britain which was considerably more than Hitler’s Luftwaffe managed to do. And her legacy is still causing grief and pain, even now that she is dead and twenty years after she left office.

Robles: I would call you, if don’t mind, a champion of legality and rule of law. I think you are one of the few people that I’ve heard that I agree with almost everything you say. Sergey Lavrov and President Putin have also been calling on the rule of law in solving conflicts, respect for sovereignty, respect for international law. Do you see any way to bring back, or rein in, or somehow bring sanity back into the world?

Galloway: We have to draw a line in the sand now. And that line should have been drawn over Libya. The Libyan dictatorship was a vile one. And it took an act of real genius to replace the vile dictatorship of Gaddafi with a worse set of rulers than existed before them. And this should have been stopped, and it wasn’t.

And Russia and China should have vetoed the proposal to impose the NATO-led no-fly zone on Libya, which became not a no-flies but a plenty-fly zone, it became a free-bomb zone. And it led to the thirst for regime change by foreign attack, invasion of one kind or another, and that thirst becoming literally ravenous. And we are lucky that we stopped it after Libya, and we had to.

We have to undo the Blair-Chicago doctrine – this notion of a responsibility to protect – which of course is open to the interpretation of any member state. I mean, for example, according to the Chicago doctrine which has been now used in Yugoslavia…

Robles: You are speaking about NATO doctrines, as far as I know.

Galloway: Yes, but they have been allowed to become United Nation’s doctrine. They were stopped by Russia and China over Syria. But they must be rolled back, because if you allow any member state to invade any other member state, because it claims that it has a responsibility to protect people in that country, then the recipe for a total international anarchy is complete.

Imagine now, if President Putin were to invade Ukraine, he could easily claim that he had a responsibility to protect the Russian-speaking people there and he could move the Russian armed forces in there. He could easily have done so in Latvia and Lithuania, and other places where the rights and even the safety of Russian-speaking people there were being prejudiced, some of them extreme prejudiced.

You simply can’t have a world where any member of the United Nations can invade any other member on the basis of this responsibility to protect. We have to go back to a time, it seems long and distant. Alas, I’ve lived long enough to remember when it was the norm, which is that every nation state is sovereign and that it has sovereign rights, and one of those sovereign rights is not to be invaded and occupied and regime-changed by other states. We have to get back to that situation or the world will become increasingly lawless and anarchic.

That was the end of part 2 of an interview with British Member of Parliament George Galloway. You can find the previous and following parts of this interview on our website at Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you all the best, and happy holidays wherever you may be.

The US is a Knuckle-Dragging, Low Grade Moronic Culture - Part 3

29 December 2013, 18:02 Download audio file

The high point of the American Empire has passed and mercifully we have emerged intact from the 20 very dangerous years during which the United States was the sole superpower in the world. We must never allow ourselves to endure that trial again. Power in the world is now passing to the East, to China, to Russia and to other rising nations as the United States is an aging tiger whose teeth are falling out. This was stated in an interview which outspoken and brutally honest British MP George Galloway granted to the Voice of Russia's John Robles. With regard to US surrogate NATO which is circling both Russia and China with bases and nuclear weapons, he labeled it an "imperial war machine" and called it "the greatest danger to peace and security in the world." Mr. Galloway was also candid on his assessment of Saudi Arabia which he called a "gangster state" with Prince Bandar acting as chief capo who delivers severed horse's heads into the bed of whomsoever they wish to intimidate. As for Ukraine Mr. Galloway put the situation into stark perspective by saying: "Can you imagine what would happen if President Putin went to the streets of Toronto on street demonstrations whipping up anti-American feeling, in neighboring country. And yet this is precisely what is happening on the front line in Kiev now," he added; again President Putin has again played a masterful diplomatic game. As for declining US hegemony he stated: "… they are losing and losing and losing. … they are losing because their power is waning, because hard power is waning, their financial power is defunct and their soft power, their cultural power is virtually non-existent. Anyone who takes a look at John McCain and thinks that that is a cultural soft power icon to desire, to head towards, would need their head examined. This is knuckle-dragging, low grade moronic culture," he stated.

This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with George Galloway, a member of the British Parliament. This is part 3 of an interview in progress.

Robles: Another country that, I just want to add to your list, was Saudi Arabia when Prince Bandar threatened terrorist attacks on the Olympic Games in Sochi. Russia would have had every right to just wipe it off the map. 

Galloway: Well, Saudi Arabia is a gangster state and Bandar is increasingly the chief capo. He is the man who goes around delivering the severed horse's headinto the bed of whomsoever they wish to intimidate. 

They try bribery first of all and then they try browbeating, and finally they are ready to bully through the use of their surrogate auxiliary terrorist army. 

And they found that President Putin could be neither bribed nor bullied, and he was sent away with a flea in his ear. But he was very lucky; it was only a flea in his ear. Frankly if he'd tried it with me he'd have gone home without an ear. 

Robles: Yeah, I mean, you don't threaten a nuclear superpower, I'm sorry, the West can say whatever they want but Russia is still a nuclear power. You don't tell a president: "We are going to unleash Al Qaeda; we control your Chechen terrorists". What about Scotland? You are Scottish, yes, sir? 

Galloway: Yes, I am, yes. 

Robles: What about Scottish independence? Do you think that will happen? How is it going? 

Galloway: I don't think it will happen and I don't want it to happen. I'm against the breakup of states. This small country has been one country for more than 300 years. We speak the same language, we have a common language, a common culture, a common economic situation and once upon a time, if only briefly, we did some good things in the world, particularly in 1940 and 1941 when we stood alone against Fascist barbarism,and we didn't ask the people who did so whether they were Scottish or whether they were English. 

And I just think that working people divided are always weakened, working people together will be stronger. So, I was against the breakup of Yugoslavia, I was against the breakup of the USSR, I can hardly be in favor of the breakup of this small country. 

Robles: Ok. Can you give us your opinion of sovereignty in the EU with regard to, for example, Ukraine and how much do countries lose in terms of sovereignty in your opinion when they join the EU? 

Galloway: Before I answer that, let me just make this point. Can you imagine what would happen if President Putin went to the streets of Toronto on street demonstrations whipping up anti-American feeling, in neighboring country. And yet this is precisely what is happening on the front line in Kiev now. European and North American politicians are on the streets of Russia's neighboring country whipping up anti-Russian feeling. But it seems to me, maybe I'm wrong - you will know better than I - but it's running out of steam. 

Again President Putin with his economic arrangements that he has now made with the President of Ukraine has again played a masterful diplomatic game. And the European Union, virtually bankrupt, is not in a position to match what Russia can do to help Ukraine in this terrible economic situation that it is in. 

But to answer your point, the European Union is a good idea in principle. It has stopped the countries of the west of Europe in the first instance, from attacking each other, and murdering each other in their millions, which they did from 1870 until 1945, three times at least. And that is a good thing. 

It is a good thing if working people in the European continent, not only within the boundaries of the European Union but throughout the European continent, can reach a common agreements on social policy, on environmental issues, on issues of social security and even common defense. There is nothing wrong with any of these things. 

But the European Union is utterly dysfunctional when it comes to the manner in which it is run and the free market banking principles on which it is based. 

We have a Reganite-Thatcherite European Central Bank which sets monetary and fiscal policy for the Franco-German center and not for the periphery even of Western Europe, never mind Central and Eastern Europe as they become more often members of the European Union. 

So it is a very dysfunctional organization, it is broke and it ought to fix its own problems rather than sticking its nose into the problems of Ukraine and the Ukraine's relationship with Russia. 

Robles: I see. And by extension – NATO, what is your opinion about NATO and their expansion? 

Galloway: Well, NATO is an imperial war machine; its name is increasingly of course a misnomer. The North Atlantic has been stretched as a geographical definition as far as the desserts of North Africa. And the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is circling both Russia and China with bases and nuclear armed warships and airplanes and so on. And it is the greatest danger to peace and security in the world. 

And one of the many reasons why I find the call for Scottish independence implausible is that the Independence Party plans on making the independent Scotland a member of NATO which makes a mockery of its professed intention to be rid of nuclear weapons. You cannot be rid of nuclear weapons whilst joining a nuclear armed club. 

Robles: Do you see NATO weakening or just growing and growing beyond all control? 

Galloway: No, no, they are definitely weakening. The high point of the American Empire has passed as the high point of the British Empire before it passed. 

Power is passing to the East, to China, to Russia and to other rising countries in the East and the South. I wouldn't say as Chairman Mao said 30 years or 40 years, prematurely, that the United States was a paper tiger, but it is definitely an aging tiger whose teeth are beginning to fall out. 

Robles: I see. Very well put, thank you sir - brilliant. 

Galloway: Thank you. 

Robles: If I could last, very last point and then I'll let you go: Ukraine, right; Syria, we think Ukraine it was like revenge for their loss in Syria, right? Now if they lose in Ukraine what is the next hot spot going to be in your opinion? 

Galloway: Well, the thing is they are losing and losing and losing. Now that might make them more angry but it doesn't make them more able to win. They are losing because they are losing, they are losing because their power is waning, because hard power is waning, their financial power is defunct and their soft power, their "cultural power" is virtually non-existent. 

Anyone who takes a look and a listen to John McCain and thinks that that is a cultural soft power icon to desire, to head towards, would need their head examined. This is knuckle-dragging, low grade moronic culture. And I don't think that the great people of the Ukraine or in many other places are attracted to the soft power of the United States. The United States doesnot have the financial and economic wherewithal to make it worth their while. 

So people are increasingly looking to themselves I hope, and looking elsewhere to other rising powers in the world. And let's hope that in the next year and the next decade we have a number of great powers in the world. 

Mercifully we have emerged intact from the very dangerous twenty years in which the United States was the sole superpower in the world, we escaped that and we must never allow ourselves to endure that trial again. 

Robles: I see. Can we finish up with your film? Can you give us a few details, maybe plug it if you want to, tell us where can we go to see it. I understand your film is very unique in that it's being funded by the people. 

Galloway: Yes, the Killing of Tony Blair began on Kickstarter, which is a crowd-funding mechanism. We asked for £50,000 and we got £160,000. And the money is still coming in, it can't come in now by Kickstarter but you can still support us through PayPal, you can go to   

You can follow us on Twitter at the.@TheBlairDoc. There are many many ways, if you forget any of those, just go to George Galloway MP on Facebook or follow me @George Galloway on Twitter and I'll put you in the right direction. The film should be out next autumn, and it is coming to a cinema near you.  

Robles: OK. I'm sure it will be very popular in Russia; hopefully we can get a Russian version. 

Galloway: I hope so. Thanks very much indeed, John. 

Robles: Ok, thank you, sir, it was an honor and a pleasure, and thanks for your time. 

Galloway: My pleasure, my pleasure, thanks, bye. 

Robles: Ok, bye-bye.

That was the end of Part 3 of an interview with British Member of Parliament George Galloway. You can find the previous parts of this interview on our website at Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish all the best and happy holidays wherever you may be.


Last Update: 08/06/2023 03:23 +0300


Site 1JAR2 Blog Button


JAR2 Biz


 Link to JAR2 YouTube Account  Link to JAR2 Blogger Account  Link to JAR2 Live Journal Account  Link to JAR2 Word Press Account    Link to JAR2 Sonation and Support Page


  Please help keep us going and make a donation Thanks to all supporters!

PayPal, Сбербанк Sberbank Visa 4276 3800 4476 1661


Copyright JAR2 2003-2103 All Rights Reserved

Publishing Banned Truth Since June 06, 2003