|
Galloway wins against Telegraph
|
The Telelgraph will be laughing!! £150'000....lol. Pittence.
Galloway is a ****. |
The newspaper said it was in the public interest to publish the claims, based on documents found in Baghdad. |
'Galloway is a ****.'
why is that then ? because he had the cheek to disagree with b-liar and the rest of his zionist warmongering chums ? |
Originally Posted by geeva
'Galloway is a ****.'
why is that then ? because he had the cheek to disagree with b-liar and the rest of his zionist warmongering chums ? Cos he publically aligned himself with a mass murdering dictator. Regarding the case - I don't know, however above is fact. Went to dinner together etc. Therefore - he's a ****. |
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
The Telelgraph will be laughing!! £150'000....lol. Pittence.
Galloway is a ****. Yes Galloway has some seriously flawed politics and on the balance probably does more harm than good but the telegraph were more than a little stupid to print unsubstantiated documents of a higly dubious nature. |
Originally Posted by mattstant
Your forgetting the 1.25 million in costs yet to be awarded hardly a pittance
Yes Galloway has some seriously flawed politics and on the balance probably does more harm than good but the telegraph were more than a little stupid to print unsubstantiated documents of a higly dubious nature. Yes - but that's how the media operates. Behind closed doors they are laughing - guaranteed. |
Stroll on gorgeous. Yet another win to add to your scalp collection :)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...044031,00.html |
Originally Posted by Jye
Stroll on gorgeous. Yet another win to add to your scalp collection :)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...044031,00.html Public apologies, agree to settle. lol - the damage was already done, they got loads of media coverage and sold loads of newspapers!! PMSL. |
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
Public apologies, agree to settle.
lol - the damage was already done, they got loads of media coverage and sold loads of newspapers!! PMSL. |
Originally Posted by Jye
The Christian Science Monitor, yeah I bet they sold shed loads of em :cuckoo:
The cost?? The money they lost?? To them, relatively nothing. |
Stroll on that man ;)
Mr Galloway has now earned an estimated £350,000 in damages from legal actions, some of which have been settled out of court. His most notable success was in 1992, a £150,000 pay-out after the Daily Mirror and Daily Record accused him of abusing his parliamentary privilege by stating that Robert Maxwell, the papers’ former owner, had links with Israeli intelligence. COURT CRUSADE GEORGE Galloway’s libel crusade through the courts has proved to be extremely successful. His first and biggest pay-out came in December 1992, when he successfully sued the Daily Mirror and the Daily Record or £250,000, after they printed editorials accusing him of exploiting and abusing parliamentary privilege and alleging that he had links with an Arab terrorist organisation. The award included £155,000 in damages, plus costs. In March 1996, Mr Galloway received an unreserved apology and undisclosed libel damages from the publishers of the London Evening Standard over an article that questioned his financial affairs. The newspaper accepted the article, which appeared under the headline Do tell us how you do it, George, had made allegations which were without foundation. |
Originally Posted by Jye
Stroll on that man ;)
And btw, he got nearly £100K from the CSM, I guess that's nothing to a man of your means SAP ;) :D Have I ever said Galloway didn't get a shed of cash????????? 'No' I believe is the word you're after. |
Never said you didn't, and? :)
|
Originally Posted by Jye
Never said you didn't, and? :)
The link had no relevance to our debate..... Bizarre. |
Our debate? Bizarre.
|
Originally Posted by Jye
Our debate? Bizarre.
Yes, Jye. Our debate. |
A link posting Galloways 'last' triumph over the press has no relation to his 'latest' triumph over the press?
Bizarre :D Debate? You saying he is a ****? Bizarre :D |
Originally Posted by Jye
A link posting Galloways 'last' triumph over the press has no relation to his 'latest' triumph over the press?
Bizarre :D Debate? You saying he is a ****? Bizarre :D I was under the impression our debate ended up being "does the paper actuallly care". |
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
Yes - but that's how the media operates.
Behind closed doors they are laughing - guaranteed. |
I agree with SAP on this, anyone who sat down and had a friendly chat with SH and shook hands with a mass murderer is a first prize tw@t. Galloway should be deported to Iraq as he likes it so much over there - preferably deported on the underside of a Hercules-C130 and dropped from a great height :)
|
Conspicuously or grossly unconventional or unusual.
Bizzare :D There was no debate. |
Ah yes Bob, but the UK and US have shook hands with Saddam more times that you can imagine, Donald Rumsfeld even shook hands with him ffs. And what about Jack Straw and Mugabe, similar thing imo. The thing is Galloway said the war was illegal and it was, the popular press then went to town, yaddayadda.
Now the 'debate' might begin ;) http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB...ndshake300.jpg |
Not the first time for The Telegraph either. There was a Telegraph reporter in the past who was supplied crap by the intelligence agencies to spread other misinformation.
And I wonder what The Telegraph reported all those years ago when a British journalist was hanged for spying in Iraq? They were probably the first to print the story about how Bazoft had a previous conviction - something the Tory government of the day conveniently leaked to play the whole matter down. But of course we were all great mates back then. |
Oi, less use of offensive language please :p
|
Originally Posted by Diablo
Oi, less use of offensive language please :p
|
LOL
was referring to the continued use of the banned word Tw*t :D |
Originally Posted by paulr
wouldnt think so,doesnt do their reputation much good for seriuos journalism.
They have a first class reputation already. It's a glitch. This is NOT a tabloid. |
Originally Posted by Jye
Ah yes Bob, but the UK and US have shook hands with Saddam more times that you can imagine, Donald Rumsfeld even shook hands with him ffs. And what about Jack Straw and Mugabe, similar thing imo. The thing is Galloway said the war was illegal and it was, the popular press then went to town, yaddayadda.
Now the 'debate' might begin ;) http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB...ndshake300.jpg Rumsfeld shook hands for Political reasons. Galloway "liked" SH!! Ok, if we weren't debating ; it was an argument or a discussion or an exchange of posts. Whatever. Stop being so pedantic. ;) |
At least the Telegraph represents the interests of the average Impreza owner...
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:53 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands