George Galloway on Capitol Hill

George Galloway's fiery defence of his integrity before a Senate committee on Tuesday made big headlines in Britain, though it caused barely a ripple in the U.S. news agenda. Yet Galloway's appearance - the first by a British politician who was being interrogated by the U.S. Senate as as a hostile witness - was great political theatre, searing in its vigor and downright condemnation of the Senate and the entire U.S. government. As the BBC noted,

Far from displaying the forelock-tugging deference to which senators are accustomed, Mr Galloway went on the attack. He rubbished committee chairman Norm Coleman's dossier of evidence and stared him in the eye. "Now I know that standards have slipped over the last few years in Washington, but for a lawyer, you are remarkably cavalier with any idea of justice," the MP declared.

Galloway continued along much the same lines:

I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims did not have weapons of mass destruction.

I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al-Qaeda.

I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the atrocity on 9/11 2001.

I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion of their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning.

Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people paid with their lives; 1600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies; 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever on a pack of lies.

This should be the sort of compelling spectacle that - a la Richard Clarke's testimony before the 9/11 commission - the media should salivate over. The Member of Parliament for Bethnal Green and Bow is quite a charismatic figure (and an arrogant, media-hungry, prickly yet thuggish prima donna). He's got a compelling Scottish accent (Americans love that!). In the recent UK general election he used popular - and especially Moslem - opposition to the Iraq War in his constituency to defeat a young Blairite black woman (name of Oona King, who just happens to be the daughter of American civil rights leader Preston King). There's enough material here for a mini-series! Yet what little coverage there was of Galloway's appearance seemed set on trivializing the content of his testimony by focusing on his Scottish roots and mannerisms - a sort of "Braveheart on Capitol Hill" frame, too nutty to take seriously. Beyond that, little attention was paid to what he actually had to say.

Now I know George Galloway is barely known over here. But you could say that about many news figures the media anoint (albeit fleetingly) as instant news "celebrities" (e.g., Chandra Levy, Pvt. Jessica Lynch, Lynndie England, "runaway bride" Jennifer Wilbanks - and even figures such as former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and Richard Clarke himself). But it's what Galloway so compellingly represents that makes this story so potentially newsworthy. And, btw, it was the Senate report that initiated this story in the first place, charging that Galloway, an elected British MP, was given credits for Iraqi oil by Saddam Hussein - but without offering him the opportunity to defend himself! And meanwhile Galloway continues to draw investigations into his conduct - his name is far from being cleared. Frankly, his demeanor and behavior are so odious that they make many anti-war activists squirm (whenever Galloway does his anti-war bit, I find myself sympathizing with Tony Blair!) There's bags of conflict here! Galloway should be the Big Meanie that everyone loves to hate. And now he's riding into Dodge for the Big Showdown! Come on, is it me or should this be Big in News-land, at least for a couple of news cycles ... no? Am I missing something? I don't think he did any studio interviews on the cable channels (though apparently Wolf Blitzer on CNN characterized his testimony as "a blistering attack on US senators rarely heard" in the Senate). The BBC's piece on U.S. media reaction is pretty flimsy. Even NPR's coverage was fleeting. I dunno - let's say the media's studied lack of attention just seems a bit odd, to say the least.

Could it possibly be that this is more evidence of the news media's gun-shy attitude, post-U.S. election, toward any stories that in any way call into question the administration's fundamental handling of the Iraq War? And no matter how much we might dislike him personally, doesn't Galloway represent something (anti-war, Moslem opinion) that needs to be taken seriously - yet almost never is in this country? Or is that just too out-of-left-field for the safety conscious news media to handle? Much easier just to trivialize the story and bury it.

Or am I being too cynical?

(Check here for a full video clip of the testimony.)