You guys might have a point, if Galloway were guilty of anything.

If one assumes (as you do) that Galloway is guilty, then it is truly amazing that none of his opponents, including very powerful people and media and government institutions, have not been able to convict him of anything.

Galloway is quite a simple man, certainly no criminal genius - amazingly able to outwit, repeatedly, all those on his tail.

But it seems you cannot stomach the possibility of Galloway's innocence - because you are suckers for the propaganda narrative that paints him as a crook. (Galloway happens to reinforce this prejudice in people's minds through his style - bluster and showmanship. But when passing judgment, it is your responsibility to separate facts and evidence from image and perception.)

The cabal of gangsters who initiated this aggression-invasion-occupation brazenly lied about their motives ("democracy", "human rights"). That's obvious for many reasons including the fact that one of them, Rumsfeld, is on record (and video!) doing friendly (far more friendly than Galloway) and lethal (arms sales) business with Saddam, when it was politically expedient to do so, in full knowledge of what a mass-murderer he was supporting. Therefore, it's only natural (and a far easier lie to sustain) that they would lie about and smear a significant one of their detractors (Galloway),