British “Respect Party” MP, George Galloway, acting like a cat at the British Celebrity Big Brother house. And yes, he is actually drinking milk from the hands of Rula Lenska.

This comment was posted under the “Churchill Out” piece:

commonsense Says:

MUCH more interesting is the booting of george galloway: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22125705-23109,00.html

And I have to agree on the fact that it is interesting, but it’s only an 18 day suspension:

CONTROVERSIAL British MP George Galloway has been suspended from Parliament after an investigation found his charity had taken money from Saddam Hussein.

Mr Galloway was booted from the House of Commons for 18 days after a recommendation by a standards committee made up of his fellow MPs.

George Galloway, if you recall, is the British MP who said THIS:

In an interview with GQ magazine, the reporter asked him: “Would the assassination of, say, Tony Blair by a suicide bomber - if there were no other casualties - be justified as revenge for the war on Iraq?”

Mr Galloway replied: “Yes, it would be morally justified. I am not calling for it - but if it happened it would be of a wholly different moral order to the events of 7/7. It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq - as Blair did.”

Galloway also testified before the US Senate about the Oil for Food scandal, and was quite feisty in his denial of taking money from Hussein:

British Member of Parliament George Galloway angrily denied Tuesday that he profited from Saddam Hussein’s regime and criticized a Senate panel probing alleged corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq.

Galloway, an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, called the panel’s investigation the “mother of all smokescreens” used to divert attention from the “pack of lies” that led to the 2003 invasion.

Whoops, George, it does appear that you did have some cash sent your way “from Saddam Hussein’s regime,” bummer.

Galloway was removed from the Labour Party for telling British soldiers not to fight in Iraq, and retained his his seat in Parliament after creating the “Respect” party.

Thanks, cs.

THIS is outrageous:

Congressional Democrats today failed to include a provision in homeland security legislation that would protect the public from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior that may lead to a terrorist attack, according to House Republican leaders.

The provision, dubbed the “John Doe Provision,” stemmed from a lawsuit filed by six imams who were ejected from a US Airways flight after acting sketchy. You know, sitting in a 9/11 terroristesque pattern on the plane, allegedly yelling “Allah,” and stuff like that. Here is a description of the lawsuit filed by the “flying imams” against ordinary citizens:

“The flying imams” lawsuit was announced on March 13 by Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The imams are suing US Airways and Minnesota’s Metropolitan Airports Commission, alleging that their civil rights were violated.

And while CAIR says the airline is the main focus of the lawsuit, the imams also are suing “John Does”– described in the lawsuit as “passengers at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport who contacted U.S. Airways to report the alleged ’suspicious’ behavior of Plaintiffs’ performing their prayer at the airport terminal.”

One of the unnamed “John Doe” defendants is described as an “older” man who “picked up his cellular phone and made a phone call while watching the Plaintiffs pray” at the U.S. Airways gate.

In March, House Republicans jumped in and put together a provision that would give passengers immunity from lawsuits and it passed:

On Tuesday, U.S. lawmakers got into the act. House Republicans proposed a measure to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity involving their fellow passengers, the Washington Times reported.

By a vote of 304-121, the House agreed to send the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee so that language shielding passengers can be inserted into the bill.

But, alas, the “language shielding passengers” was never “inserted into the bill.” House Democrats held a press conference last week to discuss the Homeland Security legislation that was passed, but didn’t address the missing provision that had so much bipartisan support:

Democratic leaders held a press conference with members of the September 11 commission just prior to the conference meeting but did not address the fate of the provision.

“We have always said that any discussion of September 11 in any way, shape or form would be made on sacred ground, with reverence to those who were lost,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat.

“We promised you answers, and we promised you a safer America. Hopefully, this legislation will fulfill the rest of the promise,” Mrs. Pelosi said.

Safer for whom, Mrs. Pelosi, lawyers and potential terrorists? Certainly not for the average American trying to do the right thing. Will people be less likely to report suspicious behavior on planes, trains and busses if they’ll get sued if they’re wrong?

And what is the reason we have so far for removing the “John Doe provision?” Like you didn’t already know:

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, initially opposed the legislation, expressing concern that it would lead to racial profiling.

Political correctness.

“Six-nation talks?” “Closing of a key nuclear facility?” “Disarmament?” Holy cow, is the US involved in doing something…gasp…right…with North Korea?

Six-nation talks to begin outlining a plan for North Korea’s nuclear disarmament should begin next month after Pyongyang has completed the closing of a key nuclear facility, a top US diplomat said Monday.

US Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the US envoy for negotiations with North Korea, said he expects the six-nation talks to take place in Beijing in July to discuss supplying economic and energy assistance to North Korea and a complete declaration from Pyongyang to end its nuclear programme.

North Korea’s Kim Jung Il, in puppet form.

And there’s even more good news, the IAEA looks like it’s going back into at least one of North Korea’s nuclear sites:

North Korea has invited the International Atomic Energy Agency to the country to oversee the closing of the nuclear reactor and reprocessing facilities at Yongbyon.

The talks had stalled earlier this year over $25 million dollars tied up in a Macau bank because of US sanctions. The money was released, and North Korea is apparently back at the table. Hill thinks the reactor can be shut down in as little as 3 weeks, and his surprise arrival in Pyongyang this month indicates that the Bush Administration may be deviating from their policy of multi-lateral only talks with North Korea.