Two small bits of news about George Galloway: one of the English papers carried a “where is his writ?” note — apparently he still hasn’t sued the Telegraph for suggesting that he took money from Saddam Hussein — and the Christian Science Monitor, which had carried much more detailed allegations about him, published a piece explaining that they had been had. All of the evidence was forged:
bq. On April 25, 2003, this newspaper ran a story about documents obtained in Iraq that alleged Saddam Hussein’s regime had paid a British member of Parliament, George Galloway, $10 million over 11 years to promote its interests in the West.
An extensive Monitor investigation has subsequently determined that the six papers detailed in the April 25 piece are, in fact, almost certainly forgeries.
The Arabic text of the papers is inconsistent with known examples of Baghdad bureaucratic writing, and is replete with problematic language, says a leading US-based expert on Iraqi government documents. Signature lines and other format elements differ from genuine procedure.
The two “oldest” documents – dated 1992 and 1993 – were actually written within the past few months, according to a chemical analysis of their ink. The newest document – dated 2003 – appears to have been written at approximately the same time.
The Telegraph story came from papers found by its reporter in a government building: the Monitor had brought its story from a Baathist general who claimed to have looted them from a former office of Qusay Hussein. But this twist certainly makes the whole story more interesting.