Or the easiest given that the expectation to be able to make the slightest difference to two millenia's worth of conflict is almost zero - draw the salary and then throw up your hands and declare "They're all fekkin nutters these people".

True!

I don't judge a man on how hard his job is, just on how well he does it. Bliar has basically done fsck all of any significance that I am aware of, unless you count being complicit in buying time for Israel to cement illegal settlements in the West Bank. It is not just me. Wherever I look for opinions, the general consensus is that in seven years he has achieved almost nothing. I was certain his appointment was a mistake but he has had the chance to prove the doubters wrong. If it was too difficult for him he could step down at any time. To be in a critically important job for seven years and achieve basically nothing is what seems pointless to me.

To be fair to him, he is not paid for this role, and doesn't need the stick and vitriol he seems to manage to get from nearly all sides, he could make even more than the millions he does if he sacked his pro bono work, but to me his continuation in the role is as ridiculous as the idea that he was the best candidate in the first place.

Galloway is a racist and gets his backside kicked by somebody who he has racially abused - Its fair game and I wouldn't have cared less if he had been battered into a pulp.... The less of his type stoking up trouble on this earth, the better.

For a fair analogy, if Nick Griffin got his head kicked in by a Muslim while shopping in Tesco, would he garner much sympathy??.... I very much doubt it.

So you care nought for free speech and the rule of law? You ought to get on a plane and join the caliphate.

Blair has also just been announced as GQ Magazine's "Philanthropist of the Year".

Mind you, in 1938 Adolph Hitler was feted as Time Magazine's Man of the Year

..... Are you mental??.... I have nothing at all against free speech, but if during that free speech, you choose to spread hate against certain groups, whether it be Galloway against Jews, or Griffin against Muslims, then you shouldn't complain, or expect sympathy, if a member of the group you are bad-mouthing chooses to hand out a little justice in the form of a good kicking.

Yes particularly for a warmongering pro israeli war criminal

There's a difference between "Israeli free" and "no Jews" you know

But why get bogged down in details when you can just mix the two and throw the anti-semite card around at anybody daring to question the murderous actions of a far right Government?

Its like a battle for biggest village idiot.
HTF can you condone beating someone up because of words.

On another note, and i know it takes all kinds to make the world go round but do people on these forums just disagree for the sake of it just cos they've got nothing better to do

Interesting contrast to the current Hardaker incident!

I do know that. Perhaps you should focus on why a egocentric parasite can come into a city where Muslims are still in the minority stand on the steps of the town hall and apparently speak for the whole town. Galloway will have spent less that a month of his whole life in this city yet he has decided what the city wants? It will six months before he returns to the city to see what damage his racist outburst has caused. I am amazed he didn't stand in front of Leeds town hall, Leeds has three times the population of Bradford, and do the same - being the coward he is there was no way he was going to do that. His ego knows no bounds and I repeat what I said earlier he had it coming and he got what he deserved.