Galloway, Castro and democracy.

Galloway does make me smile. Here's his take on Castro standing down. What always makes me grin is the fact that George doesn't allow the other side to set the terms of the debate.



And I think Krishnan Guru-Murthy's point would have more resonance if we proved that we respect the wishes of the electorates that we keep demanding be democratised. Only today we read this:

In a strategy some Western diplomats admit could badly backfire, the Bush administration has made clear it wishes to continue to support Mr Musharraf even after Monday’s election in which the Pakistani public delivered a resounding rejection of his policies.

Oh, and Pakistanis are being asked not to "fixate" on the restoration of the judiciary, which was the very thing which one of the winning parties specifically ran for office promising to restore.

I've long argued that Bush does not have a Pakistan policy, he has a Musharraf policy, and he's not going to let a small thing like the Democratic wishes of the people of Pakistan change his mind.

We have seen this time and time again by these supposed lovers of democracy.

"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."

Henry Kissinger.

The truth is that democracy is a great thing when it gives them the answer they seek. Otherwise, it's a piffling little thing to be thrown aside at will.

I mean, let's be serious. If Bush really loved democracy, why was he so keen to stop the vote counts in Florida?

Tags: George Galloway, Krishnan Guru-Murthy, Castro, Cuba, democracy