I thought I was cynical in those days, but look what I wrote.
Both parties in the dispute are pretty repellent, and yet both seem to tell plausible stories. The Telegraph journalist is said to be reputable and honourable (for example by journalists at the Guardian) and he claimed that he had literally stumbled accidentally on the papers that proved the case in a safe in a bombed out building.
Yet, Gallloway won his libel suit against the Telegraph, and it appears the 'reputable honourable' journalist had simply lied from the start. These days I would trust my instincts. If it smells like a lie, it is a lie.
Now the US Senate accuses Galloway of selling 20 million barrels of oil for Saddam Hussein. Smells like a lie to me. Galloway is an arse but 'He told the BBC it was "patently absurd" to think that, as an MP being closely watched by UK security services, he could have become an "oil billionaire" on the sly and he does have a point.
How pervasive and dreary this has become. They literally don't give a fig for the so-called 'reality based community'. People at all levels of society want to hear comforting fictions, and will punish those who refuse to provide those fictions.