GEORGE Galloway last night threatened legal action against a left-wing magazine after it claimed he was a Muslim and had converted at a secret ceremony in London.
The Respect MP for Bradford West, reportedly raised as a Roman Catholic in the Irish quarter of Dundee, strongly denied the suggestion he had converted to Islam at a secret ceremony more than a decade ago.
Jemima Khan, who became a Muslim ahead of her failed marriage to Pakistani cricketer Imran Khan, claimed in an article for the New Statesman she knew someone who had attended the "shahadah" conversion ceremony, attended by members of the Muslim Association of Great Britain, at a hotel in Kilburn.
Ms Khan, who interviewed the MP in his new constituency, starts the article: "George Galloway, MP for Bradford West, is a Muslim. Those close to him know this. The rest of the world, including his Muslim constituents, does not."
In her article, Ms Khan tells the former Glasgow MP she knows someone "who attended your shahadah" and asks: "So you converted?" He is quoted as replying: "I can't answer that. God knows who is a Muslim."
When being sworn in recently as an MP Mr Galloway chose to affirm rather than make the pledge on a religious text.
The 57-year-old is quoted as saying he affirmed because he had to take an oath of allegiance to the Queen and all her heirs and successors in which he did not believe. "I have no allegiance to any of them and I could not possibly swear such a thing on a holy book. So nothing else should be read into the affirmation."
Last night, the Respect backbencher responded to Ms Khan's article, saying it was littered with "deliberate falsehoods" and "schoolgirl howlers".
He said the reference to an alleged conversion ceremony was "totally untrue".
Mr Galloway added: "Moreover I told her it was fallacious when she put it to me. I have never attended any such ceremony in Kilburn, Karachi or Kathmandu."
However, the New Statesman responded by saying: "It is notable Galloway does not deny being a Muslim convert and he did not deny it when it was put to him at the time of the interview, which is on tape."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article