Iraqi Journalist Throws Shoes At Bush..Misses

[Skeptic Ginger]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/iraqis-demand-release-of-shoehurler/2008/12/16/1229189564564.html

Then there is this report from the NYTs.

Witnesses said that Mr. Zaidi had been severely beaten by security officers on Sunday after being tackled at the press conference and dragged out. One of his brothers, Maythem al-Zaidi, said Monday that the family had not heard from Mr. Zaidi since his arrest, and that a security officer who picked up Mr. Zaidi’s cellphone at midnight on Sunday had threatened the family.

And more specifically from the NYT's Baghdad Bureau regarding the threat to the family when a brother tried to call his arrested brother's cell phone:

When his brother, Maythem al-Zaidi, 28, called his cell phone on Sunday night, a man claiming to be one of the prime minister’s bodyguards answered. Maythem al-Zaidi said that the bodyguard threatened, “that they will get us all.”

(emphasis mine)



When I referred to the Fox News version of reality, what I was referring to was twofold. One, too many Americans view the world from ignorance believing every person on the planet should have the same values as that American does, and two, the main sources of information in America about the rest of the world are completely distorted by those sources, with Fox epitomizing that distortion.

Iraq is not a heterogeneous country where everyone hated Saddam equally throughout. And sometimes, even a dictator with the worst record on human rights still trumps outsiders coming in and occupying a country to some people in that country, especially given the cost the Iraqis have paid and are paying to get rid of Saddam.

The current government does not deal with all populations even handedly. There is an undercurrent with the nature of a simmering civil war in Iraq. Not everyone in Iraq feels the replacement government was freely elected. US interests had a clear advantage in support and campaign publicity. Paul Brenner in the first year 'dictated' all the laws, including making deals for foreign oil companies. The reconstruction was a mess leaving extremely high unemployment in Iraq while foreign companies, many Bush cronies, looted the reconstruction money. Private security firms like Blackwater have not been held accountable for murdering innocent Iraqis (until recently and that one case is no where near being decided).

I'm not claiming the world is either all black or all white. But I certainly am not such an ignorant egotistical aka "Ugly American" as to claim an Iraqi should be "grateful" we invaded their country. That is up to that individual Iraqi to decide for themselves, and who am I to question how that individual should feel about it?

 

[dudalb]

If only.

So you advocate the assasination of Dubya?

Nice.
Of course your avatar displaying you attitude toward copyright tells us all we need to know about you.

 

[godless dave]

1) Germany declared war on the U.S, ergo, they made war on the U.S.

2) Spain was neutral in WWII.

My point exactly.

3) I beleive it was Democrat President Truman who wanted the U.S. military to be a police force. He called the Korean War a "police action."

And we've had ample time to realize just how flawed that view is.

 

[godless dave]

So you advocate the assasination of Dubya?

I advocate that Iraqis use violent resistance against the guy who invaded their country. That's not assassination, it's an act of war.

I absolutely do not advocate that Americans use violence against Bush. But if an Iraqi were to kill him, it would be competely justified under the customs of war, and I would do a happy dance.

Of course your avatar displaying you attitude toward copyright tells us all we need to know about you.

I think you don't get it. My avatar shows my attitude towards copyright infringement.

 

[boloboffin]

Last night in the wee hours, the Bloomberg anchor read the copy -- "Throwing shoes is a sign of disrespect in Middle East culture" -- and then added his own commentary: "...as it is in any culture I'm aware of..." and then continued without missing a beat. Beaut.

 

[Cicero]

My point exactly.



And we've had ample time to realize just how flawed that view is.

Switzerland was a nuetral country in WWII, yet they were in bed with Nazi Germany. They allowed shot down Luftwaffe fliers to be repatriated with Germany while holding on to American fliers for the duration. Not to mention they banked the gold taken from Jews and occupied countries.

So even declaring oneself neutral does not mean that it is actually so.

Iraq was never a neutral country and had invaded Kuwait back in 1991.

 

[Tin Foil Timothy]

So you advocate the assasination of Dubya?

Nice.
Of course your avatar displaying you attitude toward copyright tells us all we need to know about you.

Once again you get it all wrong. ha ha ha ha ha. Someone urinating on copyright infringement means to most rational people that it's a stand against it.

Or maybe you are someone who advocates copyright infringement?

 

[godless dave]

Iraq was never a neutral country and had invaded Kuwait back in 1991.

Which is completely irrelevant to the 2003 invasion.

 

[Cicero]

Which is completely irrelevant to the 2003 invasion.

Had Iraq not violated numerous UN sanctions and fired on coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone from 1991 to 2003, you might have a point.

 

[godless dave]

Had Iraq not violated numerous UN sanctions and fired on coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone from 1991 to 2003, you might have a point.

The coalition aircraft had no right to be in the no-fly zone, so my point stands.

Violating UN resolutions is not a sufficient cause for the US to invade someone. Military force is only for self-defense.

 

[Cicero]

The coalition aircraft had no right to be in the no-fly zone, so my point stands.

Violating UN resolutions is not a sufficient cause for the US to invade someone. Military force is only for self-defense.

Ah, it is Iraqi aircraft that could not operate in the two no-fly zones. U.S., U.K., and French aircraft patrolled the skies in these areas to protect humanitarian operations in northern Iraq and Shiite Muslims in the south.

Self-defense is the only reason to use military force? Says who? Iraq did not threaten these countries when they invaded Kuwait in 1991:

U.S.
U.K.
Egypt
France
Syria
Morocco
Oman
Pakistan
Qatar
Bangladesh
Canada
Italy
Australia
Netherlands
Niger
Senegal
Spain
Bahrain
Belgium
South Korea
Afghanistan
Argentina
Czechoslovakia
Greece
Poland
Philippines
New Zealand
Denmark
Hungary
Norway

yet they all participated in fighting Saddam.

 

[gumboot]

I'm surprised no one has given the obvious response...



However, despite the hilarity of the event (and yes, it was hilarious), I am likewise quite alarmed by what it suggests. Good or bad, smart or stupid, admired or reviled, the simple fact is George W Bush is President of the United States.

Do you Anti-Bush Americans honestly think the journalist was simply expressing disgust at Bush? Do you think you and he could sit down over coffee and joke and laugh about your shared distaste for the President? How naive can you be?

The journalist was throwing his shoe at America. He was expressing his disgust and hatred at America. At you. Do you think the scene would have played out any different had it been six months later, and Obama standing there? Please. All they see is America, standing on that podium. The Iraqi people have been raised on hatred of the west, and particularly the USA, for almost two decades. None of this is new, spontaneous, or even caused by Bush or the Iraq War.

And yet you're laughing at it. You're cheering this person. Your country's name is mud, and you think it's funny? I'm appalled.

As for discussion of the war itself, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that we will have to wait until the very end of my lifetime before we can begin to look at this war objectively and actually find any truth in it. I wonder if people felt the same about the Vietnam War 30 years ago. So many people are so blinded by their own personal little political vendettas they're incapable of actually thinking rationally.

I mean, what are people thinking with statements like "puppet government of Iraq?: The Iraq elections were overseen by an international monitoring group, many of whose members were loudly opposed to the invasion. The Iraq elections were easily less corrupt, more fair, and more accurate in end result than any American election for decades. And let's not forget the governments that have been voted in are not the governments the USA wanted.

This reporter is an idiot, and he's liable to be brutally punished by the Iraqi government for what he did. There is no greater crime than insulting a guest.

CAPULET:Why, how now, kinsman! wherefore storm you so?

TYBALT: Uncle, this is a Montague, our foe,
A villain that is hither come in spite,
To scorn at our solemnity this night.

CAPULET: Young Romeo is it?

TYBALT: 'Tis he, that villain Romeo.

CAPULET: Content thee, gentle coz, let him alone;
He bears him like a portly gentleman;
And, to say truth, Verona brags of him
To be a virtuous and well-govern'd youth:
I would not for the wealth of all the town
Here in my house do him disparagement:
Therefore be patient, take no note of him:
It is my will, the which if thou respect,
Show a fair presence and put off these frowns,
And ill-beseeming semblance for a feast.

TYBALT: It fits, when such a villain is a guest:
I'll not endure him.

CAPULET: He shall be endured:
What, goodman boy! I say, he shall: go to;
Am I the master here, or you? go to.
You'll not endure him! God shall mend my soul!
You'll make a mutiny among my guests!
You will set cock-a-hoop! you'll be the man!

Romeo and Juliet, Act 1. Sc. 5

If this journalist is so enamoured of his Arab culture he must know how the Iraqi government will react.

 

[Dr Adequate]

The journalist was throwing his shoe at America.

Yes, but on the other hand, the journalist was throwing his shoe at America.

 

[Cicero]

Yes, but on the other hand, the journalist was throwing his shoe at America.

Another "soulless" journalist disapproves of the U.S. This guy will be a shoe-in to get a job at the New York Times or MSNBC.

 

[Pardalis]

When I referred to the Fox News version of reality, what I was referring to was twofold.

No, there's really one reason why you keep using Fox News as a rhetorical device: Everytime you disagree with someone you accuse that person of listening to Fox News, you did that to me a few months ago, and I don't even have cable.

Iraq is not a heterogeneous country where everyone hated Saddam equally throughout. And sometimes, even a dictator with the worst record on human rights still trumps outsiders coming in and occupying a country to some people in that country, especially given the cost the Iraqis have paid and are paying to get rid of Saddam.

This can't be more clear, you prefer Hussein than the present democratic government (even though it's not perfect, it's still better). Again, a perfect example of the far-Left making excuses for monsters. I'm just glad he's dead, and his crazy sons, but that's just me.

The current government does not deal with all populations even handedly.

And Saddam Hussein did?

There is an undercurrent with the nature of a simmering civil war in Iraq. Not everyone in Iraq feels the replacement government was freely elected.

Like those elections Hussein won at 99%? Clearly that was far better then, according to your "logic", after, all, it's the Iraqi's choice, who are we to interfere or tell them who to vote for when their genocidal dictator can do that for them.

 

[Pardalis]

The coalition aircraft had no right to be in the no-fly zone, so my point stands.

Yes, by all means respect the dictator's airspace!

Good thing people are still rooting for him.

Violating UN resolutions is not a sufficient cause for the US to invade someone.

You prefer sanctions?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Bush = Hitler and Al Qaeda = The French Resistance.

I didn't think I'd hear that meme again.

What?

I never said Bush is Hitler. And what has Al Qaeda got to do with it?

The guy who threw the shoe was not a member of Al Qaeda--not even "Al Qaeda of Iraq" (which didn't exist before Bush's invasion and occupation and is not the same organization as Bin Laden's Al Qaeda).

I was pointing out that a guy who is angry enough to risk life and limb to resist a foreign invader and occupier--even if that resistance is largely symbolic--is not some media whore loser looking for a bit of personal grandiosity.

 

[quixotecoyote]

You prefer sanctions?

I don't know if dave meant it that way, but you could make an argument that it's not our business if Saddam butchered 200 babies a day and kicked a puppy on Sundays so long as he wasn't threatening us.

I don't buy it. I think atrocity is a reason for intervention, but in this case it was an excuse not a reason.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

The journalist was throwing his shoe at America.

Yes, but on the other hand, the journalist was throwing his shoe at America.

Are you saying he threw one shoe with each hand?

 

[Pardalis]

I don't buy it. I think atrocity is a reason for intervention, but in this case it was an excuse not a reason.

I agree. I still don't fully understand why the US didn't just wait a few months or maybe years for it to be plainly obvious to everyone that Saddam Hussein in Iraq was unacceptable. If they had waited for Hussein to make his move, which he would have done I have no doubt, then everyone would have been on board to snuff him out.