Tuesday, December 16, 2008


The journalist who threw his shoes at President George W. Bush was handed over to the Iraqi judiciary, an Iraqi official said Tuesday, a move that signals the start of criminal proceedings. The reporter shouted in Arabic, "This is your farewell kiss, you dog!" In Iraqi culture, throwing shoes at someone is a sign of deep contempt.
A White House spokeswoman said Tuesday that Iraqi leaders are the ones to decide whether punishment is appropriate for the Iraqi journalist who stunned observers by hurling two shoes at President George W. Bush from close range. "The president believes that Iraq is a sovereign country, a democratic country, and they will have a process that they follow on this," White House press secretary Dana Perino told reporters. "The president harbors no hard feelings about the incident."
With all of the attention which has been laid on the Iraqi Journalist, an immediate death sentence is not expected (unlike other Middle eastern countries), but he will certainly be dealt a stiff punishment; certain imprisonment, and will achieve martyr like status to the Iraqi masses who are currently protesting for his immediate release.
My suggestion? Bush should have shown the world what freedom looks like with his immediate interaction into the situation. Although the man did commit an attempted assault, Bush could have used the opportunity to engage in a closed session dialogue with the journalist, once he had calmed down. Let the world see how democracy works first hand. Let the Iraqis witness a world leader who cares about the voices of the people, the Iraqi vox populi. The Iraqi's have many reasons to protest against President Bush. They didn't need another, and certainly didn't need yet another anti-American hero and martyr.


Papa Giorgio said...


What reasons do the Iraqi people have to protest Kimba?


Kim said...

They have had enough. They had another country come in and invade their country, bomb the crap out of it, and now that the new government has officially requested us to get out, we are still there. Iraqi's have had to flee their homeland, and oh yes, many innocents have died. I believe we call them "collateral damage." Compared to under Saddam's brutal regime, many more Iraqi's live in fear now under our rule. We would like to think life in Iraq has become better because of our intervention. I am not sure every Iraqi agrees.

How would you feel if Iraq had invaded here without our permission, overthrown (and killed) our President, forced their government on us, and their tanks and military control our city. You can't drive down any street without fear of hitting a roadside bomb, and our economy is in shambles. You would be throwing so many shoes your entire family would be walking barefoot.

Papa Giorgio said...


We are out in 2011 Kimba, and as soon as we are you will have many asking us to come back in. We bombed their country because Saddam stepped on 17 UN resolutions and continued his biochemical and nuclear programs. In the Baghdad neighborhoods and mosques (and elsewhere across the country) our military men and women found chemicals, lab equipment, and scientists tucked away in safe-houses -- against UN resolutions. Firing on our jets almost daily was reason enough to re-enter Iraq according to the cease-fire deal. Now, I must admit I am not a big fan of the UN, but there were so many violations of the “edicts” made from the gavel there at the UN that the U.S. created a coalition larger than the first Gulf War.

Many innocents have died, most at the hands of terrorists, not the U.S., and the innocent death during the early years of the war was very low, the lowest of any war to date... a feat that I never hear lauded from the left. That is, if one has to go to war, give props to the military that truly tries (and sets historically low records in collateral damage) to do the right thing in such a serious moment in its role. All I hear is, the U.S. is the murderer of innocents, which is what you said Kimba -- implicitly.

And Kimba, if there were rape rooms and tens-of-thousands killed here in these rape rooms or lined up to be shot, or have their hands and fingers cut off; then yes, I would want a Constitutional Republic (we are not a democracy) to come in and get rid of the most tyrannical leader the world knew at that time... which is what Saddam was at the time. Saddam had a library full of books by and about Stalin, his hero. And Parade Magazine did a great investigation in 2003 about which person was the worse dictator oin the world, here is a bit of their criteria:

President Bush has called North Korea, Iraq and Iran—three nations that sponsor terrorism—the “Axis of Evil.” But what are the world’s worst regimes—and how do we know? PARADE asked Contributing Editor David Wallechinsky to explore these questions. “Dozens of nations,” Wallechinsky says, “are ruled by repressive governments—both individual dictatorships and collective regimes such as royal families, military juntas or single political parties. In either case, the effect on those nations’ citizens is the same: They are not free to express themselves, and they are punished if they try.”

To compile his “10 Worst” list, Wallechinsky consulted independent human-rights organizations that are willing to expose both left- and right-wing regimes, such as Freedom House, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. “I looked at the documented suppression of those freedoms and rights that Americans take for granted,” he says. “Freedom of speech and religion, freedom to choose elected representatives and to disagree with their government, and the right to a fair trial.” He gave “extra credit” to those dictators who torture prisoners and others, execute political opponents, cause their citizens to starve or to suffer malnutrition and who interfere violently in the politics of countries other than their own.

Saddam showed up in 3rd place. We had legal reasons to re-enter Iraq and depose this current and future problem/funder of terror towards the U.S. and the only free country in the Middle-East, Israel. As far as your statement that my family and I would be shoeless is wrong, I would be happy that a country would care enough to depose legally one of the world’s worst dictators. A Hitler like (Stalin lover) leader gone, the net evil/good in the world is up on the good side.

The question then becomes this, “which rally would you be marching in?