Lunar Threads

Well, maybe not boot, but he did get two size ten shoes thrown at him. I think that is pretty funny and not exactly something you would see or hear every day.

I thought it was pretty funny. Bush has good reflexes, though; dodged both of them.

All the same, the journalist who chucked the shoes should be released. This is barely something above prankish behavior. KF

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFldBVWFgWo

The thrower forgot to watch this youtube video first.

I agree Kiz, the man should be released. I mean, the whole thing is so funny and I sympathize with the journalist that did it anyway.

Apparently though, US security personal had to stop the other journalists from beating the snot out of the man.

I never thought I would live to see a day when the president has to duck like that. Personally, I would rather be shot if I was the president.

phyco126 wrote:Personally, I would rather be shot if I was the president.

No you wouldn't. This is a silly statement.

As far as the incident goes, the man should not be released immediately. Freedom of speech is one thing, but when you chuck your shoes at someone with the intent to cause physical harm, you have crossed a line that should not be crossed. I can understand why he did it, but that does not negate the fact that he could have protested without resorting to what equates as a violent act, especially at a world leader.

Whether you like President Bush or not is irrelevant; what is relevant is that the man attempted to cause physical harm to a world leader, and to expect his immediate release is unrealistic. Given the man's inability to control himself and his emotions, if he had been holding a loaded weapon instead, would he have fired? I'd wager a yes. I'm sure the secret service and the military agree with me, and it is reasonable that they're in the midst of questioning him and looking into any possible associations.

Would he have shot the President if he had a gun? I seriously, seriously doubt it. He wanted to make a statement, not cause physical injury. If he wanted to injure him, there are other things he could've just as well snuck by and tried to throw at Bush.

Regarding him being released. Now that I've read a bit more on it, there are laws regarding insulting a foreign leader in this manner in Iraq, which can carry a maximum sentence of 2 years. It's likely he'll be tried under that--which, now that I know about the law, seems reasonable.

Most likely outcome though will be some kind of fine on him and his employer, and probably a ban on further travel to Iraq. Whether or not his employer will fire him is another question (I can't tell what direction they're leaning in this regard). KF

Kizyr wrote:If he wanted to injure him, there are other things he could've just as well snuck by and tried to throw at Bush.

Except he couldn't have, because then he'd never have made it into the room in the first place.

Parn wrote:

phyco126 wrote:Personally, I would rather be shot if I was the president.

No you wouldn't. This is a silly statement.

I think you would be surprised .

I have read somewhere that throwing your shoes at someone is the greatest insult in the Muslim world. It was a statement over the deaths when we first invaded. It is respectable that he thinks of his fallen countrymen in the service of Saddam.

On a side note, when I watched the video clip in the news, after the second shoe I couldn't help picturing the dog from duck hunt popping up and laughing.

Parn wrote:

Kizyr wrote:If he wanted to injure him, there are other things he could've just as well snuck by and tried to throw at Bush.

Except he couldn't have, because then he'd never have made it into the room in the first place.

Chairs, microphones, microphone stands (those three were obviously in the room, as you can see from the news footage). Beyond that, getting in clipboards or anything else much harder than a shoe would've been simple, given that it's a press conference. It would also have been simpler to throw those than to take off his shoes and throw them instead.

Instead, he specifically purchased some shoes (or sandals--couldn't tell which) in Iraq to throw. It was obviously meant as an insult and symbolic gesture, not an attempt at injury (like throwing a pie at Bill Gates, or dumping flour on someone wearing fur). It's quite presumptuous, given that, to assume that he would've killed someone--even Bush--had he the chance.

BattleMedic wrote:I have read somewhere that throwing your shoes at someone is the greatest insult in the Muslim world. It was a statement over the deaths when we first invaded. It is respectable that he thinks of his fallen countrymen in the service of Saddam.

It's an insult almost anywhere to throw your shoes at someone. It has relatively greater significance in Arab countries.

What did you mean by your last sentence? KF

On a more serious note, the secret service needs to be canned. Or at least fined. After the first shoe was thrown, there should've been at least one in between the president and further shoes.

In the same article that I read about the event, it said that the reporter threw his shoes at the president with the soldiers in Iraqi army that died during the invasion in mind. I'm not sure if it was from an interview with a friend or a family member of the reporter or the reporter himself. I said it was respectable because he didn't do it pacificly because our occupation there, but the loss of human life. To me, it's like how we are angry and sad that we lost our own soldiers during invasion and prevention of sectatrian violence.

Kizyr wrote: It's an insult almost anywhere to throw your shoes at someone. It has relatively greater significance in Arab countries.

I haven't been keeping up with this on the news channels, but I heard CNN put on their crawler something to the extent of "In the Muslim nations, it is considered an insult to throw a shoe at someone." The person who read that basically had the same reaction as you, Kizyr saying, "Isn't that an insult everywhere?"

I think that in Muslim (or Arab -- might only be an Arab thing, but please correct me if I'm wrong) countries, there is something especially insulting about being touched by the soles of your shoes -- even more so than in other cultures (like what Kizyr said). For example, after the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein had a mural depicting President Bush the elder installed on the floor at the entrance to one of the nicer hotels in Baghdad -- thereby forcing everyone who entered to step on the face of Bush Sr. whenever they entered and exited -- a very grave insult. Similarly, after the fall of Baghdad in Gulf War 2, there were scenes of Iraqis slapping a prominent statue of Saddam Hussein with the soles of their shoes for similar effect.

As part of the customs and courtesies that you have to learn with regard to the Middle East for those that deploy, soldiers are made to know that even showing the soles of your shoes to another person is considered extremely rude in the region. The implication is that the person you're showing the bottom of your shoe to is lower than the dirt you walk on. This is why it is recommended to not be in the habit of crossing one of your legs while sitting, among other various habits that westerners do.

The throwing of shoes at someone is pretty much the worst insult possible in the Arab world.

Yeah... but it's just funny the way that CNN presented it. It wouldn't have been funny if it had a long explanation attached to it, but as one line running down the bottom of the screen, it's hilarious, in my opinion at least.

Dragonmaster Lou wrote:I think that in Muslim (or Arab -- might only be an Arab thing, but please correct me if I'm wrong) countries, there is something especially insulting about being touched by the soles of your shoes -- even more so than in other cultures (like what Kizyr said).

More so Arab, but there are similarities in Muslim countries, and in several other non-Muslim countries. Generally, your shoes trod everywhere, so your shoes--particularly the soles--are pretty dirty. This doesn't have to do with desert climates or anything, just with regular walking around.

There's a similar idea in India, Japan, and other places. I always take off my shoes when I enter my apartment (or a friends' place). My family's Bangladeshi, and our cleanliness practices are attributable to both Islamic and Indian culture (and Indian culture was also influenced by Islamic culture for several centuries).

Anyway, my point is, it's not just an Arab or Muslim thing. And where it carries more weight is probably in Arab countries. There's no cultural issue with crossing your legs with us, for example, but I wouldn't stand on someone's shoulders or climb into bed while still wearing my shoes. That just seems dirty.

I should add... My main irritation is when I hear people saying this as if it's some weird and exotic cultural trait to laugh about. KF

I remember a couple cartoons where they throw shoes at cats yowling (or singing, if it's a funny cartoon...)

I think that's probably more to do with shoes being at hand and a good weight to throw and such, rather than having particular significance. Certainly the idea of throwing shoes at noisy cats has been around for a while; I remember something like that in one of the Oz books, written circa 1916.

I wish one had hit that worthless waste of mass. He better keep practicing that ducking and diving because he doesn't get Secret Service when he leaves office.