By now I’m sure you have probably seen the video (see below) of an Iraqi journalist throwing his 2 shoes at President George W. Bush. The act was no doubt classless, rude, disrespectful, and a slap in the face to our leader. Whether or not you like President Bush, you have to admit that he did not deserve that.
However, I have to give a lot of credit to President Bush for dodging the shoes. Even if you’ve already seen the video, take a look at it one more time. The guy fires both of his shoes at President Bush’s head, and yet he ducks both of them with no problem. He definitely has a career in dodgeball once his term is finished.
Although you can’t see it too well on this video, my favorite part of the video is the smirk President Bush gets after the guy throws the first shoe. If you look closely, you can see a smile on his face as if he’s almost laughing. Great stuff! Check it out for yourself!
Tags: Dodgeball, George W. Bush, Iraqi Journalist, President Bush, Throwing a shoe
December 15th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
I blogged about this incident this morning. Rather hilarious if you ask me. 2 people commented on my blog informing me that throwing shoes in Iraq is the lowest of insults. I had no idea. Good stuff! Eric
December 15th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
I appreciate the Iraqi PM trying to block the second shoe! What a guy!
December 15th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
HAPPY RIPS DAY!!!!!
December 16th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Let me tell you what grinds my gears about this whole situation. This joker has the stones to throw his shoes at GW and call him a tyrrant. I wonder of this guy would be brave enough to throw his shoes when Sadam was in power. All Bush did was duck, Sadam would have tortured and murder the guy’s family. It is because of American blood that this clown has the freedom to chunk a shoe and live to tell about it. He may hate America but that doesnt stop him from practicing our basic fundamental rights and freedoms. It is attitudes like this guy’s that make me wish we’d turn the whole country into a parking lot and put our efforts toward people that would appreciate it.
December 16th, 2008 at 10:01 am
As far as torturing and murdering this guy’s family is concerned, have you ever considered how many of his family may already have been slaughtered by american weapons of mass destruction during the illegal invasion of his country? Where do you fascist American clowns get off? Do you not know that every time you bray about freedom and democracy, this Hitler that has been anointed as your leader takes away more of the fundamental freedoms that your people used to claim as their birthright?
December 17th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Let’s look at the facts:
Fact: Saddam Hussein was a terrorist. He was annihilating his own people. He hated America and everything the United States of America values. He hated you and me simply because we believe that everyone is created equal and should have the right to speak and believe however they choose. He had the capabilities of building weapons that destroy millions and millions of lives and had no reserves about doing so.
Fact: War is hell. I do not like war. I have had members of my family serve in Iraq. Thankfully they have made it home safely but I know hundreds have not. But we have to look at the big picture. I’m not saying that is right, but sometimes a few sacrifice their lives so that many more can live peacefully.
As a human race (and esp. as Christians) we have a responsibility to prevent moral corruption in our world. For example, every night you heard your neighbor beating up on his wife and kids, do you not have a responsibility to help? Sure there is some sadness when daddy goes to jail, but in the long run the family is better off.
Now as for you comments concerning George W. Bush (and whether you like the guy or not, calling him Hitler is completely absurd and immature. You clearly are not educated in history), I do not understand what you mean by “annointed” and what fundamental freedoms has he taken away? Please be more specific.
December 17th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
re: Let’s Look at the Facts
While I agree with your conclusion regarding the absurdity of marvin’s accusations of fascism, I think it’s a bit disingenuous to consider your first “Fact” an actual fact.
First of all, there isn’t really an agreed upon definition of terrorism. Actions that some would refer to as “terrorism” would be considered admirable depending on the judge.
Secondly, there’s very little evidence to suggest that Saddam Hussein hated “everything the United States of America values.” That is a cliche that people love to use whenever they defend action against America’s opposition. “American values,” like “terrorism,” aren’t easily defined. They’re almost completely subjective.
Thirdly, I would also argue that, at the time of the U.S. invasion, Saddam did not have “capabilities of building weapons that destroy millions and millions of lives and had no reserves about doing so.” The Iraq Survey Group, in October of 2004, concluded, “that Saddam Hussein had the desire but not the capability to create weapons that could attack the west.” Now, if you’re asserting that he had the capability of building weapons that could destroy millions and millions of lives in the Middle East, then you may be right. However, I’ve read nothing that would indicate that that was the case.
Furthermore, if we set a precedent where our own determinations of “moral corruption” justify the invasion of sovereign nation-states, we aren’t exactly in a position to condemn the invasion of sovereign nation-states by Middle Eastern countries that charge “moral corruption” against virtually every country that doesn’t adhere to their own moral beliefs.
Whether or not you support the invasion of Iraq, it’s hard to argue, without being hypocritical, that the precedent set by the invasion of Iraq is one that even the most militaristic Americans wouldn’t object to if another government cited it when invading a country they believed to be morally corrupt.
December 17th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Thanks for the comments. Good stuff (with the exception of calling Americans fascist clowns.)
Tyrone, you bring up some great points, but let’s not forget Saddam admitted to pretending to have weapons of mass destruction. He deliberately allowed the world to believe it in efforts to deter Iran. He may not have had them, but trying to convince the world that he did proved deadly for him.
Marvin, I do not appreciate being called a fascist American clown. Can you accurately judge an entire nation with three words? Do you really think your words describe the entire nation? I also have issues with you referring to President Bush as Hitler. In no way has he taken away our fundamental values. We have freedom of speech. We have freedom of religion. We have freedom of the press. He has kept the United States safe and protected our families.
December 17th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Tyrone, thank you for thoughts. I enjoy a good debate
You said: there isn’t really an agreed upon definition of terrorism. Actions that some would refer to as “terrorism” would be considered admirable depending on the judge. “American values,” like “terrorism,” aren’t easily defined. They’re almost completely subjective.
I simply cannot agree with you on these words being subjective. There has to be some objective truth in them, or else there would be no point to using them! I think a solid definition for terrorism would be: “the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political or religious purposes.” That is not to say that only Muslims can be terrorists. I believe Christians, Hindus, Jews, etc. can be terrorists. Blowing up an abortion clinic in the name of Christ is an act of terror. The point I’m trying to make is there is an objective to the word and these men fall under the definition.
As for defining American values: freedom and equality. Everyone in America has the freedom to be whomever they choose and an even ground to start dreaming upon. I don’t think you will find too many educated people that would disagree. Throughout our history we have always cherished these principles, unfortunatly at times not always in practice but I believe we are getting better and better.
You said: The Iraq Survey Group, in October of 2004, concluded, “that Saddam Hussein had the desire but not the capability to create weapons that could attack the west.” Now, if you’re asserting that he had the capability of building weapons that could destroy millions and millions of lives in the Middle East, then you may be right.
Whether it is lives here in America or lives over there, that doesn’t matter! Bottom line: I VALUE HUMAN LIFE. I don’t care what nationality, color, age, sex, whatever. I believe everyone is created in the image of God and therefore everyone has value. And if I know that someone is slaughtering human life, then I have a responsibility to do something about it whether it is here, Iraq, Africa, wherever!
You said: Whether or not you support the invasion of Iraq, it’s hard to argue, without being hypocritical, that the precedent set by the invasion of Iraq is one that even the most militaristic Americans wouldn’t object to if another government cited it when invading a country they believed to be morally corrupt.
Absolutely disagree! Anytime anyone from anywhere steps out to protect human life, they will have my support!
December 17th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Hello again everyone.
I did not by any means intend to brand every American as a fascist; all I meant to point out is that there is a disturbing tendency towards fascism by certain elements in the United States that has seemingly gone unnoticed by much of the population; also, it horrifies me when someone can casually write about committing genocide on an entire nation just because he thinks they do not appreciate the “gift” that Bush has bestowed on them.
If you would like more info on the largely unnoticed but significant changes that the Bush admistration has made that will not only effect Americans, but everyone else on the planet, visit: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment