Okay, this guy has been handed over to the military. May face a maximum penalty of two years in jail for insulting a foreign leader and the Iraqi prime minister. Two other Iraqi journalists were briefly detained just because one of them called the shoe-throwing a “courageous” action. (as mentioned [post=10571163]above[/post])
He previously [thread=497518]had been abducted[/thread] by mysterious kidnappers who weren’t interested in any ransom, but tortured him and interrogated him about his journalistic work. Also been arrested two other times by the U.S. armed forces.
He’s being held now and interrogated about whether anybody had paid him to throw his shoes… Sure, obviously. Someone else must have told these poor misguided people to hate Bush. Probably Satan himself. Let’s detain him indefinitely. We must find out the truth! Everyone has the right to get a proper witch trial.
Al-Baghdadia television has the freedom to demand that he gets immediately released “in line with the democracy and freedom of expression that the American authorities promised the Iraqi people on the ousting of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.”
See? We’ve exported peace, justice, and freedom of expression into this country. (Ah. Freedom. [noparse]::wipes tear::[/noparse]) Let’s the back-patting commence.
I’m not sure what your point is through the sarcasm. I am pretty confident that if you throw something at the president’s head in the US it wouldn’t be called freedom of expression.
Rightly! In the US, it would be assault to throw a shoe at someone. But in Iraq, everybody suddenly tries to pass it off as an example of The Great American Freedom™ that we brought. Bush himself said about the incident “That’s what people do in a free society, draw attention to themselves.”
And behind the facade, the police detained bystanders for making a wrong comment. A dissenter like al-Zeidi is held for extended periods of time, while interrogators desperately try to find proof that every little evil is sponsored by al-Qaida. In other words, just like in the good ol’ U.S. of A.
Does it seem odd to anyone that his brother seems to have such detailed information about al-Zeidi’s injuries and yet doesn’t know where he’s being held? And doesn’t it seem odd that in that out of that entire article only one short paragraph, rather vague in nature, is attributed to his brother’s alleged comments?
And then there’s the following from the AP, in which his employer (predictably)claimed he had been injured but his brother (Maitham, a different brother than mentioned upthread) says al-Zeidi told him on the phone that he was in good health and that he sounded like he was in good health:
*His employer, Al-Baghdadia television, reported that al-Zeidi had been “seriously injured” — presumably beaten by guards — and called on the government to allow lawyers and the Iraqi Red Crescent to visit him.
Later, one of his brothers said on Al-Baghdadia that he had spoken by telephone with al-Zeidi and that he told him “thank God, I am in good health.”
“I felt from his voice that he is good health,” brother Maitham al-Zeidi said.*
And does it also seem odd that lawyers and the Iraqi Red Crescent aren’t allowed to see him (according to, again, his employer…a news outlet) but he’s allowed to give detailed information right and left over the telephone to his brothers?
Now I don’t really expect that this information will find much of a home here in the land of nonstop Bush/America bashing, but in the interest of fighting ignorance and all, I thought I’d toss out the fact that what you’re getting all up in arms about may not actually be so.
The penalty has to be severe enough as to greatly discourage this type of thing in the future. a fine would be joke and only encourage other “journalists” to grab the limelight and write it off on an expense account.
What is wrong with you, man? You’re going about this all the wrong way. First figure out what possible scenario would cast the U.S., and Bush ideally, in the worst possible light, and then make THAT the story. Embellish to taste.
Pity we had to close Abu ghraib, isn’t it boys?
If it was still there, we’d know exactly where the man is being kept.
Still, kudos to the new government for upholding our sacred traditions*.
*Yeah, the beating story may be fake.
So what? Our actions over there have given it a patina of plausibilty anyway.
Anyone want to deny the truth of that?
From the Huffington Post it looks like the shoe throwing has gotten the Arab world fired up.
This is a pitch perfect demonstration of the frustration everyone has over Bush. Eight years of protests and the man is still acting like the Iraqis appreciate what he has done, and he is still screwing things up.
I can just imagine what the reporter was thinking while sitting there. “What the hell is this guy doing here? He destroyed the whole country and killed millions of civilians in the process. Why is he still here. Stop talking asshole!” Throws shoe.
Just released: a memo from 1993 indicated the Clinton administration was informed well in advance of the potential danger of thrown shoes from Iraqi journalists but failed to adequately advise the Bush handlers. Typical behavior from a Democratic administration, really, to be soft on terrorism: they failed to prevent a drive-by shoeting.
But even more importantly, the Clinton administration failed to act on the information it had developed itself…and well in advance. If only it had, the ‘shoeting’ would likely have been prevented.
