Bush Nearly Hit By Iraqi Shoes

[Stalins Organ]

quite - a distinct improvement I'd say.

[FAI]

That's not even close to the 180,000+ that are reported on various websites.

Either way you cut it, I don't buy that the journalist was motivated out of frustration over the number of deaths of Iraqi civilians resulting from the current war. Civilian deaths aren't exactly a new concept in that country. He's a little late with his protests if that's his main beef - which I doubt it is.

He has a pretty good throwing arm, though, eh. Still, not quick enough for ol' W.

"Late" was actually inaccurate, he didn't plan it. Bush was more like a target of opportunity, a very juicy target just to pass at that. I bet guy wished he had had more practice with his throwing arm.

[Bugged]

Quite possibly it is a healthy sign that someone feels free to express their anger in such a fashion: personally, at the man he holds responsible.

There in lies the irony. The man (Bush) who has made it possible for the journalist to "express his anger" without fear of death is the man who is now being subjected to it.

In this way dialogue is instituted and maintained - maybe it is preferable to do this without resorting to throwing shoes,...

To expect a dialogue is wishing for too much, but throwing shoes at someone constitutes assault, and it's illegal here - I would think it's illegal there, too. I don't generally condone assault.

"Late" was actually inaccurate, he didn't plan it. Bush was more like a target of opportunity, a very juicy target just to pass at that. I bet guy wished he had had more practice with his throwing arm.

First off, how can we be sure he didn't plan it? Secondly, if it wasn't planned, then at best that makes the journalist a hot-headed spaz who is incapable of controlling himself. I've seen 5 year olds behave in this manner, and nobody has ever praised them for throwing a temper tantrum. How is this man's behaviour any different?

~~~~

And as for whatever motivated him - whether it's the death of civilians or not - really isn't an issue for me, so don't expect me to argue this moot point. I don't give a sht what motivated him, his actions were illegal. He's no hero. He's just another a-hole with an uncontrollable temper.

[gunnergoz]

I'm no fan of rage and violence myself but were I an Iraqi journalist who was unexpectedly confronted with this exemplar of insufferable hubris, whose arrogant ignorance has resulted in thousands of lost lives, a resurgent Iran and an Iraq in ruin...well, it might knock me off my nut, too.

[costard]

There in lies the irony. The man (Bush) who has made it possible for the journalist to "express his anger" without fear of death is the man who is now being subjected to it.

To expect a dialogue is wishing for too much, but throwing shoes at someone constitutes assault, and it's illegal here - I would think it's illegal there, too. I don't generally condone assault.

Sure, but this is cartoon assault. What is the worst that can physically happen - lose an eye? Bush wasn't worried for his physical wellbeing - except insofar as he showed a fair turn of speed.

First off, how can we be sure he didn't plan it?

Who, Bush? Could've, I guess.

Secondly, if it wasn't planned, then at best that makes the journalist a hot-headed spaz who is incapable of controlling himself. I've seen 5 year olds behave in this manner, and nobody has ever praised them for throwing a temper tantrum. How is this man's behaviour any different?

Indeed - most unprofessional. Drum him out of the guild. Fine him. One generally doesn't beat up on five year olds.

~~~~

And as for whatever motivated him - whether it's the death of civilians or not - really isn't an issue for me, so don't expect me to argue this moot point. I don't give a sht what motivated him, his actions were illegal. He's no hero. He's just another a-hole with an uncontrollable temper.

Amen, brother.

[SgtMuhammed]

It would be interesting to see the reaction if this had it been Obama at the podium. I doubt it would have been greeted as such a joke.

[Sergei]

Or McCain. Assaulting an old crippled guy would be awful. Someone like Bush or Obama are still in good shape, you can throw flaming bricks at them for all I care.

[Lars]

Of course we'll only have comparable figures in 2023. Anyway, killing innocent people is not some kind of high score contest. Either you are a murderous bastard with no regard for civilian lives or you aren't. Saying anything else is just to wash the blood off your hands.

You'll never make "Genocidal Maniac of the 21st Century" with that attitude, mister.

[Sergei]

It's good then that I have set my sights to become the "Slightly Annoying Maniac of the 21st Century" instead.

[SSgt Viljuri]

How about some morbidly obese fella like Michael Moore? Handicapped or not, any wanna-be assailant should make sure it's not a cake or food what they are planning to throw at him... Instead of ducking, Mr. Moore would probably swallow up the "projectile" without any discomfort or somefink.

[Patrocles]

How about some morbidly obese fella like Michael Moore? Handicapped or not, any wanna-be assailant should make sure it's not a cake or food what they are planning to throw at him... Instead of ducking, Mr. Moore would probably swallow up the "projectile" without any discomfort or somefink.

haha!

Security personnel: Look out! Pie thrower at 10 o'clock position!

Mr. Michael Moore: Yum! Throw it right here, buddy!

Or better yet, that tubby, piggish, oxycontin pill-popping Rush Limbaugh would never even feel the shoe hitting him thanks to his fat layer and pain-killer addiction! LOL

[gunnergoz]

Of course, these little wet-dreams about Obama and Moore getting shoe-bombed overlook the fact that the Iraqi press (if not general population) have no axe to grind with either of those two gentlemen; but they certainly do have a bit of cause to be upset with dear old W.

[JonS]

Of course, these little wet-dreams about Obama and Moore getting shoe-bombed overlook the fact that the Iraqi press (if not general population) have no axe to grind with either of those two gentlemen; but they certainly do have a bit of cause to be upset with dear old W.

Indeed. We all* want to throw a shoe or three at Dubya, but this guy was the one who carpe diem-ed. No-one* wants to throw a shoe at Moore or Obama.

* Generalisation is accurate to a first approximation.

[dieseltaylor]

Given my gut feeling that Bush and Blair dragged the West into a war knowing they had used loads of duff information to hornswoggle fellow legislators and the public I would be very happy to seem them up on war crimes at the Hague.

Throwing a shoe - to get upset over that after what they did. Joke!

Incidentally I think Blair has made $15m on the speaking circuit so who says crime does not pay? Makes me sick that two men have done so much damage to the world and will get away scot-free.

[Bigduke6]

Makes me sick that two men have done so much damage to the world and will get away scot-free.

The scary part is, these jerks for sure are absolutely convinced they did the right thing, and they have no concept of how much worse they have made so many peoples' lives. I have no doubt they sleep well, thinking they have served their country and their fellow citizens.

Nothing carries so much potential evil, as a mediocre man sure of his moral superiority.

[costard]

They were both elected to office - its not as though we didn't have a say. A common sense justification of their actions would lead you to believe that they believed they could do good, but also that they could make a lot of money doing it. They got one bit right.

An awful lot of people bought into this last decade, mostly following the examples set by their leadership. With the use of doublespeak the powers denied they were saying anything of value, but we (generally speaking) sat up and cheered them on.

Undoubtedly Bush and Blair have served their countries - but whereas Blair stood himself down (maybe?), Bush had to be thrashed on his way out. With a shoe.

[dieseltaylor]

Humm!

Mr Blair was the choice of a mere 35% of the UK population last time, previous election 40% - or roughly what the Conservatives polled this time - so I think we can fairly safely say that the democracy we laud to all and sundry sucks.

Mr Bush did slightly better in 2000 getting only fractionally less than his opponent Al Gore in the popular vote. If you think Ralph Nader's votes were really natural Democrats then the 2.74% he polled would have given Gore an absolute majority rather than simply being the most popular candidate.

So the people as a whole voted against both warmongerers in both countries - so what more "say" were you talking about?

; )

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0876793.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005

[JonS]

Also, 'we' might have voted for Blair and/or Bush, but 'I' didn't, and neither did Muntazer al-Zaidi.

[gunnergoz]

Nothing carries so much potential evil, as a mediocre man sure of his moral superiority.

Now there's some sig material...

[Lars]

Of course, these little wet-dreams about Obama and Moore getting shoe-bombed overlook the fact that the Iraqi press (if not general population) have no axe to grind with either of those two gentlemen.

Not to mention the fact that they won't go to Iraq.

We'll have to wait and see if any Afghanis have been practicing up.

[SSgt Viljuri]

Or Hindus, you know, if Mr. Moore keeps consuming beef like there's no Bush tomorrow.

[gunnergoz]

Not to mention the fact that they won't go to Iraq.

We'll have to wait and see if any Afghanis have been practicing up.

I'm sure that its a bit early to rule out an Obama visit to Iraq. As to Moore, his interests have always been in domestic US issues so I don't see a war film in his agenda. The only reason he is mentioned in this thread is because someone with an axe to grind, saw fit to ridicule him in a pretty petty way.

Personally, I have always found the themes and messages of Moore's films to be right on target, although his delivery can be uneven. Moore is the bringer to light of sights, scenes and sounds that many people in high places would rather not be aired. He is not afraid to film the emperor in his new clothes and for that he is to be commended.

Were things to go seriously sideways for the Obama administration somewhere down the road, I suspect that Moore would be there documenting the causal flaws and shortcomings for all to see. He is an equal opportunity horsefly biting the butt of the establishment.