Following up on the flying shoes
By BJ
As noted by, well, virtually everyone, Bush was the target of a pair of Iraqi shoes over the weekend. I do find it somewhat fitting that the incident has pretty much overshadowed whatever propaganda gains he was hoping to make on his "victory lap" tour of secret high-security flights into Iraq and Afghanistan.
Of course, there are a few people questioning the, "unusually restrained", Secret Service during the shoe-throwing incident. Apparently the fact that they weren't pulling their weapons out to start gunning people down is a problem for some people. It does make me wonder what kind of security features will be implemented at Presidential press conferences in the future. After all, one incompetent attempted shoe-bomber means millions of air travelers have to take off their footwear at the airport. Will reporters have to go barefoot now? Maybe have the Secret Service duct-tape their shoelaces so they can't take them off and throw them?
In any case, while I am forced to question the journalists professionalism, it does appear that the sentiments expressed by his shoe-tossing are very much in keeping with Arab and World opinion, but it is the man's current condition that concerns me most.
The brother of the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at US President George W Bush has said that the reporter has been beaten in custody.
Muntadar al-Zaidi has suffered a broken hand, broken ribs and internal bleeding, as well as an eye injury, his older brother, Dargham, told the BBC.
It is also reported that he has been taken to a US military hospital, which would argue to the beating claims being true, but with all access to Muntadar being denied at this point, it will be hard to verify his condition. How he is treated will give us all a pretty good indication of just how much progress has really been made in Iraq. Definitely something to keep an eye on.
And in other shoe-related news, several people have got the idea that mailing your smelly old sneakers to the White House would make for a good protest. I figure its more likely to annoy the staff responsible for screening the mail than anything, and with little more than a month to go, sending the shoes to the White House seems like a bit of a waste anyway. Send them as donations to his Presidential Library or something.




























Of course, if the Beeb reports it, it must be true.
Once source - the guy's brother (a supporter of Mookie al-Sadr)says he's been beaten. The Iraqis say the report is untrue.
Why believe the brother? Just curious, really. Here's a guy with the motive to lie while the Iraqis know that eventually the fellow will be released and people can see for themselves who has been badly beaten.
Who do you believe in that situation and why?
Posted by: Rick Moran | December 16, 2008 at 12:59 PM
It is also reported that he has been taken to a US military hospital, which would argue to the beating claims being true, but with all access to Muntadar being denied at this point, it will be hard to verify his condition.
I’m sorry if that didn’t make it clear enough that the report is unverified at this point, Rick. I would put it as plausible given what we know of the Iraqi security forces, but until independent access is granted, hearsay is all we have. If he is in US custody, allowing defence council access would immediately allow for confirmation or negation of the alleged beatings. If he’s denied access to defence council, well, that’s an issue in and of itself, and it will add to the plausibility that there is some mistreatment that needs to be covered up, while also making it impossible to verify.
As I said, we’ll have to keep an eye on what happens to see just where the Iraqi justice system rates on the fair and open scale. Do you disagree?
And one other point.
eventually the fellow will be released
How long is eventually? If he’s just badly bruised at the moment, (allegedly), and eventually is a month or two after any bruises would have healed, can you be certain he was never bruised? Eventually really doesn’t cut it. Access needs to be near-immediate to be credible.
Posted by: BJ Bjornson | December 16, 2008 at 04:34 PM