Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
But honestly, he deserves whatever he gets for throwing the shoe, no matter whether it was justifiable.
Thoreau spoke in Civil Disobedience about stuff like this (and I`m hella paraphrasing) when he said that taking an action against something unjust is only significant when you account for those actions. Trying to avoid jail time (or any other punishment) makes what may be a highly powerful and symbolic act innocuous.
Throwing the shoes was an intense symbol of disrespect, and that anger was not only directed at Bush. The number of people who are supporting the hatred of our own country is sickening(I`m speaking to the US posters, here). You may not have liked Bush, but he was the representative of the people of the US.
And I have to repeat that the government wasn`t behind it. The gov`t took down the statue because they thought it was totally inappropr
Also, this was put up in Saddam Hussein`s hometown. I`ll let you all draw the conclusions there...
Keep in mind I was a McCain supporter, I still think throwing shoes at Obama would be stupid depending on why you`re doing it.
"You`re leaving our country in ruins!" - Fair."Get out of our country!" - Not fair.
Quote from the shoethrower as he threw his shoes: "This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq!"
Quite frankly, I don`t think that when you`re the first on the scene at events like the killing of Zahra by allied forces, your initial reaction is "Lets all have a sit down tea party and discuss our differences FOR THE WIDOWS AND ORPHANS AND KILLED IN IRAQ!"
It loses some of it`s pathos.
Shoethrowing, is more than justifiable, in response to a military invasion. This is not healthcare reform.
What a shame... </sarcasm>
And Hamalina... what? Why would you oppose something you don`t disagree with? Wouldn`t that make it harder to do? I have no problem speaking out against something I disagree with. When I agree with it it`s a little harder to be against.
Allah was on the side of Bush and protected him, I say.
2) 2005 is a little too late to jump on the Bushbashing bandwagon. The American Press gave GWB a free ride after 9/11 and simply did not scrutinize him enough. They failed at their jobs. The first proper question Bush was asked was when he came to the UK, and he had the cheek to be offended by the British Press asking him questions.
Hamalina:Yes, because >5 years of protesting and debating worked so well. It prevented the Iraq war for example.
Oh wait... it didn`t. Well I guess that`s because it was a logical step with the information we had at the time. It`s not like I could have predicted the whole fiasco from the get go when I was 19.
It`s easy to throw shoes/rocks/bombs as an opposition to something you don`t disagree with. It conveniently saves you the effort of actually thinking about it in a more intelligent manner.