Bush Shoe Thrower: Press Asserts al-Zaidi Had Saddam, Baathist Connections

It seems to be emerging as an accepted fact that Muntather al-Zaidi, the reporter who threw both his shoes at President George W. Bush this weekend, had specific ideological connections to Saddam Hussein and/or the Ba'ath Party, a pleasing conceit that seems intended to isolate al-Zaidi from an Iraqi populace who have, by and large, soured on the U.S. occupation. The most commonly cited source would appear to be this blog post from the New York Times "Baghdad Bureau," which notes that al-Zaidi -- in addition to having a rather commonplace "long-building anger towards the United States military presence in Iraq" -- also had "ties to Saddam Hussein's Baath Party," and was "head of the student union under Saddam Hussein."

Absent from this account is any indication that al-Zaidi pursued either his fealty to Saddam or the Ba'ath Party with any particular zeal. While several people are quoted in the article describing al-Zaidi's politics and positions -- and not always in a positive light -- none attest to any particular love for Saddam Hussein or his ruling party. In a thoughtful piece from the Washington Independent, Spencer Ackerman explains that this is an example of the press jumping to an untenable conclusion:

First of all, Iraqis under Saddam did whatever they had to do to survive given the reality of a totalitarian regime. Baghdad metal band Acrassicauda wrote a song praising Saddam so they could get some funding for equipment. Did al-Zaidi head his student union because he wanted to head a student union or because he believes deeply in the glory of Saddam Hussein? I don't know and you don't either.

And it's completely irrelevant. al-Zaidi has become a symbol in Iraq and the Middle East because the occupation of Iraq is an unwelcome intrusion. Calling al-Zaidi a Baathist is a particularly pathetic way to put one's head in the sand instead of confronting this simple reality. (You know who were also Baathists? Thousands of the so-called Sons of Iraq.)

The Times has abundant evidence that al-Zaidi detested President Bush, took the occupation personally, and had planned to make a symbolic, attention-seeking statement to that effect. But nowhere is it conclusively proven that he was motivated by anything having to do with Saddam Hussein or the Ba'ath Party. Indeed, based upon the extent to which al-Zaidi has been exalted in Iraq, I'd say it's fair to note that al-Zaidi was expressing a very mainstream dissatisfaction.

Comments

[TIQ]

Good Morning! A few weeks ago, TV commentators were talking about giving bailout funds directly to citizens instead of to financial institutions and corporations (funds that haven't yet trickled down to us and most likely never will). If the government gave citizens these funds, this recession would be over instantaneously. Debts would be repaid, mortgages, credit cards, etc. – as part of the “terms” of consumer bailouts. Plus all sorts of new spending would occur for a protracted period. This idea started off as a comment by a Congressperson that if the government had given each man, woman and child legally in the US a million dollars, it would have been less that what the government and federal reserve will end up spending on corporate bailouts. (And why isn’t anyone calling these corporate bailouts “welfare”??) Giving citizens bailout money would do lot more good for the country, our economy and individual citizens than what they are currently doing. This plan would directly benefit the unemployed, elderly, struggling parents, those who want to attend college. No child would want for medical attention, food, housing. Why would the government rather waste OUR fortune on companies who already have every advantage and whose CEO’s are already filthy rich? Why isn’t anyone demanding the government give bailout funds to consumers, citizens, actual people? This solution merits serious consideration. Stop giving our money to those who already stole, lost or squandered it. Give our money to us for once!

[thismachinekillsfascists]

Uuh, what's that have to do with the shoe-thrower? Will he get funds in the bailout package???

[TIQ]

Sorry, first time use, and posted to wrong blog.

[demolove]

800 Billion dollars is equal to eight hundred thousand million dollars, so our nation of 275 million people night get a little shortchanges. But I get your point, and I like it a whole lot! It is our money, hey, ya know, why don't we just kick their asses and take it?

[meinokea]

Why is Pres. Bush getting all this press over the shoe ducking. People that like the President love this stuff. It makes him look strong and able to deflict the flyiing shoes like a baseball player at bat when a angry pitcher decides to throw a brushback pitch. This pitch was used after the team at bat has hit a homerun with bases loaded. Get the picture, most likely not!

[superlive]

But ducking allowed the US FLAG behind Bush to be STRUCK by BOTH SHOES!!!!

Thanks to Bush's dodginess, OLD GLORY suffered the worst insult known to the Muslim world.

[Sneakerface]

Strong ?? LOL. It does exactly the opposite; it exposes his corruption and incompetence for what it is. Hey, if our Congress won't do what we elected them to do - impeach Bush - we need to have a national holiday to recognize this Iraqi journalist. I propose we change Columbus Day to National Shoe-Protest Day. (We could just put a shoe on a pole, instead of throwing them...)

[demolove]

You don't even have so much as a byte up there, do you? What picture? What a sucker you are!!!

[LeftyFinch]

Give Bush the Boot!

We need to send our old shoes to:

President Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, D.C. 20500

[AliMB]

don't waste your time, it will only get thrown away. If you truly dislike bush, you should pressure president obama to disassociate himself from all of bush's policies and personel, including secretary gates who is a staunch supporter of Bush's current policies in Iraq. So write obama, not bush.

[Butterfly8]

Meanwhile enjoy throwing yourself shoes at Bush!! A Brazilian site has placed a show-throwing game online: http://charges.uol.com.br/game_ver.php?game_pk=37
Use the left side of your mouse to play - (and beware, it's addictive).

[SantaFeConservative]

So when the first reporter throws a pair of Air Jordan's at Obama, it will be OK. Right?

[ErikW65]

In your fantastic dreams when Obama does what Bush did? Yes, absolutely!

[Sneakerface]

What in the WORLD is with these people throwing apostrophes in every time they make a word plural??! If you want to make a word plural, just add the letter s.

[demolove]

If he does something shoe-worthy, then absolutely!!! There should never be a double standard either way. An A-hole, once he or she has proven to be one, deserves a just reward. Despite my high hopes, I've learned that most, if not all politicians will say anything, so let's just wait and see what the actual actions turn out to be, then act accordingly. Bush was a horror story, Cheney, Rove et al are worse, but that doesn't automatically make Obama the messiah. He has to walk the walk.

[Spiritgirl2]

Naturally the American "media" celebrity lapdogs want to discredit the shoe-thrower. They have learned to be obedient to a sociopathic, arrogant, incompetent bunch of liars in order to keep their celebrity! That the President is unwilling to acknowledge his incompetence in office shows exactly how pathological he really is!

Those that refuse to recognize or even understand why this whole Iraqi fiasco was wrong should ask themselves how they would feel if it had been this country that had been invaded and trashed - how would they think they would react?

[ErikW65]

Gotta wonder if they just don't let their minds go there, or if their minds are so shallow, they just aren't able to complete the mental excersize of putting themselves... in others' shoes, as it were.

[demolove]

Exactly. But the funny thing is that the longer this is talked about, the better chance there is of a serial shoe thrower popping up. Imagine Caroline Kennedy getting popped in the kisser with a size 12! Or Jumbo Jim Corzine! Batten down the hatches! LOL!!!

[GreenKalpa]

A brief bit of history...
The first objects thrown were undoubtedly sticks and stones, primitive projectiles intended to frighten away competing scavengers (we were scavengers ourselves then). Eventually we graduated to hunting with curved throwing sticks and spears. Then, then of course, we learned to mine ore, and that's how (compressing a great deal of history here) we got to bombs and missiles, which are nevertheless glorified stones. But a shoe? That's real innovation. Simply brilliant. A new stage in human evolution--overturning despots without real violence, just disdain.

[thismachinekillsfascists]

In the Middle East, historically shoes were thrown at hookers and thieves, which is why it's such an insult to have a shoe thrown at you

[chucky6]

The shoe throwing incident will mark the end of a repressive administration, if the shoes had been thrown three years ago, the reporter would now be enjoying a Caribbean vacation in Guantamo, Cuba

[shucknjive]

Saddam would have had the shoe thrower publicly beheaded on the spot.

[thismachinekillsfascists]

So if the shoe thrower ends up in Gitmo and gets tortured, are we any better?

[coastalcarla]

Nobody would have thrown a shoe at Saddam because of that, either. But we're no better taking him to Camp Cropper and beating the crap out of him. Which is exactly what they're doing right now.

[KHAAANNN]

Yes, and Ronald Reagan was a Union member and a Democrat, before he became a Republican.
What do past affiliations prove? Nothing.
This is just an attempt to demonize someone that has embarrassed the hell out of the Bush administration and expressed, in a way that cannot be ignored, the true feelings of the majority of Iraqis.

[Marlyn]

Thanks Jason for this blog.

[Hoelder]

It is not the man, it is the reaction. The discussion whether or not he was a Baathist or not is distracting from the meaning of the reaction of groups in Iraqi society and specifically, the educated middle class. Of course it makes sense for some talking heads, conservative or not to tie him to the "evil" Saddam to invalidate his action of defiance and open expression of opposition to the lies and empty grand standing. George Bush will not get a George Bush Avenue in Baghdad. Throwing his shoes at the commander in chief shows no fear of the so called most powerful man in the world. This is the beginning of the end of US hegemony. Throwing his shoes is the symbol to this event

[omahkohkiaayo]

Instead of any form of violence, the most devastating thing he could have done is to launch the kinds of questions that MSM media would never dare ask because of their careerist concerns for ACCESS that brings them SCOOPS, that bring them EXPOSURE, that bring them CELEBRITY that brings them even more ACCESS to the movers and shakers that they trail like papparazzi begging for crumbs. The old "Spiral of Success" in MSM Media. Of course Mr. Bush always made/makes sure he is in safe venues and surrounded by the types of "journalists" that never dare ask taboo questions.

And if you think taboo questions are not censored even on Huffpo, that have nothing to do with profanity, potential libel, bad taste, off-topic or whatever, just make copies of everything you submit and check out sometime what does not get through even when on-topic, to the point, relevant, free of any profanity or ad hominem, while other missives, sometimes containing ad hominem and profanity, manage to get through when on relatively safe topics or representing one-liners and zingers.

[JBS]

No one would have ever noticed.

Bush wouldn't answer the questions, and the U.S. press wouldn't have reported the answers even if he had.

[omahkohkiaayo]

I think your point is well taken on one level. And I can well understand the rage of this journalist, but the answer to one form of violence or "decider" of illegal violence, is not another form of violence unless in direct self-defense against a real and imminent threat. Ultimately, any form of violence as a political tactic, reflects and comes from impotence, impatience with the protracted grunt work of change as well as rage.

The greatest danger in countering any form of evil or violence is in mimicking and eventually incorporating the tactics and postures of that which we seek to stop.

Sometimes it takes more courage to spend long hours out of any limelight or celebrity, trying to dig up needed facts, posing taboo questions over and over in various venues that few dare to pose, and to painstakingly connect the dots to provide the sunlight that can inform and mobilize the masses who are the real makers and shakers of history.

[vegas9999]

The delight shown for the shoe throwing incident on this site is remarkable considering there was no mention of the reception the President got from OUR MILITARY.

[KHAAANNN]

You salute the rank, not the man.

[dogwatch]

If the shoe fits, wear it. No need to vet the thrower after the fact. Our cheers will not subside upon a weak showing of the bad politics of the thrower thereof. It's not the shoe but the subtle message that counts. We might have used a tomato, so go light on the criminal charges. I prefer to hurl blogs and there is a thin line between a piercing blog, a hurled tomato and a shoe in a culture that gives it a special meaning in response to the bombing of one's capital city for reasons that proved to be totally false. Our news people would probably do the same in a similar reversed situation.