Shoes Thrown at Bush Press Conference in Iraq

[Drooling Iguana]

I don't know, stale bagels could be considered a dangerous weapon...

Only some of them.

[Count Chocula]

I stay out of Chicago unless I bring lots of cash . 'Sides, the bastards closed Meigs Field! Midway's the only way I fly into Chicago now, on an airliner.

[Wicked Pilot]

Not to drive the thread further off topic, but 'driver' is in fact a common term in the military aviation community. No one takes it or gives it with prejudice.

[Broomstick]

Hmm... then it's a cultural difference between the military and civilian aviation worlds.

Upon reflection, I think in civvie aviation the term was originally used to refer to people who attempt to "drive" an airplane as if it was a car, e.g. attempting to use the yoke to steer while taxiing. I imagine the military breaks new pilots of such bad habits quite rapidly, whereas in the civilian world such bad habits can persist for years in some cases. In which case the difference in meaning becomes more understandable.

[Count Chocula]

Especially for pilots trained in an Ercoupe!

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Hmm... then it's a cultural difference between the military and civilian aviation worlds.

Upon reflection, I think in civvie aviation the term was originally used to refer to people who attempt to "drive" an airplane as if it was a car, e.g. attempting to use the yoke to steer while taxiing. I imagine the military breaks new pilots of such bad habits quite rapidly, whereas in the civilian world such bad habits can persist for years in some cases. In which case the difference in meaning becomes more understandable.

More or less. I always referred to pilots of military aircraft as "drivers" as a gesture of respect, in an impish sort of way, but then I knew military terminology from a very young age. It was often used in combination with the actual (i.e., personnel used) aircraft nickname. As in: a Bone Driver is a pilot of a B-1B.

[weemadando]

At least this happened now and not 5 years ago. Had it occurred then, the outcry in the US from all walks of life and facets of the media that the President had been so disrespected would have led to the shoe-thrower being dragged to Gitmo via various third world dictatorships with loose morals and looser arrangements with American intelligence services. People on this board (you know who you are) would have been screaming that such an insult to the President can only properly be met by a complete ban of any journalists at press conferences. Homeland security would have banned shoes, leading the majority of Americans to walk even less. The leading shoe manufacturers of the world would have been stormed by Delta Force or targetted with Cruise Missiles while Fred Phelps burnt a massive pile of loafers outside the Capitol Building...

But now, now everyone just goes: "Oh, someone threw a shoe at Dubya? Took them long enough." Thank god for that.

[Broomstick]

I disagree - in the US, shoe-throwing is simply not an insult (well, not beyond the fact you're throwing something at someone). Neither is showing the sole of a shoe to someone. Shoes and feet just don't "translate" to Americans the same as Iraqis.

[Adrian Laguna]

Throwing a pair of shoes at him while calling him a dog is the worst thing, short of assassination, that could have been done to Bush by an Arab, at least as far as other Arabs are concerned. Potentially even worse, since it could be interpreted as al-Zaidi saying that Bush is so worthless as to not even be worth killing. If that had been done to Arab strongman, the response would have been gunfire or a short but unpleasant stay in a dark dungeon where his screams would fall on deaf ears, depending on how lucky he was. Arguably the strongman would have no choice on the matter if he intended to keep power, if not he would be perceived as weak and begin losing allies while gaining enemies. The Arabs take their honour seriously(*).

That is the cultural context of this event.


weemadando, maybe some members of the board just learned to keep their mouths shut, I know I have certain opinions that I keep to myself here (and elsewhere).

[Count Chocula]

weemadando wrote:

At the risk of being permanently banned from entering the US, I kinda wish that they'd hit him.

In fact, every single person who I've talked to today has expressed that exact opinion.

Wishing that the POTUS got hit with a shoe won't get you barred from entry. Trying to enter without money, or a work visa, or from Iran may get you denied.

I can't help but wonder, how would you and "every single person" you talked to have reacted if it had been, say, Barack Obama, or Condoleeza Rice, or (hey why not) Sarah Palin in Bush's spot?

[Broomstick]

I can't help but wonder, how would you and "every single person" you talked to have reacted if it had been, say, Barack Obama, or Condoleeza Rice, or (hey why not) Sarah Palin in Bush's spot?

He didn't talk to me, and you didn't ask me directly, but here's my feeling for each getting hit by a shoe:

Barack Obama - disapprove
Condoleeza Rice - disapprove
Sarah Palin - approve

[Count Chocula]

Now a tougher one, but actually possible since she's the SecState designee:

Hillary Clinton: approve or disapprove?

[Pelranius]

I personally wouldn't mind.

I must admit that I'm sort of glad the shoe didn't hit Bush (but a lot of that would be concern for the shoe thrower than anything else).

I thought that it was more offensive to make comments about one's parentage than comparing one to dogs in the Arab world though?

[Havok]

Throwing a pair of shoes at him while calling him a dog is the worst thing, short of assassination, that could have been done to Bush by an Arab, at least as far as other Arabs are concerned. Potentially even worse, since it could be interpreted as al-Zaidi saying that Bush is so worthless as to not even be worth killing.

This is funny because it underlines what the real problem is between the two cultures. They don't understand us any more than we understand them.

[Adrian Laguna]

This is funny because it underlines what the real problem is between the two cultures. They don't understand us any more than we understand them.

One of the reasons Iraq is a mess is the failure of both the Bush administration and the commanders on the ground to try and understand Arab culture. Many of the insurgents are and have been basically angry men with guns trying to restore their sullied honour, because occupation troops inadvertently insulted them, their wives, and/or their families over the course of routine peacekeeping operations.

[Sarevok]

Throwing a pair of shoes at him while calling him a dog is the worst thing, short of assassination, that could have been done to Bush by an Arab, at least as far as other Arabs are concerned. Potentially even worse, since it could be interpreted as al-Zaidi saying that Bush is so worthless as to not even be worth killing. If that had been done to Arab strongman, the response would have been gunfire or a short but unpleasant stay in a dark dungeon where his screams would fall on deaf ears, depending on how lucky he was. Arguably the strongman would have no choice on the matter if he intended to keep power, if not he would be perceived as weak and begin losing allies while gaining enemies. The Arabs take their honour seriously(*).

That is the cultural context of this event.

Just curious about something. Is not throwing shoes / calling someone a dog thing a universal insult ? What's so cultural about it ?

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Throwing a pair of shoes at him while calling him a dog is the worst thing, short of assassination, that could have been done to Bush by an Arab, at least as far as other Arabs are concerned. Potentially even worse, since it could be interpreted as al-Zaidi saying that Bush is so worthless as to not even be worth killing. If that had been done to Arab strongman, the response would have been gunfire or a short but unpleasant stay in a dark dungeon where his screams would fall on deaf ears, depending on how lucky he was. Arguably the strongman would have no choice on the matter if he intended to keep power, if not he would be perceived as weak and begin losing allies while gaining enemies. The Arabs take their honour seriously(*).

That is the cultural context of this event.

Just curious about something. Is not throwing shoes / calling someone a dog thing a universal insult ? What's so cultural about it ?

For starters, Arabs dislike dogs immensely, to the point of banning them outright in some places, and secondly, they regard seeing the sole of the foot as an insult. It varies in degrees from culture to culture, but to the Arabs, the journalist practically broke all the possible cardinal sins they could of.

[Broomstick]

Just curious about something. Is not throwing shoes / calling someone a dog thing a universal insult ? What's so cultural about it ?

Well, yes, it's somewhat insulting in the US, but not nearly to the same level it is in the Arab world. In the US, "dog" is far from the worst thing you could call someone, and you could even use the insult on prime time TV. In the Arab world, it's about as bad as you can get. So Americans are going "How stupid - what's the big deal?" where Arabs would potentially feel homicidal rage over it.

[Ryan Thunder]

I can't help but wonder, how would you and "every single person" you talked to have reacted if it had been, say, Barack Obama, or Condoleeza Rice, or (hey why not) Sarah Palin in Bush's spot?

I'd disapprove in any case, if only because they're public figures. Though I'd disapprove more for Obama and Rice.