BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- For the war-beaten orphans of the northern Iraqi city of Tikrit, this big old shoe fits.

A huge sculpture of the footwear hurled at President Bush in December during a trip to Iraq has been unveiled in a ceremony at the Tikrit Orphanage complex.
Assisted by children at the home, sculptor Laith al-Amiri erected a brown replica of one of the shoes hurled at Bush and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki by journalist Muntadhir al-Zaidi during a press conference in Baghdad.
Al-Zaidi was jailed for his actions, and a trial is pending. But his angry gesture touched a defiant nerve throughout the Arab and Muslim world. He is regarded by many people as a hero. Demonstrators in December took to the streets in the Arab world and called for his release.
The shoe monument, made of fiberglass and coated with copper, consists of the shoe and a concrete base. The entire monument is 3.5 meters (11.5 feet) high. The shoe is 2.5 meters (8.2 feet) long and 1.5 meters (4.9 feet) wide.
The orphans helped al-Amiri build the $5,000 structure -- unveiled Tuesday -- in 15 days, said Faten Abdulqader al-Naseri, the orphanage director.
"Those orphans who helped the sculptor in building this monument were the victims of Bush's war," al-Naseri said. "The shoe monument is a gift to the next generation to remember the heroic action by the journalist."
"When the next generation sees the shoe monument, they will ask their parents about it," al-Naseri said.
"Then their parents will start talking about the hero Muntadhir al-Zaidi, who threw his shoe at George W. Bush during his unannounced farewell visit."
Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi leader toppled by the United States in 2003, was from the Tikrit region.
Al-Zaidi marked his 30th birthday in jail earlier this month. One of his brothers said he is "in good health and is being treated well."
Al-Zaidi's employer, TV network al-Baghdadia, keeps a picture of him at the top left side of the screen with a calendar showing the number of days he has spent in detention. The network has been calling for his release.

By tradition, throwing a shoe is the most insulting act in the Arab world.

Honestly...can these guys be more fudging sadistic?!

which guys? what's sadistic about making a big shoe? screw bush, he deserves it and a thousand times worse. he's going to live the rest of his sad pathetic life in ignominy and die in disgrace. worst american ever.

and as for al-zaidi, i'm puzzled by the brother's comments. there's all these signs he's been getting repeatedly beaten in prison.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/16/bush-shoe-zaidi

By tradition, throwing a shoe is the most insulting act in the Arab world.

Honestly...can these guys be more fudging sadistic?!



I think barbaric (IMO) is more appropriate.  We don't even have an equivalent act.  Pie in the face?  Streaking?  Walking around in circles carrying signs with catchy slogans?  The culture is so different from anything I understand. 

shoekkake

shoekkake

Oh snap!

Oh snap!
i cant be the first person to have thought of that, i bet if i google it my browser will crash. damned if im gonna do it at work, though.

as for throwing a shoe being the most insulting gesture in the culture, i have a feeling in a secular muslim society like iraq, it's probably the most insulting gesture the way shooting the bird is the most insulting gesture in america -- because it's so allegedly shocking, people do it constantly.

now, talibani afghanistan would be a different story. in any case, it's hard for me to express how LITTLE sympathy i have for bush having had a couple shoes thrown at him. god, man up, dude.  ;D

i cant be the first person to have thought of that, i bet if i google it my browser will crash. damned if im gonna do it at work, though.

as for throwing a shoe being the most insulting gesture in the culture, i have a feeling in a secular muslim society like iraq, it's probably the most insulting gesture the way shooting the bird is the most insulting gesture in america -- because it's so allegedly shocking, people do it constantly.

now, talibani afghanistan would be a different story. in any case, it's hard for me to express how LITTLE sympathy i have for bush having had a couple shoes thrown at him. god, man up, dude.  ;D

I googled it, am still confused.  Having a shoe chucked at you?  BiG WOO!

I googled it, am still confused.  oh dear. anyone wanna field this one?  :-[

maybe i should just delete my account, fake my own death and flee to argentina.

oh dear. anyone wanna field this one?  :-[

maybe i should just delete my account, fake my own death and flee to argentina.


Tia, I may have to smite you for talking over my head.  On a Friday.

Tia, I may have to smite you for talking over my head.  On a Friday.
damn! in my face!

congrats on your fist cool C, by the way.  8) 100 posts! w00t!

damn! in my face!

congrats on your fist cool C, by the way.  8) 100 posts! w00t!


I'm so excited I'm trying not to pee a little!

Honestly...can these guys be more fudging sadistic?!


I can't even answer this with a straight face.

Tia covered it for me. ;D

I googled it, am still confused.  Having a shoe chucked at you?  BiG WOO!


I dunno either.  Maybe ask Chuck SHOE-mer!

:-\\

I dunno either.  Maybe ask Chuck SHOE-mer!

:-\\


OK I get it!  Shoe Cake!  I SO get it.  Whew!

http://blogs.fayobserver.com/faytoz/files/2009/01/iraq_shoe_sculpture-bag101.jpeg



Cat

It's a bit sad that throwing a shoe (and missing) somehow makes this guy a hero.


Though I reckon he should run for president....


...he'd be a shoe-in (or did I make that joke already?)

It's a bit sad that throwing a shoe (and missing) somehow makes this guy a hero.


Though I reckon he should run for president....


...he'd be a shoe-in (or did I make that joke already?)
it's not the shoe, per se. it's that it's the sole moment during bush's sad presidency that he's been held accountable for his actions in any way, shape, or form. i'd say that puts the guy dangerously close to hero territory, yeah, particularly with him knowing he'd probably be beaten in jail and he might well never be a free man again. he's got a helluva lot more courage than harry reid or nancy "off the table" pelosi, that's for sure.

haha. "sole moment." that was unfortunate.  :-[

Who throws a shoe?!  Honestly...

Wait, did someone do that yet?

I did & no one noticed. In the original shoe thread.

Throwing a shoe shows contempt because it implies that the person is lower than what is on the bottom of ones shoe.  I like the shoe  ;)

I'm STILL hoping for a Giant Foot Monument in London.

It would look like this....http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Monty_python_foot.png

I'm STILL hoping for a Giant Foot Monument in London.

It would look like this....http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Monty_python_foot.png



Now I'm hearing the theme to Monty Python's Flying Circus in my head.  :D ;D ;D ;D



Cat

Now I'm hearing the theme to Monty Python's Flying Circus in my head.  :D ;D ;D ;D



Cat


Me, too!!!   ;D

Me, too!!!    ;D


That's the idea.

BTW-The shoe is now being removed because it was 'Too Political'.

I'm STILL hoping for a Giant Foot Monument in London.

It would look like this....http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Monty_python_foot.png


. . . and now for something completely different. ;D

It's good to know that the Iraqis aren't being petty about having a despotic dictator removed from office.  They sure know how to express their gratitude for their newfound freedom.

/sarcasm

Once upon a time, a bunch of fed-up proto-Americans dumped tea in a Boston harbor as a gesture of contempt towards a king named George. 

So maybe it's just the beer talking, but here's a toast to Shoe Guy, for displaying more American spirit and testicular fortitude in eight seconds than 300,000,000 Americans did in eight years.  Maybe we won the damn war despite ourselves.

Once upon a time, a bunch of fed-up proto-Americans dumped tea in a Boston harbor as a gesture of contempt towards a king named George. 

So maybe it's just the beer talking, but here's a toast to Shoe Guy, for displaying more American spirit and testicular fortitude in eight seconds than 300,000,000 Americans did in eight years.  Maybe we won the damn war despite ourselves.


I think the beer may be on to something.  The guy was displaying a spirit that is needed for a government to take place.

Once upon a time, a bunch of fed-up proto-Americans dumped tea in a Boston harbor as a gesture of contempt towards a king named George. 

So maybe it's just the beer talking, but here's a toast to Shoe Guy, for displaying more American spirit and testicular fortitude in eight seconds than 300,000,000 Americans did in eight years.  Maybe we won the damn war despite ourselves.


The difference is that we were fighting a despot back then, and we removed a despot from another country this time around.

There's no comparison here.  The shoe thrower was just an attention whore (and a very successful one at that).

The difference is that we were fighting a despot back then, and we removed a despot this time around.

There's no comparison here.  The shoe thrower was just an attention whore (and a very successful one at that).


I agree.

He got his 15 minutes of fame (As Andy Warhol would say) by throwing shoes at Bush, who's reign was toast when he came there.

I agree.

He got his 15 minutes of fame (As Andy Warhol would say) by throwing shoes at Bush, who's reign was toast when he came there.


Then he should have thrown Campbell's soup cans at Bush!
:D

The difference is that we were fighting a despot back then, and we removed a despot from another country this time around.

There's no comparison here.  The shoe thrower was just an attention whore (and a very successful one at that).


No the shoe thrower was pissed, not an attention whore.  If the same amount of media was available back during the Boston Tea Party I'm pretty sure there'd be the same reaction.

No the shoe thrower was pissed, not an attention whore.  If the same amount of media was available back during the Boston Tea Party I'm pretty sure there'd be the same reaction.

Read up more on the thrower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muntadhar_al-Zaidi

Being a Shia, he wasn't exactly favored under Saddam.  His family was apparently arrested under Saddam's regime.  He was also kidnapped by militants at one point.  Yet, he throws a shoe at the leader of the same country that removed Saddam.

It seems rather strange to me.  I'd say the guy's a headcase, personally.

Read up more on the thrower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muntadhar_al-Zaidi

Being a Shia, he wasn't exactly favored under Saddam.  His family was apparently arrested under Saddam's regime.  He was also kidnapped by militants at one point.  Yet, he throws a shoe at the leader of the same country that removed Saddam.

It seems rather strange to me.  I'd say the guy's a headcase, personally.


Who put Saddam in power?  The U.S. did.  I would think the guy knew that.  One could say that factors in to his discontent for the U.S.

Who put Saddam in power?  The U.S. did.  I would think the guy knew that.  One could say that factors in to his discontent for the U.S.


Saddam tried to be like Nasser, but he failed.

Since Saddam was in power in '79, did Jimmy Carter put him in power?

If so, I would blame all this sheesh on Carter. Bush just added fuel to this fire and Obama probably won't be helping us.

Saddam tried to be like Nasser, but he failed.

Since Saddam was in power in '79, did Jimmy Carter put him in power?

If so, I would blame all this sheesh on Carter. Bush just added fuel to this fire and Obama probably won't be helping us.


I think he probably helped put him in.  As I recall Iraq once had a monarchy.  It was part of the Hasimite rule. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_II_of_Iraq

Who put Saddam in power?  The U.S. did.  I would think the guy knew that.  One could say that factors in to his discontent for the U.S.

I don't know that the US actually put him there: Reagan et al certainly aided him especially during the Iran/Iraq war, where he was seen as a bulwark of secularity against an encroaching Islamic neighbour.


Saddam tried to be like Nasser, but he failed.

Since Saddam was in power in '79, did Jimmy Carter put him in power?

If so, I would blame all this sheesh on Carter. Bush just added fuel to this fire and Obama probably won't be helping us.

His rise to power predated Carter - by the time Carter was elected, Hussein was the power behind an increasingly old and infirm al-Bakr, leader of Iraq in all but name.


I think he probably helped put him in.  As I recall Iraq once had a monarchy.  It was part of the Hasimite rule. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_II_of_Iraq

That was years before Carter came along.

Is it possible that Iraq could have a peaceful Monarchy again?  Maybe it would bring stability.  Hashimites are not members of ethnic conflict.  Don't know just a thought. :-\\

Is it possible that Iraq could have a peaceful Monarchy again?  Maybe it would bring stability.  Hashimites are not members of ethnic conflict.  Don't know just a thought. :-\\


Well America, though founded in 1776, never became stable until the Revolutionary War, which lasted until 1783.

So...give it one more year.

Well America, though founded in 1776, never became stable until the Revolutionary War, which lasted until 1783.

And it's been without internal conflict ever since


;)

(In the same way as Tom Lehrer once said "Once all the Germans were warlike and mean, but that couldn't happen again/We taught them a lesson in 1918, and they've hardly bothered us since then)

Well America, though founded in 1776, never became stable until the Revolutionary War, which lasted until 1783.

So...give it one more year.


There is no comparison here.  Apples and oranges...or dates in this case.

Who put Saddam in power?  The U.S. did.  I would think the guy knew that.  One could say that factors in to his discontent for the U.S.


Actually no...  I used to think that too, but I looked it up.  We supported Saddam, but we didn't actually install him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein

Actually no...  I used to think that too, but I looked it up.  We supported Saddam, but we didn't actually install him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein


Hands raised if in hindsight think it was a bad judgement call to have supported him.

Hands raised if in hindsight think it was a bad judgement call to have supported him.

You've got no argument from me there.  I don't like what we did to Mossadegh either or how we supported the Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets.

I also didn't support the second invasion of Iraq, but I just think this journalist is missing the forest for the trees.  Whether he wants to admit it or not, we are responsible for liberating his country.

A lot of people have died obviously, and we've essentially sacrificed our prosperity over all this, so the least the Iraqi people can do is understand that...  in the end, this was more to their benefit than ours.

Hands raised if in hindsight think it was a bad judgement call to have supported him.


Well, old Don isn't gonna raise either hand:

Support Saddam = Get rich
Depose Saddam = Get rich again!

::)

BTW-The shoe is now being removed because it was 'Too Political'.


Nah, I'll bet somebody stole it for the copper recycling money.  ;D That seemed to be a big crime in western Ohio before I left.

Hands raised if in hindsight think it was a bad judgement call to have supported him.

The principle of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" has been misapplied more than once in that part of the world - if you think Saddam was a bad judgment call, the Taliban and Osama bin Laden (who were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan) may well have even more badly misjudged.

The principle of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" has been misapplied more than once in that part of the world - if you think Saddam was a bad judgment call, the Taliban and Osama bin Laden (who were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan) may well have even more badly misjudged.


No question about that.

While I'm not a big fan of intervention, there is always a tension between real politiq and moral politics.  It's not always easy to know what the right thing is, much less do it.

Nah, I'll bet somebody stole it for the copper recycling money.  ;D That seemed to be a big crime in western Ohio before I left.


They'll be sooooo disappointed when they find out that it was only copper paint (really, that's what it is)!


You've got no argument from me there.  I don't like what we did to Mossadegh either or how we supported the Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets.

I also didn't support the second invasion of Iraq, but I just think this journalist is missing the forest for the trees.  Whether he wants to admit it or not, we are responsible for liberating his country.

A lot of people have died obviously, and we've essentially sacrificed our prosperity over all this, so the least the Iraqi people can do is understand that...  in the end, this was more to their benefit than ours.



IMO-We should've left Iraq after the capture of Saddam and have only Freedom Fighters.

They'll be sooooo disappointed when they find out that it was only copper paint (really, that's what it is)!

IMO-We should've left Iraq after the capture of Saddam and have only Freedom Fighters.



IMO, we should have NEVER gone into Iraq.



Cat

IMO, we should have NEVER gone into Iraq.



Cat

Damn right: any odds Saddam would have died of natural causes by now. 


IMO-We should've left Iraq after the capture of Saddam and have only Freedom Fighters.

To have invaded, captured Saddam, then withdrawn would have been monumentally silly: it would have left a power vacuum that would have destabilised the whole area for decades.

Well, old Don isn't gonna raise either hand:

Support Saddam = Get rich
Depose Saddam = Get rich again!

::)


Old Don should never have had any power to begin with.  Too bad the picture of him shaking hands didn't come back and bite him as much as it should of.

IMO-We should've left Iraq after the capture of Saddam and have only Freedom Fighters.


Probably the worst thing we did was decommission the Iraqi Republican Guard.  After that move, we had more "freedom fighters" than we could handle.

Old Don should never have had any power to begin with.  Too bad the picture of him shaking hands didn't come back and bite him as much as it should of.


But he's probably having a lot more fun tonight than I!
8)

IMO, we should have NEVER gone into Iraq.



Cat


i agree, but how to send the message that acts of terrorism will not be tolerated?

i agree, but how to send the message that acts of terrorism will not be tolerated?

er.. what acts of terrorism had anything to do with Iraq?

er.. what acts of terrorism had anything to do with Iraq?


Wouldn't the weapons of mass destruction believed by the US & the UK to be harboured in Iraq be suspected to be used in acts of terrorism, or one final act?  Please know that my knowledge is fairly limited and do not profess to be an expert, so I will never be offended if someone corrects me on these matters or provides further information.  I do know the UN found no evidence of the weapons and the intelligence used (or lack thereof) has been criticised. 

The acts of terrorism involving Iraq was the fact that U.S. invaded a sovereign country on a lie.



Cat

er.. what acts of terrorism had anything to do with Iraq?
check out this devil's advocate moment from me! dont tell anyone...

but one thing hussein DID do was award the families of palestinian suicide bombers thousands of dollars apiece as reward for the bombings. when bush and his supporters try to justify the war they hardly ever bring that up, which is weird because to me, as someone who was always totally against invading iraq, his funding of the palestinian suicide bombers was probably the strongest argument that he was in league with "the terrorists." i think maybe it wasn't 'sexy' enough, though; the hyped up WMD stuff makes hussein look a lot more like dr. evil and it just appeals to the lowest common denominator. ditto this whole "spreading freedom" thing. anyone who thinks about it for a second is like, okay, that's CRAZY talk, but action movie buffs are likely to just dig the whole john-wayney aspect of that story.

Money (Oil & Gas) is the root of all evil.

I think barbaric (IMO) is more appropriate.  We don't even have an equivalent act.  Pie in the face?


Yeah, the left does that a lot.

http://www.hoffmania.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/30/getaart.jpg
William Kristol

http://i44.tinypic.com/15q2hzc.jpg
Ann Coulter

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v71/PaxRomano/pie1.jpg
Patrick Buchanan

Wouldn't the weapons of mass destruction believed by the US & the UK to be harboured in Iraq be suspected to be used in acts of terrorism, or one final act?  Please know that my knowledge is fairly limited and do not profess to be an expert, so I will never be offended if someone corrects me on these matters or provides further information.  I do know the UN found no evidence of the weapons and the intelligence used (or lack thereof) has been criticised. 

Saddam had no motive to supply WMDs to terrorist organizations - even if he did have the WMDs that formed the (very spurious) grounds for the invasion, he was way too wily a customer to do anything stupid like threaten the US/UK with them. The most credible reason (IMHO) for the way he behaved with respect to WMDs is that he didn't want to admit to not having (m)any, as the threat of his WMDs was his main deterrent against Iran.  Al Qaeda didn't manage to get any influence or power in Iraq until the aftermath of the invasion - they were not Saddam's particular flavour if Islam, and these things matter to those people.

The impression you have of Iraq being some kind of terrorist haven is because of the disinformation spread by your government that has consciously tried to conflate the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which was run by a Taleban who actively supported and trained terrorists).

As Tia points out, the only link between Saddam and terrorism is that he paid a bounty to the families of suicide bombers - I don't believe, however, that this influenced the decision of even one suicide bomber.  It's not the sort of thing you choose to do because some guy a few hundred miles away will pass on a few thousand dollars to your family.

Yeah, the left does that a lot.

http://www.hoffmania.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/30/getaart.jpg
William Kristol

http://i44.tinypic.com/15q2hzc.jpg
Ann Coulter

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v71/PaxRomano/pie1.jpg
Patrick Buchanan


Yeah well the right won't allow any other form of protest.  Too bad the guy missed Ann. :\'(  The shot of the pie hitting Pat Buchanan is a classic.  Wasn't it a cherry pie?

Throwing a pie at coulter is a waste of good pie.  Take a good look at her, tell me she doesn't heave her food up at any opportunity.  It is possible that she loathes herself even more than I loathe her

Throwing a pie at coulter is a waste of good pie.  Take a good look at her, tell me she doesn't heave her food up at any opportunity.  It is possible that she loathes herself even more than I loathe her



Maybe heaving a moose turd pie at her.  ;) :D :D ;D ;D ;D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSlPJOfnJZk



Cat

Maybe heaving a moose turd pie at her.  ;) :D :D ;D ;D ;D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSlPJOfnJZk



Cat


:o Whoa!!

Throwing a pie at coulter is a waste of good pie.  Take a good look at her, tell me she doesn't heave her food up at any opportunity.  It is possible that she loathes herself even more than I loathe her


What I like is how she and her cronies make her a martyr!  Jesus has his cross, Caesar has his sword, Joan of Arc has her burning stake...and Anne Coulter has her chocolate cream pie!
:D

The universities tend to be rife with liberal activists.  Likewise, each one has its Republican club, which in turn gets funds from the Olin Foundation and such.  Thus, they have the money in advance to pay right-wing speakers to come to campus.  Campus Republicans love to get inflammatory types such as Coulter, Malkin, or Goldberg because they attract throngs of screaming protesters.  What does this do?  Attracts media attention.  It also does something more important, it fills the auditorium.  So if you're a liberal on campus, here's what you do, you go for a root beer float instead!  Then Anne Coulter's voice echoes through an empty hall populated only by the 15 fanatics in the Republican club! 

What humiliates your enemy?  Surely not showing that you hate him.  He knows that already.  Showing him how much you don't care has a much greater effect!
:)

IMO, we should have NEVER gone into Iraq.



Cat


And to be honest...my dad felt that way too.

Saddam was no Bin Laden and it was one of those "Seemed like a good idea at the time" kind of approach.