UPDATE: After writing the blog below, I read the following New York Times article, which shows the shoe thrower’s inpact on Iraqi history is intensifying:
BAGHDAD — A session of the Iraqi Parliament erupted in an uproar on Wednesday as lawmakers clashed over how to respond to the continuing detention of an Iraqi television reporter who threw his shoes at President Bush during a Baghdad news conference earlier this week, people attending the parliamentary meeting said.
As Parliament began to discuss legislation on the withdrawal from Iraq of armed forces from nations other than the United States, a group of lawmakers demanded that the legislature instead take up the issue of the detained journalist, Muntader al-Zaidi, 29. After his shoes narrowly missed Mr. Bush’s head at the news conference on Sunday, Mr. Zaidi was subdued by a fellow journalist and then beaten by members of the prime minister’s security detail.
The legislative session became so tumultuous that it prompted the speaker of Parliament, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, to announce his resignation, according to The Associated Press. A spokesman for Mr. Mashhadani, Jabar al-Mashhadani, refused to confirm whether the speaker had tendered his resignation, although he would not deny it. Some in Parliament say the government should release Mr. Zaidi immediately, while others say the judiciary should decide his fate.
How badly injured Mr. Zaidi was by members of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s security detail is not clear. He has not appeared in public since his arrest, and his family members and his legal representatives say they have not been permitted to visit him. On Wednesday, Mr. Zaidi was scheduled to appear before a judge, but it was unclear whether that happened.
Dhiya al-Saadi, one of Mr. Zaidi’s lawyers, said Wednesday that he was not sure whether Mr. Zaidi had appeared before a judge. As part of the Iraqi legal system, a judge typically determines whether bringing formal charges against a suspect is warranted, criminal lawyers in Iraq said. Mr. Zaidi faces up to seven years in prison if he is charged with and convicted of offending the head of a foreign state.
The New York Times says Iraqi “journalist” Muntader al-Zaidi, 29, has become a “folk hero,” ever since he threw two shoes at President Bush during a press conference Sunday evening.
I put the word “journalist” in quotes not because I know anything about his work or career — but only because he ceased to be a journalist when he threw his shoes at the president. Throwing shoes at press conferences is not what journalists are supposed to be doing. His anger may have been more than reasonable, more than justified, but that doesn’t excuse his behavior.
I believe he should be fired.
A reasonable question is: Should he be jailed? On the one hand, it seems silly to put a man in prison for throwing his shoes, an act which doesn’t seem to rise to the level of assault. On the other hand, it’s easy to understand why any government would make it illegal to throw a solid object at a foreign head of state during an official visit. In my humble opinon, I think it would be unreasonable for this man to spend more than a few months in jail — but that’s for an Iraqi court to decide.
He should not be beaten, however. But that may be what happened to the man, according to the several news outlets, including Reuters:
Zaidi’s brother said Tuesday he was hit in the head with a rifle butt and had an arm broken in the chaos that broke out after he threw his shoes at Bush and was leapt on by Iraqi security officers and U.S. secret service agents.
He was in a hospital in the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, his brother Maitham al-Zaidi said.
“All that we know is we were contacted yesterday by a person — we know him — and he told us that Muntazer was taken on Sunday to Ibn-Sina hospital,” Maitham al-Zaidi said. “He was wounded in the head because he was hit by a rifle butt, and one of his arms was broken.”
The brother declined to identify the source of the information and his comments could not be independently verified. Asked about the brother’s remarks, various Iraqi officials denied having responsibility for the case.
Al Jazeera actually quoted Zaidi’s brother saying he was “tortured.”
An Iraqi journalist arrested after throwing his shoes at the US president has been tortured during his detention, his brother has said.
Muntazer al-Zaidi, who called George Bush ”a dog” during his attack, was beaten by security guards after his arrest, Durgham al-Zaidi told Al Jazeera on Tuesday.
“We know that [Muntazer] has been tortured and his hand was broken. I asked them to go and check on him in the Green Zone [in Baghdad],” he said.
Al-Baghdadia television, Muntazer’s employer, reported that al-Zaidi had been “seriously injured” while in custody.
The channel has urged the Iraqi government to allow lawyers and the Iraqi Red Crescent to visit him.
The Iraqi military has denied that al-Zaidi has been mistreated while in detention.
The New York Times indicates there seems to be no reliable way to determine what happened:
Ziad al-Ajeely, president of the Iraqi Journalistic Freedom Observatory, said he had contacted senior members of the Iraqi government after he heard rumors that Mr. Zaidi had suffered severe injuries. But, he said, “they assured me he was fine.”
Under the circumstances, it is possible to believe that Zaidi hadn’t been “tortured” in detention, but had been injured unintentionally by security personnel who were overly-zealous in their efforts to subdue him after the shocking shoe-throwing incident. Of course, it is also possible that he was deliberately beaten by security forces.
Either way, the idea that he was beaten, tortured, abused, etc., will only make his example more powerful — and while his actions may have provided plenty of fodder for late night comedy talk show hosts, they’re also a symbol around which Iraq’s most virulent anti-American elements may rally.
Al Jazeera reports:
Al-Zaidi’s attack on Bush, who ordered the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, has been met with broad support across the Arab world.
Iraqis calling for al-Zaidi’s release from custody held a second day of protests on Tuesday, with hundreds of students marching in Baghdad.
The demonstrations came a day after thousands of people turned out in Baghdad’s Sadr City in a show of support for al-Zaidi.
But the Iraqi government on Monday called al-Zaidi’s outburst against Bush a “barbaric and ignominious act”.
President Bush should privately apologize to the Iraqi government for embaressing it with his presence. Zaidi’s actions — and the support they inspired throughout the Arab world — may have provided angry Arabs with a relatively harmless way to achieve catharsis, just as a new American president with an Arab middle name takes Bush’s place. But the idea that Zaidi was beaten provides more than catharsis — it provides a new rationale for violence against the powers that be in Iraq.
I disagree about the assault charge. While I am ignorant of Iraqi criminal code it seems to be a well thrown object right at someones head constitutes assault and battery. The fact the President had quick reflexes shouldn’t affect that.
If someone threw a shoe at your face wouldn’t you press charges?
In any case being fired seems proper for the reasons you state.
Comment by John — December 18, 2008 @ 10:56 am
To John: You may be absolutely right about the criminal charge. I can’t imagine myself filing charges against someone for throwing shoes at me — but just because I can’t imagine it now, that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t actually do it. For me, the key question is, should he be beaten, tortured, etc. The tiny gratification Iraqi government officials may derive from inflicting pain on this guy is nothing compared to the moral legitimacy the Iraqi government forfeits when it lets brutality substitute for justice.
Comment by Ian — December 18, 2008 @ 11:53 am
“For me, the key question is, should he be beaten, tortured, etc.”
Well, the answer to this question seems pretty obvious to me. You don’t torture because it’s a violation of all civilized codes of conduct. And illegal, according to international standards of decency, to boot. And a twisted means by which one person or group of people tyrannize another.
We used to rightly consider torture regimes sick, twisted, depraved examples of human corruption and degradation. We rightly pointed out that torturers were monsters who ought to be prosecuted and jailed for their crimes. Now, by Dick Cheney’s own happy admission, we do the thing we used to claim to deplore (it’s different when we torture; in fact, because the US does it, it can’t even be defined as torture!) and also have installed a regime in a country that has apparently adopted our torture techniques.
Because of these reports of torture, I suspect that the shoe-thrower is going to become a huge symbol of resistance to the occupation for many Iraqis. The treatment you mention above is going to be understood as a natural and intentional extension of the torture regime already instituted by Bush & co. Having him be released will be a big priorty for activists, I suspect. I’m not sure how it’ll play out, longer term.
Comment by Lee — December 18, 2008 @ 1:37 pm
John, i must say i would never press charges against someone who threw a shoe at me. though i understand the law i must remind everyone who sees this that this was a common insult. it would be rather like flipping someone off though this is a more violent act i thought it a stupid reaction to hostility. bush laughed at the insult as did i and think people are getting worked up over hostility that we already knew existed. The real problem i see here is our ignorance of oversea customs and feelings.
Comment by bob — December 18, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
Hey, Bob, welcome to History is Happening Now. Thanks for commenting. I think it’s fair enough for the Iraqis to prosecute the shoe-thrower for whatever local laws he may have violated by throwing his shoe. I would hope that the act would be understood as a relatively minor offense and that he would get a slap on the wrist. I suspect there will be enormous popular pressure to release him. By apparently beating him — I’m sure we’ll find out more soon — the Iraqi security forces have made him into more of a folk hero than he would otherwise have become. The longer he is in custody the more popular pressure will build up.
Comment by Lee — December 18, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
Hello, Bob! I agree our ignorance of Iraqi customs and feelings is an enormous problem. I think this raises an interesting and important question about cultural relativity versus universal values. I agree that the Iraqis who are rallying around the shoe-thrower are expressing hostility that already existed — and this is why the shoe-thrower may provide some helpful catharsis for Iraqis who still need to vent some of their feelings. On the other hand, some might use cultural difference as an excuse for the beating of the shoe-thrower, arguing, “his treatment may seem brutal to us, but that’s because we don’t understand Iraqi culture, and in that culture the shoe-thrower’s brutality is less shocking, and more appropriate.” I disagree — I think the context is different, but that doesn’t mean the abuse won’t have a powerful effect in Iraq in feeding the flames of that hostility.
Comment by Ian — December 19, 2008 @ 10:45 pm