Muntadhar al-Zeidi, the Iraqi journalist, who threw his shoes at President Bush has asked for a pardon from the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki.
A spokesman for Iraq’s prime minister says the journalist who threw his shoes at President George W. Bush has asked for a pardon.
Spokesman Yassin Majid says that in a letter sent Thursday to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki the journalist described his behavior as “an ugly act” and asked to be pardoned.
Majid says that Muntadhar al-Zeidi in the letter recalls the kindness the prime minister once showed him during an interview in 2005 and asked for al-Maliki to show him kindness once again.
Al-Zeidi, a correspondent for an Iraqi-owned television station based in Cairo, Egypt, could face two years imprisonment for insulting a foreign leader.
What would a judge impose on a miscreant such as this here in America?
Probably a fine, community service and probabtion. Plus, the villain would have to allocute in front of the court his remorse.
But, NO PARDON.
The Iraqi journalist who threw the shoes at President Bush was a Saddam Hussein Baathist Party supporter/member.
Flap supposes he could be wearing a Saddam t-shirt? But, would it be the pre-hanged version? Or how about Saddam celebrating the gassing of the Kurds? Invading Kuwait and killing American soldiers?
Here is the site (contributed to Flap by a reader)
This is the “throw a shoe on Bush” -game.
In the upper curve you adjust the angle.
In the lower curve you adjust the strength.
And if that wasn’t it, this guy has 3 shoes!
(When it pops yellow you have a hit, when it is red you must throw again)
Kast skoen = Throw the shoe
Kast igjen = Throw again
It is quite easy to hit Bush. The Iraqi journalist yesterday must REALLY be a moron.
Technorati Tags: George W. Bush
“Who Throws a Shoe?”, Austin Powers
Thanks to Michelle Malkin for this one.
The radical Arabs could not defeat President Bush in Amerian elections or on the ground in Iraq. So, they throw shoes and celebrate.
It REALLY shows how PATHETIC these folks are.
Video you will never see on NBC News or MSNBC
Thanks to Gateway Pundit for this excellent video. You see, not everyone is throwing shoes at POTUS while peace and democracy comes to Iraq.
The complete video is here.
What a farewell to President Bush – getting shoes thown at you. But isn’t that what the radical Jihadists want to show – disdain for President Bush since they could not defeat him or the United States in Iraq?
Welcome to Baghdad. An Iraqi reporter set off pandemonium Sunday by hurling two shoes at President Bush during a news conference that was the centerpiece of his secret goodbye visit.
Bush was cool under fire and prevented an even bigger incident by waving off his lead Secret Service agent, who was prepared to extract him from the room.
Video shows the president’s lead agent rushing to the podium, but the president immediately and subtly motions to him that it’s OK. The agent backs off.
The president successfully ducked both throws. Photos show him with his head down near the top of the podium. The embarrassing incident marred a visit meant to show off the improved conditions since the troop “surge” dramatically reduced casualties to U.S. troops.
“This is a gift from the Iraqis. This is the farewell kiss, you dog,” the journalist shouted (in Arabic), Steven Lee Myers of The New York Times reported in a pool report to the White House press corps.
Myers reported that the man threw the second shoe and added: “This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq.”
Here is the video:
As was described in the video above White House Press Secretary Dana Perino received a microphone in the eye and has a shiner. The Secret Service who were apparently in the other room eating donuts also received a black eye because they were nowhere to be found. Secret Service = disgraceful in this case.
Michelle Malkin has more on the journalist, Muntazer al-Zaidi, a correspondent for the independent al- Baghdadiya television station. Whoever this jerk works for will award him a medal.
Flap wonders if the President-Elect will make a comment? So, far crickets.
In the meantime, unfazed President Bush is off to Afghanistan.
Barack Obama has said The Surge would actually worsen sectarian violence In IraqJake Tapper over at ABC fact checks Barack Obama on Team Obama’s “spin” of his Iraq War policy and The Surge.
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, on January 10 2007 predicted (watch HERE) that the surge of troops in Iraq would fail. “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,” he told MSNBC. “In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”
Four days later he told CBS’s Face the Nation, that “we cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality — we can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops, I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.”
Asked about these predictions on Sunday’s Meet the Press, Obama told NBC’s Tom Brokaw that “I know that there’s that little snippet that you ran,” referring to the MSNBC clip, “but there were also statements made during the course of this debate in which I said there’s no doubt that additional U.S. troops could temporarily quell the violence. But unless we saw an underlying change in the politics of the country, unless Sunni, Shia, Kurd made different decisions, then we were going to have a civil war and we could not stop a civil war simply with more troops.”
This has become an Obama meme — that during the debate over the surge he acknowledged that more US troops would mean a temporary reduction in violence.
But is it true?
No, it isn’t. But, American voters are not paying attention to the details and expect their politicians to lie with impunity when they come out on the wrong end of an issue.
And, clearly Obama has. Barry is just a typical pol who is a “rookie” on the world stage.
The gloves appear to be off between Obama and the MSM. No more free ride for “The One.”
Is Barack Obama playing politics with the Iraq War?
Isn’t it obvious?
But, John McCain does NOT have to paint Obama as a typical,duplicitous, lying politician on the Iraq War issue. As El Rushbo said today on his radio show the American public almost expects that from their pols. Rush suggests instead of emphasizing that Obama is a “ROOKIE” and inexperienced – one prone and destined to make poor decisions.
In other words, a politician who cannot be trusted with the Presidency. Like somebody who would rather go to the gym rather than see wounded troops. Somebody who is ALL ABOUT HIMSELF – even for a politician.
The script of Troops says it all:
Anncr: Barack Obama never held a single Senate hearing on Afghanistan.
He hadnâ€™t been to Iraq in years.
He voted against funding our troops.
And now, he made time to go to the gym, but cancelled a visit with wounded troops.
Seems the Pentagon wouldnâ€™t allow him to bring cameras.
John McCain is always there for our troops.
McCain. Country first.
John McCain: Iâ€™m John McCain and I approve this message.
Notice today how Barack Obama is moving away from foreign policy issues.
John McCain today in Denver, Colorado rejected Barack Obama’s “AUDACITY OF HOPELESSNESS” for Iraq.
McCain is RIGHT but the war is unpopular and Americans after five years in the Middle East are fatigued with war. Flap doubts that anyone is listening to Obama or McCain at this point about the Iraq War or care one iota about the war on terror in Afghanistan.
Run of the mill voters are more concerned about the economy (meaning their jobs) and the price of gas.
Did Barack Obama find support for his Iraq War withdrawal plan while in Iraq?
Gen. David H. Petraeus, the architect of the dramatic turnaround in U.S. fortunes, “does not want a timetable,” Mr. Obama reported with welcome candor during a news conference yesterday. In an interview with ABC, he explained that “there are deep concerns about . . . a timetable that doesn’t take into account what [American commanders] anticipate might be some sort of change in conditions.”
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has a history of tailoring his public statements for political purposes, made headlines by saying he would support a withdrawal of American forces by 2010. But an Iraqi government statement made clear that Mr. Maliki’s timetable would extend at least seven months beyond Mr. Obama’s. More significant, it would be “a timetable which Iraqis set” — not the Washington-imposed schedule that Mr. Obama has in mind. It would also be conditioned on the readiness of Iraqi forces, the same linkage that Gen. Petraeus seeks. As Mr. Obama put it, Mr. Maliki “wants some flexibility in terms of how that’s carried out.”
Other Iraqi leaders were more directly critical. As Mr. Obama acknowledged, Sunni leaders in Anbar province told him that American troops are essential to maintaining the peace among Iraq’s rival sects and said they were worried about a rapid drawdown.
The answer is NO.
But the American MSM has reported “The MESSIAH’S” Iraq visit a success even though his policy has NOT been accepted favorably by the major players there.
American voters grow weary of the Iraq War and are showing little attention to withdrawal plans as their gasoline prices skyrocket.
Obama may be wrong but Americans hear “get out” and unfortunately agree.