Latest Weapons System a Shoe-In
The unprovoked shoe attacks against President Bush in Iraq may have shocked the world. But to forward-thinking weapons system designers at Northrup Grumann and shoe experts at Nike it was simply an expected occurrence and one they have been making plans to thwart for quite a while now.
Unwilling to be quoted on the record, an unnamed source inside Nike told this writer that development of a defensive shoe weapons system has been ongoing at least since the statue of Saddam was torn down and pictures of Iraqis throwing shoes at the prostrate edifice were broadcast on worldwide television. A Nike shoe designer, aghast at the prospect of shoes being used as weapons to show disgust and displeasure, started a small side company called “The Sole of the Matter” with the goal of consulting on the growing problem of shoe violence around the world. What he learned made him suspect the escalation of shoe violence was an assured thing and that there was a terrifying anti-shoe weapons gap with the United States on the short end of the matter.
Unknown to even those on the inside of cutting edge shoe technology, Nike, in the greatest of secrecy, was given the contract to work with Northrup Grumann and Rocketdyne to build a state of the art defensive anti-shoe weapons system.
Millions saw the result of this work when President Bush was attacked in Baghdad when shoes were thrown by an angry Iraqi reporter. The president, at the suggestion of the Secret Service, was wearing a prototype of the new shoes when he was attacked. So successfully was the attack thwarted that the Defense Department immediately ordered one million pairs of the anti-shoe shoes, with three quarters of those earmarked for soldiers in the field. A source at the Pentagon said that the Joint Services Bizarre Weapons Group (Jazzwep) are leery of ordering a highly secret weapons system in such bulk based on one successful real world test.
“Anti-shoe defense gap”, my foot!
All those deaths, all that destruction, all that money, and it all it comes down to at the end is an Iraqi journalist becoming a folk hero for throwing his shoes at Bush…..
I think we need a national register of shoes; a background check should be required before any show could be purchased. A shoe safety locking system mandatory in all new shoes.
If it would save just one president, wouldn’t it be worth it?
Yes, Michael, [post 3] count me in!!!!
That guy who threw the shoes has absolutely NO CLASS, NO DECENCY AND NO RESPECT. All Bush did since his first term as President was to help the shoe thrower’s country — try to make it democratic, make it free, make it peaceful, make it stable, make it prosperous. Bush has not received anything out of trying to help that country except low approval ratings, hatred generated primarily by Obama’s followers and liberals around the world and bad, lingering memories of ‘Mission Accomplished’. That shoe thrower would never have been able to utter a single word of dissent to his former Furor Saddam Hussein. He would’ve been taken out the back of the press conference venue and shot by Saddam’s guards, then summarily stepped on with their filthy shoes.
The shoe thrower gets his 15 minutes of fame at the President’s expense, but years from now, when Iraq and the Iraqi people are truly free, democratic, stable and prosperous, he’ll regret what he did to the man who made all of that possible.
And Liberals are scared to death that Iraq becomes successful because it will mean Bush and Blair are vindicated. They love to talk about the failure of “the last 8 years”. What a joke when years from now, Iraq will be just like South Korea, Japan, Germany and the UK. What do those 4 prosperous and democratic countries have in common with Iraq?? Here’s the answer: U.S. military forces still “occupying” those countries AND at the REQUEST and INVITATION of those countries.
BC said
All those deaths, all that destruction,
You didn’t care about destruction and deaths of Irakis when Saddam was gassing them or when Al Quaida used people with the syndriome of Down to blow them to pieces. You didn’t care about Afghans when Taliban massacred them at Mazar el Sharif or when they starved them by the tens of thousands. In fact you only care of them as justification for your BDS. Don’t try to make us believe you give a dam about them.
Unfortunately, the Arabs don’t seem to get it: this is the kind of thing that can happen in a DEMOCRACY, and in a DEMOCRACY it usually blows over without anyone getting executed.
The Arabs are still stuck in slave mode. They don’t understand how anyone can have enormous power and not use it to defend his “honor.” They expected some kind of draconian response, and when it didn’t come they took it as a sign of Bush’s personal weakness or America’s national weakness. They fancy their boy has gotten away with something because he’s not sleeping in an unmarked grave with a bullet through his skull. What high standards they must have.
I don’t know what anyone can do with people like that.
LESS THAN A GOODY TWO SHOES
It takes zero courage and even less intelligence to throw shoes in a free society:
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2008/12/no-guts-no-shoes-no-glory.html
To JFM:
Please — nothing was happening in Iraq when we invaded. If we were legitimately trying to rescue a downtrodden people from tyranny, we would have invaded the Congo instead, which was in much, much more disarray than Iraq at the time. But we didn’t do that, did we? Bush simply implemented a standing PNAC policy wish to remove Hussein, and used 9/11 and “evidence” pulled from various butts as an excuse. And best estimates have about 2x more Iraqi civilians dying from the war than died in total under the worst scenarios for Hussein, never mind the destruction and loss of American lives and those of the few other countries dumb enough to go along with our harebrained scheme. It’s lucky for Bush that those were just ordinary shoes….
BC said
All those deaths, all that destruction,
You didn’t care about destruction and deaths of Irakis when Saddam was gassing them or when Al Quaida used people with the syndriome of Down to blow them to pieces. You didn’t care about Afghans when Taliban massacred them at Mazar el Sharif or when they starved them by the tens of thousands. In fact you only care of them as justification for your BDS. Don’t try to make us believe you give a dam about them.
> national register of shoes
Ha! My sister could fill that up all by herself. (No, her name is not Imelda, but it might as well be.)
Seriously, and back on topic, I think President Bush’s response was perfect. He showed off amazingly fast reflexes — those shoes never touched him! — and he laughed the incident off later. I can’t think of a better way to make the anti-democratic opposition look impotent than to treat their deadly insult as a big joke.
Bush was almost a victim of a shoe-icide bomber. An email pointed this out:
Just read your blog on the “shoe-icide” attack on President Bush. You’re right. He should have been able to nail the Prez from that distance, but ‘ol W is not really a “lame” duck — he had quick reflexes — and he keenly informed us the shoe was a size 10.
Bush Comes Under Fire in Iraq
How did you find out about “JAZZWEP”? Über defensive systems should not be discussed with public. Your source has been liquidated in “Operation Shoe Poo”.
The journalist did the Arab equivalent of spitting in Bush’s face. Bush was too stupid to pick up on the magnitude of the insult, even after 7 years of supposedly being involved in decisions on “moderating” Muslims. He thought it was funny.
What an oblivious, clueless fool.
The impression left is not one of “How Wonderful Democracy Is!” in the Arab world, but they took it as a sign of Bush’s personal weakness or America’s national weakness.
We should have demanded an apology from the Iraqi government for the physical assault. We should have asked for Iraqi security to return the shoes to the Sadrite radical journalist. One shoe up his ass, the other implanted deep into his mouth, past several broken teeth.
888 – The shoe thrower gets his 15 minutes of fame at the President’s expense, but years from now, when Iraq and the Iraqi people are truly free, democratic, stable and prosperous, he’ll regret what he did to the man who made all of that possible.
Regret it? He is being praised right and left in Islamic lands for showing Bush is a punk who can be given the supreme Iraqi insult.
It does make a nice bookend for Sadr followers, who were the ones as soon as Marines made it safe to do in Bahgdad in May, 2003 – were the ones all the TV crews showed throwing shoes at Saddam’s big statue or grabbing their shoes and hitting about Saddam’s head with the soles.
Now in 2008, they get to give Bush the same treatment.
Iraq may be prosperous within our lifetimes, but given who the Iraqis are, it will never be truly stable or truly democratic. And history books may record the shoe throwing as the fitting end to the Bush Presidency, along with being the end of America’s stab at Neocon Wilsoniam idealism “bringing democracy to grateful, noble, people the world over.”
Yes BC, invading the congo is so important to our national security concerns. It seems you do not understand our governments job is to act in furtherance of our national security, Show me one reason to go into the congo (as an example) while more pressing concerns are on the table.
Cedarford? Neocon wilsonian idealism? Mixing kool-aid with that cheap whiskey again I see.
This ethnic nationalist moron throws a shoe at a foreign leader simply due to his being a foreign leader. Maybe I should go to Baghdad and throw a shoe at his leader for the same reason.
cedarford (14), don’t mock democracy and freedom just because you have it. Even JFK, Truman and FDR wanted to spread democracy and freedom. It’s so easy to take those things for granted when you’ve never had to fight or die for it.
888- No one is mocking Democracy, just the fact that primitive Arabs and Africans are unfit to make it work. As for Freedom!!! – well, again, the African and Arab (and Afghan) version of what Freedom!!! is is quite different than ours.
It’s so easy to take those things for granted when you’ve never had to fight or die for it.
I must have missed the columns of “Free Iraqi freedom fighters” storming into gunfire alongside the Americans to liberate their land from Saddam.
BC (10) – that doesn’t compare to Clinton not doing anything to stop the Rwandan genocide during his presidency. That happened under his watch, and he chose to look the other way and not even call it a ‘genocide’. I find that woefully insulting, especially since over 500,000 Rwandans were massacred from April 1994 through mid-May 1994.
Here’s what Clinton said about Rwanda on April 8, 1994: “I mention it only because there are a sizeable number of Americans there and it is a very tense situation. And I just want to assure the families of those who are there that we are doing everything we possible can to be on top of the situation to take all the appropriate steps to try to assure the safety of our citizens there.” Excuse me??? What about the defenseless Rwandans???
May 25, 1994: Mike McCurry, State Department spokesman, is asked at a press briefing, “… Has the administration yet come to any decision on whether it can be described as genocide?”
He answers, “I’ll have to confess, I don’t know the answer to that. I know that the issue was under very active consideration. I think there was a strong disposition within the department here to view what has happened there; certainly, constituting acts of genocide that have occurred …”
June 10, 1994 At a State Department briefing, spokesperson Christine Shelley is asked, “How many acts of genocide does it take to make genocide?”
“That’s just not a question that I’m in a position to answer.”
Reporter: “Well, is it true that you have specific guidance not to use the word ‘genocide’ in isolation, but always to preface it with these words ‘acts of’?”
“I have guidance which I try to use as best as I can. There are formulations that we are using that we are trying to be consistent in our use of. I don’t have an absolute categorical prescription against something, but I have the definitions. I have phraseology which has been carefully examined and arrived at as best as we can apply to exactly the situation and the actions which have taken place … ”
In other words, the above Clinton Administration Govt-speak meant, “We don’t give a ______ about Rwanda and defenseless Rwandans.”
By mid-July 1994, the death toll is 800,000.
On March 25, 1998, in Kigali, Rwanda, President Clinton apologizes to the victims of genocide. He says, “… the international community, together with nations in Africa, must bear its share of responsibility for this tragedy, as well. We did not act quickly enough after the killing began. We should not have allowed the refugee camps to become safe havens for the killers. We did not immediately call these crimes by their rightful name: genocide. We cannot change the past. But we can and must do everything in our power to help you build a future without fear, and full of hope …”
Great…the richest, most powerful country in the world sat by and watched these horrors, and all that its leader can do is apologize.
December 1998 A French parliamentary commission completes a nine-month inquiry into France’s military involvement in Rwanda before and during the genocide. The commission concludes that most of the blame lies with the international community, particularly the United Nations and the UNITED STATES. Although France is noted as making “errors of judgment,” the government is absolved of responsibility for the killings.
March 1999 A week before the fifth anniversary of the Rwanda genocide, the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights Leagues and the U.S.-based Human Rights Watch release a report titled, “Leave None to Tell the Story.” The 900-page report documents events before and during genocide. It also criticizes the U.N., the UNITED STATES, France and Belgium for knowing about preparations for the impending slaughter and not taking action to prevent the killings.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/etc/slaughter.html
Before you start talking about Bush in Iraq and not in Congo, look to the recent past and see what was NOT reported about the Good Ole US of A and its then-President CLINTON not doing anything to stop the Rwandan GENOCIDE.
To 888 and the others:
The point is that we did not invade Iraq for any sort of humanitarian reason: it was strictly a policy decision that had nothing to do with the war on terror. Which makes all the major reasons put out by Bush and his people justifying the invasion utter BS.
Also while Clinton was guilty as Bush in being a bystander for an African tragedy, Clinton does get kudos for intervening in Bosnia, however belatedly. There were no US interests there — that was strictly humanitarian. There has been some attempt to rewrite history by Serbs denying there being any ethnic cleansing or such, and Clinton as being a villain, but there was indeed some nasty, genocidal operations going by Serbs against Bosnian Muslims.
If the shoe fits….
Kender,
Funny, funny stuff. Great wit, highbrow satire. Really, you should write for SNL. This piece is hilarious, and I love the “Shoe-in” pun. In fact, while there are many, many worn out shoe puns going around, yours, Kender, is polished.
And I detected your jab at Bush’s missile defense
system. LOL. Like it would really work.
My only question is why haven’t they released the thrower, Muntader al-Zaidi? No one was hurt. Bush forgave him. Even likened it to someone yelling during a speech. No harm. No foul. Plus, Muntader hurled the insult of insults at Bush. LOL again.
Granted, there are those who’r gathering in the streets of Arab nations much like Bill Ayers and Jeramy Wright, stomping and burning American flags, but it’s all in good, clean freedom of speech fun.
Like Muntader’s station manager said, “Let him go. He was just exercising his freedom of speech, and giving Bush some exercise in the process”.
Is it not healthy that the Arab world now embraces the tenents of freedom of speech? It’s a wonderful thing.
Why, I saw a drawing of Muhammad in the Village Voice of all newspapers last week, and nobody blinked. There were no riots in the streets of Syria or anyplace else.
Well, actually, it wasn’t just a drawing of Muhammad, (and this is the best part) the Prophet Muhammad was (this is so funny my sides are splitting) the Prophet Muhammad had this German Shepard dog on its back, and was performing an oral act on it.
I kid you not.
In the western world, this is considered to be a huge insult to a religious leader, but not one towel-headed (I love freedom of speech) bath needing, bead growing Arab so much as commented, much less killed a Jewish bystander.
Well, actually one did. (not killed, commented)
The Village Voice received a letter from a Jordanian gentleman who said the funniest part of this whole cartoon was that Muhammad was performing this act while the dog was lying on an open copy of the Koran, which, some idiot in the office calls a must read for derelicts, dildo-heads and demons.
Personally, I was offended. I mean, freedom of speech doesn’t mean you can yell theatre in a crowded firehouse. Does it?
When all is said and done, I think the guy who drew the cartoon is a real heal. By the same token, I guess some humorless Americans didn’t appreciate our President and the office of the Presidency being the target of some coward who throws like a nine year old girl. Then screams like her little sister.
Oh, well, to each his own, I guess. Or in The Hammad Man’s case, to each his bone.
Peeper – My only question is why haven’t they released the thrower, Muntader al-Zaidi? No one was hurt. Bush forgave him. Even likened it to someone yelling during a speech. No harm. No foul. Plus, Muntader hurled the insult of insults at Bush. LOL again.
1. It was the Iraqi equivalent of some deranged American being close enough to Obama to spit in his face and call him “Nigger”.
2. At a minimum, it is physical assault. “No harm, no foul” is an insipid saying when someone like Bush is “perfectly fine” because he ducked, or the grenade thrown at him had a bad fuse, or when Squeaky Fromme missed.
3. What Bush said is irrelevant, After 7 years, he is still remarkably stupid on Arab cuture and “reading it”. His ignorant remarks are attached to videos of the incident sweeping through the Muslim world from Londonistan to Indonesia.
Muntader al-Zaidi is being praised for his bravery and likened to the Chinese guy who stood up to the tanks in Tiennamen Square.
4. Like Muntader’s station manager said, “Let him go. He was just exercising his freedom of speech, and giving Bush some exercise in the process”.
His station manager is in Cairo for a reason. He is a Sadrist. He supported the killing and maiming of US Troops and praised the Iranian EMPs the Sadrists used to kill 450 troops and main 2100 more.
********************
Meanwhile, Russia, CHina, Cuba are hosting a conference of all Latin countries. The US is not invited. The premise is that steep decline in US power and influence after 10 years of ignoring the Latins for Israel,the ME and the “Evildoer” threat – is now so low that America is no longer the dominant power in the Western Hemisphere.
Before our fiscal system melted down, the Latins who adapted economies to “US-style capitalism” saw it fail badly. They are now looking more and more to different investors, different political systems than “Free Markets! Free Trade! Freedom! Freedom!” China wants the resources of S America, Mesoamerica, the Caribbean. They have 1 trillion in their sovereign wealth fund to invest with Latin partners. The US has 9.5 trillion in Fed debt before more bailouts have to be funded…
The only reason I can think of concerning the soles of shoes being insulting is that the Iraquis had to walk through camel poop to get anywhere. Those days are over, but traditions live on. The Arabs should move into the 21st century.
cedarford,
Darling,
Russia is consolidating her power again. They want to be a superpower. What the hell do you think that invasion of Georgia was about this summer? Oil Pipeline directly from Eastern Europe to Iran.
China, Cuba and Russia are working to establish more communist/socialist governments so that they can be more powerful. It has little to do with “America’s declining power.” It’s more akin to the Arab league meeting before the 1973 Yom Kippur War – they wouldn’t invite Israel to that meeting. Why would these countries invite their own enemy to their shindig?
Of course, I’m sure in your great intellect, you are going to insult me, call me a “neocon Zionist redneck”, and pat yourself on the back for being sooooo much smarter than me so have at it.
cedarford,
I don’t think Bush’s response to the incident indicates anything negative about Bush. He responded as an American President in the spotlight should respond to a political demonstration – by not making a big deal out of it.
That the Arabs interpret his response as weakness says more about Arab culture than it does about Bush’s intelligence. He was right not to lower himself to their primitive level, regardless of the PR effect. You don’t treat a mental patient by validating his delusions, and you don’t help the Arabs into the 21sth century by validating their foul beliefs about honor.
Cedarford: so shoe-throwing is a serious insult in Arab culture? I’ll take your word for it. In our culture, it isn’t. At most it’s a self-important jackass being rude. You criticize the president for failing to act like an Arab; he acted like an American.
Gee, from reading the ranting left wing main line media, the “shoe in” was the political equivalent of the “Tet Offensive.” Now all we need is Nixon’s wage and price controls, a cap and carbon trade, with a win in Iraq, and the democrats can pull a repeat of the 70s economic difficulties, pulling the plug on the war. It’s a war of choice after all. It’s too bad that Obama, like Ford, gets to be the democrat’s fall guy for the the defeat. Of course, one way around this is to make the defeat in a war of choice a necessary historical inevitability peculiar to Bush. Hey, girls, get ready for Sharia. Uncle Obama loves you.
The poor guy missed the translation; He was supposed to throw a towel.
BC (20): BUSH DID NOT STAND BY AND ALLOW 800,000 AFRICANS TO BE MASSACRED LIKE CLINTON DID IN 1994. No comparison, guy. Don’t even go there and try to rationalize and justify and cover up for Clinton using Bosnia, which to this day, is marred in political problems and which Clinton used at the time to move the discussion and the spotlight from his ever-growing scandals.
If Bush (or any Republican) was in office in 1994 and not intervene and help like Clinton failed to do in Rwanda, Bush would have been villified forever by everyone, because everyone is manipulated and controlled by the liberal media and establishment. Instead, those establishments covered up for Clinton’s failure and disgrace in this horrible tragedy. And they’re still covering up for him. Don’t worry, though, because Africa remembers what he didn’t do for them.
Of course, because Bush is a good and kind-hearted man, he would never have allowed that genocide in Rwanda to happen. He would’ve intervened. He is a true compassionate conservative. Again, as usual, when he does something good, the MSM and people like you, BC, spin it and paint a different picture of him — i.e., that he’s a warmonger, etc.
As for Bush’s legacy in Africa, well, suffice it to say, his accomplishments in Africa have no comparison to any other U.S. president’s to date. President Bush has spent BILLIONS in Africa, trying to rid the continent of malaria, HIV and other diseases. We have also been in Africa now for the last few years establishing and implementing Bush’s new military Command called AFRICOM. Under AFRICOM, we are rebuilding and strengthening the African armies to defend themselves and reconstructing the infrastructure to help the African people. That infrastructure that we are helping to build or rebuild include education systems, medical systems, economic and trade systems, etc., etc., etc. George W. Bush is loved in Africa, and the media is not talking about it. It’s obvious why.
You can find some of Bush’s accomplishments in Africa in the following weblink, although, as usual because he and his administration are humble, not all of his achievements are listed: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/africa/accomplishments.html
I agree that since President Bush was the victim, it should be his decision whether or not to press charges. Since he’s forgiven the assailant, go ahead and release him. At the very least, drop the “Insulting a foreign leader,” charge. That’s more of an insult to us and to President Bush than throwing a shoe is.
I think the laws being enforced in the handling of the shoe thrower are Iraqi laws, so it’s really not President Bush’s choice whether or not he is released.
Wonder what bambi (and his worshippers) will do when someone throws something at him from 15 feet?
To 888: With Bush, anything that sounds like he did for once a good job has to be taken with a grain of salt:
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=29241
Even if he had this one good thing without strings, he is still destined to go down in the history books as one of our worse Presidents ever, both in terms of integrity and competency.
wow today i learn next type of weapon so interesting to read bt the act of reporter is nt justified bt dats his anger