|
Fighting an obdurate mountain gorge
A.U.M. Fakhruddin
Except a handful of ideologue journalists, such as rebel poet Kazi Nazrul Islam who in the early 1920s shot to prominence and was imprisoned for his scathing editorial comments against British imperialism including other writings, newsmen have hardly ever been newsmakers. But the Iraqi journalist Muntader al-Zaidi did make news as no other media person ever did before. Zaidi, a young correspondent for Al Baghdadia, an independent Iraqi television station, stood up about 12 feet from Mr. Bush and shouted in Arabic: “This is a gift from the Iraqis; this is the farewell kiss, you dog!” He then threw a shoe at Mr. Bush, who ducked and narrowly avoided it. As stunned security agents and guards, officials and journalists watched, Mr. Zaidi then threw his other shoe, shouting in Arabic, “This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq!” That shoe also narrowly missed Mr. Bush as Prime Minister Maliki stuck a hand in front of the president’s face to help shield him.
On the YouTube the Bush shoe-dodging video was watched over five million times on 15 Dec 2008.
The New York Times on December 15 reported under the headline “Iraqi journalist hurls shoes at bush and denounces him on TV as a ‘dog’”.
Datelined Baghdad the story says that President Bush made a valedictory visit to Iraq, the country that will largely define his legacy, but the trip will more likely be remembered for the unscripted moment when an Iraqi journalist hurled his shoes at Mr. Bush’s head and denounced him on live television as a “dog” who had delivered death and sorrow here from nearly six years of war.
The shoe-throwing incident in Baghdad punctuated Mr. Bush’s visit here — his fourth — in a deeply symbolic way, reflecting the conflicted views in Iraq of a man who toppled Saddam Hussein, ordered the occupation of the country and brought it freedoms unthinkable under Mr. Hussein’s rule but at enormous costs.
Hitting someone with a shoe is considered the supreme insult in Iraq. It means that the target is even lower than the shoe, which is always on the ground and dirty. Crowds hurled their shoes at the giant statue of Mr. Hussein that stood in Baghdad’s Firdous Square before helping American marines pull it down on April 9, 2003, the day the capital fell. More recently in the same square, a far bigger crowd composed of Iraqis who had opposed the security agreement flung their shoes at an effigy of Mr. Bush before burning it.
Friends described Mr. Zaidi as a devoted journalist. “He was committed to his job and after training in Lebanon became chief of correspondents about a month ago,” said Haider Nassar, who worked with him at Baghdadia.
The Los Angeles Times in its editorial under the headline “Bush’s shoe toss” wrote on the next day: “In the history of footwear and politics, the protest of Bush in Baghdad was short on style but long on Iraqi support.
Shoes make news surprisingly often. Think Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev at the U.N. General Assembly in 1960, brandishing his shoe at a Filipino delegate who was accusing the U.S.S.R. of imperialism in Eastern Europe.
“Although hardly a compliment in the West, a shoe in the face is a particular affront in the Arab world. After the U.S. invasion in 2003, Iraqis frequently slapped their shoes against portraits and statues of Saddam Hussein. Now, the shoe is on the other foot, so to speak… Many Iraqis, however, took to the streets on Monday to hail Zaidi as a hero. Tens of thousands of Iraqis have died in the 5 and a half-year war, and anger about the US occupation is widespread, even among those who view the presence of US troops as a necessity to avoid further sectarian conflict. Many of those demanding the journalist’s release chanted, “Bush, Bush, listen well: We pushed you out with two shoes.” The good news for Bush is that the assailant hurled shoes, not bombs. … This was an act of protest with a shoe laced with blame. Bush made light of the incident, saying all he could report was that the shoe was “a size 10.” Many Iraqis thought the shoes fit.”
The Opinion LA of The Los Angeles Times wrote: “The editorial board is about to weigh in on Muntadar al-Zeidi, the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush at a press conference yesterday. The piece is likely to talk about the symbolism of footwear in politics — there’s a rich history of shoe incidents — before discussing the meaning of the protest. Knowing us, we’ll find a way to lambaste Bush while still expressing admiration for his ability to evade incoming projectiles.”
Among others, one JP posted his opinion thus: “The flying shoe symbolized all of the resentment built up over the tragic and unnecessary invasion of Iraq. It was an uncharacteristic dose of reality for Bush, although like everything else he was able to duck it.” However, opposite views were also there.
In the Al-Jazeera web site Joseph Garrick from United Kingdom writes in his remark entitled “Insulting Dogs by calling Bush one” ——— [http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2008/12/2008121419453773379.html] —- thus: “I am furious about the fact that the shoe thrower called Bush a dog. A dog is a noble beast that has served man bravely over a period of thousands of years. To call a lying mass murdering war criminal like Bush a dog is insulting to man’s best friend, the dog…. To associate Bush the coward, who dodged combat in Vietnam, a dog is an insult to dogs.”
Ibrahim Omer writes from Turkey: “God bless this brave man! Muntadhar Al-Zeidi has shown what all of the Muslim world and substantial part of the rest of the world think and feel about George Bush! Bravo, young man! Muntadhar, you are a hero.”
Antonio PJ from United States goes a step further as he writes: “Don’t ever apologize to the US. Why didn’t the rest of the reporters throw their shoes, too?” Such comments are numerous.
Amal writes from Egypt : “Bravo!!! Thank you, Muntadar al-Zeidi!! Millions of us in the Middle East and elsewhere have been dying to do this!! I pray that during Bush’s visit to Afghanistan someone would hurl something heavier at him ... and not miss!!”
From Ghana writes Jonathan on 15 December 2008: “Zeidi is not a hero only in Arab world but all over the world. I salute him for his courage. This most violent human right abuser will have no peace even in his grave. Let him remember Sharon (Mr Bulldozer of Israel) his action against Arafat and the people of Palestine and where he is today.”
Joben writes from Thailand: “Muntadar al-Zeidi, the correspondent for Al-Baghdadiya television, will not only be loved in the Middle East but all over the World. I thank him for his great courage!”
From the United States Sara wrote on the 15th December: “Good for this journalist! Someone had to do it. I love how they are downplaying this here in the US. We, Americans, should be ashamed of ourselves that we did not show as much courage as this Iraqi did towards Bush. Instead we voiced are [our] concerns over the dinner table and did nothing about this dictatorship that has been ruling over the US. This journalist better be released without any marks on him, he was voicing his “freedom” of speech...that’s what you get Bush! HA!”
J R Costello, again from the United States, wrote: “Please....let it be known that the Majority of Americans DO support the SHOE THROWER..and we are ONLY sorry the shoes didn’t HIT HIM! I say from now till Bush leaves office...ALL people in Washington DC, tourists included...start throwing thier shoes over the WH Fence in Solidarity to the Iraqy Reporter! (the sad part about this whole thing is....Bush is Sooo stupid, he doesn’t even realize what an Insult it is..to have shoes throw[n] at you) .......soon world...soon...President Obama! Praise be!”
Jyoti Simha from Nepal wrote: “Muntadar ai -Zeidi is no doubt a hero. He managed to do what no terrorist attack, suicide bomber so far were able to do. A lesson to all —- no need to hurl a grenade or fire a bullet, a simple and harmless act of throwing a shoe can achieve better result. Imagine how this will go down on the History book - a 43rd American President was so unpopular that a shoe was thrown at him....”
From Sweden Ken wrote: “Why don’t the Iraqis, who used their shoes to beat the head of the fallen Sadam statue, hurl those same shoes at the guy who insulted the man responsible for the removal of Saddam?”
A Palestinian wrote from Palestinian Territory: “ Bravo, well done, ????. Yes, he deserves more. Thugs as such should be dismissed with shoes and boots. How i wished Rice, Blair and Bush were treated the same way in Ramallah. Hope one day justice prevails and they stand as mass murderers in The Hague. They don’t know that they are welcomed only by leaders who don’t represent but themselves.”
Phyo Mg Mg Win from Myanmar criticised the shoe thrower newsman thus: “It’s very ugly because I think media man should not do that”.
Ron from United States wrote: “This pair of shoes should be auctioned to be kept in the Washington DC Museum to remind future American Presidents to remember 12/14/08 of an arrogant American President.”
Barbara from Canada wrote on 18 Dec: “Along with many people all over the world, I salute this man and his courage to give witness to the truth.”
The US war on Iraq, a sovereign country, will remain the most blatant violation of the UN Charter on Human Rights in the history of mankind. In an interview broadcast by the BBC on16 September 2004, Annan declared explicitly that the U.S.-led invasion violated the UN charter and hence international law. “I have indicated [the war against Iraq] was not in conformity with the UN Charter,” he said. “From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal.” History will not pardon George Bush, Tony Blair and so on for perpetrating the
Ron Suskind in his 2008 book The Way of the World writes, “The White House had concoted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam backdated to July 1, 2001. It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq . . . The letter also mentioned suspicious shipments to Iraq from Niger set up with al Qaeda’s assistance. The idea was to take the letter to Habbush and have him transcribe it in his own neat handwriting on a piece of Iraq government stationery, to make it look legitimate. CIA would then take the finished product to Baghdad and have someone release it to the media. Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi, writing in The American Conservative magazine, has claimed to have a reliable source who tells him that Suskind’s basic story about the White House
Just Foreign Policy or JFP [http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/about/index.html], an independent organisation dedicated to reforming U.S. foreign policy, has “seen through the Iraq war that unnecessary military actions can undermine civil liberties and democracy at home… to the detriment of the great majority. According to JFP’s estimate, 1,297,997 people died in Iraq. In her article “How Many Iraqis Have Really Died?” Diane Farsetta of PR Watch, wrote on March 1, 2008 that the WHO’s 151,000 figure is for violent deaths in Iraq. The Lancet study’s 650,000 figure represents invasion-related violent and nonviolent deaths.” [http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/77992/how_many_iraqis_have_really_died/ ]
As if that was not enough, Zaidi has further intention. Posted on December 22 by Lisa Derrick, www.alternet.org says, Zaidi's brother Uday al-Zaidi said the reporter would toss footwear again if he had the chance. Reuters reports: Uday al-Zaidi said his brother had told an investigative judge Sunday that he had expected to be shot after hurling his first shoe. But when that did not happen, "'that gave me time to throw the second shoe,'" Zaidi quoted his brother as saying. "If the clock were turned back, I'd do the same thing over again.'"
As of 23 December, Ramazan Baydan, owner the Istanbul-based Baydan Shoes factory which made the shoes thrown at Bush, has been swamped by orders, reports AFP. The maker of the shoes that an Iraqi journalist hurled at US President George W Bush Baydan has had to take on 100 extra staff to cope with a surge in demand for his footwear. "Between the day of the incident and 1pm today we have received orders totalling 370,000 pairs." Normally the firm sold only 15,000 pairs a year of the model that al-Zaidi threw at the US president.
Why did US invade Iraq? Why was this unjust war waged? There was no iota of truth in the Bush administration’s claim that Saddam possessed WMD (weapons of mass destruction) such as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. In March 2004, Hans Blix and El Baradei reported that the “US had ignored evidence against the existence of WMD in Iraq” and the “basis of the war was unjustified”. In 2004, Blix published a book Disarming Iraq in which he gave his account of the events and inspections before the coalition began its invasion. Says Global Policy Forum, “In a report to the Security Council Chief Inspector, Hans Blix, stated that before leaving on the eve of the US-UK led invasion, he had found no evidence that Iraq had WMD. (Associated Press, June 3, 2003))
Did US invade Iraq for her oil resource? Marcus Reeves, author of Somebody Screams! Rap Music’s Rise to Prominence in the Aftershock of Black Power, has written for the Washington Post, The New York Times etc., wrote on June 19, 2008 [—- http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:ltxDipLchqMJ:anarchist-graffiti.blogspot.com/ 2008/06/real-fruit-of-iraq-war-theres-oil-in.html+nyt+iraq+war+for+oil&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10 —-] “The New York Times reports that four Western oil companies are in the final stages of negotiating no-bid contracts to get oil from Iraq’s largest fields. Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company — along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies, are in talks with Iraq’s Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq’s largest fields, according to ministry officials, oil company officials and an American diplomat.
There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the US had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract. The Bush administration has said that the war was necessary to combat terrorism. It is not clear what role the United States played in awarding the contracts; there are still American advisers to Iraq’s Oil Ministry.”
‘Newspapers without a government’
Like newsmen of diverse climes and cultures everywhere, this scribe too has immense regard for a sage statesman of America. Of all the views of scholars and the wise on the press, the most outstanding tribute to the Fourth Estate and its paramount importance was offered by American President Thomas Jefferson over two centuries ago, back in 1787.
The cultivated thinker affirmed: “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter [that is to say, newspapers without a government].”
While Tagore thought about the print media’s significance, poet Nazrul was editor of a number of political weekly newspapers and fiery columnist. Tagore wrote, “In the dawn of a new age/why waver, in subtle disputes/and miss your chance for starting/and employ your thoughts in a bottomless doubt?/ Like a desperate torrent fighting an obdurate mountain gorge/take a wild leap into your fate, dark and strange,/ win it for your own through a defiant courage/challenged by obstacles.”
The preceding message of Rabindranath Tagore was given to The Statesman of Kolkata on 14 April 1937. (Its Bangla version was as follows: Notun jouger protyushay kone probin buddhiman/Nitya-i shudhu shukhma bichar koray/Jaabar lagna cholar chinta nishsheshay koray daan/ Shangshaymoy tolhin gohbaray/Nirjhar jotha sangramay naamay durgam parbatay/Achenar maajhay jhaap diye por dushahosher pothay;/Bighnoi tor spardhita pran jagaye tuibay jay ray,/Joy koray tobay janiya loibi ajana adristeray.
A determined and indomitable enemy of the British colonialists, the role of poet Nazrul as a crusader, a courageous, uncompromising journalist was significant in that as Editor of the Langal the Dhumketu the Sevak and the Navayug he wrote fiery editorials and called upon the people to rise against the alien British rulers who had subjugated the then colonised India. In the words of Buddhadev Bose, “To meet him has been to love him, for his was one of the most picturesque and attractive personalities in our recent history. He has been a living denial of everything that withers the heart. Where he was there was delight.”
Nazrul was above all parochialism of creed, caste, clan or group. He burst on the literary scene of Calcutta like a comet —- later on he brought out a political journal called Dhumketu, meaning a comet, with his first poem Vidrohi which was an instant, overwhelming success and its tremendous, forceful rhyme and rhythm were soon reverberated in every nook and corner of West and East Bengal. Many of the book by Nazrul, writes Dr Shisir Kar in his well-researched book Nishiddha Nazrul, (Ananda Prakashan, Kolkata). During this time in 1924, Police Commissioner of Calcutta, Charles A Tegart, CIE, MVO, gave his report to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bengal, A. N. Moberley, suggesting proscription of Visher Vanshi. In the same manner Additional Secretary S. N. Roy advised on May 6, 1935 that Sanchita be proscribed. Again, Yuga Vani, Bhangar Gaan, and Chandrabindu were banned.
Epilogue: “Our conscience is not the vessel of eternal verities. It grows with our social life, and a new social condition means a radical change in conscience.” —- Walter Lippmann.
The writer is Associate Editor of the Holiday.
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^
|
