you son of a shoe!

apparently, the above is a curse in arabic.

the act of throwing shoes at bush was rude. but it was entirely proper, i think. after all, iraqis lost hundreds of thousands of dead to this war that they did not ask for. if the war was really waged for iraqis, then why did iraqis not ask for it? if it was all done for the good of iraq, why did the american occupiers refuse to count the iraqi dead when they began piling up?

bush did not accord iraqis the respect to think that they might have their own sovereign destiny, their own will. (the excuse, of course, is that under saddam, they had no voice. but then we ought to have helped them have a voice, by removing the sanctions that were starving them). why, then, being so disrespected, should iraqis accord bush respect? he chose violence to be their fate. his decision, taken in the comfort and quiet of his washington residence, sucked them into a vortex of killing and suffering (imagine the mental health problems among the children of baghdad) from which they have still not recovered. the violent must be clearly criticized and condemned.

bush is a violent but insecure man in search of validation and applause.

but the violent are always insecure, aren't they?