You've all heard the story by now - disgruntled journalist throws shoes at a surprisingly lithe President Bush, gets tackled by security, becomes instead cult hero.
Here's what one avid fan said of shoe-thrower Muntadhar al-Zeidi in this story:
"All Iraqis should be proud of this Iraqi brave man, Muntadhar. History will remember him forever."
Um, really? Guy chucks his shoes at the president out of anger/angst/unhappiness and he deserves Superman status? I guess heroes are in such short supply overseas that they'll promote anyone, even footwear warriors.
But let's dissect this cute little moment in history for a second. Some hoser displays his political fervor in an act of defiance and is glorified by many tired of U.S. forces being in Iraq. One group gives him a medal.
Look at the larger picture and ask - what of noteworthiness has this guy accomplished? Why should he be a hero?
I understand the value of voicing dissent. Good on ya for doing so. But why should that warrant hero status? Regardless of nationality, don't you want your heroes to accomplish great deeds? The story says many in the Middle East love Che. Well, at least Che did something, he was part of something bigger than him.
This guy threw some shoes and people are ready to stick him on a pedestal.
Honestly?
No comments:
Post a Comment