Lowering the Bar

Iraqi Shoe-Thrower Evolving Into Mythic Hero Symbol

The story of the journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush the other day has now become entirely surreal, with the shoe-thrower being hailed as a hero throughout the Muslim world, and the shoe itself adopted by crowds as a symbol of anti-American protest.

Opinion in Muslim countries was reportedly somewhat divided, at least as to whether the shoe-flinging was an appropriate way to act.  Some said that Muntader al-Zaidi had violated the long-standing Arab custom of hospitality toward guests (although if I recall correctly this isn't the first time that's happened in Iraq), but even those people were sympathetic.  "Although that action was not expressed in a civilized manner," one Iraqi was quoted as saying, "it showed the Iraqi feelings, which is to object to the American occupation."  Others simply expressed what the New York Times called "glee, even if thinly veiled."

Fair enough, or understandable, anyway, but beyond that things seemed to get a little strange, as Zaidi was elevated in some communities to mythic-hero status because he had thrown a shoe at some old dude's head.  (Okay, two shoes.)  Many television stations displayed Zaidi's picture on-screen 24/7, as viewers called in to praise him.  In Damascus, a huge banner read, "Oh, heroic journalist, thank you so much for what you have done."  Muammar el-Qaddafi's daughter awarded Zaidi a "medal of courage," and a newspaper in Saudi Arabia reported that someone had offered as much as $10 million for just one of the shoes involved.

Really?  Some glee is understandable, but it's not like the guy walked on the moon with those shoes.

Or on water.  The Times also reported that shoes had become a symbol in many areas, being held aloft by protesters, and that in Sadr City, people "removed their footwear and placed the shoes and sandals at the end of long poles, waving them high in the air."  Probably none of these people had ever seen "Monty Python's Life of Brian," in which the followers of Brian -- who have mistaken him for the Messiah and are chasing him around seeking a blessing -- adopt the Shoe as a religious symbol after Brian loses it while running away from them:

ARTHUR [John Cleese]: He has given us a sign!

FOLLOWER: He has given us . . . His shoe!

ARTHUR: The shoe is the sign.  Let us follow His example . . . . Let us, like Him, hold up one shoe and let the other be upon our foot, for this is His sign that all who follow Him shall do likewise.

Monty Python's Life of Brian, Scene 18.  The group immediately splits into rival factions, as others interpret the Shoe as meaning that they should instead "gather shoes together in abundance," and others refuse to accept the Shoe at all and instead exalt a Gourd that Brian had given one of them earlier.  In a later scene, followers of the Shoe can be seen bearing shoes at the end of long poles, waving them high in the air.  Thus hath Life imitated Art (again).

As for he whose Shoes are currently being exalted, Zaidi was still in custody at last report, and there were also rumors that he had been beaten and even tortured by Iraqi police in retaliation for throwing a pair of shoes.  (Maybe those are just rumors, but since it appears from the video clip of the shoe incident that Zaidi was being beaten and kicked before they even took him out of the press room, maybe they aren't.)  Even if we were okay with torture -- and I'm told we're not -- it doesn't seem like a great idea to make this guy a martyr and not just a 15-minute folk hero.  Not to worry, though, because according to Zaidi's brother he has been offered free legal representation by more than 100 lawyers from around the world, including at least one who represented Saddam Hussein.

Considering how Saddam's defense went, Zaidi might want to pass on that particular offer.

Link: New York Times (Dec. 15, 2008)
Link: Life of Brian (Wikipedia)
Link: Life of Brian (IMDb)

Burglar Says He Was Trapped In Home By "Supernatural Figure"

A Malaysian newspaper reported last weekend that a couple had returned from a trip to find an exhausted, dehydrated and terrified burglar inside their home.  The man, who the couple reportedly found "clasping his hands in an apologetic gesture for his wrongdoing," said he had been trapped inside the building for three days by a ghost.

The burglar said he had come in through the back door after the couple left but was "blinded" once he got inside and "felt like he was in a cave."  He told police, "Each time I wanted to flee, I felt a supernatural figure shoving me to the ground."

Sounds to me like somebody got himself stuck in a coat closet and panicked.  "Aiieee!   A supernatural figure, or several, have fallen upon me in this small cave!  I am blinded and frightened!  Even though it is surprisingly warm and cozy under here."  The burglar said he had called for help repeatedly over the next 72 hours, but to no avail.  The owners called an ambulance, and then the police.

The man, who told police that it was his "first time experiencing such trauma during a break-in," thus admitting there had been other break-ins, was said to be in stable condition.

Link: Malaysia Star
Link: Legal Juice

 

Breath Tests Demanded for Australian Legislators

Australian newspapers, and some members of Parliament, called this month for legislators there to be subjected to periodic breath tests.  The calls were prompted by a series of incidents in which drunken legislators have embarrassed themselves and the government.

Most recently, a New South Wales MP, Andrew Fraser, was forced to resign from a leadership post after he shoved a female colleague during an argument at a Christmas party.  (Fraser had been suspended in 2005 "after chasing a minister around the chamber and grabbing him by the shirt.")  The Christmas incident followed one in September in which another minister resigned "after allegedly dancing in his underpants at a drunken party in his parliamentary office."  See "Underpants minister loses job," BBC News (Sept. 11, 2008).

The BBC report of that incident is worth quoting:

Reports of the raucous party in Mr Brown's Parliament House office, surfacing in local newspapers, alleged the minister had danced in "very brief" underpants to techno music on a green couch. . . . Initially Mr Brown said nothing untoward had happened at the party. But his boss, Premier Rees, was not so sure.

"I subsequently put it to former minister Brown late last night [Rees was quoted as saying] that there are 'too many reports of you in your underwear for me to ignore.' He conceded he'd been in his underwear and that gave me no option but to demand his resignation."

The debacles of the Underpants Minister and the Christmas Lady-Pusher, both alcohol-related, led to the breathalyzer suggestions.  "Honestly, if you are going to have breathalysers for people driving cranes you should have breathalysers for people writing laws," said a Green Party MP.  People who drive cranes (and other stuff) agreed.  "All rail workers are subjected to random drug and alcohol tests, an infringement on their personal lives that they are told is necessary due to the safety-critical nature of their work," said a representative of the Rail, Bus and Tram Union.  "But driving the state is every bit as safety-critical, and decisions our politicians make on issues as diverse as health, education and transport policy do affect public lives."

The Daily Telegraph used fewer words to express its opinion, running a headline reading: "BREATH TEST THIS MOB."

Whether breathalyzers would be put in next to the ministers' voting buttons, of course, would be up to the ministers, and this seems like one of those things that they all support in theory but might not quite find time to get around to during the legislative session.  Richard Torbay, the speaker of Parliament, said he would have no problem with the idea as long as the tests were "voluntary," which of course defeats the purpose.  "I think it is important," he said, "to establish high standards that the community expects."  Actually, the community may not expect too much at this point.  It might be satisfied with fewer fights and less revealing underpants.

Link: BBC News (Dec. 4, 2008)

Bush Survives Shoe Barrage During Baghdad Press Conference

Sources said President Bush was resting comfortably after narrowly escaping injury at a press conference in Baghdad on Sunday night.  The president, on a surprise visit to the Iraqi capital, was surprised to find a shoe being thrown at him by an outraged Iraqi reporter.

The attack came as Bush and Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki prepared to take questions Sunday night.  "This is the farewell kiss, you dog!" the man shouted, flinging one of his shoes at Bush's head.  The throw was highly accurate and (as the video shows) would likely have clocked Bush right in the forehead had he not dodged with remarkable speed.

Bush Survives Sustained Shoe Barrage During Iraq Visit

No one reacted for a moment or two, which allowed the reporter to throw a second shoe (which thus was technically the actual farewell kiss).  "This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq," he shouted.  According to the Los Angeles Times, the second shoe was thrown "with similar precision," but it was not quite on target.  Whether Bush recognized that or just was not expecting a second shoe, he did not duck as fully as he had the first time.  But al-Maliki came to the rescue, flinging "his arm in front of Bush's face, his hand outstretched like a baseball player reaching for a line drive."

 

But the shoe again sailed harmlessly over the two presidents.  By this time, security forces were reacting and the man, identified later as Muntather Zaidi, an Iraqi correspondent working for a Cairo satellite TV channel, was quickly wrestled to the ground, removed, and likely beaten severely.

Rumors that a third shoe may have also been thrown from a nearby grassy knoll, which if true would implicate a second assailant and thus a possible conspiracy, were dismissed by White House officials.

Bush also played down the incident, saying, "All I can report is, it is a size ten."  That's a pretty good line, and I give the president credit for that, and for not automatically trying to link the shoe-thrower to al Qaeda.  But it is hard (okay, impossible) to resist remarking that the Bush presidency has increasingly seemed to generate headlines that could come straight out of The Onion.  In recent weeks, The Onion has run small items in which the president has supposedly been, for example, attacked by an alligator or dragged behind his motorcade after his tie got caught in the trunk of a limo.  (The president survives each incident.)  After some double-checking, however, the shoe assault seems to have actually happened.

According to the New York Times report, "[h]itting someone with a shoe is considered the supreme insult in Iraq. It means that the target is even lower than the shoe."

Link: Los Angeles Times
Link: New York Times

UPDATE: Urlacher's Toenail Accuser Has Lied Before

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about allegations that Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher has been painting his three-year-old son's toenails blue and otherwise causing him gender confusion.  I was reminded recently that Urlacher's accuser, Tyna Marie Robertson, has a history of making colorful allegations that later turn out to be totally false.

In 2002, Robertson claimed that Michael Flatley, the "Lord of the Dance," had raped her in a Las Vegas hotel room.  She hired an attorney, Dean Mauro, who sent Flatley a long and poorly written letter threatening to go public with the allegations and ruin Flatley's reputation if he did not pay at least $1 million.  Mauro called this letter a "settlement offer," but the California Supreme Court later called it "criminal extortion."  Flatley counter-sued and was eventually awarded $11.1 million after another court also found that the record "conclusively established the falsity of Robertson's claims and Robertson's malicious, intentional and willful publication of these false accusations."

Presumably, Brian Urlacher was not aware of any of this when he encountered Robertson (or, more likely, she encountered him) sometime around 2005.  He has been paying her child support, but evidently not enough to allow her to pay Flatley any part of the judgment against her.  She claimed late last year that she needed more money from Urlacher, saying that she only had $6 to her name.

In fairness to Robertson, there is at least some evidence that the toenail allegations are true -- if, in fact, these are actually Kennedy Urlacher's toes.

Link: On Point News
Link: Chicago Sun-Times

Thief Unwisely Tries to Steal Law Student's Laptop

A burglar learned the dangers of trying to come between a first-year law student and his case notes in an incident on November 6 at Arizona State University.  Alex Botsios told police he woke up to find that a man (later identified as Gabriel Saucedo) had entered his apartment through an open window, armed with a baseball bat.  Saucedo threatened Botsios and demanded his wallet and guitars, and Botsios handed them over peacefully.

Saucedo then made the fateful decision to demand Botsios's laptop.

"I was like, 'Dude, no -- please, no!" Botsios told reporters.  "I have all my case notes [in there] . . . that's four months of work."  When the dude demanded the laptop anyway, Botsios snapped.  He lunged at Saucedo, got the bat away from him and began punching him in the face.  After subduing him, Botsios called police, who took Saucedo to the hospital for stitches before arresting him for armed robbery.

Botsios's mother, who flew to Arizona after hearing about the incident, was proud of her son.  "I just couldn't believe it," she said.  "I'm so glad he watched all those police shows his whole life. . . . He knew how to take care of himself."  Botsios did not say which police show had taught him to punch someone in the face, but did say he had learned to keep his windows closed at night.  He remained disturbingly protective of the laptop.  "It's my baby," he said.  "Don't mess with my computer."

Link: KTAR.com
Link: Switched.com

Batman Reportedly Planning to File Bat-Complaint

Variety Magazine reported last month that the mayor of Batman, a city in southeastern Turkey, is preparing a lawsuit against Warner Bros. and Christopher Nolan, the director of the two most recent "Batman" movies.  The mayor alleges that the filmmakers used the name of the town without permission.

"The royalty of the name 'Batman' belongs to us," said Huseyin Kalkan, the town's mayor, according to a poorly translated report in the English-language Hurriyet Daily News.  (He might have meant "the royalties from" the name belong to us, but maybe not.  It is a pretty cool name.)  "There is only one Batman in the world.  The American producers used the name of our city without informing us."

It is not at all clear who was using the name first.  It is clear that the DC Comics character (originally "the Bat-Man") was created in 1938 and first appeared in a comic published in May 1939.  Facts about the town's name are more difficult to get (it's probably easier if you speak Turkish).

People have lived in the area for thousands of years, but just when they started calling the town "Batman"  is hard to say.  According to some reports, the name is a contraction of the Turkish words "bati," which means "west," and "raman," which means something else.  There are lots of references to the "Bati Raman" or "West Raman" oil field, which was discovered in the 1950s, but whether the town's name predated that and so could have conceivably inspired the comic-book hero is not clear.  Even if it could have, it is probably unlikely that DC Comics decided to name its character after an oil field in southeastern Turkey, let alone that anyone would get the two Batmen confused.

Reportedly, the lawsuit (which has not yet been filed) will include the claim that the film's success, and the psychological impact on residents of not sharing in that success, has led to a high female suicide rate and "a number of unsolved murders."

Link: Variety
Link: Overlawyered.com
Link: Hurriyet Daily News (in English)

Single-Equity-Partner Structure Poses Risk, Says Magazine

"Dreier Troubles Show Danger of Single-Equity-Partner Structure," says a headline on the ABA Journal's site today.

One such danger: the single equity partner gets locked up for fraud.

This was in connection with the arrest of Marc Dreier, of the Dreier Law Firm, on wire and securities-fraud allegations.  The firm has (or had) 250 lawyers, but only one equity partner - Mr. Dreier himself.  Dreier told the National Law Journal last year that he earns all of the firm's equity, controls all its expenses, and pays all partners who are not Marc Dreier a base salary plus business-origination bonuses.

That arrangement probably works great, at least if you are the single equity partner, but it "spells trouble for other partners," the ABA Journal opined today, quoting expert legal consultants for this surprising analytical result.  "When that person goes," said one such consultant, "there goes the business."  But is it really that simple?

"It's that simple," he continued.  "Nobody else has any right to any of the firm's assets.  It's just not a business model that makes sense for a 250-lawyer firm.  What if Dreier just got hit by a bus?  What would happen then?"  The other 249 lawyers would sue the bus company, that's what would happen then; the real question is, what if Dreier, let's say, got charged with over $100 million worth of fraud in connection with bogus debt instruments?  Well, then 249 lawyers would be wishing he had been hit by a bus instead, probably.  But no such luck.

Our multiple-equity-partner structure prevents such dangers, or at least greatly reduces them.  Equity partners please take note: the more people you let into the club, the less risk that all of you will be hit by a bus or buses at the same time.  Don't you owe it to your firm to plan for these sorts of things?

Link: ABA Journal

"Chinese Democracy" Criticized by Chinese Government

After 17 years of working on it, Axl Rose is finally happy with the new Guns N' Roses album, "Chinese Democracy."  Surprisingly, the Chinese government is less pleased.

Websites and searches related to the album were reportedly blocked throughout China after the album's release last month, and the government also told record distributors that they should not bother to order it.  If it has "democracy" in the name, one official was quoted as saying, it's "not going to work" here.  They are not too keen on one song's reference to the "Falun Gong" movement either, it turns out.

According to scattered reports from Chinese fans of the band ("Qiang Hua" in Chinese), they liked the music but had mixed feelings about Axl's apparent insistence on political reform.

"I feel GNR has a mocking, misunderstanding and disdainful view of our country," said one Internet poster, identified as "Tiffany."  Shut up, Tiffany, responded "Mr. Lee":  "You are judging it just from the album's name. Did you ever try to listen to it, understand it and think about it?"  A third made another point that I haven't quite figured out yet: "Green Day could have an album named 'American Idiot,'" he wrote (and it does), "but if a band released an album named 'Chinese Idiot', whatever the content or motivation, Chinese patriots would be outraged."

Everybody might be reading just a bit too much into the political philosophy of Professor W. Axl Rose.  He picked the name over ten years ago, and had this to say in 1999 as to why he chose it:

Well, there's a lot of Chinese democracy movements, and it's something that there's a lot of talk about, and it's something that will be nice to see. It could also just be like an ironic statement. I don't know, I just like the sound of it.

In this country, some other people liked the sound of it, too (the music, anyway), but not everybody.  Rolling Stone liked it, and gave it 4 out of 5 stars.  But the New York Times music critic called it "the Titanic of rock albums: the ship, not the movie."

Link: AFP
Link: Wall Street Journal
Link: GunsNRoses.com (official site)

Cardboard Criminals, or, Paper Perpetrators

On December 3, authorities in Reading, Pennsylvania, reported that a man disguised as a paper plate tried to rob a local gas station.  According to a report in the Morning Call, "[t]he caper began near Reading when a man wearing a paper plate over his face emerged out of the frost-filled darkness around 3:15 am," and stood outside the front door of a Sunoco station.  (The report didn't say whether he had cut eyeholes in the plate, but I assume he did.)  When the man came inside, "the suspicious clerk informed him that he had to remove his paper mask before she could serve him."  He mumbled something and gave her a note demanding money, but the clerk hit the alarm button instead "and told Plate Face the police were on their way."  Plate Face ran off, disappearing back into the frost-filled darkness.

Just the week before, in New Jersey, police had engaged in a tense 90-minute standoff with what turned out to be a criminal made entirely of paper.  Police responded to an alarm at a bank in Somerset County on November 27, at about 8:40 p.m., and saw someone standing behind the drawn blinds of one of the bank's windows.  They called in a SWAT team, sealed off the area, and evacuated three nearby apartment buildings.  Officers then tried for some time to negotiate with the person holed up in the bank, first through bullhorns and then by phone.  When he stubbornly refused to respond -- or even move -- police sent in the SWAT team, only then finding "to their chagrin" that they had been held at bay for an hour and a half by a life-size and entirely motionless cardboard cutout.

After spending about two tenths of an hour trying to decide between two alternative titles for this post, I'm going to give up and just offer you both of them.

Link: The Morning Call (Allentown, PA)
Link: New Jersey Star-Ledger