According to Reuters, U.S. Forces Didn't Really Hurt Anyone in Iraq

Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet at 12:45 PM on September 14, 2009.

So, they're finally letting the Iraqi shoe-thrower walk. That year in the slammer ought to teach him what it means to be free!

A minor story in the greater scheme of things. But I was struck by how Reuters characterized the motivation behind the flight of that now-famous footwear:

Millions of people across the world saw online or TV footage of Zaidi throwing his shoes at Bush and calling him a "dog," both grave insults in the Middle East.

Zaidi's actions toward Bush during a news conference summed up the feelings of many Iraqis toward the former U.S. leader after the bloodshed and sectarian killing triggered by the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

That, folks, is a passive term -- "bloodshed and sectarian killing triggered by the U.S.-led invasion."

What's more, Iraqis, according to Reuters, don't have a beef with our decision to invade their country, or the fact that we dropped more munitions on them than the allied totals for World War I. It was, you know, Abu Ghraib ...

While many Iraqis were grateful Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein was ousted, some dark chapters in the U.S. occupation, such as the sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison, fueled broad resentment.

Take-away: this never happened.

This stuff is ubiquitous in our reporting, and will help make the next senseless war possible with minimal dissent.

Tagged as: iraq

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.