A nightingale’s act of defiance

Thousands of people need to be mobilised — from their homes and on to the streets. Only then can we make a difference.


Shahid Mahmood October 17, 2012

In developing countries, attempts to raise awareness of wrongdoing may result in imprisonment or death. In the West, unless an individual has access to money and power, the system itself stonewalls any recourse. As a political cartoonist, trying to remove himself from the US no-fly list, it has proven very difficult to affect systemic change. Over the years, I was told by lawyers that my phone was likely tapped and my garbage was being sifted through; my political leanings were questioned by the Canadian ministry of transportation; I was lied to by the deputy prime minister; police officers surreptitiously questioned a carpenter — asking him how he was being paid for his service during my house renovation. A seven-year process, which culminated at a hearing with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, to date, has yielded no clear remedy.

Seeking public remedy for a wrongdoing is a near impossibility anywhere in the world. Thousands of people have died in Syria during the uprising against the atrocities of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Individuals attempting to raise public awareness are killed. The Syrian poet and songwriter Ibrahim Qashoush was found dead in a river with his larynx ripped out. He was abducted and killed in a manner only a brute would metaphorically illustrate. Qashoush was known as the “nightingale of the revolution” and composed political songs that criticised Syrian authority. Since his death, Qashoush’s songs have spread across Syria, where anti-government protesters chant them as their own.

Jonathan May-Bowles is the man who became famous for throwing a pie at media baron Rupert Murdoch. Bowles pied Murdoch during a hearing regarding the phone-hacking scandal. This act epitomises the deep-rooted frustration the public has with the political and business elite and symbolises human freedom and defiance. Lacking a crème pie but not the passion, Muntadhar al-Zaidi threw both of his shoes at George W Bush as an act of protest and extreme disrespect. He yelled, “This is a farewell kiss from the Iraqi people, you dog,” as he threw his first shoe towards the US president. He then shouted, as he threw his second shoe, “This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq.” Al-Zaidi was dragged out of the room and severely beaten. Shouting above the man’s screams, Bush quipped, “That’s what people do in a free society, draw attention to them.” A large blood trail was photographed where security agents dragged al-Zaidi — beaten within an inch of his life.

Al-Zaidi later testified that he was moved to throw his shoes because he did not know what achievements Bush was praising in Iraq. “The achievements I could see were the more-than-one-million martyrs and a sea of blood. There are more than five million Iraqi orphans because of the occupation. More than a million widows and more than three million displaced because of the occupation,” said al-Zaidi. “I wanted to restore the pride of the Iraqis in any way possible, apart from using weapons.” In Tikrit, a monument was dedicated to his shoe-throwing action. An online game, Sock and Awe, inspired by his actions, has been played by tens of thousands of people around the world.

These tens of thousands of people need to be mobilised — from their homes and on to the streets. Only then can we make a difference. As Martin Luther King once said, “human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable ... every step towards the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.”

Published in The Express Tribune, October 18th, 2012.

COMMENTS (4)

David Smith | 11 years ago | Reply

@author rough time in Canada? Return to the safety and comfort of Pakistan.

LionOfPunjab | 11 years ago | Reply

Yawn! Author should have mentioned something about why he is on no-fly list..so a reader can make judgement of perceived prosecution of the author. Otherwise, it sounds like one-sided diatribe. In my opinion,the western society, specially canadians are quite liberal and accommodating of different viewpoints. So a little background on no-fly reason would be helpful.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ