Gun related...well there was a mention of some famous shooters/assassins.
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=10610
An Open Letter to the Guardian
Monday, October 25, 2004
Dear Sirs:
I am not a reader of your newspaper, I never have been, and I never will be. However as a public-minded citizen of this country, I must respond to your recent attacks on George W. Bush. Seldom in the history of newsprint has a publication been so arrogant in its presumptions, so tactless in its dialogue, and so witless in what it chose to be fit to print.
First, let us begin with your ill-conceived campaign to write to voters in Ohio. I have to ask: what were you thinking? Anyone with a tangential awareness of American history will realise that Americans are an independent people, much of whose pride comes from having made a successful break with the past, namely the ways of the Old World. Its population, from a variety of ethnic groups and religions, is united by this rejection of the old and embrace of a new identity. As such, your “letters from abroad†was perceived as a “blast from the pastâ€, the Old World trying to dictate its preferences to the new.
This heritage is only bolstered by the fact that the Americans got much their spirit of independence from us: for example, how would we feel if Americans started writing to voters in marginal constituencies, asking for the return to Tony Blair? Your newspaper would be among the loudest voices denouncing such imperial presumption, working yourselves into a lather of self-righteousness over sovereignty and the independence of the electoral process.
In short, the loud, angry responses were the least you could have expected. In fact, it was the least that you deserved.
This was bad enough. And in the final analysis, it was harmless; as a conservative Briton and supporter of President Bush, I have to thank you for obviously bolstering the President’s support with your outrageous behaviour. However the recent article from Charlie Brooker in your October 23 edition, asking, “John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?â€, goes beyond the pale.
I am thoroughly disgusted and enraged by your (and by extension the Left’s) demonisation of President Bush to the extent that you would allow such an article to be printed. Is it President Bush who was responsible for the phenomenon of fundamentalist Islam? Is it President Bush who made the Islamists call for the quashing of religious tolerance, the subjugation of women, the extermination of Israel? Is it President Bush who made Al Qaeda take men, women and children hostage in their flying bombs on September 11th and kill 3000 people?
Except for those trapped in the malarial fever swamps of conspiracy minded Left, the answer is obviously no. However, your newspaper and the ranting herd that supports it have worked yourselves up into such a lather because somehow President Bush offends your delicate sensibilities that you cannot see the obvious truth. We are locked in a struggle in which our culture, which respects life and liberty, is up against one which wants us to embrace death and submission. If the Islamists get their way, there will be no more Guardian, no more left wing columnists snootily deriding President Bush, no more Arts Section, no more Tate Gallery, no more River Café, no more critics able to call for the assassination of a President. The daughters of your staff would expect to be circumcised, the homosexuals in your staff could expect to be killed, and any woman columnist who dared to show her face openly let alone write, would beaten, tortured or perhaps murdered. Just like in Taliban Afghanistan.
If we were to follow your newspaper’s prescriptions, the freedom you and the rest of us enjoy now will become a memory, part of a culture that was trampled underfoot because it lacked the courage and the conviction to stand up for itself, and preferred the death of one of its champions, rather than its actual enemies.
Fortunately, it appears the Americans possess greater perception and intelligence than all of the Guardian editorial staff. President Bush is up in the polls and with a bit of luck, will be re-elected on November 2. I hope you will learn from the rebuke implied in this turn of events. No matter the outcome however, you have disgraced your publication, your supposed “humanitarian†values and our country. Worst of all, you did so at a time when British troops were going into battle for the cause of civilisation.
I hope that the British public realises the depths of your depravity and turns on you with a sharpness that merits the disgrace you have earned. Shame, shame on you all.
Yours sincerely,
Ivan Groznii
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=10610
An Open Letter to the Guardian
Monday, October 25, 2004
Dear Sirs:
I am not a reader of your newspaper, I never have been, and I never will be. However as a public-minded citizen of this country, I must respond to your recent attacks on George W. Bush. Seldom in the history of newsprint has a publication been so arrogant in its presumptions, so tactless in its dialogue, and so witless in what it chose to be fit to print.
First, let us begin with your ill-conceived campaign to write to voters in Ohio. I have to ask: what were you thinking? Anyone with a tangential awareness of American history will realise that Americans are an independent people, much of whose pride comes from having made a successful break with the past, namely the ways of the Old World. Its population, from a variety of ethnic groups and religions, is united by this rejection of the old and embrace of a new identity. As such, your “letters from abroad†was perceived as a “blast from the pastâ€, the Old World trying to dictate its preferences to the new.
This heritage is only bolstered by the fact that the Americans got much their spirit of independence from us: for example, how would we feel if Americans started writing to voters in marginal constituencies, asking for the return to Tony Blair? Your newspaper would be among the loudest voices denouncing such imperial presumption, working yourselves into a lather of self-righteousness over sovereignty and the independence of the electoral process.
In short, the loud, angry responses were the least you could have expected. In fact, it was the least that you deserved.
This was bad enough. And in the final analysis, it was harmless; as a conservative Briton and supporter of President Bush, I have to thank you for obviously bolstering the President’s support with your outrageous behaviour. However the recent article from Charlie Brooker in your October 23 edition, asking, “John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?â€, goes beyond the pale.
I am thoroughly disgusted and enraged by your (and by extension the Left’s) demonisation of President Bush to the extent that you would allow such an article to be printed. Is it President Bush who was responsible for the phenomenon of fundamentalist Islam? Is it President Bush who made the Islamists call for the quashing of religious tolerance, the subjugation of women, the extermination of Israel? Is it President Bush who made Al Qaeda take men, women and children hostage in their flying bombs on September 11th and kill 3000 people?
Except for those trapped in the malarial fever swamps of conspiracy minded Left, the answer is obviously no. However, your newspaper and the ranting herd that supports it have worked yourselves up into such a lather because somehow President Bush offends your delicate sensibilities that you cannot see the obvious truth. We are locked in a struggle in which our culture, which respects life and liberty, is up against one which wants us to embrace death and submission. If the Islamists get their way, there will be no more Guardian, no more left wing columnists snootily deriding President Bush, no more Arts Section, no more Tate Gallery, no more River Café, no more critics able to call for the assassination of a President. The daughters of your staff would expect to be circumcised, the homosexuals in your staff could expect to be killed, and any woman columnist who dared to show her face openly let alone write, would beaten, tortured or perhaps murdered. Just like in Taliban Afghanistan.
If we were to follow your newspaper’s prescriptions, the freedom you and the rest of us enjoy now will become a memory, part of a culture that was trampled underfoot because it lacked the courage and the conviction to stand up for itself, and preferred the death of one of its champions, rather than its actual enemies.
Fortunately, it appears the Americans possess greater perception and intelligence than all of the Guardian editorial staff. President Bush is up in the polls and with a bit of luck, will be re-elected on November 2. I hope you will learn from the rebuke implied in this turn of events. No matter the outcome however, you have disgraced your publication, your supposed “humanitarian†values and our country. Worst of all, you did so at a time when British troops were going into battle for the cause of civilisation.
I hope that the British public realises the depths of your depravity and turns on you with a sharpness that merits the disgrace you have earned. Shame, shame on you all.
Yours sincerely,
Ivan Groznii