The Guardian avocates assasination of Bush

[Comrade]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguide/columnists/story/0,,1333748,00.html

These wankers are unfreaking believable, and at the very least Mr. Brooker should never be allowed to set foot into our country for 'wishing for' someone to assasinate President Bush.

See the last paragraph:

Dumb show

Charlie Brooker
Saturday October 23, 2004
The Guardian

Heady times. The US election draws ever nearer, and while the rest of the world bangs its head against the floorboards screaming "Please God, not Bush!", the candidates clash head to head in a series of live televised debates. It's a bit like American Idol, but with terrifying global ramifications. You've got to laugh.
Or have you? Have you seen the debates? I urge you to do so. The exemplary BBC News website (www.bbc.co.uk/news) hosts unexpurgated streaming footage of all the recent debates, plus clips from previous encounters, through Reagan and Carter, all the way back to Nixon versus JFK.

Watching Bush v Kerry, two things immediately strike you. First, the opening explanation of the rules makes the whole thing feel like a Radio 4 parlour game. And second, George W Bush is... well, he's... Jesus, where do you start?

The internet's a-buzz with speculation that Bush has been wearing a wire, receiving help from some off-stage lackey. Screen grabs appearing to show a mysterious bulge in the centre of his back are being traded like Top Trumps. Prior to seeing the debate footage, I regarded this with healthy scepticism: the whole "wire" scandal was just wishful thinking on behalf of some amateur Michael Moores, I figured. And then I watched the footage.

Quite frankly, the man's either wired or mad. If it's the former, he should be flung out of office: tarred, feathered and kicked in the nuts. And if it's the latter, his behaviour goes beyond strange, and heads toward terrifying. He looks like he's listening to something we can't hear. He blinks, he mumbles, he lets a sentence trail off, starts a new one, then reverts back to whatever he was saying in the first place. Each time he recalls a statistic (either from memory or the voice in his head), he flashes us a dumb little smile, like a toddler proudly showing off its first bowel movement. Forgive me for employing the language of the playground, but the man's a tool.

So I sit there and I watch this and I start scratching my head, because I'm trying to work out why Bush is afforded any kind of credence or respect whatsoever in his native country. His performance is so transparently bizarre, so feeble and stumbling, it's a miracle he wasn't laughed off the stage. And then I start hunting around the internet, looking to see what the US media made of the whole "wire" debate. And they just let it die. They mentioned it in passing, called it a wacko conspiracy theory and moved on.

Yet whether it turns out to be true or not, right now it's certainly plausible - even if you discount the bulge photos and simply watch the president's ridiculous smirking face. Perhaps he isn't wired. Perhaps he's just gone gaga. If you don't ask the questions, you'll never know the truth.

The silence is all the more troubling since in the past the US news media has had no problem at all covering other wacko conspiracy theories, ones with far less evidence to support them. (For infuriating confirmation of this, watch the second part of the must-see documentary series The Power Of Nightmares (Wed, 9pm, BBC2) and witness the absurd hounding of Bill Clinton over the Whitewater and Vince Foster non-scandals.)

Throughout the debate, John Kerry, for his part, looks and sounds a bit like a haunted tree. But at least he's not a lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat. And besides, in a fight between a tree and a bush, I know who I'd favour.

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?

If I were polite I'd tell this piece of dung to sod off. But honestly, this is way beyond the pale of proper behavior from the British, let alone the most snide leftist American, who very well knows how treasonous such language is.

So in that case, I'd like to send a resounding fuck you to Charlie Brooker
and the editors of the Guardian who actually allow this proposition to make it to print in their piece of crap paper.

ahh, Breath...

 

[Mr. P]

IMO...it's writing like this that is really responsible for this new wave of American hatred.
Not to mention our own, the extreme left wing here at home. I'm sure they will cheer over such an article.

I'll join you! :finger: Charlie.

 

[Comrade]

I'll fisk this bastard unless anyone else wants first crack. What do you think, worth the time?

 

[Mr. P]

I'll fisk this bastard unless anyone else wants first crack. What do you think, worth the time?

Nope.

 

[Hobbit]

Who is this guy? Who does he think he is? Has been so blinded by rhetoric that he can't figure out that Bush IS NOT the AntiChrist. Listening to these left-wingers, you'd think he'd been putting innocent Arabs in concentration camps and gassing them in the shower. Also, that comment about the whole world screaming "not Bush" is one of the most arrogant things I've ever heard, and I've seen a web site done by a guy who think's he's Jesus. Now, what I'm really worried about is that the media really has gone too far with their hatred of Bush and that another Lee Harvery Oswald or John Wilkes Booth will emerge. Someone who is so convinced of the LMM's lies and spin that he thinks killing the president will be good for the country.

 

[sagegirl]

Several observations: Bush does tend to stumble when he speaks, drops off sentences, loses his train of thought, using long pauses ,as if hes going to say something important and come up with something profound, and ends up with some overused rhetoric in the end. In his campaign speeches he is reading from a script, hell I could spout his rhetoric better that he can, and I dont even agree with it. He so confidently flips over the pages as he delivers his speech it makes me wonder if he really knows what he is saying. I have a close friend that use to drink, heavily, sober now for over 20 years and I notice a great similarity in their mannerisms, the failure to follow thru on a thought process, long pauses while trying to get their thought together. My friend readily admits that he burned alot of brain cells in the process. I think George did too.

As to the wire, I dont think his mannerisms were all that different but I must say he was sure eager to get up and speak, I guess once he has an idea of something to say , whereever it comes from, he has to say it quickly or he might forget it. The fact this issue wasnt exploited is that it isnt really an issue, if the shoe was on the other foot, you would have heard endless ranting and raving about it.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

At least bush's statements are not self contradicting. Kerry is a joke. He says he will do anything to stop terrorists, and then says only with a global test. Which is it. Those two are mutually exclusive. The implication of a test is that kerry would not act if we failed the test. Correct? And that means he's NOT willing to do ANYTHING it takes.

 

[insein]

More proof that Modern liberalism is a disease.

 

[Said1]

I didn't notice anything in his ear, maybe it was a whisper 2000.

 

[theim]

Again this is one of the huge reasons I fear a Kerry victory. All these psychos will feel a sense of vindication and this hateful smearing will go on for decades to come. "Hey, calling that guy a lying cheating SOB worked in 2004!"

 

[KarlMarx]

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?

AND AMERICANS AREN'T SUPPOSED TO TAKE THIS KIND OF S**T PERSONALLY?!?!?!?!?! A foreigner advocating the assasination of an American President?????? Wow! What f***ing gall some b*****ds have!

What an arrogant conceited SOB. It would almost be worth paying a hitman 10Gs to whack that b****d.

I wonder how this m***erf***er would react to an American reporter advocating the assasination of the British Royal Family.

Too bad they don't assasinate reporters. Better yet, amputate his hands so that he can't write any longer. And if he decides to go into radio instead, yank his tongue out, too. Better still, get his testicles and run them through a paper shredder. The nerve of that f***ing limey.

Typical liberal SOB, condemning and judgemental. Too bad some of those b*****ds don't hang themselves and spare the rest of us from having to put up with their stupidity.

Again this is one of the huge reasons I fear a Kerry victory. All these psychos will feel a sense of vindication and this hateful smearing will go on for decades to come. "Hey, calling that guy a lying cheating SOB worked in 2004!"

Actually, the reason I fear a Kerry victory is that he might actually start the practice of assasinating his political rivals. The Left is talking about whacking Bush and other Republicans more and more often, so someone in the high ranks probably is thinking about it seriously. Before you know, it will be "Heil Hitler" time all over again!

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

IMO...it's writing like this that is really responsible for this new wave of American hatred.
Not to mention our own, the extreme left wing here at home. I'm sure they will cheer over such an article.

I'll join you! :finger: Charlie.

It certainly doesn't help. A little over a year ago, Dan Patrick from ESPN went to France on vacation. On his radio show he talked about some of the books and tv programs that were over there. They were so anti-American and particularly anti-Bush they made Michael Moore look subtle in his bias and hatred. He had people come up and ask him what it was like to have a President that arranged an attack on his own country, talking about the 9/11 attack. All he could do was tell them it wasn't true.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

Several observations: Bush does tend to stumble when he speaks, drops off sentences, loses his train of thought, using long pauses ,as if hes going to say something important and come up with something profound, and ends up with some overused rhetoric in the end. In his campaign speeches he is reading from a script, hell I could spout his rhetoric better that he can, and I dont even agree with it. He so confidently flips over the pages as he delivers his speech it makes me wonder if he really knows what he is saying. I have a close friend that use to drink, heavily, sober now for over 20 years and I notice a great similarity in their mannerisms, the failure to follow thru on a thought process, long pauses while trying to get their thought together. My friend readily admits that he burned alot of brain cells in the process. I think George did too.

As to the wire, I dont think his mannerisms were all that different but I must say he was sure eager to get up and speak, I guess once he has an idea of something to say , whereever it comes from, he has to say it quickly or he might forget it. The fact this issue wasnt exploited is that it isnt really an issue, if the shoe was on the other foot, you would have heard endless ranting and raving about it.

Everyone has already pointed out how stupid you are, so I'll just get more specific.

I can see why you would have problems with the way President Bush speaks. You are so used to the programmed responses from people like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry, you don't recognize a genuine reaction anymore. Those pauses aren't the President losing his train of thought, that's a sign that he'd just talking and answering a question rather than giving a standard response to something. I won't even get into "overused rhetoric". If you don't see it coming from Kerry you're blind. I'll also add, no better than you can post you're bullshit, I doubt you could give an actual speech.

 

[musicman]

So, I gather that assassinating President Bush would pass the "global test".

 

[KarlMarx]

So, I gather that assassinating President Bush would pass the "global test".

I wonder how quickly President Kerry would act if an article appeared in a US publication encouraging Americans to arrange for his demise. Very quickly, I'm sure. In fact, quicker than a speeding bullet. And coming almost as quickly would be a vast amount of vitriol from the Left against the author of such a piece, not only in discussion forums, but the news, magazines, newspapers and so forth.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

i thought that advocating and talking about assassinating ANY US Prez was a federal offense no matter who you are?

 

[theim]

i thought that advocating and talking about assassinating ANY US Prez was a federal offense no matter who you are?

Shit lets send Delta to London and arrest the Guardian editors :firing:

 

[sagegirl]

here are my several observations:
your arrogance is still front & center
your need for attention is obvious, or is it that you just enjoy stirring it up?
your manner of posting should change if you wish to be taken seriously around here.

So you think Im arrogant and need attention and like to stir things up and that I should change to be taken seriously.....well some of that may be true but it doesnt change how I feel about the way Bush delivers his message. I do think he is a poor speaker and not too good at thinking on his feet as the saying goes. I know he has a great deal of charm. I am not a Kerry fan, you wont find me singing his praises.. I do not underestimate the power of either of these men . I think there are potentially far greater candidates than these guys but this is what was offered up. So I try to stick with the issues, I got a little off track here when I got personal.


truly spoken like a liberal! hate to dissapoint but I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone here ranting and raving about something that was really that stupid to say. we dont much care for the democatic candidate but we are not out to see him assasinated!

I do not think that any rhetoric about assassinations is appropriate.

 

[NATO AIR]

i am sadly not surprised. this is the kind of extreme, hateful rhetoric that is rarely reported on in the media, so most americans are unaware of the depth of personal hatred some have for bush. it is truly frightening.

 

[insein]

i am sadly not surprised. this is the kind of extreme, hateful rhetoric that is rarely reported on in the media, so most americans are unaware of the depth of personal hatred some have for bush. it is truly frightening.

Not reported on in the media? IT is the media advocating the assassination!!! How do you cover that when most of the members of the media quietly think to themselves "You know thats not such a bad idea."