UK paper's anti-Bush ploy gets hacked, sacked

The Guardian, a London-based newspaper, ended a letter-writing campaign aimed at defeating U.S. President George W. Bush after a Web site hosting the promotion was attacked by hackers.

Ian Katz, an editor at the British newspaper who thought up "Operation Clark County," said in a letter posted to the company's Web site on Thursday that despite garnering an overwhelming response from the public, the project was being scrapped. The campaign asked for non-American volunteers to pen letters to undecided voters in Clark County, Ohio--which the Guardian had identified as a crucial region in a battleground election state--urging them to vote against Bush in next month's presidential election.

According to Katz' letter, more than 4,000 people visited the Guardian's Web site to be matched with Clark County voters during the first 24 hours after the campaign was launched on Oct. 13. By the next day, the total had risen to 7,000, and by last Sunday some 14,000 individuals had volunteered to write to the U.S. voters.

However, Katz said the Guardian's Web site came under attack on Sunday, by "presumably politically inspired" hackers. The editor said he and 53 members of the newspaper's staff were also buried under an onslaught of more than 700 spam e-mails each, many of which promoted conservative political causes.

Katz wrote in his letter that the effort was launched as something of a joke, but took on a more serious tenor as angry letters began flooding into the Guardian from Americans incensed by the plan. Despite taking the turn for the worse, the editor said his project still had its intended effect, provoking discussion of the election.

"We set out to get people talking and thinking about the impact of the U.S. election on citizens of other countries, and that is what we have done," Katz wrote. "For the Guardian to have experienced such a backlash to an editorial project is extraordinary, but the numbers of complaints are thoroughly outdone by the number of people who engaged positively with the project."

[rhett121]

I think the Brittish should mind there own business!

They certainly like to tell us to keep our nose out of other
people's business but what the hell is it of their business who we
vote for? I think they should shut the "F" up and butt out!

[Jonathan]

Funny...I was thinking the same thing about the US.

PS- Yah and I'm an American. Or maybe not since I don't want to f around in other countries affairs. Because only real American's want to tell everyone else what to do, how to live, etc, etc.

[aemarques]

Oh really?

So, you "think the 'Brittish' should mind there own business!"
Well, the REST OF THE WORLD THINKS 'AMMERICANS' SHOULD MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS, TOO!

[praetor]

US should mind its own business

How about the Us ,inding its own business and keeping out of other people's countries. There is a long list of countries like Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba and Iraq that have sufffered from US interference. How is that individual Americans are really nice people but their country is a selfish bully?

Ninety percent of all businesses fail...

Wow, the list of countries in which the US has interfered is a whole lot longer than that.. don't forget Mexico, Panama, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua.. Colombia, Venezuela, Chile, Peru, Argentina, Brasil... i mean just keep going then cross the oceans.. Angola!! Everywhere!
Where has the US ever kept its vicious black ops, and predatory lending policies out of anybody's business.
The Guardian was making a relatively reasonable point that US politics *matters*, even outside our borders. Instead of knee jerk reactionary spew, why not spend your energy convincing your neighbors of the same.. if you care so much for these demented incompetents, turn out a few voters. even though apparently at least 45 - 90% of them wouldn't know ther isles of langerhans from their elbow.
there's no real reason why Kerry should be able to clean Bush's clock, he hasn't done anything to prove he can, and yet he's going to.

you hateful types are asking for more of the same. unfortunately there are innocent bystanders giving you cover.

[zaznet]

This UK paper has the same agenda as...

several terrorist organizations. Hmmm, makes you wander huh?

[ftho]

This UK paper has the same agenda as...

that is if you have an opinion different from your great commander-in-chief its high treason! Democracy in America is really going down.

The thing that is the most disturbing for me is that opinions like your's are now the staple of US politics, in the press, in churches, on the street. The US has become a dangerous ally, and we should beware of the liles of you.

[ranwave1]

The Brits refuse to acknowledge that even Smoking

is bad for one's health much less being able to recognize Terrorism and it's dangers when they see it. Long live Tony Blair.

[David Arbogast]

Strong Men

Blair is a strong man, as is Bush. It is difficult to stand up for what is right when the rest of your team is too lethargic to act. Or... is it the fact that the rest of the UN was being bribed...? Hmmm...

Saddam needed to be held accountable for over a decade of UN cease-fire treaty violations. The treaty outlined appropriate actions and Bush and Blair are really the only two who lived up to their end of the deal. The nonconsenting members were violating the treaty just as much as Saddam. Nobody will doubt our willingness to uphold the responsibilities we accept as a country with Bush as president.

Finally Hackers get it right ;)

Bush all the way!!!

[David Arbogast]

Bush or Kerry

Regardless of whether Bush or Kerry is elected, Americans should flatly reject outside influence in the presedential elections. Hey... would swing voters listen to North Korea? No. Because the interests of any other country are never perfectly aligned with the interests of Americans. The Brits start letter writing campaigns... the terrorists blow up trains. Americans need to make decisions that are best for Americans. Not bow to the vocal minority groups who have their own agenda for our country. If you want to influence the vote in America, you can become a US citizen and VOTE. There is a legal process for doing so, and if it is that important to you, then just do it.

[Cbarnhorst]

The Guardian should bug out.

Voicing an editorial opinion is one thing, but conducting a campaign to influence American voters directly is gross interference in the internal affairs of another nation and is inviting citizens of other nations to pay the Brits back in a future British election. Bad idea.

[David Arbogast]

Agreed.

Conducting campaigns to directly affect elections in another country to benefit your own agenda is nothing short of political warfare. It is an intrusion into the fundamental workings of a representative republic, and if it were North Korea trying to impact our elections, you can bet that people would be calling it an act of war.

[cpudrewfl]

Our presidental election effects the world

Anyone who supports Bush is not only not for the world but also unamerican. Bush has led to the US worst economy, a winless war, 9/11 attacks which he knew about. Bush is not only bad for America but bad for the world. If the world could cast a vote in our election they would all vote for Kerry.

W stands for wrong.

Go Kerry

[David Arbogast]

Biased Trash

One-sided, closed-mind positions. Gotta love 'em.

The election does affect more than just the US. Which is why other countries should elect officials that are able and willing to work with US officials.

We should all be furious that our votes are being watered-down by the interests of other countries. Instead of encouraging them because their view is as devoted as yours is, perhaps you could try placing your vote and letting the majority of AMERICANS make the decision that is best for them.