George Bush Assassinated!!! - (on film)

[Randy Whorewald]

In the news yesterday: -

LONDON (Reuters) - British public broadcaster Channel 4 is courting controversy with what it calls a "shockingly real" drama about the fictional assassination of President George W. Bush.

"Death of a President," shot in the form of a documentary examining the assassination, will use a blend of archival footage and computer-generated special effects to portray Bush in October 2007 arriving in Chicago during an anti-war rally.

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...31353872_RTRIDST_0_FILM-MEDIA-CHANNEL4-DC.XML

I think its just plain wrong to portay an assassination of a sitting POTUS. They could have achieved the same effect by having a fictitious character.

 

[LonelyGhost]

Christ, you could blow half that dumb fuckers head off and his policies
would only improve!

 

[Gandalf]

Christ, you could blow half that dumb fuckers head off and his policies
would only improve!

LMAO...you said it LG

 

[JustAGuy]

There's no one on this planet who loathes George W. Bush and his neocon puppet masters more than I do but in my opinion something like this crosses some kind of boundary of good taste. Never mind the fact that he'd be succeeded by Dick Cheney and the very thought sends chills down my spine.

 

[dirtydan]

There's no one on this planet who loathes George W. Bush and his neocon puppet masters more than I do but in my opinion something like this crosses some kind of boundary of good taste. Never mind the fact that he'd be succeeded by Dick Cheney and the very thought sends chills down my spine.

Usually it's the VP that is a heart beat away from becoming president, but with Cheney's heart the Dark Lord might expire in the middle of taking of the oath of office. Who's the Speaker of the House of Representatives?

Anyhow, so what if some program ficitionalized an assassination of the President Bush? Gees, if it was some other world leader, say one that is considered an enemy of the US then I'd bet few here would have anykind of a problem with a double standard. People are far too worried about pissin' off those asshole Republicans and their frat boy/awol pilot/drunkard of a president.

 

[planetsmurf]

if president bush was actually killed while still in office my fear is that the president bush is the smart one of out of the bush/cheney duo.

 

[Oldfart]

It's their puppeteers who would still remain pulling the strings no matter who was wearing the crown.

 

[luckydog71]

I would like to see this film. I am curious what the left envisions would be an alternative solution.

After these patriotic Americans have finished celebrating the assassination of the President of the United States what would they do instead? How would they act differently?

A question to the crowd that believes if we just leave them alone they will leave us alone, the week long national holiday, celebrating the assassination is over. Now what?

What do you do about Iran? Do they have a nuke? You don't know.... you certainly don't want to act without 100% proof that Iran has a nuke and they would use a nuke..... OK let's wait a see.... let's just leave them alone and they will leave us alone...

What do you do about North Korea? Do they have a nuke?

Even if they do, they would not dare use it. Would they? No, just leave them alone and they will leave us alone?

If the Democrats wonder why they get labeled as unpatriotic and weak on terror, their glee at this movie is what re-enforces the belief a majority of Americans have of them.

I listen to Air America out of Seattle once or twice a week. They have done back flips over this movie. I can only conclude that they are hoping the President is assassinated.

If anyone watched the movie....I would love to know what the Progressives did after the calibration. I will bet the movie end at that point. The main reason is the "I Hate Bush" Progressives (they hate the word liberal) do not have a fucking clue what it is they would do.

These Progressives reminds me of the right wing wackos who hated Clinton so much they would do anything to stop him. It included perverting the constitution of the United States and impeached Clinton over actions in his personal life. The extremists in both parties are dangerous, maybe even more dangerous than the terrorist.

 

[JustAGuy]

What do you do about North Korea? Do they have a nuke? Even if they do, they would not dare use it. Would they?

That seems to be pretty much the attitude of the current administration, actually. They invade a country that didn't have WMD's but just wag a finger of disapproval to chide a country that does have them. I'm sure the difference couldn't be that the former country has vast oil reserves and the latter country has no natural resources to speak of but does have millions of starving people that have little or no economic value. After all, Haliburton can't make a profit off people with no money and no resources.

The extremists in both parties are dangerous, maybe even more dangerous than the terrorist.

Quite possibly the first time the two of us have ever been in agreement on anything, ld. But it's not just extremists in the two American political parties, it's extremists of every stripe, particularly the religious kind. Whether they are Islamic fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalists, Hindu fundamentalists or whatever, they feel they have a direct pipeline to their particular deity and as a result know exactly what the rest of us should be believing, thinking and doing. True believers of any kind are the most dangerous people on the planet.

 

[dirtydan]

I would like to see this film. I am curious what the left envisions would be an alternative solution.

Interesting words LD and indeed a wild assumption. You are assuming that this flick represents the views of all of the Left in some kind of monolithic fashion.

After these patriotic Americans have finished celebrating the assassination of the President of the United States what would they do instead? How would they act differently?

How do those on the Republican side react? Are you in unison with your reactions predetermined by some one else and you happily follow?

A question to the crowd that believes if we just leave them alone they will leave us alone, the week long national holiday, celebrating the assassination is over. Now what?

The West has been fucking around in Middle East affairs long, long before 9/11. It is that interference that has been pissing off a lot people in the ME and many have chosen to follow radical brands of Islam.

Interesting though, it's dead wrong to be a radical if one is a Muslim but it is righteous as all hell to be a radical if one is a born-again Christain neo-con lapdog like the types that vote for dolts like Bush.

What do you do about Iran? Do they have a nuke? You don't know.... you certainly don't want to act without 100% proof that Iran has a nuke and they would use a nuke..... OK let's wait a see.... let's just leave them alone and they will leave us alone...

Why is it so concerning that Iran does or does not have the capability to build a nuclear weapon? Dude you like sitting in the country that has the most powerful nuclear arsenal in the world and your government is acting like it's shit pissin' scared that some country might develope a few of its own.

Iran and other countries, one that comes to mind is North Korea, probably want a few nukes to be able to deter the influences of other countries and in particular those of west such as the US and UK for instance.

Really man T-H-I-N-K about it, the Bush admin is whipping up fears of Iran perhaps constructing a few nukes when the only country to have ever used such WMD's is the US of A.

What do you do about North Korea? Do they have a nuke?

Perhaps NK does. If being so vigilant about nukes is the paramount concern then why is the US not kicking and screaming about Russia and China? Their respective arsenals are far more powerful than anything Iran or NK might have.

Even if they do, they would not dare use it. Would they? No, just leave them alone and they will leave us alone?

Who knows. More than a century of blatant interference in ME affairs would be a pretty fucking tough addiction for the West to kick.

If the Democrats wonder why they get labeled as unpatriotic and weak on terror, their glee at this movie is what re-enforces the belief a majority of Americans have of them.

Is that labelling fair or does it just pander to the mindless blather coming from Republican fearmongers and their highly reliable allies in the mainstream media?

I listen to Air America out of Seattle once or twice a week. They have done back flips over this movie. I can only conclude that they are hoping the President is assassinated.

Typical for a Republican diehard. Portray anyone that doesn't agree with you as being some kind of kook.

If anyone watched the movie....I would love to know what the Progressives did after the calibration. I will bet the movie end at that point. The main reason is the "I Hate Bush" Progressives (they hate the word liberal) do not have a fucking clue what it is they would do.

And your clue is then?

There is a fair bit of dishonesty in what you say LD. That dishonesty is built on the idea of you projecting the perception that the "other side" doesn't have an idea as to solve what has become a great problem for the US. Of course this being the woefully misguided "War on Terrorism". The idea being if the "other side" doesn't have the answer then whatever "your side" says is then the answer.

These Progressives reminds me of the right wing wackos who hated Clinton so much they would do anything to stop him.

The same right-wing whack jobs of the Republicans who's policies you support.

It included perverting the constitution of the United States and impeached Clinton over actions in his personal life. The extremists in both parties are dangerous, maybe even more dangerous than the terrorist.

Indeed, get a BBBJ and get impeached. Start a war based entirely on a lie, get almost 3,000 US troops killed, thousands and thousands and thousands more injured, tens of thousands civilians killed, tens of thousands more injured and get praised to no end.

 

[luckydog71]

Interesting words LD and indeed a wild assumption. You are assuming that this flick represents the views of all of the Left in some kind of monolithic fashion.

It is an assumption, because I have not seen the film. I only know the title and comments I heard on the radio. I do not know if it is a wild assumption. There are only two small groups of Americans that would celebrate the assassination. The far left and the far right. The far right would be celebrating if the president was left leaning (not even far left). So that eliminates the right celebrating in this film and narrows it down to the kooky left.

The West has been fucking around in Middle East affairs long, long before 9/11. It is that interference that has been pissing off a lot people in the ME and many have chosen to follow radical brands of Islam..

I believe the radicals in the ME need a war and they will provoke were ever they can to get it.

The Hezbo’s crossed into Israel and snatch a soldier knowing (hoping?) it would provoke a reaction. It did, just not strong enough.

Sadam just needed to give UN free access. He did not.

Really man T-H-I-N-K about it, the Bush admin is whipping up fears of Iran perhaps constructing a few nukes when the only country to have ever used such WMD's is the US of A.

It is getting into the election season and that is what happens during elections here.

Perhaps NK does. If being so vigilant about nukes is the paramount concern then why is the US not kicking and screaming about Russia and China? Their respective arsenals are far more powerful than anything Iran or NK might have.

Agreed, China, Russia and a few more like India, Britain, but I think they would use them in self defense not as offensive weapons. We could not stop any of those countries even if we wanted to, but we can stop Iran with a few well placed conventional weapons. NK is a different matter. I think our hands are tied and I doubt we will take any action at all.

Who knows. More than a century of blatant interference in ME affairs would be a pretty fucking tough addiction for the West to kick.

The US is a Johnny come lately to meddling in the Middle East. France and Britain lead that category

Is that labelling fair or does it just pander to the mindless blather coming from Republican fearmongers and their highly reliable allies in the mainstream media?

Actually I do not think the label is fair. A very large percentage of Americans (I would guess north of 90%) are patriotic. Many outside the US say to a fault.
It is US politics and the lows we have reached that result in false labels.

Typical for a Republican diehard. Portray anyone that doesn't agree with you as being some kind of kook.

Interesting label – Republican diehard. But Air America is Kooky. Just listen to them. They are a Rush knock off.
They take facts and twist them to form unfounded conclusions.

And your clue is then?

There is a fair bit of dishonesty in what you say LD. That dishonesty is built on the idea of you projecting the perception that the "other side" doesn't have an idea as to solve what has become a great problem for the US. Of course this being the woefully misguided "War on Terrorism". The idea being if the "other side" doesn't have the answer then whatever "your side" says is then the answer.

If the “other side” does have an idea how to solve the problem the only ones voicing their solution is the “cut and run” crowd and the “America is getting what it deserves” crowd. I do not believe that represents the opinion of most Democrats. So what is their position?

The same right-wing whack jobs of the Republicans who's policies you support.

I do not support the policies of the “right wing whack jobs”. The ones who impeached Clinton were wrong. The ones who want to ban abortion are wrong. The ones who spend trillions of dollars more than they collected are wrong. The ones who stand by and do nothing as millions of illegal flood over the border are wrong.

I do support Bush’s war on terror and that includes Iraq. In my opinion he is winning.
I do support the tax cuts and the increase in minimum wage. Both are good for our economy.

Indeed, get a BBBJ and get impeached. Start a war based entirely on a lie, get almost 3,000 US troops killed, thousands and thousands and thousands more injured, tens of thousands civilians killed, tens of thousands more injured and get praised to no end.

Now you are the one taking some facts and jumping to the wrong conclusion.

There is absolutely no evidence to support Clinton went BB.

There is no evidence Bush lied. He had wrong information, but I have yet to see any evidence that he knew for sure WMD did not exist when he told Americans it did. Just the "other side" whipping up fear.

 

[The Lizard King]

There is no evidence Bush lied. He had wrong information, but I have yet to see any evidence that he knew for sure WMD did not exist when he told Americans it did. Just the "other side" whipping up fear.

Bwaahaaa! Good one!

 

[luckydog71]

Bwaahaaa! Good one!

Yup...the standard response when you have no facts....


Bwaahaaa Good one LK

 

[dirtydan]

Yup...the standard response when you have no facts....


Bwaahaaa Good one LK

And you do?

Either Bush knowingly lied to Americans in "manufacturing consent" for the US invasion of Iraq or he's as dumb as a brick and went along with whatever "intelligence was given to him. And let it LD, the intelligence reports were politicized to the Republicans' liking. Blaming whatever intelligence gathering organization would be wrong. If you truly believe Bush did not knowingly lie then be honest enough to blame the politicos that handled the information given to him.

 

[The Lizard King]

Yup...the standard response when you have no facts

That's funny, I was just thinking the same thing about you! Still relying on FOX News, Bill O'Reilly, and Ann Coulter for your fair and balanced news, eh? LOL

 

[luckydog71]

DD - no doubt the information about WMD was wrong. No doubt the intelligence agencies that reported it were wrong. Those agencies included some outside of the US.

The house and senate in the US plus parliament in Britain got the same information as the White House. The majority votes in all of these gov't bodies came to the conclusion there was WMD.

For your theory to be true, it would require a wide spread conspiracy that included politicians from both sides of the isle and multiple countries.

So now it just comes down to opinion. You believe he lied....I do not...

I believe he has kept the US from being attacked again....you do not...

You believe he is a lying, bumbling idiot ... I do not...

I believe the US is better with Bush than it would have been with Gore or Kerry.... you do not.

Opinions are like belly buttons we all have one.

 

[HankQuinlan]

For your theory to be true, it would require a wide spread conspiracy that included politicians from both sides of the isle and multiple countries.

It doesn't have to be a conspiracy --- it can just as easily be incompetence and greed. There is ample evidence that the only "conspirators" were those who manipulated both the available intelligence and common sense to support their theories. Whether Bush himself is smart enough to know better, there is no way to know, so it may be technically true in that there is no evidence that he "lied".

The chickenshit Democrats in your country that supported the Iraq invasion were afraid of the polls that said most Americans supported the president, as they tend to do when fed a steady diet of fear-mongering. The British govenment were just as likely motivated by greed to share the anticipated spoils, and ignored the polls in their country, hoping it would all work out. It hasn't.

How you can possibly think your country is safer after creating a whole new generation of young people in the middle east with an extra reason to hold a grudge against you (and by extension, us as well) is completely beyond me.

Sorry for responding; I promised to stay out of your posts when I realized you were not open to changes of mind, and were still stuck in the "right" versus "left" mindset that is pulling your country apart.

 

[Randy Whorewald]

So now it just comes down to opinion. You believe he lied....I do not...

I believe he has kept the US from being attacked again....you do not...

You believe he is a lying, bumbling idiot ... I do not...

I believe the US is better with Bush than it would have been with Gore or Kerry.... you do not.

Opinions are like belly buttons we all have one.

I'm very much in agreement with you LD, except for the last line. It should read:

Opinions are like assholes - everbody has one, and they all stink.

 

[dirtydan]

DD - no doubt the information about WMD was wrong. No doubt the intelligence agencies that reported it were wrong. Those agencies included some outside of the US.

Yet the information the intelligence services was desperately trying to give Bush was the threat Al Qaida posed. The Bush White House wanted nothing to do with hearing about any terrorist threat. Meanwhile the Clinton Administration had put the kabosh on a number of assassination attempts on Osama bin Laden because of the high probability of collateral damage, specifically what likely would have been the deaths of a large number of civilians. Slick Willie directly told Uncurious George of what bin Laden meant to the US during the transfer of power.

Anyhow, back to the mysterious Iraqi WMD's. It was all bullshit, as those WMD's were destroyed in the 1990's despite "roadblocks" put up by the Iraqis. As I pointed out before the Clinton administration order a large number of airstrikes and cruise missile attacks to prod Saddam Hussein into allowing the UN to do its job. In the end the job WAS done. What was the course of action taken by Uncurious George? A vicious campaign to assinate the characters of people like Hans Blix and anyone that dared to point out the obvious.

So the war was wrong. It was wrong for the US to invade Iraq. There was NEVER any reason to do so. The result now being yet another country in turmoil as a result of a great power's meddling. Just like Afghanistan, for which we should thank the US and the Russians for that.

The house and senate in the US plus parliament in Britain got the same information as the White House. The majority votes in all of these gov't bodies came to the conclusion there was WMD.

As many experts have stated, the information given to Bush and Blair was likely "sexed-up" by their politicos and not by the intelligence agencies involved. It doesn't matter one iota that the respective governments voted in majority there were still Iraqi WMD's. That LD equates to those governments voting in majority to change 2+2=4 to 2+2=5. It flies in the face of the truth.

For your theory to be true, it would require a wide spread conspiracy that included politicians from both sides of the isle and multiple countries.

I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, rather I would call it a desire to finish the job left from the Kuwait War. People within the Republican party were determined to resume the war against Iraq, for whatever strange reasons, and 9-11 provided the excuse. This dispite the reality Iraq had sweet bugger all to with 9-11 and there were no Iraqi nationals among the 9-11 terrorists.

So why was the war started by the US?

So now it just comes down to opinion. You believe he lied....I do not...

Yes I believe Bush lied, be that he did so knowingly or not. In the end he is the Commander-in-Chief and it all comes down to being his responsibility. Either way a real man would have resigned for deliberately lying to the US people to suck their country into a disasterous war or resigning because he should have known the truth and the apparatus he set up to inform him ended up misleading him.

I believe he has kept the US from being attacked again....you do not...

The last part smacks of the idiotic crap Republicans like to spit out. I suggest to you LD that you re-evaluate that last tidbit to figure out just where I have said the US would not be attacked again. IMHO you have "Bushed" your way into uttering nonsense.

In fact I think because of the disasterous war Iraq, and Afghanistan ain't that far behind, that the likelihood of the US being attack is greater now that before the war was started by the US. The occupation is clearly generating vast volumes of hatred toward the US and its allies thereby leading people to the extremists. In other words, everything is backfiring.

You believe he is a lying, bumbling idiot ... I do not...

There are times I think Bush is a very much the bumbling idiot, yet there are other times I think such is all an act and he's really a bright fellow, but one enthralled with death. In the end I think he is the worst president the US has yet to have.

I believe the US is better with Bush than it would have been with Gore or Kerry.... you do not.

One can only theorize what either Gore or Kerry would have done as president. However it doesn't take a genious to figure that no matter what actions either might have taken in the war, it would have been deemed as all wrong by the Republicans. The latter's partisanship is such a cult that they don't give a shit what is right or wrong, that opposing anyone who isn't their guy is all that matters.

I can't see how the US is better with Bush. Massive deficits unseen since the days of Ronald "spends like a drunken sailor" Reagan. A needless war, growing poverty in the US, a growing trade deficit. Other than military goodies is there anything in the US that has "Made in the USA" on it? Anytime I go shopping in the US I feel like I am supporting the Chinese economy!

Opinions are like belly buttons we all have one.

Just becareful not to project your opinions are being some one else's.