yay! another bush bashing film..

Death of a President
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Death of a president)
Jump to: navigation, search
aktion This article or section contains information about one or more scheduled or expected films. The content may change as the film's release approaches and more information becomes available.

This article is about a British film. For the book on the assasination of John F. Kennedy, see The Death of a President.

Death of a President is an upcoming British film by Gabriel Range, a fictional documentary about the assassination of U.S. President George W. Bush. [1] It is set to air on the More4 channel on October 9, 2006. The film premiered at the 2006 Toronto International Film Festival on September 10, 2006. The film uses archive footage, actors and computer effects to portray the president's assassination.
[edit]

Synopsis

In October 2007, President of the United States George W. Bush is assassinated by a hidden shooter on his way out of a Chicago hotel, in front of which an anti-war rally is being held. A man of Syrian origins, Jamal Abu Zikri, becomes the number one suspect. Three years later, a documentary filmmaker presents a movie about what the United States has become since the assassination.
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.

The Syrian Jamal Abu Zikri possibly sympathetic to Jihad was initially suspected as the assassin. Dick Cheney, after being elevated to the position of President, uses the possible al-Qaeda connection of the suspect to push his own agenda. He calls for a Patriot Act 3, suspends most civil liberties and for military action against Syria. An already grotesque world situation keeps growing tesquer.

Eventually, the movie revealed that the perpetrator is a black American, a father of a soldier who had died on duty in Iraq. The assassin blames Bush for the death of his son. He shoots the President, then himself. The killer's suicide note reads: "There's no honor in standing for an immoral country. George Bush killed our David and I can't forgive him." So it turns out that the assassination was entirely personal.
[edit]

Trivia

* The White House has declined to comment on the film.
* The Republican Party has commented. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/5302598.stm
* Gabriel Range has directed another fictional documentary called The Day Britain Stopped.
* Checkpoint, a 2004 novel by Nicholson Baker, also showcased an assassination plot of George W. Bush, although not completed. It raised some controversy. The movie The Assassination of Richard Nixon, based on a true but failed attempt, also holds similar subject matter.
* Newmarket Films, who has distributed Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, has reportedly bought rights of the film for $1 million to distribute the film to US market. [2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_a_president

..Some people have sick minds...I'm sick of all this..This whole bush bashing is a fad, they did the SAME exact thing to Reagan in the 80’s (They even had a “Rock Against Reagan and all this other stuff.), it’s a double standard..if such a thing were done of Clinton, it would be barred somehow from being released.

...You're kidding, right?

Have you completely missed the uproar about the 9/11 "docudrama" that's been airing on...ABC, I think it was? The thing basically purports to be based on fact...but includes loads to falsified information. One of the climatic scenes of the movie shows a Clinton administration official refusing to give the order to kill Osama bin Laden, thereby leading, essentially, to 9/11 and the like.

...Didn't happen, even though the film claimed to be based on the 9/11 commission report, and even though they sent it out to schools for "educational purposes." Oh, and it was screened exclusively to conservative commentators, so it's not as if this was all an accident.

So, in one case, we have a film that, while it may be inflammatory, at least does reflect actual fears many have about the administration at hand...and is openly hypothetical, not to mention something that only a handful of people will see.

On the other, the film targeting Clinton's administration, facts and blatant lies are melded on openly slanderous notes...and it's airing on a major television channel.

Right. They'd never do it to Clinton. It's such a double standard against Republicans, Simba. Boo-hoo.

I refrain from comment at the whole Bush bashing thing.

Although this movie does look awfully interesting. I should give it a look.

I like these althistory things. Must be why I like NESing so much and, by extension, makes European History AP bearable. Because I'm reminded of things I can use in NES.

On the more general topic of Bush-bashing, I'll say that it certainly does exist, and it certainly is annoying. I wish everyone that had a bone to pick with Bush had such on the basis of well-laid out and thought through objections...it's not like there's a lack of material to lay out and think through, after all....but there are a few people that just got into the swing of it, when it became mildly "rebellious."

And then there are others who probably do have reasonable objections to Bush but are just so sick of hearing garbage arguments in favor of him that they become very thoughtless about how they criticize him. Hear enough people say "Don't you support the troops? Then how can you not support Bush?" and you'll just start wanting to smack people.

So...sometime's it's inexcusable, sometime's it's understandable. In defense of Bush-bashing, though, a tu quoque should probably be offered, to put things in perspective: the uninformed, vocal, Bush supporters are also large in number, and while it may not be "cool" to be pro-Bush, it's certainly not smart to have an uninformed view on a political issue.

...I think this thread is a good example, to be frank.

LeftHandedPen wrote:

So...sometime's it's inexcusable, sometime's it's understandable. In defense of Bush-bashing, though, a tu quoque should probably be offered, to put things in perspective: the uninformed, vocal, Bush supporters are also large in number, and while it may not be "cool" to be pro-Bush, it's certainly not smart to have an uninformed view on a political issue.

...I think this thread is a good example, to be frank.

So I'm an idiot now? Just because I think a movie that assassinates someone who is still living?

If they did do the same thing to a liberal as well, I would be against it..

But such a thing will NEVER happen. Because all they would have to do is pull out the lawyers. (See Clinton on the whole path to 9/11 film. There are parts that were edited because of a letter he sent.)

In general the whole concept of the movie is stupid, And it is clear to see it was bred out of liberal whackjobs sick fantasy..

I never remember once hearing someone say "They wanted clinton dead" Impeached? yes. Dead? no.

Oh and the whole idea of the dad of the solider is very not well thought of as well..

It's like the equivlant of me killing my mom's doctor, because she died of cancer, and he didn't stop it.

Simba wrote:

Oh and the whole idea of the dad of the solider is very not well thought of as well..

Actually, it's perfectly plausable. Military mothers and fathers who have lost their sons (and daughters) to this conflict aren't all so happy with Bush for the way he's handled things. Look at Cindy Sheehan...lost her son, and became one of Bush's most vocal and recognized dissenters. Losing a child is terrible...losing one in a protracted battle that should have been avoided is another, and I could see it happening.

As for the fad of Bush bashing, with approval ratings at 38%, yes, this is the majority of people in the United States, going "We don't like him". It's easy to dismiss most of the low-intelligence bashing, but for those of us actually affected by his policies...it's easier to grumble and growl. My friend is out in Iraq, so I worry every now and again, plus, I'm Romanian, and get a lot of flack from certain red blooded individuals about being a 'Haji' or that I 'pray to the east'

*sighs*

Stupid roommate.

Simba wrote:

So I'm an idiot now? Just because I think a movie that assassinates someone who is still living?

I didn't say you were an idiot. I said that your viewpoint on this is uninformed. Clinton's people did manage to get some things changed in the 9/11 film, yes...but the essential plot of the film relies on some of the biggest falsehoods used. Imagine, for example, the movie without the scene I described above. Certainly, a near-miss at killing bin Laden's going to be a pivotal point in a film about bin Laden's villainy...so, if you take it out, the film's going to make no sense.

Given that they aired it, it had to have at least some of the objectionable material still in it. And, quite frankly, any lies in a film purporting to be based on fact on such a topic is unacceptable, whoever it's targeting.

Simba wrote:

But such a thing will NEVER happen. Because all they would have to do is pull out the lawyers.

If there were an "assassination of Clinton" movie, you think that he'd be able to do any more than Bush can about this one? The law's the same in either case; there's jack either one of them can do about it. But the fact is that the 9/11 movie does something much worse...and it is targeting Clinton.

Simba wrote:

I never remember once hearing someone say "They wanted clinton dead" Impeached? yes. Dead? no.

That's a pretty fair statement. I can't recall anyone ever saying such, either, about Clinton, but I know there are quite a few people who wouldn't mourn the loss of Bush. I think the problem comes in when you assume that those who wouldn't mind Bush getting hit by a bus are just "bashing" for the sake of a fad.

Comparing dislike for Clinton and Bush is really quite a leap...Clinton, whatever one may think of him personally, simply didn't have as many huge, political stains on his administration's record. Bush does. Hence, much more hate.

Simba wrote:

It's like the equivlant of me killing my mom's doctor, because she died of cancer, and he didn't stop it.

Well...maybe if your doctor indirectly gave your mother cancer. Otherwise, not so much.