It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Death of a President" Fictional Documentary of "Bush" Assassination!

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Some films are better left on the shelf this may be one of them, a fictional documentary of the assassination of president Bush. The 93 minute film has Americans outraged and to make matters worse, in the film, after president bush is killed Dick Cheney becomes president.
 



www.foxnews.com
I'm guessing there are a couple of things Americans, no matter what their party affiliation or political ideology, really don't want to see in a movie. One would be the assassination of a sitting American president, and the other would be a black man getting pinned for his murder just to make a point about anti-Arab sentiment since Sept. 11.

But that hasn’t stopped British filmmaker Gabriel Range and his team from Film Four in Great Britain. Their film, “Death of a President,” which will air on television tomorrow night in the UK, was such a hot ticket last night in Toronto that publicists at the Paramount theater had to make a human chain to block out gate crashers. Weeks of hype had caused a frenzy, and there was talk of scalped tickets. But as one potential distributor said to me as we went in, “What if it’s bad?” Whoops! We never thought of that, did we? Film Four makes very good documentaries in Britain, so the assumption was that there would be merit to this controversial film. Maybe it’s me, folks. Maybe I’m not hip enough for “Death of a President.” I know there’s a point to this thing. As the writer and director said during the Q&A after the screening, they wanted to show our “rush to judgment” and how Arabs have been treated in the U.S. since the World Trade Center disaster. But this really sounds to me like stuff people who don’t live in New York and didn’t actually experience Sept. 11 might say from a safe distance. In “Death of a President,” George W. Bush is murdered after making a speech in Chicago on Oct. 19, 2007. Outside the Sheraton Hotel there are massive, violent demonstrations that recall the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago more than anything of recent times.

The president’s motorcade is stopped by unruly protesters; the police don riot gear and use tear gas. It’s a bad scene, as the faux Secret Service agent who was protecting Bush recalls during the mockumentary part of the film.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Did anyone stop to think that maybe this would inspire some crazy copycat killer to carry out this plot? I mean we have no shortage of people who dislike president Bush so the logical question would be, what if someone liked what they witnessed on screen to the point of accomplishing it for real, would they?

[edit on 12-9-2006 by the_sentinal]

[edit on 12-9-2006 by UM_Gazz]



apc

posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Assassinations are rarely carried out by a single crazed individual.

As it is a British film, I don't really have a problem with it. The controversy is just circumstantial.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Assassinations are rarely carried out by a single crazed individual.


Tell that to Jackson, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, T.R., Kennedy, Ford, and Reagan.

Note: Not all the presides listed above were actually killed. And please spare me the theories.



The controversy is just circumstantial.


Not really, the fact that they superimposed Bush's face makes this more than just circumstantial, it makes it personal and deliberate.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I think I am going to need to see this movie before I can make an accurate decision on the movie. The superimposition of Bush's face makes it a little questionable, but I really need to watch the context of this to make a judgement. I definitely will not take the word of Fox News to form an opinion. Everyday that their weather man says it is going to be sunny, I look outside just in case.


Seriously though, as much as I cannot stand this man, it seems somewhat distasteful at a face value. Time will tell though, and this is one of those moments where freedom of speech is at work and at its finest. Then again, this is British, and I admit to being ignorant to exactly what is allowed/not allowed there.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Oh comon, yea "hey look at me!! Watching a movie about killing the President actually gave me the MEANS AND RESOURCES to actually do it!!" , lets get serious. I am sure there are plenty of crazed nuts who have already plotted and planned to murder several presidents in history, of which only two have succeeded one hundred years apart. NONE of which were inspired by a movie, book, comic strip or editorial making someone into a copycat killer.

I may not agree with the film's premise, but I MOST definetly support their freedom to express their views. Of course this movie will probably not be shown or even imported on DVD here in the states, but I would liek to watch it. Suppose I have to wait till its on DVD over there.

Yall Europeans that get to see this soon give us a holla and let us know how it is.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   
This movie wont be a call to nutjobs believe me. Anyone who is capable of this has already thought about it long and hard and made up their minds.....

Is this the first movie ever to kill off a president of the USA? Goes to show you how popular he is all over the world.

Hey a movie is just a movie..right?? Its fiction like Road to 9/11...no need to get your feathers ruffled- right? I agree its disrespectful and not the norm, but Bush is not the norm either.
Its just a movie.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
You know what,.....I'm not a big Bush fan, although I certainly do not hate him....I think the guy who dreamed up this movie should be closely watched. SERIOUSLY. The last thing this country needs is for some nutjob to get an idea in his/her head to assassinate the president and give our country another heartache. I know,I know, some would debate as to whether it would be a heartache or not.

Quite seriously though, anytime a leader, whether one likes him/her or not, gets assassinated it is a sad affair. I think,actually, at this point in history, if Bush were assassinated, all hell would break loose in this country. Make of it what you will.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
I find it ironic that after seven years they decide to kill him off in his last few months of his service. I mean damn they couldnt have just waited two more months? Would never have to worry about him again if theyda just waited. Ahh well.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Assassinations are rarely carried out by a single crazed individual.


Tell that to Jackson, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, T.R., Kennedy, Ford, and Reagan.

Note: Not all the presides listed above were actually killed. And please spare me the theories.




Lincoln's assasination was plotted out by a group of several men, not a lone killer.

Reagan was never assassinated, it was just an assassination attempt, which failed, perhaps because he was a lone crazed individual, if he had backup, reagan would've been dead!

Jackson was never hit, the bullets missed, and Jackson actually beat down the man with his cane!

Garfield...yeah, he died, three months later due to poor medical treatment.

Teddy Rossevelt survived the gunshot. And the attack didn't count, the ghost of William Mckinley told John Schrank to do it!

Ford wasn't killed either.

So in the end, only Mckinley and JFK were killed by sole attackers, and the JFK assasination is still a subject of contention and hot debate.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Assassinations are rarely carried out by a single crazed individual.


Tell that to Jackson, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, T.R., Kennedy, Ford, and Reagan.

Note: Not all the presides listed above were actually killed. And please spare me the theories.



The controversy is just circumstantial.


Not really, the fact that they superimposed Bush's face makes this more than just circumstantial, it makes it personal and deliberate.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by WestPoint23]


I study history so it pains me to have to ask such an ignorant question... Garfield was assassinated? I never studied him, I always thought though that he was in office for a very short time and died on natural causes...?

Anyways, if it was an American who made the film then it could be a problem, you can't joke about that kind of stuff without SS coming to your front door. Since it was a UK citizen I habe no problem with it, freedom of expresion.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Curious, can someone knowledgable with law in Great Britain respond and point out the laws regarding freedom of speech and how applicable it is to this movie filmed? I don't feel that it is appropriate to judge based on the standards of law provided by my country (USA.. am I still in the USA?). So until then, I'm going to bow out and wait, but I request someone knowing of the current laws in Britain responding with any legal ramifications of this film. Could it be stopped? Would it be stopped, normally? If so, what would be the basis of making the film illegal?


apc

posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Tell that to Jackson, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, T.R., Kennedy, Ford, and Reagan.

Note: Not all the presides listed above were actually killed. And please spare me the theories.


Most of that has already been responded to, but I also must point out that what you list is a very small percentage of assassinations. How many have our own government carried out? Other governments? Throughout history? Assassinations are usually one ruling body killing a leader/figurehead of another ruling body, or the work of a group of conspirators.

"Friends, Romans, countrymen …"



Not really, the fact that they superimposed Bush's face makes this more than just circumstantial, it makes it personal and deliberate.

Indeed, that is a circumstance. It's just a movie. A work of fiction. Getting worked up over this is like all these nuts getting worked up over 'The DaVinci Code'. Come on...



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Call me superstitious, but have there not been predictions of Bush being assassinated?? and if so wouldnt this movie be like a bad omen or something or perhaps maybe the individual who made the movie has some inside information on a future event already planned.

I know it sounds crazy, but that is why I posted this news piece because I've heard these theories about bible codes predicting the assassination of Bush and now a movie depicting that very event???

[edit on 12-9-2006 by the_sentinal]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Anyways, if it was an American who made the film then it could be a problem, you can't joke about that kind of stuff without SS coming to your front door. Since it was a UK citizen I habe no problem with it, freedom of expresion.


that statement gave me shivers down my back. "oh hes from britian, freedom of expression. Hes american? call SS!" if thats the truth, thats something to think about.


apc

posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Same reason you can't walk around saying "I am going to kill the President."

If it were made in the US, it would be questionable, and probably not go anywhere. But it would be pushing the limits of the law.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Can you belive that they had to form a "human chain" to keep people from crashing through the gates??


What would happen if they released the movie over here?? That probably wont happen though and for good reason.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by the_sentinal]

[edit on 12-9-2006 by the_sentinal]



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 05:32 AM
link   
Just so you know, i read somewhere (I forget where) that this filmmaker has received death threats now from some source....



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Just so you know, i read somewhere (I forget where) that this filmmaker has received death threats now from some source....


Got to love freedom of speech, eh? And yes Garfield did die as a result of the wounds.

Now this is just so I satisfy the one liner hawks.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 07:00 PM
link   
However Garfield enters this equation i guess i only known to you.


And yes, lets satisfy the one liner hawks


apc

posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   
It was a narrow focused attempt to argue against my argument against the likelihood that this film will inspire someone to make an assassination attempt.

Probably by his father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join