How mindblowingly stupid and irresponsible is this? Check it out...

A new U.K.-made movie portrays the fictional murder of George W. Bush.
I hate the guy and his administration with the white-hot intensity of a million suns. Making a fantasy film depicting his - or anyone's - assassination is absolutely unacceptable and morally repugnant.

Click the link:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=filmNews&storyID=2006-08-31T114101Z_01_L31353872_RTRIDST_0_FILM-MEDIA-CHANNEL4-DC.XML

I suspect it's just to make a name for the director by shocking people - why else would you make this kind of movie.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

This doesn't do anything to further intelligent discussion of *'s crimes. I smell a rat.

Or any form of any art. The public will vote with their wallet. The rest is free speech. So what. It's not like it's going to give anyone any ideas they didn't already have or make someone do it who wouldn't otherwise have.

And as far as I'm concerned I hope he sees it and shits himself.

Been to the movies much? Violence murder and mayhem are routine. I see nothing at all wrong with this subject.

I have been to the movies "much". Still haven't seen any movies offering up a fictional depiction of the murder of a real, still living, still breathing person. Even if the person is a war-mongering assclown.

Get a grip.

I'll bet you'd be singing a different tune. Yes?

I was just thinking about all the animations I've seen made by amateurs that show Bin Laden being sliced and diced by 'Merkins.

I'd say it was just as unacceptable. How sick do you (I don't mean you personally) have to be to go out and watch a film which offers up a revenge kill fantasy against a real person?

Now...if Bin Laden for instance was finally caught and captured or killed - for real, in the real world - I wouldn't be outraged.

Let's keep reality and fantasy separated. That would be a good place to start.

Did you get all worked up over the "Osama in a Blender" internet games that popped up five years ago?

But more to the point....would you be as laissez faire about the whole thing if President Clinton (or a future President Kerry, President Clark, whomever....) had a movie made about them depicting their fictional assassination? Would it be freedom of expression then? Free speech? Art?

Puh-leeze.

President Clinton was flawed but a decent human being.

The only way that comparison works is if you consider Bush the Republican equivalent of Clinton.

But yeah, it would be free speech.

...same deal? I mean free speech is free speech, right? I disagree with your opinion, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. That kind of thing? What a pantload. You think the Bush murder movie is okay because you hate the guy's guts (as do I, but I think the movie is wrong), and not for any other reason.

But yeah, free speech.

Hell, when Clinton was president there were senators making death threats at him in public and nothing even happened.

Yeah, I'm fine with this movie about Bush. In fact, I think having a problem over it is a tad "unamerican."

...then I'm glad I don't fit your definition of an American....which, by the way ought to include, actually being American, which I am not. I am a Canadian. Might wanna click the 'profile' button on me first.

Ultimately though...my opinion is simply that, my opinion. As is yours. I am not a heavy-handed, censor-happy anti-expressionist, as you would seem to suggest in your McCarthy-esque pronouncement on my "unamerican"-ism.

You strike me as quite heavey-handed, censor-happy, and anti-expressionist.

Self censorship of previous comments aside...

:hurts:

censor-happy and unamerican are redundant.

BTW...your inference that I am in fact "censor-happy" is an assertion you make based on what...the fact I never called for the banning or censoring of this film, or the fact I expressed my personal opinion that it was repugnant, stupid, and irresponsible. Self-expression such as this, it would seem to me, is actually about as far from being 'unamerican' as apple pie.

"would you be as laissez faire about the whole thing if President Clinton (or a future President Kerry, President Clark, whomever....) had a movie made about them depicting their fictional assassination? Would it be freedom of expression then? Free speech? Art?"

Basically, you're suggesting that it's not free speech.

So, I think you're censor-happy. But, hey, that's my personal opinion.

...where I said I would censor or ban this movie, and I'll pretend to give you a fictitious one million dollars. All I ever have done is express my opinion. I have never suggested that this stupid fucking movie should be banned from view by anyone, at anytime, anywhere in the world. I pointed out Clinton, Kerry and Clark in the context of asking whether such a movie, if it were about one of them being popped off, would still be acceptable as art or whatever. And that is what you use to illustrate my "censor-happy" nature? Read what I have written, don't infer what you think I mean. Honestly, it's pretty straightforward stuff.

Got it yet?

"stupid," "unacceptable (wtf?)," "irresponsible (wtf?)," and "morally repugnant (lol)."

Of course, this is just your opinion. You haven't actually seen the movie, but that's never stopped the censor-happy bluehairs from forming opinions about them.

Now, as evidenced above, you didn't get particularly upset when people made fictional depictions of the death of other people, Osama bin Laden for instance. So I'm going to have to conclude you're not upset over what it is they're saying, but who they're saying it about.

What is your point???

Why is my opinion sooooooooo important to you, anyway? I mean, I have mine, you have yours. So go watch the movie if you get a chance. Get off on it or tear up when Georgie gets whacked, whatever turns your crank. I just do not understand why my opinion, and that's all it is, my opinion...makes me 'censor-happy'? In fact, the honest to God's truth is...if this movie became available to me to watch...I might just watch it. And what does that prove? Nothing!! Except for the fact they depict an actual real life person being assassinated, I might find the plot, the characters, the friggin' cinematography for that matter...to be top notch!! So what???!! My opinion does not make me censor-happy! If I said ban this movie, that would. The difference...painfully obvious. But, apparently not to some.

And why bring up Osama again? What does that prove? Why not just ask me "Why do you hate America?"

Also..."Osama in a Blender" or whatever the hell it was, or any of the other silly internet fantasy games/cartoons of that ilk...you compare a goofy Microflash game with a 'what if?' TV/movie drama scenario regarding the fantasy killing of a real president? Yeah, that's a good comparison.

Fuck sakes.

I couldn't care less about your opinion. Not that I think you actually have one.

But I do take some pleasure in knowing that what you consider "unacceptable"... there's nothing you can do about it but sit there and accept it.

I guess that's why you left this thread long ago, and haven't debated me back and forth for an hour or more.

Gotcha.

The last refuge of a person who's run out of arguments to back up their point, is to suggest they 'couldn't care less' about the other person's opinion.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've got a lot of sitting there and accepting it to do...as I've been so artfully put in my place.

I'm done...I might suggest you do the same.

But as you appear to be one of those people who absolutely MUST have the last word...be my guest, because life's too short.

Ooo! You got me!

:rofl:

touche!

But of course lets ban everything offensive. Why stop with this?

and still claim to be for freedom of speech.

It may be tasteless, but that doesn't mean that we get to say they "can" or "can't" do whatever the hell they want.

Or calling for the banning of anything. Nowhere on this thread do I suggest anything other than my disgust at the premise of such a movie.

It seems to be that a political crisis develops after Stupid is assasinated. Why is that premise disgusting?

;)

Actually the less civilized part of my genetic makeup wants the movie to be really really good and scare the shit out of him, keep him awake at nights like sending our soldiers off to die in Iraq for a war designed to enrich Halliburton and steal oil has not.

I'd probably even get Bruckheimer to add liberal aliens disguised as the virgin mary shooting laser beams out of their assholes, plus jesus in drag, on the half shell, to offend as any people as possible.

If a movie depicting Chimpy's murder scares the shit out of him, then the worst part of my character would love to watch him squirm. But, on the other hand, I don't want to become that which I despise.

of civilians. I don't like that either.

But, on the whole, I just find this :boring:

a popular book, not a movie as far as i know

mick jagger is still going strong and i doubt he lost a moment's sleep over it, i haven't read the book or seen it around since the 70s though so i don't know if the title was just a title or if it was really on that theme

Okay, her sisters sang the song on the Nurds album and it's hysterically funny, but still . . . Think of poor Suzzy's feelings, especially when she goes to the laundromat.

...is like comparing an ageing, philandering rock star to a man who lied his country into an illegal and immoral war. Oh...wait....

Yep...that's pretty much the same thing.
:eyes:

mick jagger is old but he ain't dead yet

i thought i read upthread that the OP had never heard of any work discussing the assassination of a person still living

that's why i brought it up

i like mick jagger and certainly do not advocate his harm, but i also think he has a strong sense of humor not shared by usa politicians

have no idea of the merit of the work since i didn't read it

ah, here we go, i think you're the one who inquired-- haven't seen any movies offering up a fictional depiction of the murder of a real, still living, still breathing person

i don't disagree that it's pretty stupid to make a movie discussing the assassination of a usa president, far as i know, that's quite illegal here and will make distribution of the work impossible in usa so that's just for starters why it's stupid

A fictional work depicting the assasination of George Bush is illegal under what law?

in the 60s and the 70s this was used by the fbi to harass the peace movement, i don't know how much more i can talk abt this without getting into deep waters myself, but you couldn't even make a joke about such matters much less a full-length movie, it simply couldn't be legally discussed, as far as i know this hasn't changed altho i'm willing to receive new information

when you have time, look into cointelpro and how it was used to pretty much destroy people by any means necessary, even for silly season stuff like smoking a joint or making a stupid joke

people are getting arrested for wearing t-shirts that might disturb mr. bush, i doubt this film-maker is going to get a visa to be allowed to enter the usa any time soon

it may be part of the law where it is illegal (conspiracy) to plot violent revolution in the usa, by definition, any discussion of violent removal of the leader of the country would be such a plot since it would willy-nilly force a change of gov't

i'm no lawyer tho, just know folks were hassled by this, so i'd be cautious

Imagining that this somehow extends to a ban on fictional accounts of his demise is a bit of a stretch.


So we'll just change Bush's name to Stupid and post a big disclaimer on the front of the movie that it is a work of fiction blah blah blah. Then everyone can be happy and it will be the same as several other movies where if the presidunce isn't killed, he comes real close to getting killed.

It's illegal to threaten somebody's life.

Killing somebody off in a work of fiction is just fine.



In fact, I'm pretty sure the founding fathers had things like burning people in effigy in mind.

whatever the founding fathers may have had in mind, in more recent times (cointelpro) then merely making a joke (jokes are fictional) was enough to get you in trouble for threatening nixon

since people have been arrested for wearing anti-bush t-shirts in the wrong place, i don't see an entire movie getting a free pass

good lord, i don't know how many years doris lessing was forbidden entry to the usa for basically writing the communists weren't all bad and black people shouldn't be treated so shittily, for all i know she's an undesirable person yet to usa customs

people in britain can write what they wish but it can mean they'll be banned from entering this country for some length of time or maybe forever

not a lawyer here, i'm just sayin

some things aren't really worth it

doris lessing writing about the efforts to break down the color bar in rhodesia, worth it, some guy trying to promote a movie, not necessarily worth it, depends on the quality and the intention of the work probably -- obviously if this is a terrific and involving movie, it's more worth it than if it's a piece of shite but we can't tell from here

Especially since Cheney would take his place. Do NOT even suggest this, even if it is in the fictional sense. I'm kidding-sort of. It is irresponsible, but you can't underestimate how much this man is truly hated around the world. Of course Bush will NEVER be assasinated. He's too heinous. Only the great ones, like JFK, RFK, MLK, Ghandi, etc. end up assasinated, and always by right wing assholes.

face! Thanks, I needed that.

The grin is hugh!!!! I'm series!!!

i feel so sorry for them.




....



NNAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

we need more films like this!

The "I" Word Bush Dart Game 16"x20" Poster
(darts not included)


http://www.cafepress.com/massmadness.44300294

that did a video in which a rapper fantasizes firing an RPG at Air Force One when the President steps off the plane. Also I believe the rapper Paris has a album cover in which a jet flies into the White House.

sense of entertainment; wouldn't want any reality slipping in and spoiling the fun. :)irony:(

I'm old and conservative. This concept is just heinous and says a lot about us, but I'm just not sure what.

Guess I have a line and this is just way, way over it.

I do believe I am going to embrace apathy because I just can't be part of this kind of political movement.

Our media is still safely controlled by our corporate masters, so fear not. :patriot:

sounds more like an attention getting ploy to me

What political movement? Channel 4 in England made a TV movie about a crisis that develops after Bush is assasinated. Fiction. Not advocating anything.

What I am shocked by is the knee jerk reactions of people who think that everything must be banned that is not prohibited.

All obvious jokes aside...he actually is not. And yet, he is assassinated in a movie set in the future. It's not just a president who is killed here, it is the 43rd president of the United States. How can people not see that a line has been galloped across here?

Its is a movie, perhaps it is a work of art. How can anyone make that judgment on the basis of a single press release?

...such a movie is just a-okay with them, is...replace Bush with someone you do NOT loathe...and in fact might even love and/or admire...and tell me how much you still think it's 'art', 'free expression', or whatever. It's not about WHO the real, live person the movie is fictitiously murdering off...it is THAT the movie is doing this.

Was the movie depicting the murder of a real person (not a person's title...such as a President, but a real person with a real name in real life)? I don't think it was, and that makes your argument invalid.

Next.

But hey, if you think that a fictional story, featuring the murder of a person who is still alive, is immoral under any circumstance, regardless the intention of the writer, then my arguments are irrelevant.

i would make the president a fictitious person, rather than a real person

if it's fiction, let it really be fiction

an example of this might be seen in "the broker" by john grisham (an airplane read type of book) -- the fictional president who pardons our "hero" is somewhat modeled on * -- much verbiage is spent telling how he is the least intelligent human of all time who makes ronald reagan in the last days of alzheimer's look like an einstein -- but then he changes it enough to make it clear it's a fictional story and not a suggestion or a wish -- for example, president stoopit has a son and he loses re-election by a landslide

If it's a fictitious murder, then it's a fictitious president too. Not Michael Moore's definition of fictitious president in this instance, although I did enjoy his Oscar acceptance speech as much as any I've ever heard.

Might be a Conservative who hates the federal deficit.

I'd just like to be in the cinema to hear the cheers. Catharsis is wonderful.

That's the problem with us "Liberals". Liberals. A word that is now bandied about and carries all of the stigma of the scum of the earth. And you know why this is? Because Conservatives have done everything in their power to make us less than human in the eyes of many people in this nation.

So let's see if I understand: Ann Coulter can say:

Federal Judges should be killed if they don't adhere to a certain conservative train a thought
The NY Times should be bombed
Clinton is a FAG
911 Widows are Harpies.


And let's not get it crossed here: Ann Coulter is not a foreign national. She's supposedly American.


This movie might suck: who knows. But IMHO, I don't feel we need to wring our hands over this given the invective that's directed at us.