President Bush 'assassinated' in new TV docudrama

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Sep 3 2006, 07:13 PM) [snapback]313753[/snapback]</div>

I'm a conservative Christian who accepts current evolutionary theory as the best explanation for our (physical) origins.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Aug 31 2006, 10:56 AM) [snapback]312183[/snapback]</div>

The film was shown last night on the UK's commercial channel More4. Like others in this thread I did not agree with the idea behind the story but I have to admit that the film is well made and thought provoking.

The story is that Bush is visiting Chicago on October 19, 2007. Whilst he is making a speech in a hotel thousands of noisy and violent demonstrators in the streets break through police barricades and the crowd outside the hotel is chaotic. Bush's security man advises the president not to take his usual 'ropewalk' shaking hands with the public, but he insists on doing so. Two shots are heard and he falls unconscious and is rushed to hospital but he doesn't survive the night. The investigators soon establish that the shots came from a sniper's rifle in a hotel room on the opposite side of the street and they arrest a Syrian worker at the hotel. Rumours abound. The Syrian government is accused. The accused is charged with the murder on very flimsy evidence and a few months later a jury finds him guilty. However a former army man then finds documents in his late father's room which prove that he, the father, was the sniper. He had been aggrieved because he had lost two sons in Iraq.

All this would have seemed sordid but the film is so realistic that it demands attention. It's made to look like a detailed documentary after the events with astonishingly realistic scenes of unruly crowds and of Bush arriving in the hotel and interviews with officials, journalists and ordinary onlookers. One of the messages that come through strongly is that after a big crime like this the police are likely to grasp at unlikely fragments of evidence and exaggerate their value so leading to false accusations.

 

What. You mean it's only fiction?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Sep 3 2006, 08:53 PM) [snapback]313792[/snapback]</div>

Nice bit of racist innuendo there, your "camel jockey" bit. Right up there with mackerel snappers, slant eyes, watermelon eaters, frogs and darkies. Very clever! He now holds the PriusChat record for Nine (count them!) identical emoticons in a row. So deep!

I think when you went in to take your test for Mensa you took a wrong turn and found Densa.

Congratulations! You qualified!



The Dober feels it's just a little distasteful to assassinate a living president.

But, in another thread, he votes to have the North Koreans nuke California and would be willing to hand over L.A. or San Francisco to them to keep the peace.

He needs his dosage increased.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Oct 11 2006, 01:50 AM) [snapback]331042[/snapback]</div>

Why the personal attacks? I am getting quite lost with all the quotes of quotes. Actually PriusGuy04 didn't make the comment about the camel jockeys. He was quoting somebody else. The emoticons were his. Also, the camel jockeys remark was in reference to the article, which I didn't read.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusRos @ Oct 11 2006, 05:42 PM) [snapback]331470[/snapback]</div>

Actually the quote was direct from PriusGuy04 (post 40 of this thread) and he didn't reference anybody else. But since he's not real good at writing, perhaps he doesn't realize that unattributed remarks become your own. I'll look back and see if I missed where the original might have come from. It did seem a bit clever for him. He usually just quotes somebody else, says he agrees 100% and drowns us with a flood of standard emoticons.

Why the personal attacks? Because it's offensive for a person to opine that racial slurs are funny, whether he is the original author or not. "Camel jockeys" and similar ethnic put-downs invite personal response. Somebody tells a watermelon joke, you laugh, you're as bad as he is.

Where were you when I was called a "spelling NAZI" by PriusGuy04? That's just hilarious, no? (Capitals are his, for emphasis, I guess.)

DOCTOR Berman thrives on personal attack. If you don't know that, then you are new here. He wasn't kidding (he has no sense of humor) when he made the remarks I attributed to him. He doesn't deny them either. If I were slandering him I'm sure he'd jump in himself.

These folks go around dropping their vitriol and expecting nobody to call them on it. If they want calm, reasoned dialog they have to initiate it. Around here it's very often, "who let the dogs out?"

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triphop @ Sep 3 2006, 07:13 PM) [snapback]313753[/snapback]</div>

Yep, I missed that. triphop is the OP for the phrase. It looks a lot more sophisticated in this setting, doesn't it?

But priusguy04 split a gut over it, to judge by his well written remarks:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

He's sure got a gift with words!