President George W. Bush Assasination Caught on Video

A YouTube clip from a film in England of President Bush Getting Assasinated. Not real of course. Oh- let’s see if mispelling asasination or assassination helps drive views to this.

Let’s hold our opinions about whether Bush should/shouldn’t be assasinated, and instead deconstruct the video:

  1. Looks like film. Raw edgy video would have been better.
  2. We don’t see enough of the digital GW
  3. The cut to the security cameras takes away the “real time” effect
  4. The television announcer should have appeared at the beginning to establish credibility
  5. Nice work on the casting- the fat guy in the limo reminds us of the Reagan assasination attempt
  6. Good camera jolts and screams to give us the feeling of chaos

Hot debate as to whether this is appropriate or not. We’ve seen real presidents appear in footage on other movies. Have they gone too far? Talk amongst yourselves.

Via VideoSift.

Author: Nalts

Hi. I'm Nalts.

14 thoughts on “President George W. Bush Assasination Caught on Video”

  1. Umm, where did you see Bush? I couldn’t pick him out after several viewings. Sure, looked “real” at first glance, but the watermarks were a dead give-away. Plus the location of the video being on YouTube makes me question the validity as well. As far as the acting, great job. Got a sense of real panic there. Very similar to the Reagan shooting. And I agree on the newscaster, could have shown up earlier and the security camera could have been cut out completely.

  2. > Have they gone too far? Talk amongst yourselves.

    Personally, I’d be more interested in the ‘spooks’ that may suddenly stumble upon your site as a result of your headline and body copy.

    Check your site logs for ‘.mil’ or ‘.gov’ visitors. What you find would probably be more interesting than the video. Seriously.

    -joe

    “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not watching.”

  3. constitutionally, i think the producers are on safe ground. making open threats is illegal, but a clear dramatization isn’t any kind of a violation.

    sure, many will argue it’s in poor taste… ironically, these are the same folks who often complain about political correctness and how it is ruining american society.

    i’m in the final stages of pitching a script to paramount, “The President Wears Prada” – a profile of W’s transvestite tendencies

  4. Oh I had a feeling this post would result in some nice comments.

    Just a quick hello to the guys in my company’s IT group and the FBI folks that are reading. I’m not wearing any pants as I type.

  5. ” Iā€™m not wearing any pants as I type”,…thats clearly illegal,we’re coming to get you right now nalts! šŸ™‚

  6. > a nocturnal visit from one of his minions

    I can expect to experience nocturnal minions again? Cool.
    I don’t think I’ve enjoyed one of those since high school.

    joe

  7. From what I understand, the FBI has been working on a new device that can induce anaphylactic shock from a distance… i’d watch out.

  8. Believe it or not, those four semi-common words, “peanut pellet projectile propeller” have yet to appear next to each other on any document anywhere on the web.

    What’s even harder to believe is that I took the time to google it, and then post my results here.

    I’m working way too much…

    beer me-
    joe

  9. And to think it only took me 10 seconds to think of that particular string of words. My first thought was “pea shooter” but thought “peanut” would be better since I was allergic to them. Thus the anaphylactic theme.

Comments are closed.