lyndalu-45740 I was going to say this was the most ridiculous documentary I've ever seen but you can't call this show a documentary, its more like a comedy based on the most ridiculous assumptions. If you're looking for a good laugh, this is your show, if you are looking for unbiased truths, you won't find them here.

mta7000-732-708008 I've learned from watching pivotal events unfold over the years, that initial testimony from people at the scene before an official narrative can be spun and all the messy details from initial accounts can be synthesized into corroborating official details can later prove invaluable for those interested later in revisiting the events of a given day and poking holes in said narrative. For example, when reporters on the scene on the morning of 9/11 got all these eyewitness accounts describing a series of explosions right before the twin towers came down OR when BBC reporter Jane Standley talked on the air later in the afternoon about the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building (Building 7) on BBC Worldwide a whole twenty minutes before it actually collapsed - a clip since removed on copyright grounds - such tidbits, I am sure, made people like Webster Tarpley, author of "George Bush: the unauthorized biography" and later "9/11: synthetic terror" go, "wait, WHAT?!" and delve further.The first part of this documentary has some great clips of just this kind of unfiltered initial testimony of people doing their jobs on the scene that day in Dallas and initial tidbits not adding up that similarly make anyone paying attention question the established official JFK narrative that's been put forth for over half a century. That George Bush can be plausibly linked to the JFK cover-up is all the more interesting because he can also be plausibly linked to the planning of 9/11 (Tarpley's "9/11: synthetic terror" makes a good case for a Bush/Cheney 9/11 connection) and the planning of the assassination attempt on Reagan (see below).Having said that, after the documentary presents people-on-the-scene testimony from the JFK era - many of which I hadn't seen before - it then goes into the chart-on-the-wall territory linking Bush Sr.'s portrait to E. Howard Hunt's portrait, etc, etc in the same way that made my eyes glaze over watching Glenn Beck on the Blaze back in the day discussing the nefarious deeds of and all the links between Bill Ayers, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, Saul Alinsky, George Soros, and the rest of Obama's crowd drawn from the Chicago machine, academia, and the global establishment.Despite that, this documentary did manage to present some interesting facts I wasn't aware of like Zapata Petroleum putting Bush Sr. right in the middle of the Caribean where he could have been involved in anti-Castro operations in the '60's like the Bay of Pigs invasion code-named - what else? - Operation Zapata or businessman George de Mohrenschildt turning up dead in '77 with a self-inflicted gunshot wound right before he was to meet with an investigator from the House Select Committee on Assassinations to discuss the JFK case. I didn't realize anyone (besides Lee Harvey Oswald of course) from the JFK era was silenced that way. This bore an interesting resemblance to Gary Webb's "suicide" by two shots in the head after going public about the CIA's alleged role in the cocaine trade during Iran-Contra era (Bush again?) and portends the "whistleblowers beware" era we're so familiar with today exemplified in the Michael Hastings case where his Mercedes C250 ran into a tree and blew up sending the engine block flying several hundred yards behind the car right before he was to go public with some dirt he had on the CIA. (Remember all those engine blocks ejected from cars crashing into walls shown in those "You could learn a lot from a dummy" TV ads in the 80's and 90's? I don't either but recreating Hastings' accident to see if an engine could be made to eject like that would've made a great Mythbusters series finale.)What I was hoping for from this documentary but didn't get was more time devoted to discussing Bush Sr.'s pre-9/11 connections - his business ties to the bin Laden family going back to the 1970's (Bush and Osama bin Laden's brother, Salem bin Laden, founding Arbusto Energy, an oil company based in Texas, In 1978 acc. to the Denver Post article, "Bush ties to bin Laden haunt grim anniversary") or the Bush's pre-Reagan assassination connection with would-be assassin John Hinckley, Jr.'s, family ("Bush's son was to dine tonight with suspect's brother" by Arthur Wiese and Margaret Downing, Houston Post ca. March 1981 which reads in part, "Scott Hinckley ... was to have been a dinner guest Tuesday night at the home of Neil Bush..." - is that why Nancy seemed to dislike the Bushes so much?) and other "weird Bush stuff" that could establish a pattern that if touched on here, after awhile, would make anyone stop and say, "wait, WHAT?!". It's like the whole "Clinton body count" phenomenon where suspicion unavoidably mounts with the sheer number of deaths of former Clinton associates that Snopes, Mother Jones, etc, have to explain away all the while their credibility with each new iteration of their broken-record narrative and also reducing the odds that all those freak accidents, suicides, and deadly burglaries were just random happenstances and that's what could've been shown here. I mean, if your neighbor's business name showed up in a failed government operation, you'd probably shrug your shoulders and think, "huh, that's random" but then if their son's friend's brother tried to kill a prominent public figure, you'd wrinkle your nose and think, "that's odd" and finally if your neighbor's business partner's brother blew up a building, at some point you'd probably begin to wonder about your neighbor and at least ask them about it especially if they were running for public office."JFK" is in this documentary's title so I shouldn't have expected this other "Weird Bush stuff" to be touched on but, still this documentary could've helped explain to the uninitiated why the Bush's family name is mud as far as those who are awake are concerned and why they likely won't be winning more races for prominent political office any time soon...

Russ Hog This movie deserves zero stars.It's poorly made - makes no sense - and almost none of the plot points connect at all. Basically some people knew some people and therefore Bush killed JKF!?!? ???Ever since JFK was killed - a great deal of Americans have wondered whether it was a lone gunman or a vast conspiracy. There is an entire industry based on this question.Perhaps it was the CIA and the military industrial complex - or hit men from the Italian mafia who felt betrayed by the Irish Kennedy's - or maybe LBJ - or maybe it was just one lone guy with a gun!I call tell you this - anyone who thinks this movie is true - that Bush has so much power he pulled all of these strings - is an idiot. It's trendy to link old man Bush was a master manipulator behind so much stuff - because Bush was powerful and his name shows up in a lot of places. I am sure Bush did some bad stuff - but be the man who killed JFK? Stupid.

Tcarts76 This is a film that will have all the tin foil hat crowd all up in arms. It's proof that stupid has no bounds. I always have to laugh at conspiracy theories that idiots come up with to hate Bush. People that were born before the end of the cold war have been buying this stupidity for years. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, plain and simple. He was a mentally unstable. He was the kind of communist that communists would run from. If you ever see some of the forensic evidence and recreations.The "magic bullet" reacted just like most bullets do with that rifle. One shot took out an electrical cable. The car was a parade car so Kennedy was elevate. All reputable forensic investigations say the Warren Commission got it right. Please stop believing in magical unicorns. This film is best watched by people that need a good laugh. As far as Bush goes, idiots come up with theories of some evil plot because they are to stupid to think for themselves and look at reality. The real problem with Bush the elder was that he didn't get a second term. The whole "New World Order" and "Shining light on the hill" wasn't some corporate conspiracy. The fact is that the guy ran the CIA before being Vice President. His term came when the Cold War ended. This "new world order" conspiracy is bunk and what he was really saying is that we did business with and backed some really bad people to keep us safe. Now that the Soviet Union was out of the game, we could start to make things right, and better for everyone. That is why he went after Noriega and Saddam. CNN and Ted Turner, big anti-war nut jobs cause Saddam to be left in place. Had that not been the case, the world would be a much better place.