Et un autre Oscar en vue pour le merveilleux producteur de films Gerald R. Molen pour son travail absolument génial! (C’est du moins l’avis de nos amis Birthers juifs, Phil Berg et l’Israélienne Orly Taitz Averbuch.)
Une chance que le parti républicain, le parti des bons chrétiens conservateurs américains, est là pour tous nous sauver des griffes d’Obama, du Socialisme/Communisme, de l’Islam et de l’anti-impérialisme!
Merci mon Dieu, Romney, ce grand ami et ancien partenaire d’affaires de Bibi Netanyahou, va sauver l’Amérique! Peu importe si cela prend une guerre contre la Chine ou la Russie pour y arriver!
By Michael Collins Piper
There’s a not-so-secret mission behind 2016: Obama’s America—neoconservative fixture Dinesh D’Souza’s new documentary about Barack Obama—but most theater-goers will miss it. D’Souza and his sponsors masked their agenda in an appealing patriotic and pro-American guise.
That a film—ostensibly of a “conservative” bent—should receive such heavy-duty promotion by Hollywood and the major media and widespread distribution in theaters—tightly-controlled, interlocking industries run by a handful of wealthy Zionist families and allied corporations—should be the first tip-off something is amiss.
That the film’s producer, Gerald Molen, is a longtime close associate of movie titan Steven Spielberg, is more than interesting. Molen won an Academy Award as producer of Spielberg’s Holocaust extravaganza, Schindler’s List, considered by some to be one of the most egregious propaganda films of all time.
That aside, let it be said up front: While directly aimed at destroying Obama’s presidency, D’Souza’s film is actually a purposeful frontline defense of —and advocacy for—the New World Order. You read that correctly.
Founded on relentless denunciation of what D’Souza calls Obama’s purported “anti-colonialism,” the film is carefully-crafted linguistic posturing (propaganda, that is) advancing the argument in favor of the 200 years of imperialism and global intervention by the Rothschild banking dynasty.
Naturally, D’Souza never says such a thing nor does he mention the Rothschilds. But his film is precisely that.
It’s no coincidence Lady Lynn deRothschild—one of the primary figures of the Rothschild empire—is one of Obama’s most energetic critics today.
Through their domination of the so-called “British” empire in the 19thCentury, the Rothschilds looted the planet and in modern times—as The New Babylon has documented—their power is entrenched in America through control of the Federal Reserve money monopoly holding sway over global finance.
The film proudly speaks of “American exceptionalism.” That sounds good, but, in fact, that theme—as AFP has explained in the past—is hard-core internationalism, putting forth our United States as world policeman for the predatory plutocratic interests. There is nothing“nationalist” about it whatsoever and it’s absolutely central to the New World Order agenda.
The term “anti-colonialism”—as used in the film—sounds mysterious and sinister (as it was intended to sound) and is traced back to the opinions of the president’s Kenyan father, adding a further “alien”dimension.
However the truth is that “anti-colonialism” has always been a cornerstone of opposition to Rothschild financial imperialism—as old and as American as apple pie—and its been the foundation of American nationalism going back to Thomas Jefferson and represented by such populist firebrands as William Jennings Bryan, Ignatius Donnelly, Father Charles Coughlin, Huey Long—the list of American anti-colonialists goes on and on.
D’Souza stumbles explaining why American Revolutionaries were “good” even though they were anti-colonialists, but D’Souza knows his audience is historically ignorant, with no hands-on experience with colonialism or imperialism. D’Souza hints, but never says, an“anti-colonialist” might be a communist—and that’s enough to scare good Americans.
The subtle underlying message of the film is made clear—to those in the know—in the opening stages where D’Souza enunciates his first major complaint: that Obama ordered the removal of a bust of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill from the White House—an act something many Americans (particularly those of German and Irish descent) would endorse.
As British historian David Irving documented in his monumental Churchill’s War, the bankrupt English politician admired by D’Souza was rescued from his mess by a clique of Jewish financiers known as“the Focus” who then controlled Churchill, sponsoring his rise to power and his drive for war against forces challenging Rothschild domination of Europe.
That Indian-born D’Souza would herald Churchill is puzzling since Churchill was responsible for policies causing the starvation of some 3 million Indians during World War II. But D’Souza’s enthusiasm for Rothschild imperialism apparently excuses that.
Another significant signal of D’Souza’s objectives comes when he bemoans the fact Obama backs Argentina over Britain in the dispute over ownership of the Falkland Islands. Suggesting this is a betrayal of America’s “ally,” D’Souza doesn’t mention that one of the most beloved conservative icons, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), was a hardline supporter of the Argentine. Former readers of The Spotlight will recall that nationalist newspaper supporting Helms on the issue.
D’Souza complains the Occupy Wall Street movement voices what he says are Obama’s own themes: “denunciations of the rich, of the big bad corporations, of American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, of America’s support for Israel, of globalization and free trade.”Those themes are—almost to a point—concerns of AFP readers—none of whom are “anti-American” or “pro-communist.”
Not surprisingly, D’Souza references Obama’s ties to communist theoretician Frank Davis (a mentor from Obama’s childhood [Actually, Davis is Obama’s father, not the Kenyan under whose name his birth certificate was written when he was born in Kenya. – Tony B.]), to Obama’s longtime Chicago pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright and to Vietnam-era war protestor Bill Ayers. Even here, there’s more than meets the eye.
In his book, Obama’s America(a companion to the film) D’Souza admits that “Davis’s communist sympathies were driven largely by his anti-colonialism and that “for Wright, the basic enemy was and always has been imperialism.” Likewise with Ayers, also said to be a critic of Israel.
In truth, Davis’s positions that concern D’Souza were no different from those of a host of unabashed American nationalists of the 20th-Century. D’Souza finds it outrageous Davis said Winston Churchill wanted the world to be under “Anglo-American imperialism and global control”and that Davis opposed the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after World War II.
Yet, those views, in fact, reflected the thinking of famed anti-communist Chicago Tribune publisher Robert R. McCormick—an unswerving advocate of America First—and many congressional Republicans and GOP activists who fought against the plan.
Regarding Wright’s infamous call “God Damn America”—highlighted in the film—D’Souza lets the cat out of the bag in his book. It turns out Wright’s comments were the final flourish of a sermon—interestingly titled “The Day of Jerusalem’s Fall”—in which Wright said things that could have been right out of AFP or any broadcast of Internet trumpet Alex Jones: “The government lied about Pearl Harbor . . . . The government lied about the Gulf of Tonkin.”
In other instances, Wright raised questions as to whether the U.S. government told the truth about 9-11 and pointed out, as has AFP, that there are questions about the origins of AIDS, which some believe was the product of secret experimentation by military agencies. Wright is also a critic of Israel, and that upsets D’Souza.
Eager for an attack on Iran, D’Souza is concerned Obama is pressuring Israel against it. D’Souza contends: “Once Obama is re-elected, he can then say to Israel: if you now use military force, America will not support you,” a point that concerns many supporters of Israel now backing Mitt Romney.
To buttress his claim Obama advances the Muslim agenda, D’Souza brings on Zionist propagandist Daniel Pipes—who has attacked AFP—as his“source.”
And while D’Souza actually portrays Obama working to bring about the death of America through debt, he doesn’t mention Obama’s neoconservative predecessor, George W. Bush, racked up trillions in debt waging unnecessary wars or that if Mitt Romney wins the White House and engages the United States in a venture against Iran—or some other country—the debt will spiral as never before.
The complaint that Obama prevents the drilling of domestic oil is disingenuous. For years (as informed patriots know) a serial array of presidents—Republican and Democrat (even including D’Souza’s hero, Ronald Reagan)—have stifled such drilling, a point made repeatedly for decades by writer Lindsay Williams whose work has been featured in AFP.
D’Souza also worries (correctly) about Obama’s support for foreign trade treaties at the expense of American jobs, but doesn’t mention that neoconservative giant Newt Gingrich (as Republican House Speaker) helped bring the infamous North American Free Trade Agreement into being or that most congressional Republicans and GOP candidate Mitt Romney are firmly in the outsourcing “free” trade camp whereas Obama has sometimes adhered to pressure from congressional Democrats and opposed some measures.
More could be said, but the bottom line is this: D’Souza compares Obama to British Prime Minister William Gladstone who fought Rothschild imperialism, urging England to stop meddling abroad and take care of things at home. That was a good thing—but D’Souza and the Rothschilds don’t think so.
Écoutez la connerie (« Obama=Communiste=Anti-colonialiste, etc. »). Démonstration:
VIDEO – Interview Dinesh D’Souza on Glenn Beck
CJN (lié au Congrès juif canadien) – Obama’s rabbinical supporters include BDS…
President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign on Aug. 21 announced a new initiative, “Rabbis for Obama,” consisting of more than 600 rabbis—among them Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) activists and a rabbi who…
Netanyahu’s cartoon bomb wasn’t meant for world leaders, and not even for Obama
Instead, Netanyahu was speaking over Obama’s head, directly to the president’s employer and boss: the American voter.
Republican Bob Turner, Democrat David Weprin, Senator Joe Lieberman and Mayor Ed Koch all agree, President Obama is not pro Israel.
VIDEO – ECI – THE UNITER
America Can — and Will — Survive Obama
by Michael Collins Piper
Generals or the Warmongers: American People Must Choose
by Michael Collins Piper
Americans have a stark choice and will have to take sides.
The issue is war with Iran. The battle lines are clearly drawn. Which side will you be on? Opposing war: a distinguished array of ex-diplomats, intelligence officers and former high-ranking military figures (battle-tested veterans who know war first-hand).
Among them: two retired chiefs of the U.S. Central Command, Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni and Navy Adm. William J. “Fox” Fallon.
Supporting war: Israel and itsWashington lobby, bankrolled by a clique of billionaire families and financial groups who control the mass media and who fund the networks that now dominate the Republican Party.
This past week, the anti-war group released a formal report concluding an attack on Iran could potentially spark an all-out Middle East war, driving up the price of oil and making more enemies for America around the globe.
The pro-war group argues that unless action is taken, Iran will destroy Israel. America must come to Israel’s aid, even if American civilians die in retaliatory attacks. Some “collateral damage,” prowar voices say, is worth the price of stopping Iran.
Thus far, Barack Obama seems to side with the anti-war forces.Mitt Romney—a close friend of Israeli warhawk Benjamin Netanyahu—is in the prowar camp. A lot of Americans who don’t want war—but who don’t like Obama whom they consider an ultra-liberal big spender—are supporting Romney, whose war aims will definitely bankrupt America.
The former military leaders who oppose war say stopping Iran’s nuclear aims would require “a significantly expanded air and sea war over a prolonged period of time, likely several years,” and that “occupation of Iran would require a commitment of resources and personnel greater than what the U.S. has expended over the past 10 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.”
Many backing Romney are part of the 47 percent of Americans whomRomney scoffed “believe they are victims,” entitled to things like Social Security and Medicare.
Ironically, Romney made those remarks at a gathering of pro-war plutocrats at the home of Jewish financier Marc Leder, ex-senior vice president at Lehman Bros., a Rothschild dynasty outpost on Wall Street.
A key player in what the Jewish Forward described as “a small group of Jewish private equity investors, hedge fund managers and real estate developers [playing] an outsized role in [Romney’s] fundraising efforts”— many of them former Obama supporters—Leder’s circles regularly use the concept of Jewish victimhood to advance support for Israel.
Now Americans may truly become victims—in a foolish war against Iran. Americans must choose between the generals and the warmongers.
—— Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host.
Sur ce blog: