More on movie “Gates of Hell”: When black extremists learn Planned Parenthood’s secret agenda to exterminate their race
Carder posted a trailer last week about the upcoming provocative pro-life movie, Gates of Hell.
Some commenters expressed concern about violence in the film. In response, the film’s producer, Molotov Mitchell, posted another film trailer on my Facebook page with the comment:
Molotov here. Gates of Hell does not promote violence. It’s a fictional film about how a handful of extremists react to Planned Parenthood’s extermination of black Americans. For gun-shy pro-lifers, here’s another (less violent) clip:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MOPDXbiyQU&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
I know Molotov. Molotov filmed the viral video Kill and Destroy in 2008 (wow, up to 2.5 million views), which featured me relaying my firsthand experience with pro-abortion/pro-infanticide Barack Obama, then a presidential candidate.
Molotov is my kind of on-the-edge. Sit tight. African Americans need to learn the white supremacist plan, spearheaded by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, to exterminate their race after they were no longer needed for slavery. This film looks like a way to make inroads.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I’m going to get flack for this, I know, so let me preface with a few caveats. 1. I think it’s clearly true that black people disproportionately obtain abortions and are therefore disproportionately affected by abortion. 2. I think that there are elements of racism and classsism that run among those that support abortion (some more overt than others). They think there is a social benefit to eliminating the proliferation of these groups 3. Both of these facts should be emphasized to black people (and other disproportionately targeted groups) b/c it is the insidious truth of the abortion industry.
Having said that, I do not believe and I have never seen evidence of a genocidal plot by planned parenthood or others to use abortion to exterminate black people. The vast majority of pro-abortion people see abortion as a “good” – it gives women ‘control’ over their lives and a way to eliminate a ‘problem’. They push abortion in poor neighborhoods (which will be disproportionately inhabited by minorities) b/c those women are more susceptible to their sales pitch that a pregnancy is a dire, life ending problem and more likely to buy their ‘good’ as a solution. These women tend to have less resources and be more vulnerable to the sort of mentality that often leads to abortion.
Ok that’s it. Be gentle.
Do we have an idea of the venue this will be released? Internet? DVD? Movie Theaters?
CT, have you ever watched “Maafa 21”?
Amber, see previous post about release information.
Thanks!
There’s an inaccuracy in one of the titles onscreen. Planned Parenthood was not an “abortion agency” when it was founded. It was a birth control organization.
In fact, Margaret Sanger, as far as I know, never publicly advocated for abortion, although given some of her statements about how “the kindest thing a poor family does for one of its children is to kill it” she probably would have loved to. Planned Parenthood didn’t begin performing abortions until it began to be legalized around 1970. True, it would be hard to get all of that onscreen at once. . .
I think the writer of this film definitely saw Maafa21. . .
Jill I have not. I’ve only seen clips from it. I do want to see it. I guess I just find it hard to believe that there’s something in this movie that I haven’t seen or read about somewhere else that would change my mind, but I suppose the only way to put that to rest definitively is to see the movie. Is there a way to see it without buying the DVD that you know of?
To say that Margaret Sanger did not “publicly advocate for abortion”, I think is correct. However, she did publicly advocate for the extermination of people of races, other than white….so what is the difference in the method. It is all rooted in murder of those of color and it is all an evil that planned parenthood was founded on and continues to advocate, every day with abortion. They found an ‘acceptable’ way to kill off blacks and if they think they are ‘helping’ women, I would ask how they are helping all those baby girls in the womb that are dead now.
CT, you can watch Maafa 21 on youtube.
Nice so a movie that misrepresents the facts around Margret Sanger and targets specifically Planned Parenthood Clinics for violence…
Just remember your support of this factually inaccurate hate film when the next bomb goes off or the next doctor is shot. Remember that you supported this racist hate propaganda.
Seriously, is this what Jesus was talking about? Revenge killings for a perceived crime? Is this the message the Pro-life movement is trying to promote, or is this more like the Scott Roder incident where you say you disagree with the violence but still support criminal and his actions as long as they are against abortion providers?
So I guess your view is “Stop abortion at all costs” no matter who gets killed in the violence that follows. Don’t think for one second that Pro-choice people are going to continue to take this violence lying down. That stuff is over. Doctors are buying guns and flak jackets as are the other clinic staff members. They will be shooting back next time. If you guys want to continue to push and promote this line reasoning that says violence is a valid “weapon” in the “abortion war” then be prepared to start losing some of your people as well. Up until now it has just been the Pro-choice side that has been taking all the violence, murder, and bombings. The fact that this type of anti-choice LIE can be made into a movie and held up by pro-lifers as some sort of call to arms makes me want to buy a bullet proof vest myself and wear it in protest and remembrance of all the people who have been the victims of pro-life violence.
I have listed over and over all the names and circumstances of the violence aimed at pro-choice people and the list is very long. Pro-choice people are sick of always being on the receiving end of the violence. This type of propaganda is just the fuel to spark a huge bonfire of violence and if that happens there will be causalities on both sides of the argument not just the pro-choice side.
Make no mistake, this is not a threat, this is a prediction.
Biggz, quite a few pro-lifers here apparently do not support this film and have expressed concern about its depiction of violence against abortion clinics?
Do you even read what others say before commenting? Ever?
Littlz you need to slowly back away from your computer. You are about to lose it. Lori’s question is spot on about whether you read first. Don’t worry we see through your little tirade which is sort of a veiled threat but you did try to back out at the last minute. Most of the prolifers, myself included, have expressed concern about this movie but that doesn’t matter to you. You are busy trying to slander prolifers for your own twisted purposes. Mods continue to be vigilant about what is posted here, maybe he should be reported. Very interesting quotes “ don’t think for one second pro-choice people are going to continue to take this violence lying down”. Jill and mods be very careful.
Futuristic thinking for sure.
Let’s just hope that the United States as we know it will actually make it to 2016.
Lori has her facts straight – so I hope this movie gets it right. I am still unhappy about the violence message. This clip is better, but does not make the movie a good one. We’ll see.
Jill,
I have grave reservations about this one. It isn’t the message of Black Genocide that I fear may spark violence. Truth is truth. PP operates 78% of their facilities in neighborhoods occupied by a demographic representing 12% of the population. In marketing, that’s called “Targeting”.
I got a bad gut feel when I saw the statement in both trailers that the Zulu terrorist group (named for the most feared and admired of all African warriors) planned revenge for 40 years of Black Genocide.
Our inner-city neighborhoods are filled with fatherless young black men (75% out-of-wedlock birth rate), who already have a disproportionately high rate of violent crime and incarceration. There is a palpable rage that drives so many of these boys and young men who have no effective older male mentoring. And now comes a film that holds out terrorist tactics and revenge. It’s not good, and I fear that innocent people will die as a consequence of whipping up such passions and pairing them with terrorist tactics and violence.
Then there is the fundraising issue at the movie’s website. The gift for $5,000+ is:
$5,000 OR MORE
All of the above + an actual prop w/display case (gun, vest, video game case, etc. first come first
Any violence attached to this film (and there will be) will make Scott Roeder’s murder of Tillman look like a tea party by comparison, and set back all of the good work of Alveda King and the national black team at least ten years.
I’ve blogged extensively about Sanger and Black Genocide, but I draw the line at anything that will whip up the masses. We’ve got PP on the ropes. I predict that this film will stall many legislative actions, and even reverse many. This simply does not reflect pro-lifer’s fantasies or wishful, futuristic thinking.
A question for Molotov:
Does this second, less violent clip mean that the violence in the first will be left on the cutting room floor? If not, I am not assuaged by a clip showing some down time between violent scenes that will be left in.
If Michael Moore can make a film called “Bowling for Columbine” why can’t some other filmmakers make a film about a fictional group? This is an issue that is current in our culture and why not be able to make movies or write books about it?
Does everything have to be perfectly agreeable and flawlessly made? Might we not just watch and see what the film is? You know, I love being active in the pro-life movement, but we can’t do everything on some kind of committee. We can’t sit on every creative piece that comes out. The point of this project is that it isn’t the usual pro-life faces making the usual presentation. This is someone else’s point of view, someone else’s creative project. It’s a fictional what-if. I don’t think we’re going to end up in a situation like the fictional one described any more than I think that vampires are real and fall in love with high school girls.
Some of you Christians might remember the prophets railing against Babylon. They imagined it was going to go down in catastrophic defeat, amid flames and devastation. Do you know or remember what really happened to Babylon? It was gradually abandoned. Gradually. Its festivals became less and less attended. Without strong leadership, it’s prosperity faded. Babylon’s enemies eventually entered the gates in peace and without a drop of bloodshed. Think about that.
ninek, Are you referring to Isaiah 13? Where does it talk about a social migration from Babylon? In my reading of the scripture any reduction in migration to the city was likely due to the gruesome slaughter of the Babylonians. Is there a certain passage you are referring to?
John,
I was making a completely different point with Jill. I’m not wasting my time with trolls who can’t engage the truth. I would actually have more respect for you if you tried to defend Sanger’s Negro Project. Get well soon.
I’m referring to the historical truth. The Bible is full of condemnations of Babylon, and understandably so since they drove Judah out of Jerusalem, taking the best and the brightest to serve foreign masters and destroying the temple.
But the actual history is this: the city of Babylon gradually fell. Isaiah himself didn’t know how it was going to turn out; he assumed it would be fire and conquest. It’s fall was peaceful, historically. It’s leader retired for about 10 years to a rural location far from the big city. He wasn’t there to officiate over all the (pagan) religious festivals so people stopped travelling to the big city for those festivals. Without the religious tourism, Babylon’s economy suffered, and when it was conquered, not a single Babylonian was killed.
I’ll look through my notes and if I can I’ll post my source here.
“Prolifers” haven’t a clue.
Can’t find the page/edition but I’m pretty sure Eusebius is my source for the historical reference to Babylon, The History of the Church by Eusebius.
John, I’d rather be called clueless than support the murder of developing human beings (I don’t support the murder of any human beings for that matter, no matter what stage of life).
Thanks harmonfam4 – I will watch it!
Just because you can’t stomach the violence of this film does not get you off the hook for it’s repercussions guys.
The entire basis of this film is a anti-choice lie, If you subscribe to the black genocide conspiracy then you are supporting this film.
You can’t say “I don’t support the birthers but you know I really do think Obama was born in Kenya…”
If you support the lie then you support the violence that results from the misrepresentation of that lie.
Like I said I am not threatening anyone I am predicting the future of this debate if it continues to go down this “obscure the facts to make a political statement that I agree with” path.
I get the feeling that this next year is going to be politically ugly…
Fiction, kids, it’s fiction. Deal.
OK, I’ve thought a bit more about this since my previous comment on an earlier post about this movie.
Thought experiment (and maybe a question for the director of the movie):
The Zulu gunman enters a restaurant where an abortionist is having lunch. Weapon is out. Also in the restaurant is well-known pro-life priest Father Frank Pavone, who sees what is about to happen. Father Frank steps between the gunman and the abortionist and says, “You can’t do this! In the name of God, stop!”
What happens next? I have an idea of what *should* happen next, but what happens in the movie is important.
@Biggz:
To allege that the only violence perpetrated in the ongoing battle for the lives of poor babies (many minorities) is against pro-choice folks is simply disingenuous. Have you seen a partial-birth aborted fetus? Would you not describe that as violence?
The prophets were not wrong; that would mean they were false prophets, or else God is a liar. No, the prophets simply weren’t talking about the Babylon you think they were talking about. They were talking about the same Babylon mentioned in Revelation 17.