Posts Tagged ‘Revolutionaries’

Is Obama A Secret Member Of The Muslim Brotherhood?

by John Myers on Wednesday, September 11th, 2013

This is article 1054 of 1262 in the topic International

Is Obama A Secret Member Of The Muslim Brotherhood?


It is a travesty that on the 12th anniversary of 9/11 President Barack Obama is poised to use our military to support Syrian rebels, many of whom pledge: “Death to America!”

Obama is prepared to take up arms against the Bashar Assad regime even though half of the anti-government rebels may be avid jihadists, some of whom have been busying themselves with SS-style executions of captured Syrian soldiers and attacks on Syrian Christians.

Last week, The Associated Press reported that “al-Qaida-linked fighters launched an assault on” the “Christian mountain village” of Maaloula, some 40 miles from Damascus. The rebels commandeered a mountaintop hotel and were shelling civilians, according to a nun who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Assad’s army, as brutal as it may be, had been protecting the village, whose residents speak a version of Aramaic, an ancient language that Christ is believed to have spoken.

“The stones are shaking,” a nun at Mar Takla told The AP. “We don’t know if the rebels have left or not. Nobody dares go out.”

The attacking of Christians by those supported by Obama is nothing new. It happened in Egypt. The recently overthrown Muslim Brotherhood destroyed churches and persecuted Christians. It is also an outspoken goal of some of the anti-Assad forces, including untold multitudes of al-Qaida affiliates that have entered the war and hail from as far away as Chechnya, the country of origin for the Boston bombers.

These are the same Syrian revolutionaries that Obama is risking world peace to defend with U.S. military might. The question we should ask is: Why? Some people within the Arab world think they know the answer, that Obama is a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

So tweeted Shadi Hamid, director of research at the Brookings Center in Doha, Qatar.

The allegation was printed in Egyptian newspaper Al-Wafd.

“One could hardly come up with a more explosive allegation about a U.S. president than secret membership in an Islamist group,” wrote The Blaze.

Jonathan Spyer, senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center and an Arabic speaker, talked to The Blaze about Al-Wafd’s allegation.

Spyer said Egyptians are angry at the Obama Administration for not taking a stand against the Muslim Brotherhood. “There is some degree of justification” in the accusation that Obama is pro-Muslim Brotherhood, according to Spyer, because the president has not condemned the group.

The truth is that Obama has come right to the edge of endorsing the Muslim Brotherhood. Last week, in a story titled “‘My Administration is Proud to be Your Partner’, Obama Tells Muslim Brotherhood Pro-Hamas Group,” Frontpage Mag wrote:

Obama taped a statement congratulating ISNA [Islamic Society of North America], an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hamas Holy Land funding case, on its anniversary, telling the Muslim Brotherhood terror-linked front group, “My administration is proud to be your partner.”

ISNA’s president had met twice with Obama and Valerie Jarrett, making this a high end meeting. And Jarrett had addressed the ISNA convention back in 2009.

“Muslim Americans are integral part of our character and history and we rely on your innovation and entrepreneurship to help keep moving this country forward,” Obama told ISNA members.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Man who escaped Castro’s Cuba speaks at Oregon gun control hearing: ‘You people don’t know what freedom is because you never lost it’

by Doug Powers on Monday, April 8th, 2013

This is article 412 of 603 in the topic Gun Rights

Forty years ago, Manuel Martinez escaped communist Cuba and became an American citizen. Last week, Martinez spoke extemporaneously at a hearing in the Oregon state legislature, where debate took place over four proposed gun bills.

Video and partial transcript below (full transcript here):

My name is Manuel Martinez. Born in Cuba. American Citizen for more than 40 years. I oppose any manipulation, any regulation or disruption of the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. In 1957 a Revolution … individuals … malicious individuals, masquerading as Democrats, revolutionaries, established a regime … a dictatorial regime … in my nation. Called Communism, Socialism, Stalinism, Marxism, and whatever other named -ism you want to put on it. The reason why it was done was to take away the guns from the People. The right of the People to wear guns. That is a God-given Right. It’s not given by anybody. It’s not given by any group. It’s the same thing as freedom, which is a God-given Right. And no one, absolutely no one, has the authority to take it away. To cease to defend the Second Amendment, and my God-given Right of freedom, will cease only with my death.

I’ve been through it. I’ve been there. You people don’t know what freedom is because you never lost it.

(rest of transcript here)

Dan Sandini, who was at the hearing, writes:

I can assure you even the Liberal hacks in the press pool were visibly shaken. The expressions on the Senators faces … well they spoke for themselves (I’ve included a few stll shots here). I’d wager no one in room did not feel a chill up their spine, or a tear in the corner of their eye, as Martinez described scenes of sons being torn from their mothers arms, and shot dead in the street, because they lacked the means to protect themselves. He spoke from the heart: no notes or teleprompter required.

Too bad Mr. Martinez and this former Tiananmen Square activist aren’t available to speak at every one of the hearings around the country.

(h/t CainTV and Weasel Zippers)

Go straight to Post

Apologizing to Our Enemies

by Alan Caruba on Friday, September 14th, 2012

This is article 333 of 805 in the topic Terrorism

All Presidents are hostages to events. It is, however, the manner in which they respond that shapes their outcome.

By the afternoon of September 11, the Obama administration scrambled to disavow a statement to the assault on the U.S. embassy in Cairo that had been issued by the embassy.

The statement said, “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims—as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”

“Misguided individuals”?

“The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect views of the United States government” an unnamed administration official told Politico.

But the statement did reflect the Obama administration’s views as expressed repeatedly over the years. Indeed, in condemning the killing of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and his staff, issued on September 12, was repeated in President Obama’s statement. “While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the senseless violence that took the lives of these public services.”

The attacks, deliberately timed to coincide with the eleventh anniversary of the worst attack on the U.S. homeland since Pearl Harbor on 9/11, the administration made no effort to connect them. It made no effort to explain to Americans that this nation is at war with Islam, a war made manifest in Afghanistan following 9/11, pursued against the dictator Saddam Hussein, and which the President himself has been personally carrying out with drone attacks on al Qaeda leaders in Yemen and in Pakistan; a war personified in the ten-year effort to find and kill Osama bin Laden.

It was a war declared by Iran when, in 1979, Islamist revolutionaries scaled the walls of the American embassy in Tehran and took our diplomats hostage for 444 days until releasing them the same day Ronald Reagan took the oath of office for his first term in office. He would later order an attack on Moammar Gaddafi, the dictator of Libya after he sponsored terrorist attacks carried out against American targets in Germany and the bombing of an airliner over Great Britain carrying Americans. Gaddafi sued for peace.

If Obama had announced that the proposed funding to Egypt would not be sent, nor similar support for the nascent Libyan government that replaced Gaddafi then, at the very least, a message would have been sent that we will not support governments that stand aside when such attacks occur.

Obama’s “diplomacy” with the Middle East has been a message of apology.

All this is reminiscent of former President Carter’s failed attempts to assert American power and outrage. For all the criticism of President Bush, after 9/11 he swiftly authorized the bombing of al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Obama has been trying to open lines of communication with the Taliban instead of steadfastly pursuing a policy of destroying them. In this regard, ignoring Pakistan’s support for them has been a failure of spectacular misjudgment.

Never forget that Osama bin Laden was found and killed in Pakistan where he had received sanctuary, living barely a mile from that nation’s equivalent of our West Point academy.

Contrast that with Republican candidate, Mitt Romney’s response to the Libyan killings.

Click to continue reading “Apologizing to Our Enemies”
Go straight to Post

The Great Internet Blackout

by Daniel Greenfield on Monday, January 23rd, 2012

This is article 22 of 45 in the topic Cyber space

“This is our world now… the world of the electron and the switch, the beauty of the baud.” For people who grew up at a certain time with a thick glowing monitor casting light on their faces these were the closing words of their own Declaration of Independence. For those people the internet was not a layout of graphics and flash videos blaring from every website, but amalgams of text. The internet before the internet was an elitist place, like Linux, it was part puzzle and part love of taking intangible things apart and putting them back together again.

Like most revolutionaries they were doomed to be made irrelevant by the consequences of the forces that they had set in motion. The curiosity that was their code of honor has been overtaken by the world that they helped open up. And that world is an amazing place.

Freedom of information is no longer an idealistic slogan, it’s a commonplace reality. So commonplace that it’s hardly worth mentioning. People once fought and died to protect libraries. Now you can take every single library within a hundred miles of where you live, whether it’s a metropolis or a small town, and dangle it from the end of your keychain as a flash drive. Books, articles, vast troves of information, even classified diplomatic cables. Everything is available.

While the back ends of the system have become more complex, the end user experience has become trivially simple. With the iPad and the Kindle Fire, and Android and Windows 8 spreading the experience across generic tablets, the user experience comes down to touching the screen of a locked down system which is actually a disguised storefront to sell the user content through a carefully controlled, but fun to use environment. That is an overstatement, but it’s also the trend. It has been a long journey, but we finally have the technology that movies told us to expect wrapped in a simple package without any of the depth or complexity. Without most of the freedom that was at the core of how the technology got started.

The economics of the internet are based around it as a vehicle for the delivery of goods and services. That transformation is slowly destroying American retail, it is doing so at a snail’s place as big box retailers struggle to adapt, but the shopping mall and the big box store are still dinosaurs and their day is swiftly coming. Retailers who sold anything that can be digitized and delivered over the internet are already gone. Music stories, video rental places and now bookstores are vanishing into the past. An era when we get many of our goods out of CAD/CAM printers is not entirely inconceivable.

Virgin, Blockbuster and Borders have been sucked into the vortex as the middlemen in the marketplace that the marketplace no longer needed. The megacorporations which actually produce the songs, movies and books have been making their last stand since the nineties and their last stand invariably involves lawyers and lobbyists, rather than intelligently adapting to the marketplace. It is hard to feel sorry for these massive behemoths stomping and roaring about, bellowing about thievery everywhere.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Smoke and Mirrors

by Dr. Robert Owens on Friday, December 2nd, 2011

This is article 321 of 529 in the topic Government Spending

Like a sleight-of-hand-artist on a busy street with a briefcase that turns into a table, three walnuts shells and a pea the perpetually re-elected and their town criers in the Corporations Once Known as the mainstream Media appear to be perennially able to fool the perpetually distracted by pulling a metaphorical quarter out of their ear.

I know a professional revolutionary. We grew up together. He has correctly diagnosed America’s disease as a corporate cult in a symbiotic relationship with a corrupt government. He deftly outlines the general theory, although not the specifics of how crony capitalists and political hacks have crafted a system wherein money laundering has become national policy. The political hacks fleece the sheeple through taxes and inflation. They give the money to their accomplices in the flimflam corporations who funnel huge chunks of cash back to the hacks for re-election. Every few years the sheeple rouse themselves out of their media induced coma long enough to be herded to the polls to vote for more of the same.

Yes, the professional revolutionaries and their government educated followers have correctly diagnosed the disease. However, they have prescribed poison instead of medicine. Their answer to the curse of Corporatism’s National Socialism is less nationalism and more socialism. Since corporatism has built a coffin our body politic cannot seem to claw its way out of, he prescribes cutting out the crony capitalists and giving the whole operation to the political hacks. In other words if the black shirts have ruined the country let’s try the reds. That would be as transparent as fighting the most horrendous war in human history because Hitler attempted to pull Poland into his freedom smothering embrace and then giving Poland to Stalin.

Headlines and talking heads scream for days, “The Super Committee cannot fail or the sky will fall!” Endless hours in the 24 hour news cycle are devoted to debating, “Will the Super Committee succeed or will they fail?” Meanwhile most of the sheeple are consumed with concern about the NBA strike, a celebrity drowning thirty years ago, or was Kim’s wedding a set-up all along. Then we’re told he Super Committee failed accompanied by endless squabbling about who caused the failure.

It is all nothing but Kabuki, a form of Japanese drama based on popular legends and characterized by elaborate costumes, stylized acting.

Remember how the Super Committee became so super? It didn’t come from another planet with a red sun and lower gravity. It was instead the Frankenstein created as the cover for another rise in the debt ceiling. The Tea Party had just made a Herculean effort in the 2010 elections and achieved an historical sweep of the House of Representatives. Over sixty newly minted congressmen owed their seat at the table of plenty to the greatest grassroots movement America has seen in generations. They had campaigned on changing the culture of corruption in Washington, stopping the deficit spending, severing the cord to the crony capitalists, and paying down the national debt.

Before they could even arrive the Republican leadership colluded with a recently humiliated inexperienced president and a recently repudiated Democratic leadership to extend the Bush tax cuts in exchange for more spending in the lamest of all lame duck sessions.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Expel the UC Davis Occupiers

by Donald Douglas on Thursday, November 24th, 2011

This is article 113 of 195 in the topic Marches/Protests/Riots

From David Horowitz, “Don’t Pepper Spray Them: Expel Them“:

A bunch of students who think they’re revolutionaries formed a mob at UC Davis the other day, blocked a public walkway and refused to move when campus police requested them to do so. As participants in the Occupy Wall Streets on American neighborhoods and now campuses, these are people who support violence against a democratically elected government at home and terrorism abroad. They are friends and comrades of Jew-haters both domestic and foreign. You will notice the Keffiyehs in the video — but the record of the Occupiers is quite clear — on the matter of Jews, on the matter of violence and on the matter of hatred for their own country.

To be a “revolutionary” in a democratic country is to be a self-conceived and self-declared outlaw. That’s who these students are. Of course the may not realize who they are since the adults around them have conspired not to hold them accountable for their actions. But that’s who they are. I have long been of the opinion that the Sixties might have been avoided if administrators had responded to the illegal occupations of college campuses by expelling the culprits responsible. I see the same mistake being made now by the administrators at UC Davis who in the midst of what is — for them — a public relations nightmare, are groveling before these enemies of civility, decency, public order and the fundamental principles which sustain our Republic.

These demonstrators, these haters of our civic order, have forfeited the right to be subsidized by California taxpayers and to occupy privileged spots at our public universities. They need to be taught a lesson as much as our society needs to learn a lesson.Treating adults as children is bad policy; treating the enemies of American democracy as children and “idealists” can be suicidal. If we don’t defend ourselves, there is no one else who will.

Deep Commune Off

Image Credit: Serr8d’s Cutting Edge.

Go straight to Post

“Democratic” Egypt to Ban Bikinis, Beer and King Tut

by Doug Giles on Sunday, August 28th, 2011

This is article 24 of 1262 in the topic International

Remember when every Ron Burgundy out there was giddy as a schoolgirl telling us that Egyptian “freedom fighters” were getting rid of that old meanie Mubarak and were headed for a “democracy” in the land of Pharaoh? I sure do.

I particularly remember the reporters selling us that smack during the outset of the Arab Spring: “Revolutionaries,” they called the Egyptian dissidents-veritable “mutineers from Mubarak’s mayhem, sick of servitude and longing for liberty, just like Paul Revere!” They flung that noise, or something to that effect, at us with goggle-eyed glee each day for weeks on end.

Personally, I never bought this “freedom fighter” bull shiitake we were all being sold, and I said so from day one of this uprising on my amazing show, Indeed, this “democratic” thang reeked of nutty radicals to me, and I believed it had zilch to do with “Egyptian young folk just wanting to live la Vida Loca.”

That said, however, I must confess that I did question myself as to whether or not I was being too harsh on the newscasters’ spiel and the motivations of the “freedom fighters.” Perhaps I had become too much of a jaded skeptic when it came to the jacked-up scat in Cairo.

That personal inventory regarding the wrongness of my perturbation with the “democratic revolt” lasted about two days. I believe I second-guessed my naughty heart right up until two hundred “democracy seekers” gang raped CBS’s foreign correspondent Lara Logan. I thought that was a strange thing for lovers of democracy to do.

Oh, another thing that made me think that maybe I was dialed into what was truly going down was the Muslim Brotherhood started popping up all over the place, gaining control over the “secular” Egyptian military.

And one more thing that ended my brutal introspection was that after Mubarak got deposed, the “new democracy” reestablished relations with Iran and Hamas and officially told Israel to blank off.

It was at that point in time that I ceased my second-guessing and formally realized that I am a genius. Radicals hijacked Egypt, and the Egyptians who truly long for freedom-at least as defined by sane standards-are now more SOL than they were under Hosni’s boot.

And lastly, this past week the “freedom folks” in Egypt have put forth their liberty legislation that includes bans on bikinis, mixed bathing on beaches, and drinking beer in public-and they’re even yapping about getting rid of the Sphinx, the pyramids, and other ancient Egyptian archaeological wonders.

Call me weird, but that doesn’t sound like liberty to me.

Go straight to Post

Time for an American Spring

by Daniel Greenfield on Monday, August 22nd, 2011

This is article 21 of 1300 in the topic 2012 Elections

Stopped clocks are right twice a day, and Al Gore can be too, assuming you use a generous definition of “day” and “twice”… and “right”.

Long after the media had shamefacedly retired the “Arab Spring” in the same closet where they keep the Mondale presidency and Grateful Dead memorabilia– Al Gore brought it out with impeccable timing on an episode of “Where on TV is Keith Olbermann”.

We need to have an American Spring,” Gore said. “You know, the Arab Spring—the nonviolent part of it isn’t finished yet—but we need to have an American Spring, a kind of an American Tahrir Square.

And this time no CBS reporters will have to be sexually assaulted. But the Goracle of Montecito, like a stopped clock, got the time wrong. The American Spring was in 2010. It was in the roar of Tea Party crowds gathering for popular protests around the nation. And the role of Mubarak was played his distant cousin, Barry.

You can always tell the revolutionaries from the tyrants by seeing which group issues bulletins about the dangers of extremism, and which tells the government to go to hell. Last year a lot of people told the government to go to hell… and that worries the government.

Janet Napolitano wasn’t issuing bulletins about the dangers of right wing extremists for her health, but because her boss and his cronies are terrified that an electoral revolution might shake them off and their legions of parasites as completely as a dog in a flea bath. Best to make the alternative seem as scary and dangerous as possible, before Janet, Barry and Joe are out of office and working as lobbyists for some company that wants to send pesticides into space.

Gore’s proposal for yet another grass roots movement echoes phony pro-government forces in Egypt. Sure the Coffee Party wasn’t riding camels into Tahrir Square, while waving swords around, but that’s only because you can’t do all that while sipping a latte. The intention was the same. Shut down popular protests before the peasants start getting too many ideas about their station. And it hasn’t worked yet.

The Goracle’s grass roots movement, like the Coffee Party, has no purpose except to pressure Obama to go further left. That’s like forming a grass roots movement to convince Bush to wear more cowboy hats. It only exists to endorse the authorities, while pretending to be revolutionary. An uprising of cats dressed up as mice. “Workers and Peasants of Capitol Hill Unite, You Have Nothing to Lose But Your Government Jobs.”

When Obama picked up an economic crisis and carried it into the Great Depression end zone, doing his touchdown dance to celebrate killing more jobs than every human resources department in the country combined, the American Spring was inevitable. And it came.

The media has played the same role in America that it did in Egypt, touting the pro-regime line and warning about the dangers of crazy mobs hopped up on guns, bibles and racism who want to overthrow the benevolent government of Hussein I, Prince of Chicago, Earl of Oahu, Duke of Nairobi and Great Steward of Jakarta.

And the public has listened to them bleat with one ear, while storming the barricades with the other.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The Last Refuge of Liberty

by Daniel Greenfield on Tuesday, July 5th, 2011

This is article 19 of 147 in the topic History

When Madame Roland, the moderate French Republican, was a prisoner in the hands of the radicals, she wrote; “Oh my friends. Heaven grant that you may reach the United States– that last refuge of liberty– in safety!” Two-hundred years later, her “last refuge of liberty” is under siege by the same power hungry fanatics who turned the French Revolution into a reign of terror.

The modern Western republics were born out of military or political revolutions against a hereditary nobility. These revolutions led to republics, but did not allow the revolutionaries to replace them with a program of state controlled equality for very long. The most notorious example of such state control in France fell after a bloody reign of terror. The revolutionaries then moved on to the second phase of their program, targeting the democratization of wealth through free enterprise that had made a revolution against a hereditary nobility possible.

The second revolution never fully took hold outside of the USSR, but some elements of its agenda were incorporated by even conservative governments in the form of subsidies, social safety nets, worker representation and price controls. By the 21st century, the second revolution has prevailed in policy, but not in the absolutism of its aims. Most countries have accepted some degree of socialism to the degree that they no longer recognize it as such. And the prosperity of industrial democracy neutered the second revolution. The subsidies became part of the cost of doing business. But another revolution was still waiting.

The third revolution demanded state control over social life in the name of equality. These revolutions are often described in terms of civil rights, human rights, etc. They did not accomplish all their goals, but they allowed the revolutionaries to overlay a new thicker layer of state control in the name of social equality, over the existing layer of state controlled economic equality.

While none of the revolutions were able to impose the absolute state controlled equality that they sought, they made significant gains with the second and third revolutions. Winning a seat at the table allowed them to reshape society through the bureaucracy that had been created to appease them. And the creation and implementation of that bureaucracy was always at the heart of their demands.

Rather than directly impose a radical ‘people’s government’ as the Jacobins or the Bolsheviks had done, they allowed the democratic system and its elected representatives to be the ‘human face’ of their socialism, while they became the ones who actually ran things. Democratic republics slowly sank into an invisible tyranny. A tyranny that everyone encountered, but lacked the vocabulary to describe. The tyranny of the shadow government brought into being by the second and third revolutions, mostly immune to democratic change, rooted in a bureaucracy that endured as politicians came and went. A bureaucracy that used words like ‘democracy’ and the ‘public’, but like the Bolsheviks and the Jacobins, it meant something very different by them.

Like the Bolsheviks and the Jacobins they used the mob to get to power. But they did it indirectly. They organized violent protests and riots, but without real hope of using them to directly seize power. Instead they presented themselves as the only men and women who could turn off the violence.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

The Film “Too Hot” for Public TV

by Cliff Kincaid on Friday, February 18th, 2011

This is article 63 of 577 in the topic Media

It documents how Che was not a hero but a sadistic killer

As Congress debates federal funding for public TV and radio, Mary Grabar has written a column for Pajamas Media about how telling the truth about the Castro regime in Cuba is not an assignment that the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) has wanted to take on.

She focuses on how Agustin Blazquez, a Cuban exile, ran into a series of roadblocks from PBS and its parent, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), when he requested funding for films on life under the Castro dictatorship and Castro’s murderous accomplice Che Guevara. Not only did public TV refuse to fund the anti-communist films, public broadcasting would not consider airing them.

His new documentary, Che: The Other Side of an Icon,” also got the label “too hot” for public TV. It is a response to what Blazquez calls “the pro-Che propaganda in the popular press.” He explains, “It profiles the life of the man killed in Bolivia, as well as ‘Che,’ the icon, who lives on today. It presents the real man behind the myth, his legacy and why he has become so popular among the youth, revolutionaries and terrorists of the world. It explores the dangers of believing in Che’s carefully constructed fake public image.”

The film includes interviews with people who worked directly with Che, knew his family in Argentina and Havana, and who were knowledgeable about his personal background and philosophy. It documents how Che was not a hero but a sadistic killer.

Grabar’s column takes a look at the film and examines how Blazquez faced opposition from public TV to telling the truth about Castro’s communist revolution. She reports, “He learned that grants and prizes for documentaries in his series ‘Covering Cuba’ would not be forthcoming. The latest, and seventh, titled “Che: The Other Side of an Icon,” was produced on a budget of $14,000. Only about $4,000 of that was from a non-profit that he had started himself. He had submitted a more typical budget of $494,000 to CPB-PBS (Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Public Broadcasting System). Blazquez had no success with the publicly supported organization, nor did he with the taxpayer-supported American Film Institute in his other projects. In fact, he could not even get an airing on POV (Point of View), the program created by PBS specifically for the purpose of airing ‘controversial’ films.”

Blazquez provided me with some additional details, saying about the Che film offering, “I mailed the 104-page proposal to CPB on Monday, April 2, 2007.  On Tuesday, May 8, 2007, John Prizer from CPB called me about 6:35 p.m. to notify me that they rejected my project. The next day Prizer talked to my proposal advisor and told him, ‘PBS won’t do a project like that.’”

Grabar describes the interference he gets on college campuses. “Dead silence is what mostly greeted Blazquez when he contacted over 100 campuses for the screening of his first film,” she says.

Click to continue reading “The Film “Too Hot” for Public TV”
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin