Skip to comments.Screening of anti-Obama film draws protests [want to fill seats w/ people who oppose it to disrupt]
Posted on 10/24/2012 5:56:40 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
LA MARQUE [TX] County Commissioner Ken Clarks screening of an anti-President Barack Obama documentary at a county park next week drew the ire of several, including a county constable who called the screening inappropriate.
The movie, Dreams from my Real Father, makes an argument the president is not the son of Kenyan-born Barack Hussein Obama Sr. but rather communist author Frank Marshall Davis.
The screening, which Clark is paying for, is being held in the Texas AgriLife Center in Carbide Park in La Marque on Nov. 1. The Agrilife Center is a building next door to the countys Wayne Johnson Center building, which is named for the late county commissioner who was a Democratic Party and civil rights activist in the county.
Texas AgriLife Extension Service is a statewide educational agency that focuses on agriculture and gardening issues in partnerships with county governments.
Pct. 3 County Constable Derreck Rose said he was infuriated when he got a flier from a Clark mailer promoting the screening. At first, Rose thought the screening was being held in the Wayne Johnson Center, a move the constable considered to be irreverent.
To have a movie that depicts the president as some sort of Nazi in a county building named for a champion of civil rights is just not right, Rose said.
The movie, directed by Joel Gilbert, actually claims Obama is a socialist with training from a communist and doesnt appear to tie the president to Nazism.
According to the documentarys website, the film, is the alternative Barack Obama autobiography, offering a divergent theory of what may have shaped our 44th presidents life and politics. In Dreams from My Real Father, Barack Obama is portrayed by a voiceover actor who chronicles Barack Obamas life journey in socialism, from birth through his election to the presidency.
The movie also features nude photos of a woman who the movie claims to be Obamas mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.
Rose called on Clark to cancel the screening or at least move it to another facility. Clark did not return The Daily News calls or emails Tuesday.
Clark arranged for the lease of the center through William Johnson, the extension agent for the states AgriLife Center.
Johnson said the commissioner paid the $255 rental fee, which allows the lease of the facility for up to three hours.
Its a public building, Johnson said. There were no tax dollars used for this. There are (public) facilities that are leased for political activities. Its not my role to make an assessment of the event he is paying for.
I cant do a screening process of a personal nature, whether I agree with (the movie) or not.
Johnson also said that the event doesnt mean the state or the county endorses the movie, either.
This is a First Amendment issue, he said.
Clarks flyer promoting the event indicates its an RSVP event only because there is limited seating.
He directs people to call his mobile phone or email him to reserve a seat.
For his part, Rose is using social media to encourage those who object to the movie to email Clark or call and reserve a seat. He hopes to pack the facility with people who oppose the message of the movie in an effort to disrupt its presentation.
Yet we have to listen to anti-Chrisyian and gay vitriol on a daily basis from the Left and it’s okay.
Get over it.
As long as it wasn’t on company time or used company funds I don’t see a problem with it. We are human and have a right to our own beliefs off the clock.
I have seen those nude pictures...they look a lot like her, but some website said they were actually that of a 50s burlesque/stripper.
Someone should rent a cable channel and run it 24/7
The movie will be shown and anyone disrupting it will be arrested and jailed. This ain’t Chicago.
I watched this movie yesterday. Had to do it in increments because it was so disturbing. The beginning re his father is speculation and the premises make sense. Later, when the timeline moves away from the focus on his paternity, it’s a ton of info that we pretty much already know. The way it’s presented is tight and clear, and makes a person want to scream when you realize the evil this man and his cronies represent.
A few months back there was a FR thread about Obama and FMD, with several photos posted of them, side by side. Their similarity is striking. It would be interesing to find one of FMD’s “legitimate” children, and compare that DNA with Hussein’s.
This image of some other fine DVD's by Director Joel Glbert is a link to a website that contains an in-depth look into Gilbert and Dreams from My Real Father...including an interview with the man who actually owns the home Frank Marshall Davis lived in. All information is sourced and linked where possible.
There is very little truth in Gilbert's "documentary".
Freepers need to crank their skepticism up to 11. This junk is no more credible than "Loose Change".
Surely even a birther can recognize this sentence to be oxymoronic.
Could someone please explain to me what the producers think the relevance of his possible bio-dad being a commie might be? Is communism supposed to be genetic? Don't they recognize that if Davis is the "real" father then their "non-native-born" claim goes right out the window?
What the libs aren’t getting is that the Elvis amend McCartney “documentaries” were made as satirical features. They are comedy. He doesn’t present them as the truth. Strike one. Even if you throw the FMD taking nude pics of O’s mother out of the question, the rest is still damning and scandalous enough to say that the libs have been gullible and taken in by professional conman posing as a politician. The expose could have just been another con by one of his henchmen to mke it look untrue but it dorsnt explain the couch and Nat King Cole record in a box that looks identical to the photos of FMD’s living room. Nice try to divert from the core isues but that’s to be expected from libs anyway.
After looking at the so-called “expose” I noticed that the books that the photos are found in look surprising new and could not have been printed in the ‘50’s or ‘60’s moreover they have covers on them do you can’t see the condition or any information about the books they are in. Any liberal twit could have made up those pages, inserted the fake / counterfeit pages in the “book” and claimed that the photos were taken in 1958 and then given the educated nutcase liberal narrative. Probably the same guy that manufactured Obama’s online birth certificate.
Nowadays, Gilbert would likely defend his Paul and Elvis films on the grounds that they weren't meant to be serious. On the Highway 61 website, they are listed under the category of "Spoofs/Mockumentaries."
That category, however, is a relatively new addition to Gilbert's company website. Previously, Paul and Elvis were promoted as straightforward documentaries, both in the films themselves and in Gilbert's promotional efforts. Gilbert's company website used to list Paul directly alongside his Middle-East documentary Atomic Jihad and one of his Bob Dylan retrospectives. As mentioned above, the introduction to Paul has Gilbert directly telling his audience a story about how he received the mysterious tapes in the mail, and how he spent five years having them scientifically tested. In this interview, Gilbert claims to have commissioned scientific testing on the mysterious tapes he says were mailed to him:
Gilbert: "we do have in L.A. forensic equipment in different film studios that we've worked with as well as somebody who's actually had some experience with the police. We went to three different places, each time trying to get a little more sophisticated in our comparison...we found out that the voice did match up quite well with some recordings and interviews from Harrison from the late '90s that he'd given and that it was extremely close to that. And that's how each time we tried to nail it a little closer to the point where we were told it's a high likelihood it is Harrison."
And, of course, if Paul was just a 'mockumentary' narrated by a George impersonator, then that means Gilbert was lying through his teeth when he discussed all these supposed forensic tests, and the "high likelihood" that it's Harrison's actual voice. In another interview, Gilbert claims his attorney said "the usage of Harrison’s voice is legal because the film is a both journalism and a documentary." Documentary, he said. Not spoof.
Nowhere is Gilbert's subsequent change-of-tune more obvious than on the film websites themselves.
The "Paul is Dead" urban legend that exploded worldwide in 1969 was considered a hoax. In this mockumentary spoof of "Paul-Is-Dead," a voice on mysterious tapes reveals a secret Beatles history, chronicling McCartney's fatal accident. A package arrives from London with no return address. Inside are two mini-cassette audio tapes dated December 30, 1999 and labeled THE LAST TESTAMENT OF GEORGE HARRISON...
It plainly says "mockumentary spoof" in the second sentence. But that language wasn't added to the website until sometime after July 2011. The Paul website as it appeared in 2010, both before and after the DVD's September 2010 release, told a different story. It spotlighted Highway 61's role far more prominently, instead of the passive-voice construction of today ("A package arrives" "audio tapes dated"), and it never used the words "mockumentary" or "spoof" at all. Instead, as seen on the bottom right, it advertised the film as being a perfectly serious investigative expose:
Until now, the “Paul is Dead” mystery that exploded worldwide in 1969 was considered a hoax. However, in this film, George Harrison reveals a secret Beatles history, chronicling McCartney’s fatal accident, the cover up, dozens of unknown clues, and a dangerous cat and mouse game with “Maxwell,” the Beatles’ MI5 handler, as John Lennon became increasingly reckless with the secret. Harrison also insists that Lennon was assassinated in 1980 after he threatened to finally expose "Paul McCartney" as an imposter!
Highway 61 Entertainment has corroborated most of George Harrison’s stunning account of the conspiracy to hide McCartney’s tragic death. Harrison’s complete audio tapes narrate this film that includes all the newly unearthed evidence. The Last Testament of George Harrison may prove to be the most important document of rock and roll history, leaving little doubt that PAUL McCARTNEY REALLY IS DEAD!
What Gilbert says in 2012 is a "mockumentary spoof," in 2010 he was promoting as "the most important document of rock and roll history." Similarly, in 2012, he's claiming that the content of Dreams would earn any journalist a Pulitzer; what will he be saying about it two years from now?
Gilbert did the same rewriting of history with his Elvis movie, but even more blatantly. Here's a screenshot of ElvisFoundAlive.com circa the release of the DVD:
And here is ElvisFoundAlive.com as it appears today:
First sentence now: "In this new mockumentary spoof of Elvis theories, Elvis has been FOUND ALIVE!"
And it wasn't just on his individual promotional websites that Gilbert did this. His original press releases and promotional materials treated the films as perfectly serious, and never used the word "mockumentary." Reviews noted that the movies were advertised as "documentaries." The DVD sleeves didn't call themselves "mockumentaries" or "spoofs." And Gilbert gave multiple interviews about the Paul film where he claimed the movie was a completely serious investigative piece, including doubling-down on the 'mysterious envelope' backstory.
Even over at the Internet Movie Database, Gilbert's Paul is today categorized under three genres: "Documentary | Fantasy | Music." But back in September 2010, just after the DVD was released, it had just one genre label: "Documentary."
When one is confronted with questionable evidence, a basic question to always ask is "How credible is the source?" Has he made grand pronouncements before, only to be subsequently proven wrong? Has he made similar mistakes in the past? Does he simply have a history of lying, and recycling the same sorts of lies?
In 2010, Joel Gilbert made a DVD movie about Paul McCartney where he declared to the world that he'd uncovered astonishing new evidence that would rewrite Paul's life as we know it...until he later changed his tune and said that it was just a big joke.
In 2011, Joel Gilbert made a DVD movie about Elvis Presley where he declared to the world that he'd uncovered astonishing new evidence that would rewrite Elvis' life as we know it...until he later changed his tune and said that it was just a big joke.
In 2012, Joel Gilbert made a DVD movie about Barack Obama where he declared to the world that he'd uncovered astonishing new evidence that would rewrite Obama's life as we know it...
...who do you think the joke's on this time?
Willing to bet there’s a reason for your handle. Still doesn’t change the fact that despite your misplaced loyalty to your Messiah that he’s a fraud with an agenda and the jokes on you. BTW - I investigate conmen for a living as well as other forms of white collar fraud. One thing I can tell you is professional conmen are very good at legalese, presentation, bean counting, and fact manipulation. Sorry you’ll have to try somewhere else where there’s weak-minded fodder that will buy your Brooklyn Bridge.
You just described Joel Gilbert perfectly.
The verifiable evidence of fraud, corruption and incompetence of this administration could fill the National Archives, there is no reason to taint it with what is an obvious hoax. Just because Gilbert is saying things you want to believe doesn't mean he isn't a proven liar.
I’ve seen enough to know Obama’s a very bad choice for America and is not suited or experienced enough for the job. He’s been proven to be a pathological liar and he’s bankrupting this nation and it appears intentional.
Even if you take right wing media out of the equation and let his record stand on it’s own it’s horrible. He’s only kept his throne because of his race and supporters are blinded by their indoctrinated beliefs and PC: