“White House Must Stop Sony from Releasing ‘Killing bin Laden’ Film,” John Nolte writes at Big Hollywood, taking the Obama administration’s anti-First Amendment stance to its logical conclusion:
I’m only saying this because, you know, the White House and the media told me movies inflame and cause terrorism.
Think about it: if the poorly produced and laughably bad trailer for “The Innocence of Muslims” results in chaos, murder, and the burning of foreign outposts all throughout the Middle East, how much rioting and mayhem is a big-budgeted, slickly produced, Oscar-bait blockbuster celebrating the death of the leader of al-Qaeda going to cause?
Moreover, an excuse Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will not be able to use in the case of “Zero Dark Thirty” (as she did with “Innocence of Muslims”) is the cowardly and self-righteous claim that the federal government and the Obama White House had nothing to do with “Zero Dark Thirty.”
Because the federal government and the Obama White House had everything to do with “Zero Dark Thirty.”
And don’t even get John started about the anti-religious film produced by a major spokesman for Time-Warner-HBO:
But no one asks … What about Bill Maher?
Bill Maher made a comedy/documentary called “Religulous” that’s most famous for mercilessly mocking Christianity. But what people forget is that the last twenty-minutes or so of the film make a damning case against Islam.
Bill Maher made a film that mocked Islam.
Oh, yes, he did.
Bill Maher also contributed $1 million to a pro-Obama super PAC.
And I’m sure that upon being reminded of this, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will tremble with self-righteous indignation and demand Maher take his money back.
After all, if movies create the terrorists who in turn create the terrorism, what about Bill Maher?
Say, Barry, that Saul Alinsky fella — you might want to check out his Rule #4 sometime….
(H/T: The Rhetorican.)