At one time in the U.S., even ardent left-leaners like Jesse Jackson and the Black Panthers warned America about it.
But as the years went by and money exchanged hands, the issue was quietly forgotten.
Now viral filmmaker Molotov Mitchell is tearing the lid off what he calls “one of the most scandalous cover-ups in U.S. history,” the allegation that abortion provider Planned Parenthood has from its inception targeted black Americans for extinction.
Mitchell and the staff of Illuminati Pictures have created the explosive and controversial new film, “Gates of Hell,” an effort born out the desire to reengage America in the debate over life and death.
“If it is indeed true that the black community is being targeted for extinction today, this is like major political thriller stuff,” Mitchell told WND in an exclusive interview. “The challenge was how to communicate what’s going on without preaching to the choir, like 99.9 percent of the movies that deal with the pro-life position. The black genocide angle has not been really explored in an entertaining way. No one has seen the potential for an entertaining, thrilling movie.”
But that potential is exactly what prompted Mitchell to make “Gates of Hell.”
“Whether it is true or not – and it is true – everybody should look into it,” Mitchell told WND. “If indeed, the black genocide directive of Planned Parenthood is true, then it is one of the most scandalous political cover-ups in American history, so it makes great material for a movie.”
Mitchell points to Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s views on race, her work on the Negro Project and mounting evidence that abortion clinics are disproportionately distributed among black and minority communities as evidence of an underlying conspiracy. At one time, Mitchell points out, black rights leaders were at the forefront of sounding the alarm over abortion’s “racist” agenda.
“Originally, when Roe vs. Wade hit the scene, the Black Panthers and Jesse Jackson said [abortion] was ‘genocide,'” Mitchell said, quoting a Jet magazine interview with Jackson in 1973. “Jackson said, ‘If it is growing, it is living.’ He had a very strong pro-life position. Of course, that’s before Planned Parenthood started cutting him checks. Then, all of a sudden, a ‘woman’s right to choose’ became a fundamental, civil right.”
The bold and provocative “Gates of Hell,” however, has already been met with scathing controversy.
Dr. Gerard Nadal, for example, wrote a shocked editorial at LifeNews.com, worried that the film will cause young black men to actually seek revenge on abortion doctors, calling “Gates of Hell” a “vigilante apologia.”
“I genuinely fear that it will whip up young black men and lead some to violence,” Nadal writes. “I don’t want this film to ever see the light of day. Its very premise is antithetical to the pro-life movement.”
He continued, “I’ve seen enough in these trailers to give it two thumbs down. This is one baby that needs to be strangled in its bassinet.”
Mitchell responded, “I was pretty stunned to hear not only that strong of a criticism about a film Dr. Nadal had not even seen, but also the terrible analogy of strangling a baby, used by a pro-lifer to explain his disdain for a film he had not even seen.
“The trailer is, of course, shocking and provocative,” Mitchell said. “That’s what trailers are supposed to be.”
The trailer itself can be seen below:
Mitchell also responded to claims the film would encourage violence.
“No, I’m not espousing the murder of anybody,” Mitchell told WND. “The film is not a call to arms; it’s a political thriller. The topic of black genocide, the cover-up, the conspiracy – we were shooting for (pun intended) great art, great entertainment.
“I don’t believe that people will walk away from this show thinking that it’s OK to kill abortionists,” he continued. “People could make the same argument based on an episode of TV’s ’24,’ where Jack Bauer is chasing an Islamic bomber, and when he’s talking to Bauer, he explains why he did it and he gives some reasonable-sounding explanation for why he felt he was defending his nation. It doesn’t mean ’24’ was espousing suicide bombing because it shows more than one side of the story; it’s simply good story telling.”
Besides, Mitchell told WND, he believes the abortion argument in America has grown entrenched and “stale,” in need of some intentional stirring of the pot.
“This film is not intended to be didactic,” he explained. “We designed this film with the hope that people would debate it for hours after they watched it with their friends. We’ve discovered that even with people who have just screened the film, it has dramatically shifted their way of thinking.
“For example, one film producer watched it with his fiancée, and they were both pro-life before watching it,” Mitchell continued. “He absolutely loved the film, and she absolutely hated it. And for several hours after the film all they did was debate and argue. He admitted that both of them had never thought of several things the way they were presented in the film and it caused them to rethink all kinds of things. Eventually, his fiancée came around; he won her over. But even if he hadn’t, the goal is the argument itself.
“There really isn’t much discussion about the abortion issue in America today. It seems people have drawn their lines, they have dug their trenches and they just give each other the evil eye across no man’s land,” Mitchell said. “This film just runs right across the middle of no man’s land and causes all kinds of havoc, and that’s the point – to get people up and out of those trenches and thinking and, hopefully, fighting.”